Specific Conclusions
As stated above, this survey does not (and cannot) purport to accurately reflect user’s ability across the whole range of functionality each of these applications offers.
However, we do believe that it is worthwhile commenting on some of the specific areas covered by the survey.
Taking each of the applications in turn…
Word
VIEW DETAILED STATISTICAL ANALYSIS FOR WORD
As mentioned earlier, the single most used function across all four applications is the spell checker in Word (which tells its own story). Other functions that were used by the majority of respondents were all related to formatting and presentation (e.g. aligning text, bullet point lists, inserting pictures etc.) and it is not difficult to see the motivation for users to become reasonably adept at these functions.
However, they are to all intents and purposes just window dressing (albeit important window dressing) whereas some of the less used functions have powerful business applications.
It has been mentioned earlier that there is a general reluctance among users of all four applications to record and edit macros. While we accept that editing macros requires a reasonable understanding of Microsoft’s Visual Basic for Applications (VBA) and therefore is best left to the experts, recording a macro is very straightforward and has the potential to save users significant amounts of time (and increase the reliability of regularly performed actions).
Second only to macros in lack of use was creating automatic indices and table of contents. For a document of any length, the ability to navigate via a table of contents is extremely helpful and providing that the user adheres to correct styles and formatting, the creation of a TOC is automatic. Related to this is the use of bookmarks and hyperlinks to navigate within a document or to other documents. It can be incredibly helpful to include links from Word documents to other documents (or spreadsheets or databases) that relate. This can be especially helpful when these documents are stored on a public server where a complex directory structure can make it incredibly difficult (and time consuming) to browse to the correct file. Additionally it can save an enormous amount of bandwidth as you can email links to documents rather than the documents themselves.
We believe the other significant lack is in the ability to create mail merge documents. This does not have to relate solely to marketing or other mail shots but can be a useful way of importing data from, say, Excel into a Word document so that it can be presented in a very user friendly manner. Additionally, mail merge can be used to create labels from a database of names and addresses (and both the authors use this facility each Christmas to produce their Christmas card list with labels ready to stick to envelopes).
We recognise that a great many users of Word are people who, not so long ago, would have had a secretary (or, at least, access to secretarial services) to produce letters for them. As times have changed and individuals are now becoming responsible for their own output, many people simply use Word to produce well presented letters. However, with a modicum of training, they almost always find that a great many other tasks that they would like to do but have hitherto not attempted, become feasible. Given that virtually every respondent uses Word it is apparent to the authors that there exists a real need (underpinned by a suitable Training Needs Analysis) to enhance users’ abilities in all areas.
Excel
VIEW DETAILED STATISTICAL ANALYSIS FOR EXCEL
We have previously mentioned that there appear to be two distinct types of Excel user. The majority seem to use it as a straightforward data storage programme, possibly storing sales figures or other performance data in a simple two dimensional database. At the other end of the scale, there are those who use Excel almost as a substitute (and some would say a very good one) for Access. Excel contains some powerful data manipulation and interrogation functions and it is clear from the survey that those who use them are confident in their use; however they are in a very small minority.
It is immediately obvious from the data that usage of Excel is very different from usage of Word. The average percentage of non-users of functions in Word is just under 19% whilst in Excel this virtually doubles to just over 37%. Given that the Standard Deviation for Excel is also significantly higher we can say that, statistically, approximately two thirds of Word users will utilise between 64% and virtually 100% of those functions identified in our survey. When it comes to Excel, two thirds of users will utilise between roughly 40% and 85% of the functionality as listed, a significant difference.
Some of the functions that we would highlight as being poorly used currently but which have the ability to make significant improvements in the speed and effectiveness of using Excel (for the average user) would be: -
-
Using data validation to restrict data entry
-
Using conditional formatting
-
Inserting subtotals
-
Using auto-filter
-
Creating custom fill series
All of these functions have the ability to automate some extremely tedious (but very important and useful) tasks.
To take another example, even though it is the eleventh most used function in our survey, 25% of our responders do not use the ‘paste special’ command. Given that, amongst other things, this can enable related cells to update automatically when you change the original, the scope for improvement in accuracy and reliability of data manipulation is huge.
