The weakest case-study pages on export sites fail in the same place: they describe the seller's effort instead of the buyer's order. "Professional solution, strict quality control, timely delivery." A buyer sourcing a component or a container of goods is not grading effort — they are checking whether the order they are about to place looks like one you have already shipped.
That reframes what goes on the page. Background, specifications, results, and enough detail that a skeptical reader can confirm the case is real. Here is how to build each block.
Start with one order, not the customer's whole history
One case equals one order, or one product family shipped to one market. A page that covers everything the company has ever made reads like a brochure and gives the buyer nothing to compare against their own requirement.
Pick the case by its constraint. The interesting cases are the ones where something was awkward: a tolerance nobody wanted to hold, a certification the buyer needed in a specific market, a packaging format that had to survive a long inland leg, a deadline tied to a retail season. That constraint is the spine of the page.
The background block: what was ordered, and what made it awkward
Four to six sentences, no adjectives. Write:
- the market and channel the buyer sells into (importer, distributor, own-brand retailer, contractor)
- the order shape — how many SKUs, roughly what volume band
- the constraint that made the order non-standard
- what the buyer had already tried, if you know and can say it without guessing
What you do not need is the customer's name. "A distributor of kitchen hardware selling into the Benelux" is enough for a reader to place the case, and it is a sentence you can publish without a permission fight.
Leave out anything you cannot state as fact. If the buyer never told you why they left a previous supplier, do not write a reason.
The specs block carries most of the page
This is a table, not prose. A buyer will scan it before reading a single sentence of the background.
| Item | Value | Standard / how it was checked |
|---|---|---|
| Material | 304 stainless, 1.2 mm | Mill certificate on file |
| Dimension | 480 × 320 × 210 mm | Drawing rev. C |
| Critical tolerance | ±0.3 mm on the flange | Measured with a caliper at QC |
| Surface | Brushed, Ra 0.8 | In-house sample retained |
| Certification | CE, report on file | Third-party lab, dated |
| Packaging | 5-ply carton, 6 pcs per carton | Drop test per internal spec |
| MOQ / lead time | As quoted | — |
Rules that keep the table honest: put units on everything, name the standard or the drawing revision, and state tolerances as numbers rather than "high precision". Every row has to be backed by a document you could produce if asked. If a row cannot be backed, delete the row — an empty cell is less damaging than a claim that collapses under one follow-up email.
The results block: separate what was delivered from what changed
Two short sections work better than one paragraph.
Delivered is pure logistics and easy to defend: quantity, production window, port of loading, container type, packaging used, date the samples were sent.
Outcome is whatever was actually measured. Dimensional pass rate from your own QC record, units replaced under warranty, a test report number, the date a repeat order came in — but only if that is true and you can point to where it is written down.
If nothing was measured, do not invent a percentage. Say what was delivered and let the specs table carry the weight. A page with no invented numbers reads more credible than one with a suspiciously round "30% cost saving".
Details a buyer can verify
This is the block most pages skip, and it is the one that separates a story from a case.
- Certificate body, certificate number and issue date. A buyer can query the issuing body.
- Third-party test report number, laboratory, and test date.
- The drawing revision and the instrument used for the critical dimension.
- Port of loading and shipment month. Combined with the destination, that narrows a lot.
- Container type and count, if you ship FCL.
- Sample retention: whether a reference sample still exists and when it was sealed.
- Factory audit date and scope, if a buyer audit was done.
- Photo dates. A QC photo with a visible date stamp is worth more than ten clean studio shots.
Put a short note next to the list saying which items are available on request and that customer names, prices and drawings are redacted. Buyers expect redaction. What they do not expect is a blurred scan where the redaction accidentally hides the certificate number too.
Getting permission, and what to do when you cannot name the buyer
Ask at order confirmation, in writing, not after the page is drafted. Ask specifically: may we describe the order, the market, the specifications and the shipment dates, and may we use your logo. Those are separate permissions and buyers answer them differently.
If the answer is no, anonymise and say so on the page: "Customer name withheld at their request." That sentence costs nothing and explains the gap before the reader wonders about it. Never use a customer logo you were not given, and never assemble a logo wall from images found online.
Photos and files
Shoot the goods themselves, the packaging in place, the label, the loading. Keep the originals; compress for the page. Renders presented as photographs get spotted quickly by anyone who buys hardware for a living, and the loss of trust is larger than the gain in polish.
Publishing it and keeping it alive
One URL per case, a plain page, a visible date. Update the date when specs change, and take the page down if the product line is discontinued — a stale case that describes a part you no longer make wastes a buyer's time and yours.
Produce a PDF from the same content. Buyers forward files internally, and a link that requires anything to open dies in that chain. Then put the case link in the quotation email and in the follow-up two weeks later, where it does more work than it ever will on the site itself.
A skeleton to fill in
# <Product family> for <market / channel> — <year>
## Background
- Buyer profile: <channel>, <market>, <volume band>
- The constraint: <the awkward part>
## Specifications
| Item | Value | Standard / how checked |
|---|---|---|
| ... | ... | ... |
## What was delivered
- Quantity / SKUs:
- Production window:
- Port of loading:
- Packaging:
## Verifiable details
- Certificate: <body> <number>, issued <date>
- Test report: <number>, <lab>, <date>
- Drawing: <revision>, critical dimension <value> ± <tolerance>
- Sample retained: <yes/no>, sealed <date>
## Available on request
Redacted QC photos, full test report, buyer reference on request.
The check before publishing
Read every sentence and ask whether a buyer could demand proof of it. Anything that fails that question gets cut, moved to "available on request", or rewritten as a specification. The page does not need to be impressive. It needs to survive one procurement manager reading it carefully.
Top comments (0)