Shane Murphy: A Bahamas Case Exercise for Clearer Business Communication

By Shane Ian Murphy | Founder and author commentary

One way to improve a business explanation is to ask someone to sort its sentences. For an invented Bahamas case exercise, I would use a short proposal and three headings: facts, assumptions and next steps. The activity examines communication. It does not describe a real Bahamas venture, customer or transaction.

The facts column needs more than confident wording. Each important statement should have an identifiable basis. If a sentence depends on information supplied by another person, the explanation should reflect that source and any relevant limits. The exercise is not improved by treating every sentence in a polished document as equally established.

The assumptions column captures expectations that have not yet been confirmed. A proposed date, an illustrative demand level or a working dependency may belong here. Labelling an assumption does not make it useless. It allows the reader to understand what could change and which parts of the proposal would be affected.

The next steps column should contain actions someone can recognise and complete. “Move forward” is difficult to assess. “Obtain the current version of the supporting document before revising this paragraph” has a clearer purpose. It also identifies a result the team can examine before making a further decision.

After the sorting exercise, I would compare the reader’s interpretation with the author’s intention. Disagreement reveals where the writing needs attention. A sentence that the author intended as a possibility may have sounded like a promise. A proposed action may have appeared to be something already completed.

The sorting exercise becomes more useful when participants explain their choices. One person may classify a sentence as a fact because it contains an exact date, while another sees the same sentence as an expectation. The author can then examine which words created each impression. A precise-looking number or date does not settle the category. The question is whether the statement describes something established, an assumption being used for planning or an action someone intends to undertake. The explanation should make that distinction available to the reader.

I would include one sentence whose source is another person's statement. This invites a useful discussion about attribution. The fact that someone supplied an assertion can be recorded accurately without treating the underlying assertion as independently established. The exercise should preserve both pieces of information: who said it and what has been checked. That helps readers understand the actual basis of a proposal and prevents a supplied description from acquiring stronger status merely because it has been repeated in a more formal document with a polished layout.

The next round can introduce a change. Suppose a working assumption is revised after new information arrives. Which sentences need updating, and which next steps are affected? Participants should be able to trace the change through the document rather than alter a single number and assume the rest remains consistent. This is a manageable way to examine dependencies. It also shows why maintaining a clear distinction between evidence, expectation and action can make later revisions more straightforward for everyone who relies on the brief.

Finally, ask each reader to write a short response to the proposal using only the information provided. Their responses may identify missing evidence, propose a focused discussion or explain why a conclusion would be premature. Compare those responses with the action the author hoped to invite. If the document produces a different conversation, that is evidence for revision. The aim is not to force every reader into agreement. It is to help people discuss the same position accurately, with a shared understanding of what is known and what still requires work.

This hypothetical Bahamas case brings together a standard I value across founder and author communication: help the reader understand the actual position. A document earns confidence by making its basis, uncertainty and requested action clear. The next conversation then begins with shared understanding rather than avoidable assumptions.

Disclosure: This founder commentary was drafted with AI assistance. Illustrative cover photograph; it does not depict a company project or asset.