Get in touch

What if the real problem wasn't Excel?

Excel is not the problem; it reveals flaws in the processes and agility of finance teams.

An Opinion Piece by Mehdi Ben Salah, Co-founder of Beyond Plans

A simple question asked to a room full of finance professionals reminded me of something essential: if Excel is still so widely used, it is not just out of habit, but because it continues to fill blind spots in processes. At Beyond Plans, I see it in almost every project—Excel is not a malfunction; it is a signal, one that deserves to be viewed differently.

I came away from Financium 2025—the annual DFCG conference—with a paradoxical feeling. We talked about AI, intelligent automation, augmented models… and yet the topic that triggered the strongest reactions came down to a single word: Excel.

Beyond the tool itself, what I heard deeply resonated with what I observe every week with the clients we support at Beyond Plans.

During a session dedicated to new AI-driven uses in finance, the moderator asked a simple question to the 120 participants—mainly management controllers and finance leaders:

“What frustrates you the most in your budgeting processes?”

And the answer, on repeat: Excel. Excel. Excel again.

One could smile. In reality, I felt a certain discomfort. How can we explain that in 2025—when powerful, cloud-based, accessible EPM platforms exist—dependence on Excel remains so strong?

As a partner to finance departments, I caught myself thinking: what if we missed something?

What if the issue isn’t the tool?

For years, we’ve been repeating: “We need to move away from Excel.”
But I’m starting to think we’ve been framing the problem the wrong way.

Excel is not just software. It embodies something much deeper:

  • immediate response,

  • total autonomy,

  • intuitive understanding,

  • the ability to tinker and iterate quickly,

  • and above all… no guardrails.

But Excel is also like water. And water seeps in wherever there’s a crack in the process.
So perhaps the real issue isn’t Excel.
The real issue is the crack.

Processes evolve faster than tools

Here we touch on something CFOs know all too well.

A project starts in January. It takes 12 to 18 months to build—but by the time it goes live, the business reality has already changed. The result: the model is outdated before it’s even used.

In the meantime, Excel remains the perfect crutch: flexible, immediate, ready to absorb today’s exception. It’s not that Excel “wins the battle.” It adapts faster than organizations can transform their processes.

And that—no tool, not even the most agile Anaplan model—can compensate for on its own.

The real issue: a cultural and methodological gap

What we observe—and what I still see in too many projects—is a recurring trio:

  • Overly complex processes
    Year after year, organizations add exceptions, sub-cases, local rules… until the whole becomes unreadable.
  • Low adoption of EPM workflows
    Many users experience the tool as excessive centralization that fails to account for their specific realities.
  • Lack of agility in modeling
    Trying to cover everything from day one often results in building a rigid cathedral that’s impossible to evolve.

In this context, Excel appears as the only zone of freedom: it never says “no,” requires no training, and never blocks anything.

Excel is not a competitor. It’s a symptom.

Rethinking transformation: stop fighting Excel

This is a conviction I increasingly stand by: if Excel resurfaces, something is wrong with the process—not the technology.

When a user creates a file outside the system, it is almost never resistance to change. It’s a message—sometimes even a cry for help.

In practice, it often means:

  • “The process isn’t clear.”

  • “I was asked for a new report last week.”

  • “I don’t know where to put this data.”

  • “The tool isn’t ready for this specific case.”

  • “This exception wasn’t anticipated.”

This is fundamentally an issue of alignment, pace, and change governance—not technology.

And it is precisely our role at Beyond Plans to help finance teams detect these weak signals and address them before they explode into 200 scattered files.

What I truly take away from Financium 2025

What I take away is not that “Excel is a problem,” but that organizations leave a gap that neither tools nor processes manage to fill sustainably. And into that gap, Excel naturally flows.

To move forward, the right question is not:
“How do we get rid of Excel?”

But rather:

  • Why does Excel become indispensable for your teams?

  • Which part of the process lacks clarity, stability, or governance?

  • How can we design models that remain useful despite rapid business change?

  • How do we inject real agility—not the kind written in a specification document—into modeling and maintenance?

In short, Excel is not the enemy.
It is the revealer.

Excel reveals:

  • an overly complex process,

  • a model that is too rigid,

  • an unmet need,

  • change happening too fast,

  • or an organization that hasn’t yet found its rhythm.

If we truly want to support finance teams in building strong, useful, and sustainable transformations, the solution is not to eradicate Excel.

It lies in designing processes and models that breathe, adapt, evolve with the business—and finally give teams a reason not to fall back on Excel.

And that goes far beyond any tool.
It’s a collective, methodological, and cultural effort.
And that’s where real transformation happens.

FAQ

The questions finance departments really ask about Excel and EPM transformation

Why does Excel always come up in budget processes?

Because it immediately absorbs a request, an exception or an emergency. When the process or tool does not provide a clear answer, Excel fills the gap. So it’s not a technical problem: it’s a sign of misalignment between the teams’ needs and the way the model was designed or governed.

Is it necessary to ‘eradicate’ Excel in order to successfully implement an EPM transformation?

No. The challenge is not to eliminate Excel, but to understand why it appears. When users create files outside of processes, they reveal a flaw: overly complex rules, lack of agility, rigid models, or lack of change management. The real lever is alignment and simplification.

How can we prevent the EPM model from becoming obsolete before it goes into production?

By adopting an iterative approach, limiting the initial scope to the essentials, and deliberately leaving room for evolution. Programmes that seek to cover everything from the outset often end up missing their target. Agility in modelling is key — in Anaplan as in any other EPM.

How can exceptions be managed without recreating Excel files in parallel?

By clarifying business rules, making arbitration decisions visible, and standardising recurring exceptions. Good governance prevents the proliferation of isolated files. One-off exceptions must be able to be integrated without breaking the model.

Is the problem with EPM tools or with the organisations themselves?

Mostly organisations. Current tools — Anaplan, OneStream, Pigment, Adaptive — are mature. What’s holding things back are overloaded processes, accumulated special cases, poorly understood workflows, and a pace of transformation that doesn’t keep up with the business. Excel only serves to highlight these imbalances.

How can I tell if my organisation suffers from a ‘process vacuum’ that Excel fills?

There are several warning signs: duplicate reports, ‘temporary’ files that become critical, models that are too cumbersome to maintain, discrepancies between finance and business teams, or the inability to integrate a new rule without an IT project. When Excel comes back frequently, it is rarely a coincidence.