When an owner avoids the conversation with reality, profit tells the story. When an owner avoids the conversation about people, profit tells the story. When an owner avoids the conversation about the future, profit eventually tells that story as well.
The numbers do not speak in a human voice, but they are rarely silent. They record the cost of delay with remarkable patience.
There is a particular silence that occasionally arrives in an accountant’s office, and it is not the silence of people thinking carefully. It is the silence of people who already know the answer but have spent months, sometimes years, trying not to say it aloud.
I saw that silence many times over more than forty years. It usually sat between husbands and wives, brothers and sisters, business partners, parents and children, or sometimes between a business owner and the version of themselves they had been trying to sell to the world.
The numbers might have been on the desk, but the numbers were not really the problem. The problem was that everyone in the room had been waiting for someone else to begin the conversation.
One husband would look at the floor. His wife would look at me. The son would scroll through his phone pretending not to understand the seriousness of the meeting, while the father would explain for the third time that things were “a bit tight” but that the next few months should turn around.
That phrase, “the next few months,” has carried more false hope than almost any phrase I heard in business. It allowed owners to postpone difficult decisions, delay honest conversations and convince themselves that the truth had not yet become urgent.
In one family business, the truth had been urgent for almost two years. They were not yet insolvent in the technical sense, but they were already emotionally insolvent, because the family had exhausted the goodwill required to keep pretending.
The business had started well enough. It was a small wholesale operation supplying goods to local retailers, and for a long time it provided a decent living for a husband, wife and their eldest son. They were hardworking people, decent people, and like so many family businesses they had built the enterprise with more sacrifice than strategy.
The trouble began quietly, as it nearly always does. Margins tightened, customers delayed payments, a few suppliers became less patient, and the son began taking on responsibilities without ever being properly trained to understand the financial consequences of his decisions.
Nobody wanted to criticise him because he was family. Nobody wanted to challenge the father because he had founded the business. Nobody wanted to burden the mother because she had already carried the bookwork, the staff worries and the emotional weather of the place for too long.
So they kept working. They worked harder, stayed longer, borrowed a bit more, juggled the BAS, stretched creditors and told each other that loyalty would eventually be rewarded.
By the time they came to see me, the difficult conversation was no longer difficult because it was complicated. It was difficult because it was overdue.
The father thought they needed a restructure. The son thought they needed more sales. The mother thought they needed to stop lying to themselves, although she did not use those words at first.
She had the clearest view because she had been closest to the daily pressure. She knew which suppliers had started ringing twice. She knew which payments had been made late. She knew which staff member had quietly asked whether the business was all right.
She also knew that the business could not afford the son’s wage, the father’s drawings and the family’s lifestyle at the same time. She had known it for months, but knowing something and being allowed to say it are often two different things inside a family business.
Eventually she said it. She said it softly, without anger, and that somehow made it land harder.
“We can’t keep paying everyone as if nothing has changed,” she said. “Something has changed, and we have all been pretending it hasn’t.”
That was the meeting. Not the spreadsheets, not the tax position, not the creditor list, not the overdraft facility, and not the possible restructure. The meeting was the moment one person finally said what everyone else had avoided.
They were not twenty days too late in any literal sense. They were probably twenty months too late, perhaps longer, because the warning signs had been there long before the bank balance made them impossible to ignore.
That is the cruelty of avoided conversations. They do not disappear because we refuse to have them. They simply gather interest.
The First Conversation: What Is Really Going On?
The first conversation every business owner avoids is the conversation with reality. It sounds simple, but it is often the hardest conversation of all because business owners are remarkably skilled at explaining away what they do not want to see.
A poor month becomes a seasonal issue. A poor quarter becomes a timing issue. A poor year becomes the result of government policy, difficult customers, staff shortages, bank behaviour, weather, freight costs, fuel prices, interest rates or whatever other explanation seems available at the time.
Sometimes those explanations are partly true. Business does not happen in a vacuum, and every owner is affected by conditions beyond their control.
