Why finance reports get worse when we try to improve them

Your boss hands back your draft report with red ink everywhere.

"Can we add a section on market trends?"

"Let's include more data."

"We need another chart showing the quarterly breakdown."

Sound familiar?

Here's what almost never happens: "Can we cut this section? It's not adding value."

There's a cognitive bias at play here. When we want to improve something, our brains default to addition, not subtraction.

It's like making soup.

Soup's too bland? Most people reach for more spices. More salt. More herbs. Rarely does anyone think: "Maybe I added too much water. Let me reduce it down."

But reduction is often what makes soup (and reports) better.

Financial reports fall into this trap constantly. Draft one is 20 pages. Draft two is 30. Draft three hits 40 because everyone added their "essential" section.

Nobody asks: What can we remove? Which paragraphs are doing the same job?What would happen if we cut this entire section?

The result? Reports that are longer, denser, and harder to read. Not better. Just bigger.

Here's the shift: Next time you're reviewing a report, try the subtraction question first.

• Before asking "What's missing?" ask "What's unnecessary?"
• Before adding another chart, ask "Which chart could we delete?"
• Before expanding a section, ask "Could we cut this in half and say the same thing?"

Because clarity isn't about how much you include. It's about how much you dare to leave out.