Turn a customer interview into a website case study
Draft a story about the customer’s problem, implementation, and outcome while keeping each claim tied to the original materials.
How this works
Draft a story about the customer’s problem, implementation, and outcome while keeping each claim tied to the original materials. A credible customer story connects the initial problem, the work performed, and the observed outcome without compressing uncertainty into a promotional success claim. The draft should make it easy for the customer and editor to correct details before any public use.
Build a claim and quotation ledger from the authorized interview and supporting materials. Write an original narrative around one implementation, separating baseline, intervention, result, and limitations. If the public story must be anonymous, generalize identities and sensitive operating details while retaining the useful process.
Before you start
Story scope
Agree which product use, period, and audience the case study covers.
Customer permissions
Confirm what may be quoted or published and whether identification is allowed.
Supporting evidence
Request records behind numerical outcomes; absence of a baseline limits the claims.
Prepare the inputs
- interview
- Required
Transcript with speaker labels
Preserve exact quotations and locate them by timestamp or paragraph.
- implementation_notes
- Required
Dated records
Distinguish planned work from completed work.
- outcome_records
- Required
Measurements or qualitative observations
Include baseline, period, units, and attribution limits.
- editorial_brief
- Required
Audience and format
Specify length and the intended reader question.
- permission_record
- Required
Allowed uses
Track quote, identity, logo, and distribution permissions separately.
Implementation, step by step
Map the story evidence
- Read the interview for the original problem, constraints, changes made, and observed consequences.
- Create separate entries for direct quotations, supported facts, and claims needing confirmation.
Checkpoint: A story outline with evidence gaps.
Clarify missing transitions
- Identify where the narrative jumps from buying a product to achieving an outcome without explaining implementation.
- Prepare focused follow-up questions about ownership, inputs, exceptions, and the actual operating change.
Checkpoint: A concise clarification list.
Verify outcome language
- Check each number against its measurement period and baseline using deterministic calculations.
- Describe qualitative improvements as reported experience when no measurement supports a quantified effect.
Checkpoint: An outcome ledger with approved strength of wording.
Draft the case narrative
- Write the problem, implementation, result, and lessons in a clear sequence.
- Use only necessary operational details and preserve meaningful limitations or work still in progress.
Checkpoint: An original case-study draft.
Prepare the review packet
- Attach quote locators and the evidence behind consequential statements for the customer and editor.
- Flag anonymity choices and any material the permission record does not cover.
Checkpoint: A versioned draft with explicit review questions.
Create approved derivatives
- After the story's facts are settled, draft short channel-specific excerpts that retain the same caveats.
- Prepare files or CMS drafts; publication status must remain separate from editorial approval.
Checkpoint: A case page and aligned social drafts.
Decisions along the way
No before-and-after baseline exists
Use a qualitative account or describe the measured current state without invented savings.
Customer corrects a quotation
Retain the correction history and confirm the approved wording is a paraphrase or newly approved quote.
Implementation is still a pilot
Say so consistently in the headline, body, and derivatives.
What you will produce
customer-case-study.md
MarkdownAn editable publication candidate with appropriately scoped claims.
Include: problem · context · implementation · outcome · limitations
story-evidence.csv
CSVEnables factual and permission review before release.
Include: claim_id · source_location · measurement_basis · permission · review_status
Check the result
- Trace every number and quote to supplied evidence.
- Verify the narrative does not imply causality beyond the evidence.
- Check all derivatives match the approved story's status and period.
- Search for identifiers or sensitive details that conflict with the publication scope.
When something goes wrong
Interview and project record disagree
Show both versions and hold the disputed statement.
Customer approval is incomplete
Keep the draft internal and identify the exact open items.
A headline exaggerates the measured result
Rewrite the headline to match the narrow supported conclusion.
A worked example
SYNTHETIC EXAMPLE · NOT A REPORTED BUSINESS RESULT
Request
Draft an anonymous story about invoice triage.
Inputs
Synthetic example. Synthetic notes show a team introduced a review queue in May. June logs contain 80 processed invoices; the customer says reviews felt easier but supplies no earlier timing data.
Expected result
Synthetic expected result. The draft describes the queue and 80 June invoices. It does not claim a percentage time saving and labels the easier-review observation as the team's reported experience.
Run a small pilot
Start small
One implementation with an accessible interview and a limited evidence packet.
Record the baseline
Record editorial effort and the number of factual corrections in the usual process.
Agree success criteria
Agree acceptance based on supported claims, permission completeness, and review effort.
Stop or revise
Pause publication if a central outcome or required permission remains unresolved.
Keep the scope clear
- Interview participation does not by itself grant public quotation rights.
- Do not transform private customer records into identifying public examples.
Check before using
Verify quotes, the context of reported results, and the customer’s approval to publish.
Business activities
- Create and publish content
FROM A RECIPE TO YOUR WORKFLOW
Bring the company context together.
This workflow needs reliable inputs before it needs a better prompt. Moat8 Vault brings working information into a readable archive for the AI tools you use.
For this recipe: Interview transcript · Editorial guidelines · Product facts
Start with one recurring task, agree which sources to use, and review the first result with your team.
Discuss this workflow