Technically Right. Socially Wrong.
The finance professional who gets the numbers wrong may be right and still lose the room. Correction becomes easier to receive when people see that you are not attacking their ego.
Introduction
Let’s talk about one of the most delicate parts of finance work. How to correct people when they make errors or do not follow the established processes. With the realisation that you still need to work with them tomorrow.
The Problem
You saw the mistake.
The accrual was wrong. The margin comment was weak. The sales number had been lifted from the wrong version of the file. The operational explanation did not match what the numbers were saying.
So you corrected it, yet somehow, the conversation became about your tone and delivery.
You may not have been actively trying to embarrass anybody, but the way you went about it made people feel humiliated. And when correction feels like humiliation, people stop hearing it.
They start defending themselves. Then, finance gets a reputation for being difficult, rigid, and always finding fault.
Some of that reputation is unfair, but a big part of it is earned (unconsciously)
The uncomfortable truth is that being right is not the same as being useful. If your correction makes people smaller, they will avoid you even when they need you. But, you still have to work with them. That’s very hard to do when they are shut off from you.
A Story
I coached a finance controller called Tunde (not real name), who had a reputation he did not understand.
He was technically strong. If a number was wrong, he could find it. If a forecast assumption was weak, he could expose it. If a department submitted a budget with optimistic nonsense dressed as strategy, Tunde would remove the costume. He thought that was the job.
The problem was that nobody wanted him in meetings.
Operations stopped inviting him to early planning discussions. Sales sent their numbers to finance late. HR avoided asking him to review payroll assumptions until the last possible moment. Tunde saw this as proof that people did not like accountability. Meanwhile, people just avoided him as much as possible to avoid the shame of embarrassment and humiliation.
In one meeting, a manager had explained a cost movement badly. The explanation was wrong, but not dishonest. She had misunderstood the driver. Tunde cut in and said, “That is not what happened. You are mixing up volume and price.”
He was right.
Afterwards, I asked him: “Did you want her to understand the correction, or did you want the room to know you had caught it?”
He wanted the latter but unconsciously did the first.
We did not teach Tunde to become less direct. That would have damaged him. We taught him to correct the work before correcting the person. To name the shared risk first. To ask one clarifying question before delivering the conclusion. To make the standard visible so the correction had somewhere to land.
3 months later, operations started inviting him earlier because he became safer to learn around.
Ajibola’s Tips
Try out these tips from my experience to handle these issues
1. I correct the work before I correct the person because I have watched one careless sentence turn a useful correction into a personal fight. When you say, “You got this wrong,” the person hears judgment before they hear the issue. When you say, “This assumption changes the margin by three points,” the work becomes the subject. The correction still lands, but it has less ego attached to it.
Action Tip: Be very conscious of practising giving corrections using work-first language. Start with the number, assumption, process, or risk before mentioning the person who prepared it. Try not to use the word “you” in the feedback. Practice makes perfect.
2. I ask one clarifying question first because I learned the hard way that some corrections are really missing context. Early in my career, I challenged a cost allocation too quickly. The number looked wrong. The logic looked weak. What I did not know was that the team had agreed on a temporary treatment after a supplier dispute. I was directionally right and procedurally incomplete. That taught me to ask before I pronounce.
Action Tip: Before your next correction, ask: “What assumption did you use here?” Write down the answer before you respond.
3. I name the shared risk because people receive corrections better when they can see what the correction is protecting. If the issue is a weak forecast, say it affects cash planning. If it is a wrong accrual, say it affects month-end reliability. If it is a poor explanation, say it affects the decision the leadership team is about to make. Correction without context sounds like fault-finding. Correction with risk sounds like stewardship.
Action Tip: For one correction this week, add one sentence that begins with: “The risk here is...” Keep it factual and specific.
4. I correct more in private after watching a junior colleague stop contributing for two months because finance had embarrassed her in a room she was still learning to speak in. Public correction has a cost. Sometimes it is necessary because the business is about to act on bad information. Many times, it is not. Correcting privately protects the person. Correcting publicly should protect the decision. Know the difference.
Action Tip: Before correcting someone in a meeting this week, decide which one it is: protect the person privately or protect the decision publicly.
5. I use standards as a third party because I have learned that personal correction becomes lighter when the standard carries the weight. If there is no agreed standard, every correction feels like your opinion. If there is a standard, you are not saying, “Do it my way.” You are saying, “This is what good looks like here.” That distinction matters. It keeps finance from becoming the personality in the room.
Action Tip: Create one visible standard for a recurring output this week. Use three headings: required source, required check, required explanation.
“Correction is not the problem. Correction without dignity is the problem.” - Ajibola Jinadu
Grow With Us
If today’s issue resonated with you, here are two ways to take it further right now.
Assess Your FBP Skills. Correcting colleagues well is not just a communication skill. It is a partnering skill. Take the free FBP Skills Assessment and find out exactly where you stand today. Take the assessment her
The Finance Business Partner Masterclass. If you want to build the judgment, language, and influence required to challenge the business without losing trust, the Masterclass is the next step. Join the Masterclass here
Conclusion
You do not need to become the friendly finance person who lets bad numbers pass because you want to be liked.
That is not partnership.
You also do not need to become the person everyone avoids because every correction feels like a trial.
That is not leadership.
The work is to hold the standard without making people feel stupid for needing it. Correct the work. Name the risk. Protect the decision. Preserve the relationship where you can. Say the true thing in a way the room can still use.
Tomorrow: How to keep your standards high when the business keeps rewarding shortcuts.
Cheers,