halesowenmum
Active Member
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2010
- Messages
- 383
- Office Version
- 365
- Platform
- Windows
Hi.
I have a spreadsheet
<tbody>
</tbody>
Under Question 1 there are three things users have to report on their progress with. They type in the % figure and CF produces a horizontal progress bar. As we can see it's all hunky dory here as 40 30 and 20 does indeed equate to 90%.
I think it's when the numbers go over what would add up to 100 that we get into trouble.
What about when all three have gotten 80% of the way through - the value in E1 would be 240%, if they all mark that they've finished by typing in '100' the total will show as 300% - which is not what we need.
How do I write the formula in E1 that allows people to put in their progress as described - which is a requirement, but then the total in the E1 would be a cumulative total of their contribution towards the overall goal of reaching 100% ie all sub-tasks completed = 100%.
Can anybody help me with this (quite garbled) explanation I've provided?!
I have a spreadsheet
D | E | |
1 | Question 1 | 90% |
2 | Q1 assessment criteria 1 | 20% |
3 | Q1 assessment criteria 2 | 30% |
4 | Q1 assessment criteria 2 | 40% |
<tbody>
</tbody>
Under Question 1 there are three things users have to report on their progress with. They type in the % figure and CF produces a horizontal progress bar. As we can see it's all hunky dory here as 40 30 and 20 does indeed equate to 90%.
I think it's when the numbers go over what would add up to 100 that we get into trouble.
What about when all three have gotten 80% of the way through - the value in E1 would be 240%, if they all mark that they've finished by typing in '100' the total will show as 300% - which is not what we need.
How do I write the formula in E1 that allows people to put in their progress as described - which is a requirement, but then the total in the E1 would be a cumulative total of their contribution towards the overall goal of reaching 100% ie all sub-tasks completed = 100%.
Can anybody help me with this (quite garbled) explanation I've provided?!
Last edited: