It starts with something tiny. You write “teh” instead of “the,” or you forget a comma, or you put the wrong date in a draft that’s obviously labeled “DRAFT.” Within minutes, there’s an email reply highlighting the typo like it’s a safety violation, and—of course—your manager is CC’d “for transparency.”
Meanwhile, the same coworker quietly edits her own missteps out of shared docs and message threads before anyone can react. No note, no acknowledgement, no “oops, fixed it.” Just a neat little sweep-and-delete like it never happened, which is a pretty interesting version of transparency.
A workplace trend that’s less “transparency” and more “spotlight management”
Most teams genuinely do want transparency: clear decisions, visible progress, and accountability that doesn’t depend on hallway gossip. But CC’ing a manager on every microscopic typo isn’t transparency—it’s performance. It turns routine collaboration into a scoreboard.
What makes it so draining is the imbalance. If errors are “learning moments,” then everybody’s mistakes should be treated the same way, including hers. When only one person’s imperfections get broadcast, transparency starts to look suspiciously like targeting.
Why this stings more than it “should”
A typo isn’t a character flaw, but constant public correction can make it feel personal. It chips away at your sense of safety, like you’re working with a tiny alarm bell strapped to your keyboard. Even if your manager is reasonable, you still end up worrying about how it looks.
There’s also the sneaky social math: being corrected in front of a boss can imply incompetence, even when the issue is trivial. And the coworker gets a subtle boost—“Look how detail-oriented I am!”—without doing the harder work of solving real problems. It’s the workplace equivalent of calling out someone’s wrinkled shirt while the building’s on fire.
The “delete my own mistakes” habit is a clue, not just an annoyance
People who erase their own errors before anyone sees them usually aren’t obsessed with accuracy—they’re obsessed with optics. The goal isn’t quality; it’s looking like the person who never messes up. That can come from insecurity, competitiveness, or a belief that the workplace is a stage where everyone’s being graded.
And yes, some folks genuinely think they’re being helpful. But if she’s carefully curating her own paper trail while broadcasting yours, it’s hard to argue this is about team improvement. It’s selective accountability, which is just accountability’s shady cousin.
What your manager might be thinking (and why that matters)
Here’s the good news: many managers can smell this dynamic from a mile away. If your boss is getting copied on a steady drip of “FYI, minor typo” messages, they may already see it as noise, not insight. In fact, your coworker might be training your manager to ignore her emails.
Still, it’s not ideal to rely on a manager’s ability to decode office subtext. Managers are busy, and perceptions form quietly over time. If you’re always associated with tiny corrections, it can create a misleading paper trail unless you handle it with calm, consistent boundaries.
A few ways to respond without escalating the drama
First, don’t match her energy. It’s tempting to start CC’ing the boss on every time she confuses “affect” and “effect,” but that just turns the office into a typo Olympics. The goal is to stop the pattern, not win it.
A simple reply can go a long way: “Good catch—fixed, thanks!” Then move on. The brevity matters because it gives her nothing to argue with and signals to your manager that you’re competent, responsive, and not rattled by minor edits.
If the CC’ing continues, try a friendly redirect in writing: “Thanks for flagging. In the future, feel free to send minor edits directly to me without CC’ing [Manager]—I’ll make the updates.” This frames it as efficiency, not accusation, which is harder to push back on without sounding petty.
If she insists it’s “transparency,” you can stay calm and specific: “I’m aligned on transparency for decisions and deliverables. For typos, it’s faster if you just tell me and I’ll correct them.” You’re not debating values; you’re defining what counts as useful communication.
When it’s time to talk to your manager privately
If your manager keeps getting looped in and you’re feeling undermined, a short private conversation can help. Keep it factual: “I’ve noticed Coworker CC’s you on minor typos. I’m happy to fix errors quickly, but I’m concerned it’s creating unnecessary noise and a weird dynamic.” No name-calling, no mind-reading.
Then make a practical ask. Something like: “Would you prefer I handle small edits directly with her and only loop you in if it impacts deadlines or decisions?” Managers love clarity, and it gives yours an easy way to set expectations for the team without turning it into a courtroom scene.
Protecting yourself with small process tweaks
If your workplace uses shared docs, consider suggesting a cleaner workflow: comments for edits, tracked changes, and a quick review pass before anything is “final.” That way, typos become part of a normal editing pipeline, not a public announcement. It also shifts the focus from “who made a mistake” to “how we polish deliverables.”
You can also reduce easy targets by doing a quick scan before sending messages—especially to big groups. Not because you should have to, but because it’s a low-effort shield while the interpersonal issue gets sorted. Think of it like wearing shoes in a house with Legos on the floor: it doesn’t fix the problem, but it saves your feet.
What this says about team culture (and what you can control)
When someone uses “transparency” as a reason to publicly nitpick, it often signals a culture where visibility is confused with value. The healthiest teams don’t treat minor mistakes like news alerts; they treat them like normal, fixable facts of work. If your coworker is turning typos into headlines, she may be responding to incentives nobody has named out loud.
You can’t control her insecurity or her ambition, but you can control your steadiness. Respond quickly, keep receipts when necessary, and steer communication toward the most useful channel. Over time, consistent professionalism tends to read louder than performative CC’s.
If she deletes her own mistakes, should you call that out?
Probably not directly, at least not in a “gotcha” way. Accusing someone of hiding mistakes can blow up fast and make you look like you’re keeping score. If it becomes relevant—like she’s rewriting history in a way that affects accountability—focus on the impact: “Can we keep edits tracked so we all have the same context?”
The real win is creating a norm where errors are handled consistently. Either minor things stay between collaborators, or they’re documented in a shared, non-shaming way for everyone. “Transparency” shouldn’t be a one-way mirror.
At the end of the day, you’re not asking for special treatment. You’re asking for the same quiet grace she gives herself—the chance to fix a small mistake without it becoming a performance review. And honestly, that’s not just fair. It’s how functional teams get work done without turning spellcheck into a spectator sport.
More from Willow and Hearth:
Leave a Reply