The danger is not in recognising outside pressures. The danger is in using outside pressures to avoid looking at the decisions inside the business.
I have sat with business owners who could explain the market with impressive detail but could not tell me which products actually made them money. I have listened to owners complain about customers paying late while never admitting that they had trained those same customers to pay late by refusing to enforce terms.
I have seen businesses blame competitors for discounting while quietly matching those discounts themselves. I have seen owners blame staff for inefficiency while refusing to invest in systems, training or proper supervision.
Reality is rarely as flattering as the story we tell ourselves. That does not mean business owners are dishonest people, because most are not. It means they are human.
We all prefer stories that protect our identity. The builder wants to believe he is a good judge of jobs, the retailer wants to believe the next season will recover the last one, the professional wants to believe every client is worth keeping, and the farmer wants to believe one good year will repair three difficult ones.
Sometimes they are right. Sometimes the next season, job, client, crop or contract does change the picture.
The problem is that hope becomes dangerous when it replaces measurement. A business owner can be optimistic and still honest, but they cannot be safely optimistic if they refuse to look at the evidence.
The conversation with reality begins with simple questions. Are we making money? Are we making cash? Are the owners being paid properly? Are the tax obligations being funded as they arise? Are the debts reducing, increasing or simply moving from one pocket to another?
Those questions are not technical. They are adult questions, and in business they must be asked before circumstances force the answers upon you.
One of the great misunderstandings in small business is the belief that financial statements are produced for the accountant, the bank or the tax office. They may be used by all three, but that is not their primary value.
The primary value of financial statements is that they remove some of the fog. They do not explain everything, and they certainly do not replace judgement, but they give the owner a chance to deal with what is happening rather than what they wish was happening.
Many owners only read their numbers after the year is finished. By then, the numbers have become a history lesson rather than a steering wheel.
A set of accounts prepared months after year-end might tell you where the business has been. It cannot help much with the decisions that should have been made when the trouble was still forming.
That is where many “twenty days too late” moments begin. The business owner does not fail because the accounts were wrong. The business owner fails because the accounts were ignored until they no longer offered choices.
In the family wholesale business, the numbers had been whispering for a long time. Gross profit had slipped, wages had crept up, stock was not turning quickly enough, and drawings had become disconnected from available cash.
None of those things arrived as a thunderclap. They arrived in small movements, the way most danger arrives in business.
Had the family sat down twelve months earlier and had the conversation with reality, they may still have had options. They could have reduced stock, changed pricing, altered wages, renegotiated roles, reviewed customer terms or changed the way the son was being introduced into the business.
Instead, they treated the discomfort as a phase. By the time they named the problem, the problem had grown old enough to defend itself.
The Second Conversation: Who Is Hurting the Business?
The second conversation every business owner avoids is the conversation about people. This is often more painful than the conversation about money because money does not have feelings, whereas people most certainly do.
Every business eventually has someone who no longer fits. It may be an employee, a customer, a supplier, a partner, a family member or even the owner themselves.
That does not mean the person is bad. It means the relationship between that person and the business is no longer working.
Business owners are often slow to admit this because they confuse kindness with avoidance. They tell themselves they are being loyal, patient or understanding, when in truth they are postponing a conversation they do not want to have.
I have seen employers keep poor staff because they did not want confrontation. I have seen businesses keep unprofitable customers because the owner liked being liked. I have seen family members paid wages that bore no relationship to their contribution because nobody wanted Christmas lunch to become awkward.
I have seen partnerships continue long after trust had disappeared. The business still traded, invoices still went out and wages still got paid, but the partnership itself had died years earlier and nobody had arranged the funeral.
The people conversation is hard because business is not only commercial. It is personal, especially in small business, where the same people often share history, family ties, friendships, local football clubs, school committees, marriages, divorces and funerals.
In a large corporation, a poor employee may be a performance management matter. In a small country business, that employee may be the cousin of your best customer, the coach of your child’s team or the person who stood beside you when your father died.
