Glink Project Case

---
name: glink-project-case
description: Writes a one-page Project Case Study from your Project Interview Notes (the problem, what you did, what you learned, what you would do differently), a 150-word version for your Featured section and a permission note on module rules and employer confidentiality. Use for "run glink-project-case", "write up my project as a case study", "one page on my dissertation", "something a recruiter can open", "turn my interview notes into a case", "short version for Featured", "show how I think", part of the Claude for LinkedIn Networking for Recent Graduates Pack by Polar Bear.
---

# Project Case Study

## When To Use
You have done the Project Interview and want one thing a recruiter can open that shows how you think, not just what mark you got. This skill turns the notes into a one-page case and a 150-word version for Featured, and answers: what may I share, and what does it prove?

## When Not To Use
Without Project Interview Notes, run Project Interview first; a case written from memory alone drifts into a brag sheet. If you only need two or three lines under Education, Education and Projects Entries is the lighter tool, and a single moment for the feed belongs to Project Post.

## Inputs
- Your Project Interview Notes, including the do-not-claim list and sharing rules
- Optional: your Target Role Brief, so the case leads with the words those roles use
- Optional: your Personal Voice Guide
If you have none of this, I ask the six interview questions in short form first and mark the case as a first draft.

## Approach
A short case in four parts (problem, action, learning, next time) is a practitioner convention; the learning half uses Rolfe's What? So what? Now what? model, as set out in the University of Hull library guide to reflective writing. I write only from your notes, in your sentence length, and I keep the mistake in. The failure it prevents: a page of "successfully delivered" with no setback, which a recruiter reads as polish and an interviewer picks apart in two questions. Plain chat works; Claude Docs (beta) holds the one-page case if you want it as a document.

## Workflow
1. Ask at most three questions: which roles the case is for (or read the brief), whether you want your mark or grade shown, and whether anything in the sharing rules has changed since the interview.
2. The problem, from moments 1 and 2: what was actually wrong and how you came to see it, in two to four sentences. The brief you were set appears only if it explains the problem.
3. What I did, from moments 3 to 5, in "I" sentences: the turn and who made the call, the mistake and what you did next, what you delivered. Group work is named as the group's, by role. The mistake goes in; a case with no setback reads as a brag sheet.
4. What I learned, as Rolfe's So what?: what the turn and the mistake changed in how you work. What I would do differently, as Now what?: one or two concrete changes, not "communicate better".
5. Results only as recorded in the notes, with the source; "memory only" facts are described in words without figures. Marks appear only if you chose to share them. Anything on the do-not-claim list stays out.
6. The 150-word Featured version: the problem, the turn, what changed, in that order. Count the words; trim adjectives before facts.
7. The permission note: what may be shared under module rules and the employer's confidentiality and social media policy, unknowns written as questions to ask your tutor or manager. Legal or contractual points: check with a qualified adviser.

## Output Format
```markdown
# Project Case Study
[Project name] · [Dates] · [Associated with: degree / placement] · For: [target roles]
## The problem
[2 to 4 sentences from moments 1 and 2]
## What I did
[The turn, the mistake and what I did next, what I delivered; "I" sentences; group parts by role]
## What I learned
[So what? in 2 to 3 sentences]
## What I would do differently
[Now what? 1 or 2 concrete changes]
## Featured version (150 words)
[Problem, turn, what changed]
## Permission note
| Item | Rule | Status | Question to ask |
|---|---|---|---|
| [case text / slides / data] | [module rules / employer policy] | [cleared / unknown / not shareable] | [question for tutor or manager] |
## Decision
You decide by [date] whether to share the case, after the unknowns in the permission note are answered.
```

## Done When
- Every sentence traces to a moment in the notes; nothing from the do-not-claim list appears.
- The mistake is in "What I did", in your words.
- The Featured version is 150 words or fewer and keeps the problem, turn, change order.
- The permission note lists every item you might share with a status.

## Quality Bar
- One page; if it spills over, cut description of the module before cutting what you did.
- "I" for your part, the group by role for theirs; no teammate judged.
- No confidential client, employer or data details; names of people only with their yes.
- No figure without its source from the notes; never rounded up.
- Written only from your interview notes, and shared only within module rules and confidentiality.

## Next
Run glink-featured-section (Featured Section Plan) to decide where the case goes and what sits beside it.

## About the makers

This pack is made by Polar Bear, a consultancy built by ex-McKinsey founders with a dream to make AI work for People, not instead of them. We help our clients build people systems and AI-first ways of working, and we run our own company on Claude. If your team has outgrown the self-serve version, message Pauline (linkedin.com/in/paulinebertry).