The numbers game: make sure the numbers in your publication add up--literally.

I admit it: When I see a page full of numbers, or a chart with dozens of data points, my eyes glaze over. I've always been math-phobic. I scraped by in school, nothing terribly advanced. I don't even balance the checkbook.

Yet I somehow found my career editing corporate and financial publications, and that means a lot of numbers. Describing the benefits of a 401(k) retirement savings plan is one thing; verifying the accuracy of the accompanying chart that shows how much money an employee would save over time is another. Usually the numbers come from someplace else--the outside accounting firm, the inhouse financial department, an independent research company--so it's not as if I'm being asked to scratch out the results of compound interest over a 20-year period myself.

Still, I review the numbers, and it's amazing to me how often they literally don't add up. Do the figures cited in the text correspond to any charts? Does the arrangement of the material in a table flow logically? Do the pieces of the pie chart add up to 100 percent?

Certainly, having a basic understanding of the language of business--revenues, operating expenses, earnings per share, market capitalization and so on--will help even math-challenged editors understand what they're looking at when it comes to formal reports and corporate statements. But most of the time, it's the little stuff that trips us up.

Checking the numbers usually takes no more effort than looking up a word in the dictionary. Calculator in hand, I follow the trail of numbers, whether it's on a P&L statement or a chart of projected expenses in retirement, and flag anything that seems off. It could be a simple transposing of numbers, or it could be a missing figure or line of data. Occasionally, a big project requires a little more effort. Enlist a co-worker to read the numbers off the original document out loud while you check the final version.

What are you looking at?

Of course, you have to make sure you're looking at the right thing. A friend of mine who works for a small nonprofit told me that her boss recently came running frantically into her office, waving a proof of the organization's annual report. The numbers were all wrong, she said. Where did they come from?

My friend produced the e-mail containing the PDF file from the accounting firm that provided the figures. (An excellent example of the kind of e-mail you should hang on to, at least for a while.) The e-mail had been forwarded to her from another employee. The data had been extracted from the PDF file, proofread and submitted for publication. My friend and her boss compared the original data to the material on the page proof.

It was identical.

But it was wrong. Turns out that the figures were for the quarter end, not year end.

Fortunately, there was time to make the correction. But the crisis might have been averted if someone had compared the figures to the previous year's annual report, or confirmed with the accounting firm that these were indeed the year-end statements. Unless the organization was having a seriously bad year, seeing figures that were about one-fourth of the previous year's would likely have triggered some suspicion, and maybe a call to the finance department.

Crunch the numbers

Different chart formats can convey different meanings. Try using the various Chart Wizard options in Excel if you don't believe me. You can squeeze a line chart to make the angles steeper, for example, possibly implying that the changes in the data are more dramatic. You can include multiple pieces of information, overlaying different points in different colors. You can swap the information on the X and Y axes, giving the chart a whole different look. If you are tired of seeing material presented in the same old way, try to, ahem, think outside the box. There are designers who specialize in creating compelling charts and infographics. All the same data, just presented differently.

But make sure it makes sense. Last year I worked on a corporate white paper that dealt with workers' compensation. A chart headlined "Costs Keep Rising as Injuries Fall" showed two arrows, one heading up, the other heading down (see chart below). I must have looked at this a dozen times--as did the other editor, the writer, the designer and the corporate client--before I said, "Wait a minute."

It wasn't that the numbers were wrong. In fact, I'd checked those up and down, so to speak. What I suddenly realized was that the costs column, in the arrow heading up, had the biggest number on the bottom, which seemed counterintuitive. If costs are going up, then shouldn't the numbers appear the same way? Flopping the two arrows wouldn't work, because then the other column's information would be "wrong."

Unfortunately, by that time there wasn't much that could be done. There was some discussion of cutting off the arrows' points--essentially creating just two columns--but in the end, in the interest of time and money, we just left the chart alone.

1 + 1 equals 1?

A common culprit behind mistakes in charts is what I call the ol' cut and paste, where formatted text gets copied and pasted into a new chart or column and does not get changed accordingly. I saw this recently with three charts that outlined potential retirement savings for three different age groups. Clearly, one chart was created and copied to the next page, then the next. Most of the information had been updated, save one figure. I didn't immediately realize that the information was the same as on the first chart, but, even with my sketchy math skills, I thought that 10 years of additional savings wouldn't bring such a low figure. A calculator confirmed my suspicions. (This also happens with footnotes, which are often copied from one place to another.)

In fact, doing the math makes pretty good sense. Unless you're editing some rocket-science textbook, most of the figures you'll encounter are easy enough to confirm with a calculator--no advanced degree needed. I mentioned pie charts earlier. Do all the pieces add up to 100 percent? If not, why? Sometimes it's bad math; other times figures have been rounded up or down. A simple note, such as "Figures have been rounded and may add up to more than 100 percent" or "Respondents were allowed to choose more than one answer," should do the trick.

In some ways, numbers speak louder than words--there's not a lot of room for interpretation. And when you have any kind of illustration, like a chart or an infographic, that visual interest usually draws in the reader before he or she turns back to the main text. Whether you're comfortable with numbers or not, make sure you spend a little extra time with them.

Chart a course

When you're looking at a chart or table, ask yourself:

* What am I looking at? Will the reader know what these figures mean?

* Is this information presented clearly? Is there a better way to communicate it?

* Is there too much data? Would more than one chart be appropriate?

* Should there be any footnotes or disclaimers?

* Do the numbers add up?

Sue Khodarahmi is managing editor of Communication World.

While the numbers in this chart
are correct, the presentation
doesn't quite make sense.

       Employers' workers'      Workplace
       comp costs per $100   injuries per 100
            of wages            employees

1999         $1.33                 6.3
2000         $1.32                 6.1
2001         $1.42                 5.7
2002         $1.59                 5.3
2003         $1.71                 5.0

REPRINTED with permission from CEO Voices, October 2005,
[c] 2005 The Chief Executive Group LP.

Note: Table made from bar graph.