In this post, we explore a quiet epidemic on decision-making: ignoring data that doesn’t confirm what we want to be true. From slipping KPIs to user feedback we’d rather not hear, we dig into why teams often rationalize, reframe, or flat-out reject inconvenient data.  It’s not about the information being disagreeable, it’s about a lack of nerve to accept it.  

One of the biggest threats to your project isn’t a lack of information, it’s your reaction to it.

The Data Nobody Wants to Talk About

A focus group attempted to get customer feedback on the display and packaging of a new hand tool.  The group consisted of about 15 construction contractors.  Behind the glass sat the marketing team for the company, the founders and few others who had spent time and money developing the tool. As the facilitator led the group through the discussion to gain their feedback on the in-store presentation of the product, the conversation quickly turned as to what was the purpose of the tool and why they should need it.  One construction contractor went so far as to ask “Why would I want another tool in my bag when I can do the same thing with a screwdriver and pliers?”

From behind the glass, the executives were pissed. They watched in disbelief as the focus group shredded their prized product, not with malice, but with indifference. The company turn on the research firm accusing them of botching the recruiting, of asking leading questions, of sabotaging the entire session. It was clear, someone else was at fault for they had put so much effort into making the tool, in setting up manufacturing, developing distribution networks to ship thousands of these things. Their investor group was promised it would be a success.

And here was this group of people, the ideal customer for which this tool was to be sold, telling them it wasn’t needed. The problem it was intended to solve was already solved in other ways.  The company just couldn’t accept it.

This is a typical example of data no one wants. On personal terms, it’s calling someone’s baby ugly. It goes against what we’ve conditioned ourselves to be true, it challenges the things we’ve invested money, and more importantly our time, working towards in the believe the effort will payoff when in fact data indicated it won’t. Naturally people shy away from such news and enter into denial.

Data is neither good nor bad.  It is just an indicator.  Nothing more and nothing less.  Our interpretation of the data is what makes the implications good or bad. While a high monthly financial spend against a fixed budget may not be inherently negative, it becomes concerning if progress falls short of expectations based what was anticipated. 

And that is where everyone gets hung up.  Data is just the data; it’s not the message.  We tend to blame the data for what it is telling us, we assume it can’t be right, or there was some flaw affecting it.

In the above example, the company paid for another focus group with different participants. The results were the same. The data showed the target customers for the tool didn’t feel they needed the product and pretty packaging wasn’t going to help. The company leaders still didn’t want to believe the results and proceeded to go to market anyway.

The Psychology of Avoiding the Truth

We often resist what the data is trying to tell us, and not because the numbers are unclear. More often it’s because we want our opinions or past efforts to be validated. Admitting the data points in a different direction can feel like admitting we wanted time, money, or energy on something that won’t work. It can also mean owning up to being wrong, or facing the hard reality that a tough correction lies ahead. And sometimes, even when the facts are obvious, interpersonal conflicts or politics get in the way. One-sided truths don’t always land well in a dynamic environment.

Seeking validation for our opinions, or confirmation bias, we tend to look for information that supports our beliefs. Evidence gets interpreted towards a favorable message saying what we assumed to be correct is indeed correct. Anything conflicting with that interpretation is rejected or ignored. As a result, we only accept that data which overlaps with our beliefs. This confirmation bias comes from our own memory and experiences, searching for data in one-side ways, and the information we are exposed to in our daily lives which steer our thinking one way or another. 

Another reason we don’t like the data is because we’ve already invested so much. The sunk cost fallacy is continuing to persist in an endeavor because you’ve already invested a lot in it, and not because of the future payout or costs. This leads to poor decision-making by prioritizing past expenditures over future options. We naturally become adverse to admitting we wasted the time and money on something which isn’t working out. This includes social pressure to preserve our reputation, and feel the need to justify what has been done in the past.

When we look at and accept data, we may need to make changes, some of which can be quite uncomfortable. Fear of change is our anxiety in having to deal with new situations, or having to confront decisions which can have drastic implications on our lives and the lives of those around us. After all, it’s hard to go tell your boss you’ve just spent $4M on something for which there is no market. And it’s hard to get fired for it and see most of your team let go because the money was spent. Fear of change gets into our minds and we tend to avoid what must be done because we don’t like what could happen. Therefore, it’s easier to pretend the data doesn’t say what it actually says.

Then there’s the internal politics. When a fellow executive invests millions in building a product line for a product that no one wants, they will do whatever it takes to keep it afloat. Whether it’s a sense of self-preservation or an emotional attachment to the effort, they will manipulate the data to make things appear better than they actually are. However, when someone calls them out for it, they take it personally. They can respond with hostility, or they take the passive aggressive route all in an attempt to avoid facing the facts.

