---
id: KB-IC-017
url: https://app.codecontract.io/help/reports-and-quality/when-the-numbers-get-worse
idioma: en
categoria: informes-y-calidad
subcategoria: informes
audiencia: usuario
nivel: intermedio
actualizado: 2026-08-13
tambienEn: [es]
relacionados: [KB-IC-011, KB-IC-006, KB-IC-020]
citadoPor: [KB-IC-018]
---

# When the numbers get worse

_Reporting a bad figure is easy with a cause and a plan attached, and very hard if reported late._

**Responde a:** how to report worsening indicators · delivering bad news in a report · explaining a figure that dropped · the percentage fell what do i say

One month the percentage falls, cycle time rises, or three incidents appear where there were none. The temptation is to wait another month in case it corrects itself. That wait is what turns a figure into a problem.

## The three ways to report it, and what each produces

| How it is reported | What it produces |
| --- | --- |
| Not at all, hoping it recovers | When it surfaces, it surfaces two months old and unexplained |
| The figure alone | Questions, alarm and an unplanned meeting |
| The figure, the cause and the plan | A decision, which was the point |

> [!IMPORTANT]
> The difference between the second and third is not tone: **the third closes the gap distrust comes through**. A worsening number with no explanation leaves the reader imagining the cause, and what they imagine is usually worse than reality — normally something about your management rather than a supplier who failed.

## How to prepare it in ten minutes

1. **Separate a case from a trend** — Four stuck files are not a deteriorating process, and saying so prevents an unnecessary reorganisation.
2. **Find the cause before writing** — It is nearly always there: a staff change, a new supplier, a workload spike.
3. **Say what you have already done** — Even if little: the reaction counts as much as the figure.
4. **And what you need, if you need anything** — It is what turns a bad figure into a reasonable request.

> [!WARNING]
> The case to be clear about: **if the figure worsened because you started measuring better, say so explicitly**. It is the commonest and least understood: recording incidents that previously went unrecorded makes them rise, and a reader without that context concludes quality has fallen exactly when control improved. That nuance is not visible in the chart.

## What does not work

**En corto**

- Comparing against an unusually good month to soften it.
- Changing the metric in the very month it worsens.
- And promising it will be fixed next month without knowing why it happened.

All three get spotted, and all three cost credibility for every later report, including the good ones.

> [!NOTE]
> If the figure worsens two months running for the same reason and nothing has been decided, the problem is no longer the figure: it is that the report is not being used to decide, which was its only purpose.

**What if I do not know the cause?**

Say that: "I do not know yet, I am looking into it" is professional; inventing one is not.

**Should I warn before the meeting?**

If it is serious, yes. Nobody wants to find out in front of others.

**What if the cause is a person?**

The report covers the process; the conversation about the person is separate and not public.

## Ejemplos

**A manager sees incidents rise right after starting to record them all.**

- Explains it in the report: they rise because they are now recorded, not because there are more

→ Management reads the figure as better control rather than falling quality.

**The share of complete files drops from ninety to seventy-two per cent in two months.**

- Compares the breakdown with the previous period to see where it comes from
- Separates whether the drop is one supplier, one area or everyone
- Checks whether anything in the process changed in between

→ The drop is explained by a specific cause rather than becoming a meeting of recriminations.

**The number worsens because forty new suppliers came in with no file.**

- Separates the new book from the established one

→ The indicator stops penalising growth.

**The indicator worsens one month and the whole process is changed.**

- Looks at six months of trend before touching anything

→ The reaction is proportionate to the problem.

**It worsens and everyone is asked to try harder.**

- Checks which specific step has lengthened

→ Effort goes where the bottleneck is.

**The way of measuring changed and nobody said so.**

- Notes any change of criteria with its date

→ The series stays comparable.

**The figure worsens and stops being shown.**

- Presents it with the cause and the plan

→ The indicator keeps supporting decisions.

**One particular person drags the team's number down.**

- Checks the detail before drawing conclusions

→ Overload is told apart from a performance problem.