Case study template and writing workflow

A case study template that carries its own evidence

This is the template and the drafting workflow behind every case study on this site. You bring the client, the story and the numbers. The workflow turns them into a structured case study: three headline metrics, a challenge, a solution, an impact section, result bullets and a link back to the automation the story proves.

The workflow is a Claude Code skill with written rules. The rules matter more than the drafting, because they decide what a case study is allowed to claim.

Why most B2B case studies don't get read

The usual case study opens with the client's logo, spends three paragraphs on the relationship, and reaches a number near the end, if it has one. A buyer skimming for proof gives up before they get there.

Knowing how to write a B2B case study mostly comes down to order. The number leads, the problem is specific to that client, and the solution describes the one job the work did. Everything else in the template follows from those three choices.

Case studies also sit where buying decisions happen, which is why they belong in lower funnel marketing rather than at the top of the blog.

The template, section by section

Every case study on the site fills the same fields, in the same order:

Section	What goes in
Headline	The client and the number, in one line
Metrics	Up to three tiles, a short value and a label under about 40 characters
Challenge	Who the client is, the bottleneck with its time or cost, and why the obvious fixes failed for them
Solution	What was built, how it works, the part specific to this client, and what was handed over
Impact	The numbers in prose, what changed for the team, and honest caveats
Results	Four to six short bullets, each starting with a verb or a number
Built with	The automation the story proves, linked both ways

A hero quote is optional, and the rule for it is strict. It is either the client's real words or left out.

Three rules before a word is drafted

The draft is quick once the angle is right, so the workflow settles three things first:

The metric carries the case study, so pick the number that is most concrete and most defensible. "Twice as much output" loses to "24 to 36 articles a month".
One automation does one job, so a case study about content briefs stays about briefs instead of sprawling into everything else the engagement touched.
Concrete beats impressive, so a vague result gets sent back for the specific figure before drafting starts.

If any of the inputs are missing, the workflow asks rather than filling the gap. A case study with an invented number is worse than no case study.

The twist that makes it a case study

Every case study needs the part of the build that was specific to that client. Without it the page is an automation page with a logo on top.

For Reply.io's content briefs, the twist was that the same workflow handled refreshes of existing articles as well as new ones. Finding that detail is the job of the solution section, and it's the part no other case study on the site can repeat.

What the nine live case studies show

The template has been used for nine published case studies, and the fields hold up in practice. All nine carry three metric tiles, and all nine have five or six result bullets.

The sections flex where the story needs them to. Solution sections run from 663 to 1,125 words, challenge sections from 217 to 419, and impact sections from 405 to 519. Six of the nine carry a hero quote, and three ship without one, which is the quote rule working as intended.

What never gets invented

The drafting rules are there to stop the three things a case study is most tempted to fake:

Metrics come from the client or the engagement records, never from a plausible-sounding estimate
Quotes are the client's own words, or the quote field stays empty
Claims about specific people at the client appear only when they are confirmed

The same honesty applies to the impact section, which has to name what the work didn't solve and what took longer than expected. A marketing case study template without that section reads as an advert.

Linking proof to the work

Each case study is tagged with the automations it demonstrates. That tag does two jobs: the case study shows what it was built with, and the automation page shows a "case studies built on this" block pointing back.

That two-way link is also why the template works as an SEO case study template, not just a sales asset. Proof sits next to the page a buyer is already reading about the work, instead of in an archive nobody browses.

Teams that need this template

Teams with real results and no time to write them up need this most, or with case studies that exist but lead with the relationship instead of the number. It also fits anyone publishing proof for several services, where a shared structure keeps the case studies comparable.

Without the numbers, it can't help. The honest move then is to wait a quarter, not to write around the gap.

What a case study costs

Drafting runs in Claude Code on a subscription, so the variable cost is small. The time goes into the interview and into checking every number against its source.

Case studies are written under execution capacity, the agents route at a flat $2,000 a month that sits with a fractional Head of Content retainer. A first case study takes days rather than weeks, and most of that time goes into confirming figures with the client.

Start with one number

Bring one result you're proud of and where the number came from. On a call we'll find the angle and the twist, and decide whether it is ready to write up now or needs another month of data.

Case study writing workflow