That is why simple textbook advice can sound ridiculous to real business owners. “Just let them go” is easy to say when you do not have to live in the town afterwards.
Still, avoiding the conversation does not remove the cost. It usually increases it, because unresolved people problems spread through a business like damp through a wall.
One poor employee can change the mood of a workplace. One entitled family member can demoralise everyone else. One difficult customer can consume the attention that should have been given to better customers.
A business owner may think they are keeping the peace, but often they are merely shifting the conflict onto other people. The reliable staff carry the unreliable ones, the profitable customers subsidise the unprofitable ones, and the sensible family members absorb the consequences of the difficult ones.
This is where many owners mistake silence for stability. They look around and see that nobody is arguing, so they assume the problem is contained.
Often it is not contained at all. It is simply being paid for by someone quieter.
I once dealt with a trade business where the owner had one employee who was technically competent but culturally poisonous. He could do the work, and on a good day he could do it very well, but he left a trail of resentment behind him.
Apprentices did not want to work with him. Other staff stopped making suggestions because he ridiculed them. Customers tolerated him because the work got done, but they did not particularly enjoy having him on site.
The owner knew all of this. He also knew that the employee had been with him for many years and that replacing him would be inconvenient.
So the owner did what many owners do. He complained privately, hoped publicly, and acted never.
By the time he finally dealt with the matter, two good staff had already left. They did not leave because they hated the business. They left because they concluded that the owner valued avoiding conflict more than he valued protecting the people who were doing the right thing.
That is an expensive lesson. Losing one difficult employee is a problem, but losing two good employees because of one difficult employee is a failure of leadership.
The twenty days too late moment in that business did not happen on the day the employee finally left. It happened much earlier, on one of the many days when the owner saw the damage and decided to have the conversation later.
Later is a dangerous word in business. It sounds reasonable, but it often means “when I am forced.”
The people conversation does not always end with dismissal, separation or confrontation. Sometimes it ends with clearer expectations, better training, a changed role, a pricing adjustment or a more honest agreement about what the business can afford.
The point is not to be ruthless. The point is to be truthful.
Truth gives people a chance. Avoidance gives them a performance in which everyone slowly becomes exhausted.
In family businesses, this conversation becomes even more delicate because roles are often inherited rather than designed. Someone becomes the bookkeeper because they were available. Someone becomes the manager because they were the eldest. Someone becomes the future owner because that was assumed before anyone asked whether it made sense.
Those assumptions can sit undisturbed for years. Everyone thinks they know what everyone else expects, but nobody has tested whether those expectations are realistic.
Then a parent becomes tired, a child becomes resentful, a spouse becomes anxious, or the business reaches a point where wages, ownership and control can no longer remain vague. The conversation finally arrives, but it arrives carrying years of unspoken emotion.
The kindest time to have a people conversation is before resentment hardens. Once resentment has hardened, even reasonable words can sound like accusations.
The Third Conversation: What Happens Next?
The third conversation every business owner avoids is the conversation about the future. It is avoided because it asks the owner to imagine a business without the comforting assumption that tomorrow will look much like today.
This conversation includes succession, retirement, illness, death, sale, exit, partnership breakdown, key staff dependency, ownership transfer and what happens if the person holding everything together can no longer hold everything together.
Business owners are practical people in many ways, but they can become strangely superstitious about planning for the future. They act as though discussing illness will invite illness, discussing death will hasten death, and discussing exit will somehow weaken commitment to the business.
So they keep going. They put the matter in the drawer marked “one day,” which is perhaps the most overcrowded drawer in Australian business.
One day we will talk to the children. One day we will update the wills. One day we will review the company structure. One day we will work out whether the farm can support two families. One day we will train someone else to deal with the key customers.
One day we will sell. One day we will slow down. One day we will find out what the business is worth.
The trouble with “one day” is that it is not a date. It is often just a hiding place.
I have seen owners reach their sixties with no real plan for exit, even though the business had been their largest asset for decades. They knew what their house was worth, they knew roughly what was in superannuation, and they could tell you the price of a new ute within five minutes of being asked.
