Richard Kraneis Blog

Excel for People Who Hate Numbers

People need Microsoft Excel skills desperately in their jobs yet so many are Excel phobic.

Is it learning Excel as software that’s so hard or is it the almost genetic hatred some people have for numbers? I think it’s the fear of numbers.

I remember one young lady in particular from one of my Excel classes. She was in her mid 20’s and had glided easily through my Excel I, II, and III sequence that lasted a total of 9 hours. She was the classic interface queen. If there was a software technique in Excel, she could pick it up with ease.

Then she decided to enroll for my 3 hour Power Excel class which was really an advanced Excel tutorial for aspiring power users. It was a large class that day, perhaps 14 people. To warm the class up I began with some simple formulas. What my kids called “word problems” when they were in grade school.

For example, “You want to hire someone on staff for $60,000. Your human resource colleagues tell you that you should always multiply someone’s salary by 30% to get the cost of the benefits for this person. If someone’s salary is $60,000, what will be the cost of their benefits to the company?”

When I posed that question to the class, the nice young lady, the “interface queen”, froze up and a look of classroom fear came upon her face. It’s the look you had in school when you realized you were in a class over your head.

She loved software, Excel software was easy for her, but she never had to perform a formula on her own. Her inability to Excel with Excel was seriously impaired by her math phobias. She probably could have done the math computation easily if I had given her the formula. $60,000 multiplied by 30% is of course $18,000. But the class wasn’t about simple math, it was about problem solving.

It was for her and people like her that I wrote an e-book that serves as an advanced Excel tutorial. If you just go to my advanced Excel tutorial and listen to the “Secret to Excel” lesson, you’ll learn more about Excel in 3 minutes than you could possibly imagine.

So if you “hate numbers” or have a fear of numbers but like software, please visit my Excel tutorial today, grab a cup of coffee, and play my “Secret to Excel” Camtasia video today.

The “Secret to Excel” lesson is free, honest.

A Blogging Test on Keywords

In my previous post I tested the phrase supercalifragilisticexpialidocious politics.

Within two hours of posting my Google position on a web search was #1. The same with searching with Google on blogs, a #1 position.

The next day supercalifragilisticexpialidocious politics had slipped into Google oblivion when searching the Web. I couldn’t even find my keyword phrase on page 2, 3, or even 4. The listing for my keywords had disappeared.

But even today, 5 days after the original post supercalifragilisticexpialidocious politics ranks as #1 in Google when searching blogs.

So my keyword test was instructive.

I do believe, but still cannot prove, that Google uses the same database for indexing both blogs and websites. My post was listed on searches for both the web and blogs.

I’m sure one day I’ll laugh at this analytical test and even my questions regarding this topic. But until someone with the technical expertise of Lorell on Wordpress or Tinu Abayomi-Paul weigh in on this topic, I won’t have an answer.

Essentially, the question is this: What are the differences between Google web indexing and Google blog indexing?

But at least I know that blog posts can be tested for keyword effectiveness on Google.

Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious Politics

This blog is really both a blogging test on keywords and a brief statement on our national politics in the U.S. this primary season.

First, let’s define supercalifragilisticexpialidocious (from www.Dictionary.com )

a nonsense word meaning fantastic; also called supercalifragilistic

So supercalifragilisticexpialidocious politics means “fantastic politics”. It makes sense.

I’m just wondering if an incredibly unique phrase in my blog title of supercalifragilisticexpialidocious politics will get a high ranking in Google for blogging or either web searches.

Does Google maintain two separate indexes for web pages and blogs or is it the same? Sorry if its fundamental, but I’m hoping a visitor will comment.

But back to supercalifragilisticexpialidocious politics, “ain’t it great?”.

Obama, Clinton, and Edwards on the one side. McCain, Romney, Huckabee, Giuliani on the other side. Did I miss any important candidates? Hope not.

A few days ago my train friend Christine seemed very upset about Obama-Clinton arguments and debates. For me, it’s enjoyable. Without bullets, without threats of primaries or elections being postponed, with an occasional sense of humor, our national candidates are vying for our votes, state by state.

And don’t worry about the shenanigans too much.

When Lincoln was nominated in 1860 at the Republican Convention in Chicago, IL, he sat in Springfield waiting for news. Here’s a drawing of that convention in a building called the Wigwam.

Did Abraham Lincoln know that his supporters controlled the seating at the convention so that delegations were strategically separated so they couldn’t align themselves against Lincoln? Did Lincoln know that on the first day when many at the convention wanted to nominate Seward from New York, a handful of his people managed to take a quick voice vote to close the convention on the first day? Or my favorite, did Lincoln know that his supporters forged 10,000 tickets overnite and then packed the convention hall with Lincoln supporters, shutting out 10,000 Seward supporters with valid entry passes?

So we had some shenanigans and dirty tricks in 1860, we still do. But at least it’s a relatively peaceful process where sharp words fly instead of bullets. Although some world observers think our process quaint, most of the world would love to have a peaceful transition of national power every four or eight years.