People avoid confronting the facts for various reasons, and these aren’t the only ones. I won’t delve into further the details here. It’s worth noting, however, that our own ego often prevents us from accepting data that doesn’t align with our preferences. 

Signs You’re Avoiding the Data

As was said earlier, data is just data. Its is neither good nor bad. Yet when confronted with what we don’t like, we avoid it. This can take on various forms, and all show you don’t like what is being said. Here are a couple.

The first is questioning the credibility of the data and the data collection.  In the example above, the tool company blamed the focus group and the research firm for the message. They thought the group was the wrong group or the process was biased. They couldn’t accept the message, even when the process was repeated a second time. Now don’t get me wrong, it’s always a good idea to question the data and how it was collected.  However, the constant refusal to accept the results or blaming the process is a clear sign you are trying to avoid what the data is telling you.

Another sign is editing the data. Many manager and directors insist on “filtering” the message before it flow upward within the organization. These leaders feel they must polish the data picture before it goes to senior leaders for the reasons mentioned above. Some organizations go so far as to say no bad news ever goes upward as the executive leadership wants a company of “yes men” who make them, and their decisions, to look good for the quarter. Anytime you feel the need to edit the data before sharing shows you, or your organization, can’t accept the hard truth the data presents.

Finally, you procrastinate. You delay having discussions. You delay making decisions. Confronting the data and the resulting interpretation makes you anxious for any number of reasons.  And while you know things need to be dealt with, you delay taking steps to address the issues. As a result things stagnate and anxiety increases.

Data Isn’t the Problem – Ego Is

It’s hard when confronted with data we don’t like, we need the courage to accept it. In theory, data is neutral.  It’s just information in the form of numbers, patterns, trends, and insights waiting to be understood. In practice, however, data rarely speak louder than ego. For it isn’t the numbers which derail decision-making, it’s the people who refuse to listen to them.

Ego shows up when people clings to being right, even in the face of clear evidence. It show up when data is filtered through personal bias, or discarded because its uncomfortable to protect reputations, narratives, or past investments. Ego turns a useful dataset into a threat, feedback into an attack, and treats learning as a loss.

That is how good things go bad. It’s not because the data wasn’t there, but because someone decided they knew better. It’s not that the truth was hidden, it’s that the truth was just inconvenient. Until leaders can put their egos aside, data can’t provide anything meaningful and insights mean nothing. Progress dies not from the lack of information but rather from the lack of humility.

What to Do Instead: Handling Uncomfortable Truths

Uncomfortable truths from data are inevitable. In the environments where innovation, growth or change are involved, frequent budget over runs, schedule delays, and test failures occur. The real skill isn’t in avoiding those issues which affect our perfect little world, but learning to face them in a responsible and mature manner. That starts with shifting the mindset accepting truth isn’t the enemy, but rather a compass. Regardless of how disruptive or painful the insight may be, it’s far better to deal with it directly than continue down a path built on delusion.

The first step in handling these uncomfortable truths is to pause defensiveness. When difficult feedback or data surfaces, resist the urge to explain it away or to assign blame.  Instead, get curious.  Ask what it means, what it reveals, and what it demands.  It’s not about who’s at fault, it’s about what reality is trying to tell you.

Secondly, create a safe space for open communication. Allow people to feel they can share not only the good news but the bad. If you want honest input, you have to make it safe for people to do so. Reward candor, or at the very least, thanking people for providing it instead of shooting the messenger. Remember, the discomfort in dealing with the information is a signal of growth, not a threat to control.

Finally, when given data which is not as expected, act on it. Don’t just let it sit. No follow-thru or course correction is the same as ignoring the data hoping it’s not there. Making different decisions, developing better strategies or charting new directions when faced with hard realities is what makes someone great. Just remember the goal isn’t to be right, rather to make things right. That only happens when you accept those uncomfortable truths and insights which data provides.

Closing Thoughts: Clarity Beats Comfort Every Time

Denial is expensive. Every time we ignore a hard truth, delay a tough conversation or dismiss inconvenient data, we buy time at the cost of clarity. But the world keeps moving and eventually reality catches up with or without your permission.

The most successful leaders and teams aren’t the ones who always get it right the first time. They’re the ones who accept reality early on, welcome feedback, and adjust course before the damage can compound. They treat data, regardless of its form, as a strategic asset and not as a personal attack.

Because in the end, the truth doesn’t get easier with time, it just gets more expensive and painful. You will have to deal with it at some point whether you like it or not. The only question is whether you’ll meet it on your terms, or be blindsided by it later.