Content Planning and Briefs

Case Study Brief

Plan a credible case study covering consent, starting context, challenge, intervention, evidence, results, attribution, and meaningful limitations.

Free editable Markdown · Customer marketing teams, editors, and account teams · Updated July 30, 2026

Download Markdown

Accessible HTML preview

Blank template

The downloaded file contains the same fields in editable Markdown.

Scope and permission

Working title: [Describe the outcome without guaranteeing it]
Subject organization or approved label: [Name or anonymized description]
Primary reader: [Who can learn from the case]
Participation contact: [Authorized reviewer]
Consent covers: [Name, logo, quotes, data, screenshots, links]
Material relationship: [Customer, payment, discount, partner, or other]
Review rights and deadline: [Facts, quotations, full draft, or other]

Context, action, and evidence

Starting challenge: [Observable condition]
Baseline: [Value, method, source, and period]
Objective: [Defined target or decision]
Constraints: [Budget, timing, systems, policy, or people]
Intervention: [Actions, owners, and sequence]
Other influences: [Concurrent changes]
Result: [Value or qualified observation]
Result source: [Record, calculation, or approved interview]
Limitation: [What cannot be concluded]

Publication checks

Consent covers every identifier and asset used.
The baseline and result use compatible definitions and periods.
Quotations match the speaker's meaning and approved attribution.
Measured, estimated, and perceived outcomes are labeled.
Customer work and external factors are not erased.
The story avoids unsupported universal or causal claims.
Material incentives and relationships are disclosed.
Final approval and future withdrawal contact are documented.

How to use this template

Confirm the case's reader value, participant consent, disclosure needs, and permitted identifiers.
Capture the starting context, baseline, objective, constraints, and measurement method.
Build a dated sequence of actions, owners, adaptations, and external influences.
Verify every result, quotation, and causal implication with evidence and named reviewers.
Complete participant and editorial approval, then assign future update or withdrawal ownership.

Establish the starting condition

Results are meaningful only when readers understand the subject's context, objective, constraints, and baseline. Record the organization size or environment only to the level approved and relevant. Define the problem in observable terms rather than dramatic adjectives. If a metric will anchor the story, capture how it was measured before the intervention, over what period, and by whom. Avoid selecting a baseline solely because it makes the final change look larger. Explain other work underway that could have affected the outcome.

Document actions and contributions precisely

Describe what the customer or subject did, what the featured product or method contributed, and what third parties supplied. Include sequence, duration, configuration, training, and important deviations where these help another reader judge transferability. Replace vague phrases such as “transformed the workflow” with concrete actions. Interview more than one participant when practical, and compare memory with project records. Keep setbacks, tradeoffs, and adaptations that explain how the result was reached; removing them can turn a useful case into an implausible testimonial.

Qualify evidence and approvals

For each result, preserve the source, calculation, time window, baseline, and approver. Distinguish measured values from estimates and perceptions. Do not imply causation when the evidence only shows change after implementation. Present limits such as seasonality, a small sample, concurrent initiatives, or a short follow-up period near the result. Agree on review rights before drafting, record requested edits, and retain editorial responsibility for accuracy. Add a clear disclosure if the subject received payment, discounts, or another material benefit connected to participation.

See the fields in context

Fictional example: community kitchen booking process

Juniper Kitchen is an invented community facility, and all timings below are illustrative rather than real results.

Baseline: Fictional coordinators estimated 14 minutes to reconcile a booking, based on a two-week manual log.
Action: The team simplified its request form, assigned one approval owner, and introduced an invented calendar tool.
Result: The same fictional logging method showed a median of nine minutes during a later two-week period.
Limitation: Volunteer availability also increased, so the case does not attribute the entire change to the tool.
Approval: The invented coordinator approves the quoted description and anonymized workflow, with no logo displayed.

Frequently asked questions

Does a customer quotation prove a result?

No. A quotation records the speaker's perspective. Quantitative or causal claims need suitable evidence, while perceptions should be labeled as such.

Can a case study be anonymous?

Yes, when anonymity is genuine and enough relevant context can still be shared. Remove details that could indirectly identify the participant without permission.

Should the customer approve the entire draft?

That depends on the agreement. Define review rights before interviewing, and distinguish correction of facts or quotations from control over independent editorial conclusions.

How should exceptional results be presented?

Verify them carefully, describe the conditions that shaped them, and avoid implying they are typical. Include the baseline, timeframe, measurement method, and limitations.