Relationships, documented with consent.
A case study here is published only when both firms have reviewed it and agreed to it being public. That is slower than inventing them, and it is the only version worth reading.
Nothing is published here yet.
The network is filling its first category seats, and no member relationship has yet run far enough to be written up with both firms’ agreement. When one has, it will appear here in full — not as a percentage without a name attached.
We would rather this page stay empty than fill it with composites. An invented case study is detectable by exactly the kind of firm we want to admit.
What gets published, and what does not.
Both firms review it first
Nothing is published until both members have read the draft and agreed to it in writing, including the use of their name.
The outcome is real and specific
A case study records what actually happened — the engagement, the work, the result — rather than a directional claim that cannot be checked.
Client information stays out
Where a relationship involved a member’s client, that client is not named unless they have separately consented. Most do not, and the case study is written without them.
Unsuccessful introductions count too
Introductions that went nowhere are recorded inside the network the same way. They are the reason the matching improves; hiding them would make the record useless.
How a relationship gets to this page.
It follows the same path as every connection in the network: a request with a stated commercial reason, a fit review, consent from both sides, a personal introduction, then a tracked outcome. The full sequence is here.
The next case study starts with an application.
Applications are reviewed against category availability, verification and fit.
Request Private Access