Most projects start in a spreadsheet, and that is sensible: Excel is already there, nobody has to learn it, and for a small project it genuinely is enough. The trouble starts when there are three files, five versions and someone asks how much of the budget is still free.
Cells in a spreadsheet are independent of each other. In a project they are not: move one activity by a week and the schedule, the cost forecast, the team's workload and the funder's report all move with it. In Excel that means updating those four places by hand — and usually two get updated.
What has to finish first and what sits on the critical path is something you have to remember yourself. The first slip quietly breaks the schedule without anyone seeing it.
Cost lines, VAT and the free balance sit on a separate sheet that knows nothing about changes to the plan.
"plan_v3_final_NEW.xlsx" — once two parallel copies exist, there is no current version any more.
A spreadsheet shows only the current state. No cell answers "why did we move that deadline".
There is nothing wrong with a spreadsheet. Plenty of small projects are run in Excel and moving would add nothing. The only question is where the limit falls.
A couple of dozen activities, one owner, a budget that fits on one sheet — stay in the spreadsheet.
If you need a calculation rather than management, Excel is faster than any system.
A funder, several parallel projects, deadlines with dependencies or a reporting obligation — that is where maintaining the spreadsheet costs more than it gives.
The comparison covers the parts that actually decide things in project management. Excel here means ordinary use, not a custom tool built with macros.
| Projektiassistent | Excel | |
|---|---|---|
| Drafting the project plan | AI drafts it from a description | By hand, from a blank sheet |
| Gantt schedule with dependencies | Yes, from the plan | Drawn by hand, no dependencies |
| A change flows through | Yes — schedule, budget, report | No, each place separately |
| Budget and free balance | Yes, VAT separated | Yes, but apart from the plan |
| Risk register | Yes, derived from the plan | A separate sheet, if anyone makes it |
| Collaboration and permissions | Roles and access rights | File copies and comments |
| Change history | Yes, for the whole project | Only the last save |
| Application and report to a funder | From the same project | Rewritten by hand |
| Best suited to | Projects with a budget, deadline and funder | A one-off calculation or a short project |
You can, and it is done a lot. The limit arrives where the data has to be connected: once moving one activity has to change the schedule, the budget and the report at once, the spreadsheet starts demanding more maintenance than the project does.
It is faster to describe the project in a couple of sentences, let the AI build the structure and then bring your own numbers in. Rows can be copied, but the real gain is the structure the spreadsheet did not have — dependencies, risks, owners.
A template is a blank form and it never tells you whether the plan is sufficient. Software checks the connections — is every activity covered, does the budget add up, is the objective measurable — and keeps changes in one place.
You can, as a bar chart or with conditionally formatted cells. What is missing is dependencies and the critical path: the chart shows dates but does not recalculate what happens when one activity slips.
Yes. Cost lines are kept net, VAT separately and co-financing on its own line. That is the most common place where spreadsheet accounting drifts from the funder's in grant reports.
Kanban is fine — but plan, budget and applications live outside Trello.
→🧭Strong work management — but funding and applications stay outside.
→📐Scheduling power without the learning curve — plus funding and AI.
→🧰Jira is for development teams — a project manager needs something else.
→14 days free — all Pro features, no card required.
Start for free →