The Case Study Nobody Could Verify
A marketing team is writing a customer story about a manufacturer that adopted its inventory software. The sales rep reports the customer 'cut stockouts by 60% and saved millions.' The customer's own contact confirms the project went well but says she cannot share exact figures and that legal must approve any numbers. The team has a launch date in ten days, a draft that already cites the 60% and 'millions,' and a designer ready to build an infographic around the numbers. The account is strategically important, and sales wants a bold, quantified story.
1. Evaluate the draft's use of the 60% and 'millions' claims and the risks of publishing them.
Read the worked answer
Both claims are unverified and attributed to a sales rep, not the customer, and the customer's contact has explicitly said she cannot confirm figures and that legal must approve numbers. Publishing them creates two problems:
- Accuracy/credibility risk: 'millions' is vague and unverifiable; a 60% figure with no stated baseline or method is not defensible if questioned. If a prospect or the customer's legal team challenges it, the story's credibility - and the relationship - is damaged.
- Consent/legal risk: the customer has conditioned numeric use on legal approval. Publishing numbers without it violates that expectation and could jeopardize the account.
The sales rep's enthusiasm is not a source. A customer story must be accurate and approved by the customer for anything attributed to them.
2. The launch is in ten days and sales wants a bold, quantified story. Propose how to tell a credible, compelling story without the unverified numbers.
Read the worked answer
Keep the story specific and concrete without fabricating metrics:
- Use the customer's own qualified language (e.g., 'significantly fewer stockouts,' 'freed up the team's time') clearly framed as the customer's characterization, not a measured statistic.
- Substitute verifiable, qualitative detail: what the workflow was before, what changed, how the team works differently, a specific anecdote. Concrete process detail often persuades better than a round number.
- If any number is essential, pursue it properly: ask the customer's contact to route a specific, defined metric through legal with a stated method and baseline, and set a realistic date. Do not let the launch date force an unapproved claim.
- Brief sales on why: an unverifiable number is a liability in a deal, not an asset.
If approved numbers cannot arrive by launch, publish the qualitative story now and add verified metrics later with consent.
3. What would you do about the ten-day deadline and the designer's infographic built around the numbers?
Read the worked answer
Re-plan around the constraint rather than the deadline:
- Tell the designer now to pause number-based visuals; redesign the infographic around the verified narrative (before/after workflow, process, quote) so no work is wasted on unapproved figures.
- Set a clear gate: no numeric claim ships without customer legal approval and a stated method/baseline.
- Communicate the trade-off to sales and leadership explicitly: the choice is a slightly less quantified story on time, versus an unverifiable one that risks the account and the brand. Recommend the former.
- Keep a placeholder path: if approved numbers arrive before launch, slot them in; if not, ship the credible version and update later.
The deadline is real, but it does not justify publishing claims the customer has not approved.