dwyl Case Study Format

[ghost]

Linked to #274 & #377

• Desk research on "competitor" agencies' approach to portfolios
• Create rough 'n' ready mockups of portfolio slide templates
• Confirm template
• Create blank templates for reuse

Mark to review case study format and suggest a new, better format

[ghost]

I think the current format on the new site is good enough for now

Viewable here:
http://127.0.0.1:8000/redesign/cs-emf.html

@iteles when would you like the review of the format to be done by?

[rub1e]

Assigning @iteles to fill in gaps in spreadsheet per #377

Waiting to get some design insight from Harry before closing Format off and moving to #377 (Content) DONE

Starting on mockups of templates, process to take max 1hr, output of slides with copy but minimal design DONE

[rub1e]

With the format approved in Google Slides, is this issue ready to close @iteles ?

[iteles]

@rub1e Would love to see the write-up of your findings from your desk research in here first please and then very happy to close!

[rub1e]

@iteles ah yes of course - I had started writing a longer issue in https://github.com/dwyl/process-handbook combining notes on format and content together just so it's not stuck at the bottom of a couple of different issues, and that seemed a sensible place for it.

But I haven't pressed submit yet so can copy and paste it to wherever you think it belongs (soz, should have mentioned y'day!)

[rub1e]

Notes from desk research into case studies

After looking at examples from other, similar orgs, we've identified some good and bad practices and sketched out a general approach to writing them up, whether for a pitch deck or the dwyl website.

Things we like

• Quotes from the client (as long as these have been approved). Some clients like a hand with areas to focus on, so be helpful and proactive with suggestions
• Stories: a bullet-point list of the modules we used is useful to some people, but the best case studies tell a story. What journey did we go on? What did we learn? What will we go on to do differently?
• Emotional connection: why did we love the project? A good cause, an opportunity to learn, inspirational, receptive client open to open-source etc.?
• Works for all audiences: some of the most easily-digested case studies have an informative, at-a-glance title, a page/screen with topline info about the project and the challenges we faced, and then more detailed technical info further down. Providing busy people with essential info up-front, but also providing details for the techie stakeholders
• Personality: dwyl is one of the most human companies out there - personality should definitely come through
• Positioning the business: some case studies just talk about getting a brief and delivering it on time; that's great and all, but dwyl offers more than that - dwylers are problem-solvers, workshoppers, collaborators - more of a strategic partner or trusted adviser than just a group of people who write code.
• Client context: linked to the point above, it's good to show that we understand the context we're working in - that we understand our clients' businesses and know how our work fits in with their strategic aims. (Again, not just "we got a brief and we delivered the product".)

Things we didn't like

• Meaningless words: if you write twaddle and nonsense, people will think you're a nonsensical twaddler. There is almost literally no reason to use the words synergise or utilise or blue-sky. dwyl is better than that.
• Too many words: big blocks of unbroken text are off-putting and probably don't get read anyway

[iteles]

dwylers are problem-solvers, workshoppers, collaborators - more of a strategic partner or trusted adviser than just a group of people who write code.

❤️ So much this.

[iteles]

Question on our current format:
Are we making the solution evident enough?
I wrote the whole HL case study and then had to go back at the end to insert a paragraph in the 'Technology' section on what the application was because I realised I hadn't actually talked about it yet 😆

[rub1e]

@iteles As discussed, I think this was more an issue of me not talking about the product enough rather than a flaw in the format 😉. (But I've put that in bold in the template instructions!)

[iteles]

Done and closed. We have a starting point and can open a less noisy issue for improvements when we come to the next one.