Yet they had no reliable idea what the business was worth or who would buy it. They had spent a lifetime building something and very little time considering how to leave it.
This is not because they were foolish. It is because the future conversation feels like a challenge to identity.
For many owners, the business is not merely an asset. It is proof of effort, resilience, status, belonging and usefulness.
Asking “what happens next?” can feel like asking “who will I be when this is gone?” That is not a financial question, although it eventually becomes one.
I once dealt with a professional practice where the principal had built a strong client base over many years. The practice made good income, the clients trusted him, and from the outside it looked like a valuable business.
The problem was that almost all of the goodwill sat in one person. Clients came because of him, staff deferred to him, referral sources knew him, and the systems existed mostly in his head.
He talked occasionally about selling, but he did not like any of the conversations that followed. If we discussed bringing in a younger partner, he worried about losing control. If we discussed documenting systems, he said he did not have time. If we discussed reducing personal dependency, he insisted clients expected to deal with him.
He was right about the last point, which was precisely the problem. The clients expected to deal with him because the business had never trained them to expect anything else.
By the time health forced him to slow down, the practice was still profitable but far less saleable than he had imagined. The income was real, but the transferable value was weaker because the business had remained too dependent on the owner.
That is one of the great traps in small business. The owner works so hard to become indispensable that they accidentally reduce the value of what they have built.
The future conversation should have happened years earlier. It did not need to be dramatic, and it did not need to result in immediate retirement, but it did need to begin while options still existed.
The conversation might have been as simple as asking how the business could operate if the owner took three months away. That question reveals more than most owners expect.
Who would make decisions? Who would deal with the bank? Who would speak to the largest customers? Who understands the pricing? Who knows the passwords, leases, supplier arrangements, debt facilities, software systems and insurance details?
If the answer to most of those questions is one person, the business is not as strong as it looks. It may be profitable, busy and respected, but it is still fragile.
A fragile business can provide an income for years. It may not provide an exit.
That distinction matters because profit and value are not the same thing. A business can support an owner while the owner is inside it and still be difficult to sell when the owner wants to leave.
The conversation about the future is not only about retirement. It is also about fairness, especially where family is involved.
If one child works in the business and another does not, what is fair? If the farm can only support one family, what happens to the others? If a business partner wants out, how is the price set and funded?
These are not questions to be solved at the funeral, during a health crisis or after a marriage breakdown. They are questions to be discussed while people still have the emotional and financial capacity to make decent decisions.
The Hidden Cost of Keeping the Peace
Many business owners avoid these conversations because they are trying to keep the peace. That motive is understandable, and in many cases it comes from decency rather than weakness.
The problem is that peace built on avoidance is not real peace. It is merely delayed conflict.
In the family wholesale business, nobody wanted to upset anyone. The father did not want the son to feel judged, the son did not want to disappoint his parents, and the mother did not want to be the person who finally said the business could not continue on its current path.
They all loved each other. That love was genuine, but it did not pay suppliers, reduce debt or create a workable wage structure.
By avoiding the conversation, they did not protect the family. They placed the family under greater pressure.
This is a pattern I saw again and again. Owners postpone hard conversations because they fear the damage those conversations might cause, but they underestimate the damage already being caused by not having them.
The unpaid tax debt grows. The good staff leave. The overdraft becomes permanent. The silent partner becomes angry. The spouse loses sleep. The children inherit assumptions rather than clarity.
Then one day the conversation can no longer be avoided. By then, the tone is different because choice has been replaced by necessity.
It is one thing to say, “We need to review wages so the business remains healthy.” It is quite another to say, “We cannot pay wages next week.”
It is one thing to say, “This customer is taking too much time for too little return.” It is quite another to say, “We have no capacity left for the customers who actually make us money.”
It is one thing to say, “We need a succession plan.” It is quite another to say, “Dad is in hospital and nobody knows how the business works.”
The words may be similar, but the power behind them changes. Early conversations are planning conversations. Late conversations are rescue conversations.
