Named clients, or nothing at all.

What will appear here

As clients agree to be named, each one gets a written study covering the same five things: what their close looked like before, what was actually wrong with it, what got configured, what now lands and on what date, and what it costs them. Real company names, real numbers, published with permission.

Where a client cannot be named — which is common with financial detail — the study will say so plainly and describe the business generically rather than inventing a name for it.

In the meantime

The honest substitute for a case study is the work itself. Two things stand in for it:

• A complete sample close packet — the actual deliverable, un-gated, with annotations explaining how to read it.
• Twenty-seven years of prior engagements — Motorola, M&T Bank, BAE Systems, the U.S. Air Force, MetroPCS, MidAmerican Energy and others, all of which are verifiable and none of which are SmartDesk clients.

Those are different claims, and worth keeping separate. The enterprise record is evidence that the person doing this work has closed books at scale before. It is not evidence of what SmartDesk has done for a small business, because there is not yet a public record of that.