It is clear from this analysis that targeted training of Excel users could (and should) pay huge dividends in increased productivity and quality of information emanating from data stored within Excel.
PowerPoint
VIEW DETAILED STATISTICAL ANALYSIS FOR POWERPOINT
PowerPoint is the third most popular application in our list with almost 81% of respondents professing to use it.
The analysis of PowerPoint most closely resembles that for Word. The average percentage of non-users of the functions listed was just over 23% (cf. Word – 19%, Excel – 37%) and given a Standard Deviation of virtually 20%, two thirds of users would be expected to use between 57% and 97% of the functionality as listed.
Whilst overall the more a function is used, the more confident the users are in their use of that function there are some interesting anomalies. Looking at the three functions ‘rehearsal timings’, ‘sending graphics behind text’ and ‘grouping and ungrouping objects’ we see that there are similar numbers of users of each (25.35%, 26.81% and 28.99% respectively) and yet, once non-users’ scores are stripped out we notice that confidence levels are much higher in respect of ‘sending graphics behind text’ and ‘grouping and ungrouping objects’ (4.52 and 4.46) than they are for ‘rehearsal timings’ (3.69). This leads us to believe that many of these functions are ‘stumbled upon’ by users and some are intrinsically more intuitive to use than others.
It has been said before that the 75% of responders who use animation schemes and custom animations probably use them too much, but that is for another day and another type of report. However, given the rapid increase in bandwidth and the increasing sophistication of the recipients of PowerPoint presentations it could be useful to focus some training on the inclusion of video and sound within presentations, given that this can dramatically improve the overall experience as well as making it much easier to personalise (or ‘brand’) presentations, and current use is poor (52%).
Outlook
VIEW DETAILED STATISTICAL ANALYSIS FOR OUTLOOK
Outlook is the least used of the four applications analysed. Nevertheless it was still used by almost 75% of all respondents.
The analysis of the results in relation to Outlook is similar to (although less pronounced than) Excel. The average percentage of non-users of the functions listed was 28.61% and the statistical likelihood, given a Standard Deviation of 19.52% is that two thirds of the users would utilise between 62% and 91% of the functionality reported on.
The difference between the average score of all (3.23) and those who actually use the functions analysed (4.04) is 0.81, second only to Excel (0.93) in disparity and again, this tends to indicate two levels of usage. There are those who use Outlook as a simple email client (i.e. they send and receive emails and, possibly maintain an address book) and then there are those who use it as a full Personal Digital Assistant (PDA) who keep their diary, to-do list and meetings (amongst other things).
One of the significant benefits of Microsoft Office is the almost seamless interaction between the various applications and yet it would appear from our survey that these elements are highly under-utilised.
Significantly the most under-used element of functionality is the ability to publish a calendar on the web (although it is more likely that users will have a calendar available through their corporate intranet, if they have one). Not so far behind are functions like selecting contacts for a mail merge and using advanced search criteria which reinforces the belief that the more ‘clicks’ that any function requires (or the more preparation that is required in advance of using it), the less it is used.
Contrast the under used functionality with those at the top of the list. ‘Attaching files’, ‘sorting the inbox’, ‘entering a new contact’ and ‘creating new folders’ are all pretty much single click events and suggest that the functionality has been learned by intelligent guesswork.
Whilst Outlook does not necessarily have the power to make significant contributions at an organisational level (although mail merges can be very useful indeed) it does have the ability to significantly enhance personal organisation and effectiveness. It is clear from these results that the majority of users substitute Outlook for Outlook Express (or something similar) and then fail to use any of the additional functionality that Outlook brings.
In all likelihood, the only way to upskill users is to target those who fit the above criteria and deliver ‘across the board’ training on the advanced functionality contained within Outlook.
And finally…
We do ask (oh all right then – require) that if you wish to quote from or reproduce this report or the accompanying analysis, you give proper attribution (© GR Business Process Solutions 2003) when and if you do.
Otherwise, please feel free to make use of this analysis as you see fit.
If you feel this has been helpful in any way whatsoever (or not, as the case may be), email us with your comments at survey@grbps.com. You can also email us at this address to request a PDF copy of this article.
Thank you.
Ray Blake and Graham Barrow, September 2003.