A business owner should try very hard not to confuse the two.
Why Smart People Avoid Obvious Conversations
It is tempting to think that avoidance happens because people do not understand the facts. Sometimes that is true, but often the facts are perfectly clear.
Smart people avoid obvious conversations for emotional reasons. They fear conflict, embarrassment, disappointment, loss of identity or the possibility that saying the truth aloud will make it impossible to continue pretending.
There is also a peculiar burden that falls on business owners. They are expected to be confident even when they are uncertain, calm even when they are worried, and decisive even when every option carries a cost.
That expectation can make honesty feel like failure. An owner may think, “If I admit this is not working, people will think I do not know what I am doing.”
The opposite is usually true. The best owners I dealt with were not the ones who never had problems. They were the ones who admitted problems early enough to do something about them.
There is a quiet courage in saying, “I do not like what I am seeing.” There is another kind of courage in saying, “I need help understanding what this means.”
Those statements do not weaken a business owner. They strengthen the possibility of making a sensible decision.
The weakest position is often the performance of certainty when the owner is privately full of doubt. That performance might impress people for a while, but the numbers will eventually call for an encore that cannot be delivered.
In some businesses, the owner avoids the conversation because they already know the answer will require sacrifice. They know drawings may need to reduce, prices may need to rise, staff roles may need to change, or a family member may need to be told that the business cannot carry them.
These are not pleasant matters. Nobody should pretend they are easy.
Yet the discomfort of the conversation should be compared with the discomfort of the consequence. A difficult meeting in March may prevent a crisis in June, while an awkward conversation with a staff member may prevent the resignation of two better staff members later.
This is the arithmetic of avoidance. The cost is rarely removed. It is usually compounded.
The Adviser’s Role
A good adviser is not there merely to prepare accounts, lodge returns or explain tax rules. A good adviser should sometimes help the owner have the conversation they have been avoiding.
That does not mean the adviser becomes a family counsellor, psychologist, mediator or business celebrity with a whiteboard full of slogans. It means the adviser has a responsibility to speak plainly when the evidence is plain.
There were times in my career when the most useful thing I could say was not technical at all. It was something like, “You already know this cannot keep going the way it is.”
That sentence rarely surprised anyone. It usually gave permission for the conversation to begin.
Business owners often know more than they admit. They sense when a customer is wrong, when a staff member is damaging the culture, when the bank is becoming nervous, when the tax debt is becoming dangerous, or when the family succession story does not add up.
What they need is not always more information. Sometimes they need someone independent enough to say, “Let us stop dancing around it.”
Of course, advisers can also become part of the avoidance. If the accountant only speaks in technical language, the owner may never hear the practical warning. If the adviser is too timid, too busy or too focused on compliance, the deeper business issue may remain untouched.
That is why the relationship matters. A business owner should have advisers who are willing to ask uncomfortable questions without enjoying the discomfort.
There is a difference between being blunt and being careless. The aim is not to embarrass the owner, because embarrassment rarely improves decision-making.
The aim is to create enough honesty for action. That requires respect, timing and the willingness to sit in the awkward space where the real issue finally appears.
What the Three Conversations Have in Common
The conversation with reality, the conversation about people and the conversation about the future may seem different, but they share a common thread. Each one asks the business owner to trade comfort now for options later.
That is the essence of good business management. It is not about avoiding every problem, because that is impossible. It is about dealing with problems while they are still small enough to be shaped.
A cash flow issue identified early might be managed. A staff issue addressed early might be repaired. A succession issue discussed early might become an orderly plan rather than a family fracture.
Delay removes shape. The longer a problem is left alone, the fewer forms of solution remain available.
This is why the best businesses are not always the cleverest, the largest or the most aggressive. Often they are simply the least surprised.
They are not least surprised because nothing goes wrong. Things go wrong in every business.
They are least surprised because they have built the habit of asking questions before the questions become emergencies. They look at the numbers, talk about people, discuss the future and accept that discomfort is part of ownership.
