What Career Professionals Can Learn from Calling Bullshit
Tomas sat in a quarterly review, watching a colleague present a chart showing his department's output climbing steadily while a rival team's flattened. Tomas felt quiet satisfaction, then noticed the two charts used different time windows, one stretching back a full year, the other only the last quarter. He said nothing in the meeting, unsure whether pointing it out would look petty. Afterward he pulled the underlying numbers himself and found that, viewed on the same timeline, both teams had grown at roughly the same pace. He brought the comparison to his manager privately, framing it as a question about how the report was built rather than an accusation. The conversation that followed was more productive than the original meeting, and Tomas realized that raising a quiet, specific question had done more for his credibility than staying silent ever would have.
The whole book, compressed
This edition works through 4 core lessons — take them one at a time, not all at once.
What's different for your conditions
Tap whichever ones sound like you. Nothing here is sent or saved — it's just for your own noticing.
0 of 5 selected
The core lessons, applied to you
Comparing numbers that were never on the same footing
Tomas's discovery, that two charts used different time windows to imply different outcomes, is a quiet but common workplace version of a cherry-picked comparison. The habit worth building is checking that any two numbers placed side by side actually cover the same period, population, or method before drawing a conclusion.
Not every mismatched comparison is deliberate, since reports built on different schedules often differ by accident. Practice: before accepting a side-by-side comparison at work, check that both numbers share the same time window and definition.
Before accepting a side-by-side comparison at work, check that both numbers share the same time window and definition.
Presenting your own work without dressing up the chart
The same instinct to make output look better than it is applies to your own dashboards, not just a colleague's. Tomas's decision to bring the discrepancy to his manager as a question, rather than quietly fixing his own future reports, modeled the standard he wanted to hold his own work to.
A workplace that punishes any admission of a weak quarter makes full transparency personally risky, and that reality has to be navigated, not ignored. Practice: before presenting your own results, ask a colleague to check whether your chart would look the same drawn a less flattering way.
Before presenting your own results, ask a colleague to check whether your chart would look the same drawn a less flattering way.
Crediting the right cause for a good quarter
When output rises after a new tool is introduced, it is tempting to credit that one change and ignore other things shifting at the same time, from headcount to seasonal demand. A causal claim about your own or a colleague's work is only useful if it says clearly what result would have disproven it.
Workplaces rarely allow controlled comparisons, so some professional causal claims will remain reasonable judgment rather than proof. Practice: before crediting one change for a result, name one other factor that shifted in the same period.
Before crediting one change for a result, name one other factor that shifted in the same period.
Raising doubt as a form of professional trust
Questioning a colleague's numbers is not the same as accusing them of dishonesty, and treating it that way makes workplaces worse at catching honest mistakes rather than better at it. Tomas's quiet, private question protected both his colleague's standing and the integrity of the decision the report would inform, the kind of care that builds long-term trust rather than the short-term appearance of agreement bought by staying silent.
The sharpest tension for career professionals is between maintaining a collegial relationship and raising a real concern about someone else's numbers, since direct challenge can damage a relationship even when warranted. Tomas's approach, taking the question to his manager privately and framing it around the report rather than the colleague, shows one workable path: separate critique of the data from any judgment of the person who produced it.
Name one thing, honestly
- Which comparison at your workplace have you accepted without checking that both sides used the same measure? - How comfortable are you raising a data concern about a colleague's work, and what would make it easier? - Where in your own reporting might you be tempted to frame a number more favorably than it deserves?
Good. Now look back at the "Try this" line under whichever lesson feels most connected to what you just wrote, and treat that as this week's actual assignment — not all 4 at once.
The practices from this edition
0 of 3 selected
Run this for seven days
Before crediting one change for a result, name one other factor that shifted in the same period.