Why being right can still be the wrong business decision

The decision? Replacing fresh milk with long-life milk.

I was managing a multi-million-dollar budget in a large contact centre. We spent almost $400 a week on fresh milk, and a surprising amount was being tipped down the sink. By changing what we purchased, I calculated we could save around $15,000 annually and redirect those funds into staff rewards and recognition.

I consulted the team, gained approval and made the switch.

Then a visiting senior manager opened the kitchen fridge and asked where the “real milk” had gone. I explained the savings. He told me to reinstate the fresh milk.

I didn’t agree. Rather than exploring why it mattered to him, I defended my calculation. The disagreement eventually reached the desk of an Executive General Manager. Months later, when I interviewed to make my acting management position permanent, the incident came up again.

I had been right about the numbers. I had been considerably less wise about how I handled the disagreement.

For small business owners, that’s a distinction worth understanding.

A good spreadsheet isn’t the whole business case

Most owners have to watch expenses closely. Whether it’s supplier costs, rosters, subscriptions or wastage, a dollar saved can make a meaningful difference.

But the cheapest option isn’t automatically the best business decision.

I saw milk as a consumable expense. I later came to understand that others could see it as a small, everyday sign of care and generosity. I was measuring the cost of the product without properly considering what changing it might communicate.

The same thing can happen when a business removes a staff perk, changes a familiar process, cuts customer service hours or switches a supplier people trust.

None of this means an owner should avoid difficult decisions. Sometimes costs genuinely need to come down. It means asking a second question alongside “What will we save?”

“What might we lose?”

The hidden bill for proving a point

The milk decision was supposed to release money for something more valuable. Instead, I devoted time and attention to an argument about a decision that had already been made.

There were costs beyond the purchase order: conversations that went nowhere, tension with senior colleagues and an avoidable question about my judgement.

Those costs don’t appear neatly in the accounts, but small businesses know them well. An owner spending an afternoon defending a minor decision isn’t spending it serving customers, developing staff, quoting work or planning the next month.

That doesn’t mean every disagreement is a waste of time. There are decisions involving safety, fairness, financial survival or legal obligations where you must stand your ground.

The skill is recognising when you’re protecting something important, and when you’re protecting the satisfaction of being right.

Five questions to ask before digging in

When a decision meets resistance, I encourage leaders to work through five questions before they escalate it.

1. What problem are we really solving?

My problem wasn’t fresh milk. It was waste. I treated switching products as the solution, when reducing order quantities or changing delivery frequency might also have worked.

Define the problem clearly enough that you can consider more than one answer.

2. Who experiences the change?

An efficiency improvement for the owner may feel like a loss of convenience or respect for an employee. For a customer, it may feel like lower service quality. Ask the people affected what matters to them before assuming the impact is negligible.

Listening doesn’t require agreement. It gives you information. The Australian Government’s guide to managing change in your business makes a similar point: explain the reasons for a change, and encourage staff to share suggestions and concerns.

3. Is this a principle or a preference?

There’s a difference between refusing to compromise on safety standards and insisting everyone use your preferred office supplies.

If the issue concerns integrity, obligations or a serious business risk, explain the non-negotiable clearly. If it’s mostly a matter of preference, allow room to move.

4. What’s the cost of continuing this argument?

Consider the money at stake, but also the time, attention and relationships involved.

Would you willingly spend another half-day on this? Would the outcome justify damaging trust with a valued employee, partner or customer? If not, you may have reached the point of diminishing returns.

5. What evidence would change my mind?

This is perhaps the hardest question. If the answer is “nothing”, the conversation may no longer be about finding the best solution.

Being willing to reconsider is not indecision. It’s evidence that the outcome matters more to you than your original idea.

How to challenge a decision without creating a battle

You can disagree firmly and still keep the conversation constructive.

Start with the business objective: “I’m trying to reduce waste so we can put more money into the team.”

Then show curiosity: “What am I missing about how this change affects people?”

Where appropriate, suggest an alternative or a short trial. A café owner considering cheaper takeaway packaging, for example, could test whether customers notice a difference before committing to a permanent change.

Finally, be willing to close the discussion. Once the person responsible has made a decision, continuing to reargue it rarely builds confidence in your judgement. If there is a genuine material risk, document it respectfully and follow the appropriate process. Otherwise, move forward.

That last step was the one I struggled with.

Make reflection part of the decision

Leaders often review whether a decision achieved its financial target. Fewer make time to ask how it was implemented.

After a significant change or disagreement, ask:

• Did we solve the original problem?
• Who was affected?
• Did we listen early enough?
• Did our behaviour strengthen or weaken trust?
• What would we change next time?

If I could replay the milk conversation, I wouldn’t throw away the budget work. I’d simply say, “I thought I’d found a sensible way to save $15,000. I can see this matters more than I realised. Let’s keep the fresh milk and find another way to reduce waste.”

I might have lost the argument. I would have shown better judgement.

Every business owner eventually has a version of the milk incident: a supplier dispute, a rostering decision, an employee request or a customer complaint that becomes far bigger than it needs to be.

The point isn’t to give in whenever someone objects. It’s to remember that making the best business decision and winning the argument are not always the same thing.

Sometimes the wisest move is to be willing to be wrong, even when the spreadsheet says you’re right.

About the author

James Green is the founder of Coach James, an executive and leadership coaching business serving clients across Australia and New Zealand. An IECL-trained organisational coach, he draws on more than 20 years of senior leadership experience to help leaders make clearer decisions and lead with confidence.

Common questions

Should a small business always choose the cheapest option?

No. A dollar saved can make a meaningful difference, but the cheapest option isn’t automatically the best business decision. Ask what a change might communicate to staff or customers, and what you might lose, as well as what you will save.

When should a business owner stand their ground in a disagreement?

Hold firm on decisions involving safety, fairness, financial survival, integrity or legal obligations, and explain the non-negotiable clearly. If the issue is mostly a matter of preference, allow room to move.

What should I ask before escalating a disagreement?

Ask what problem you’re really solving, who experiences the change, whether it’s a principle or a preference, what continuing the argument will cost, and what evidence would change your mind.

How can I challenge a decision without creating a battle?

Start with the business objective, show curiosity about what you might be missing, suggest an alternative or a short trial where appropriate, and be willing to close the discussion once the person responsible has decided.