I recently asked a contractor to amend an invoice.
Based on the information they’d provided, I couldn’t justify everything they were claiming.
Some of the items looked like duplicates.
So I worked out what I could support, started preparing the paperwork, and let them know what needed to change.
Simple enough.
Except the contractor came back and said, essentially:
“Hang on. That’s not quite what happened.”
And then they explained the work in more detail.
Oh.
Right.
That makes sense now.
Turns out the work was legitimate. The original explanation just hadn’t made that particularly clear.
Unfortunately, I’d already spent quite a bit of time preparing the reduced claim.
Which meant I now got to spend another twenty minutes undoing what I’d just done and putting everything back together properly.
Excellent.
But the new information changed my understanding of the work.
So it needed to change my decision.
It’s not about saying yes or no#
A significant part of my work involves reviewing scopes, invoices, and supporting evidence.
Sometimes a contractor has used the wrong code.
Sometimes they’ve included two items that can’t legitimately be claimed together.
Sometimes there’s additional work or labour that needs better justification.
And sometimes everything is perfectly reasonable, but the paperwork doesn’t explain why.
So I ask questions.
I request amendments.
I explain what I can’t support and why.
But I also do the opposite.
Sometimes a contractor has used a code that doesn’t accurately reflect the work they performed, and correcting it works in their favour.
Sometimes additional information justifies something I initially questioned.
Sometimes I can see that the work is legitimate, but the client needs a clearer explanation before they can make a decision.
In those situations, I’ll work with the contractor to get the information right.
I’m not trying to make every claim smaller.
I’m trying to make every claim defensible.
Fairness has to work in both directions#
I think this is where professional credibility starts to build.
If I challenge everything, regardless of whether there’s a legitimate reason, eventually my objections stop meaning very much.
But if I only challenge things when I have a reason, and I can explain that reason, the conversation becomes quite different.
A contractor can disagree with me.
They can explain what I’ve misunderstood.
They can provide additional evidence.
And sometimes they’re right.
That’s fine.
I’d rather correct my assessment than defend an incorrect decision simply because I made it first.
Consistency doesn’t mean reaching the same decision regardless of new information. It means applying the same standard to the new information.
And over time, people start to recognise how you operate.
Not that you’ll always say yes.
Not that you’ll always say no.
But that you’ll have a reason for whichever answer you give.
And that you’re prepared to explain it.
We’re working together#
I work with contractors regularly, often over long periods of time.
We have different responsibilities, and sometimes we disagree about what’s reasonable or supportable.
But I don’t see those conversations as me versus them.
We’re part of the same delivery team, even when we don’t agree on every decision.
And if we’re going to keep working together, we need to be able to have those conversations without turning every disagreement into a fight.
I think that’s especially important when you work within a contract that involves multiple organisations, systems and approval processes.
Each claim needs to stand on its own evidence.
But the working relationship continues long after any individual claim is finalised.
Each claim needs to be defensible on its own. Trust is built across all the claims you’ve handled together.
Your no has credibility#
Over time, I’ve found that being straightforward with contractors makes these conversations easier.
If I can support something, I will.
If I can’t, I’ll explain why.
If there’s another legitimate option, we’ll talk about it.
And if somebody gives me information that changes my understanding, I’ll reconsider.
That doesn’t mean everyone always agrees.
It doesn’t mean every claim gets approved.
And it certainly doesn’t mean the paperwork suddenly becomes less complicated.
Unfortunately.
But it does mean that when I question something, there’s a reason.
And the contractor has somewhere useful to go from there.
Sometimes they’ll amend the invoice.
Sometimes they’ll give me more evidence.
Sometimes they’ll explain something I hadn’t understood.
And sometimes I’ll spend another twenty minutes undoing the paperwork I’d just finished.
Because the point was never to win the disagreement.
The point was to get the decision right.
Your no doesn’t become credible simply by saying it firmly.
It becomes credible when people have seen what your yes looks like.
Originally published on LinkedIn.