Business numeracy isn’t maths

Being good with numbers isn’t being good at maths.

The people who are actually effective with data in most businesses aren’t the ones who can build complex models or run regressions. They’re the ones who’ve thought clearly about what they need to see, can tell signal from noise, and know how to turn a number into a decision.

Those are three distinct skills. Most teams are weaker at one than they realise.

Instrumentation

The first gap is what you measure. Most teams inherit their metrics—whatever the CRM spits out, whatever finance has always tracked. But what you measure is a strategic choice. It should start with outcomes: what does winning look like, and what leading and lagging indicators will tell you if you’re on track?

If you haven’t deliberately designed your instrumentation, you’re flying on someone else’s dials.

Interpretation

This is where most people think numeracy lives—reading the data. But even here, there’s more discipline than most apply. Is this movement real, or just noise? Is it material enough to act on, or just worth watching? And is it connected—part of a chain that leads somewhere, or an isolated blip?

Most “data-driven” decisions skip at least one of these questions.

Influence

The neglected skill. You can have the right metrics and read them correctly, but if you can’t turn that into a decision, it doesn’t matter.

This is the craft of presenting data: leading with the insight, making it visually obvious, building enough credibility that people trust what they’re seeing. Bad formatting, unclear titles, unstated assumptions—these kill your message before you’ve delivered it.

The pattern I keep seeing: teams that are genuinely good with numbers usually have all three. Teams that struggle are often missing one—and it’s rarely the maths.

If you want the mechanics, I’ve written up how to build this discipline as a practice.

Related: From Data to Information · One-Page AOP · Clear Writing