A business without difficult conversations is not a healthy business. It may simply be a business where the truth has nowhere to sit.
Practical Ways to Begin
There is no perfect way to begin a difficult conversation. Waiting for the perfect words is often just another form of delay.
A useful starting point is to name the concern without exaggeration. “I am worried about the cash flow” is better than pretending everything is fine until the bank account proves otherwise.
Another useful starting point is to separate the person from the problem. “This role is no longer working for the business” is different from “You are the problem,” and that distinction can prevent a necessary conversation from becoming a personal attack.
It also helps to bring evidence rather than emotion alone. A conversation about drawings is easier when the cash flow is visible, a conversation about a customer is easier when the time and margin are measured, and a conversation about succession is easier when the dependency on one person is honestly mapped.
The goal is not to win an argument. The goal is to give the business a chance to become less fragile.
In family businesses, it can be wise to involve an outside adviser before the conversation becomes explosive. Not because the adviser has magical answers, but because a third party can sometimes keep the discussion attached to facts when history starts walking into the room.
History always walks into the room in family business. Every old grievance, sacrifice, assumption and unspoken debt seems to arrive just as the discussion reaches the hard part.
That does not mean family businesses should avoid these conversations. It means they should respect the emotional weight of them and prepare accordingly.
No family should discover its business plan during a crisis. No business partner should discover the exit plan during a dispute. No owner should discover the weakness of their structure when the bank, the tax office or a health event has removed the time needed to respond.
The purpose of these conversations is not drama. The purpose is dignity.
Dignity comes from dealing with matters while people still have choices. It comes from saying hard things early enough for those hard things to be useful.
The Meeting After the Meeting
In my experience, the most important meeting was often not the formal meeting. It was the meeting after the meeting.
People would leave the office, sit in the car, drive home, stop for fuel, walk into the workshop or return to the kitchen table. That was where the real conversation continued.
Sometimes the office meeting merely cracked the door open. The owner still had to walk through it.
In the wholesale family business, the meeting did not magically fix the problem. There were still difficult weeks ahead, and not every decision felt fair to everyone.
The son’s role had to change. Drawings had to reduce. Stock had to be cleared. The family had to accept that the business was not large enough to fund every expectation that had been placed upon it.
There was disappointment, but there was also relief. Once the truth had been spoken, the family no longer had to waste energy maintaining the performance.
That is an underrated benefit of honesty. It releases energy that avoidance consumes.
Avoidance is tiring. It requires memory, performance, defensiveness and constant adjustment to keep the story alive.
Truth can be painful, but it is usually simpler. Once a business owner stops pretending, they can begin deciding.
The family did not become wealthy from that meeting. They did not suddenly turn into a case study for business excellence.
They did, however, regain some control. That mattered.
Control in business is not always about power. Sometimes it is simply the ability to choose the next sensible step before someone else chooses it for you.
The Connection to Profit
At first glance, the three conversations in this chapter may not seem to be about profit. They seem to be about honesty, people, families, leadership and the future.
Yet profit sits underneath all of them. Profit is affected by what the owner refuses to see, who the business continues to carry, and whether the enterprise is being built as an asset or merely endured as a job.
A business can record a profit and still be unhealthy. It can show income and still be fragile. It can look successful from the outside while quietly exhausting the people inside it.
That is why profit must be understood as more than a figure on a page. It is a story about decisions, pricing, discipline, customers, staff, systems, risk and time.
When an owner avoids the conversation with reality, profit tells the story. When an owner avoids the conversation about people, profit tells the story. When an owner avoids the conversation about the future, profit eventually tells that story as well.
The numbers do not speak in a human voice, but they are rarely silent. They record the cost of delay with remarkable patience.
That is where we turn next, because profit is one of the most misunderstood words in business. Many owners chase it, some fear it, others manipulate it for tax purposes, and more than a few mistake it for cash.
Profit is not merely the result of a business year. It is the story the business has been writing all along, whether the owner has been reading it or not.
Author
