agentleFS
Sign inStart free
alectivismalectivism/maven-template/.claude/skills/case-study/SKILL.md

case-study

Skill1 starsChanged 6 months agoMITView on GitHub

Case studies from MMA lab results, member experiences, or program outcomes.

17 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use audit.

Other files people use alongside this one.

Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
  • OpenAISkill

    audit

    Audit or critique a product flow, journey, workflow, funnel, onboarding path, checkout path, settings path, screen, or multi-step product experience by capturing screenshots first, then reporting UX, design, and accessibility findings inline from that evidence. Use Figma only when the user explicitly asks for a board. Use when the user asks to audit, review, critique, inspect, assess, analyze, evaluate, or give feedback on a product experience.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

3 rules. 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 16 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 3

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Get approval: before using a brand's name in a case study

    line 73
  2. Distinctive:

    Verify all numbers against source data

    line 74
  3. Distinctive:

    Don't fabricate quotes — use real ones or omit

    line 75

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 16 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Case Study Generator — MMA

Case Study Structure

Standard MMA Case Study Format

Title: [Brand/Company] + [Key Result] + [Program] Example: "Kroger Achieves 259% Lift with AI Personalization Through MMA's CAP Lab"

The Challenge

  • 2-3 sentences on what the brand was trying to solve
  • Industry context — why is this a common challenge?
  • What had they tried before?

The Approach

  • Which MMA program or lab was used
  • Methodology (brief, accessible — avoid jargon)
  • Timeline and scope
  • Partner involvement (Claritas, Monks, Vidmob, etc.)

The Results

  • Lead with the headline number — bold and prominent
  • Supporting metrics in bullets
  • Comparison to industry benchmarks or BAU
  • Statistical confidence if available

Key Takeaways

  • 2-3 actionable insights other marketers can apply
  • What made this work (conditions for success)
  • What surprised the team

About [Brand]

  • 1-2 sentence company description

About MMA's [Program]

  • 1-2 sentence program description
  • How to participate or learn more
  • Contact information

Quick-Hit Format (for newsletters, social, sales)

Length: 150-200 words Structure:

  • Brand + challenge (1 sentence)
  • MMA solution (1 sentence)
  • Result (1 sentence with headline number)
  • CTA (1 sentence)

Data Sources for Case Studies

  • Lab experiment results (CAP, A3, ACE, SIFT, AURA)
  • Member testimonials from events (CMO Summit, POSSIBLE)
  • Think tank program outcomes (MMGF, BaP, MOSTT assessments)
  • DAM/MAC certification outcomes

Key Results to Reference

ProgramBrandResult
CAPKroger259% lift
CAPAT&T222% lift
CAPAverage across 29 experiments+160% lift vs BAU
AURAAverage across 300 campaigns+24% lift, 90% incremental conversion
MMGFWith Neustar validation+50% ROAS vs reach-based plans
BaPCross-study findingBrand favorables activate ~6x vs non-favorables
MOSTTCross-study finding1% capabilities improvement = +2.5% YoY revenue
DAMTraining program9,300+ registrations, 5,000+ attendees, 2,100+ certified

Guidelines

  • Get approval before using a brand's name in a case study
  • Verify all numbers against source data
  • Don't fabricate quotes — use real ones or omit
  • Frame results honestly — include context (sample size, conditions)
  • Make it useful, not just promotional — readers should learn something

Process

  1. Identify the subject (which brand, program, result)
  2. Gather data from internal sources (SharePoint, lab reports, meeting notes)
  3. Draft in the appropriate format
  4. Flag any numbers that need verification
  5. Note if brand approval is needed before publication
  6. Present for review

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

Check your setup, free