Start with the question a prospective client has about the service, then choose evidence that answers it. Show the relevant activity, decision and handover rather than relying on a prestigious context or polished image. Check authorship, publication permission and evidence limits for every selected artifact.
Translate the service into evidence questions
Read the service description and list the claims a reader would reasonably want to examine. A research-planning review calls for evidence of question design, scope choices and useful comments, while a content-rewrite service calls for evidence of editing decisions and factual review. Do not assume a broad portfolio project demonstrates every service you advertise. Make the connection explicit so someone can understand which part of the case is relevant to the work they are considering.
Choose a small number of questions with the greatest bearing on fit. A reader may need to know whether you can work with incomplete source material, collaborate with a reviewer or prepare an editable handover. These questions often require more context than a final screenshot supplies. Avoid selecting evidence only because it looks impressive or involves a familiar organization. The strongest artifact for the service may be an annotated draft or a decision record that explains a less visible part of the work.
Match each question to an inspectable artifact
For each question, identify what you can publish that genuinely supports an answer. An outline comparison can show organization choices; a marked-up paragraph can show editing; a handover inventory can show delivery boundaries. Explain the artifact’s status and your contribution. If it is reconstructed or synthetic, label it. If several people produced the final work, select the component that demonstrates your role and credit the surrounding contributions rather than implying that the whole artifact is yours.
Check what the evidence does not establish. A sample review comment can demonstrate the form of feedback but not prove that a client implemented it. A final page can show the supplied text but not establish its impact without evaluation. Keep the case summary within those limits. Permission also matters independently of relevance: a highly useful internal artifact may be unsuitable for publication. Choose a safer example or a different case rather than treating explanatory value as a reason to bypass disclosure conditions.
Build a short path from service to case and back
Introduce the case with a sentence explaining the relevant service question. Then show enough context, evidence and reasoning to answer it without reproducing the entire project history. Link to the current service where appropriate, checking that its scope still matches the work described. A historical engagement may include tasks you no longer offer. Make that difference visible so evidence of past work does not become an accidental promise of current availability or an expanded package.
Review the selected evidence when the service changes. New deliverables or responsibilities may require a different case rather than a rewritten introduction attached to the old one. Keep a simple evidence map connecting each public claim with a permitted artifact and its limits. This is an editorial aid, not a scoring system that certifies competence. Its purpose is to make gaps visible so you can narrow a claim, collect appropriate evidence or create an honestly labelled practice demonstration.
Fictional example: evidence for an editorial-review service
A fictional editor, Farah, offers a review of existing internal instructions. Her largest invented portfolio project includes a polished site, but the interface says little about the review work she wants to explain. She selects a synthetic issue register, an annotated passage and a short account of how factual questions were assigned to an internal reviewer. The case labels each artifact as part of an independent demonstration.
Farah links the example from the service page with a sentence explaining that it shows the format and reasoning of a review. She does not imply that the example proves commercial delivery or improved operational outcomes. The evidence now relates directly to the offered task while its status and limitations remain visible.
A checklist for your next step
- List the service’s evidence questions.
- Choose artifacts that answer them.
- Explain status and authorship.
- Check permission and claim limits.
- Review links when the offer changes.
Common questions
Must every service have a different case study?
Not always. One case can support several services when the relevant contribution and evidence are clearly identified for each.
What if my only relevant sample is practice work?
Use it with an explicit practice label and explain what it demonstrates without claiming client delivery or real-world impact.
Further reading
These primary resources provide related background. They do not validate the illustrative example or endorse AliveProfile.
AI-assisted drafting and automated technical checks. Examples are illustrative; no independent expert review or real-world outcome validation is claimed. Read our editorial policy.