Because the ERP records what the design anticipated, and the operation runs into situations it never anticipated. Every parallel spreadsheet is an exception someone resolved — and the reason for it never becomes a field anywhere.
What does each spreadsheet represent, beyond the rework?
A decision made under pressure, with no time to record the reason. Multiplied by department and by month, that undocumented decision becomes the operation’s real infrastructure — invisible to anyone looking only at the official system.
Is every parallel spreadsheet a sign of a problem?
No. Some handle well a situation the formal process never anticipated, and the workaround is worth more than the written rule. The distinction matters: one becomes a fix, the other becomes method — and both need to be understood first, not eliminated.
How do you map this without surveilling everyone's spreadsheets?
By asking, not tracking files. The conversation identifies the pattern and the reason; system access exists to check the result, never to monitor how someone works.
What happens once the spreadsheet is identified?
It becomes a finding — a question to investigate, never a verdict on whoever created it. Once confirmed, it can become an official field, an automation, or stay the right workaround, now visible to whoever decides.
The question that matters isn’t “how many spreadsheets exist”. It’s “how many point to the same reason” — because then they aren’t several problems. They’re one problem solved several times, by different people, none of whom knew about the others.