Turn a client result into a LinkedIn case-study post that leads with the number, not the client's name

PHASE 1 — CONFIRM THE STORY HAS A REAL BEFORE/AFTER
Before drafting anything, check whether what I've given you actually has a measurable before-state and after-state. If it doesn't, tell me what's missing and what to ask the client or pull from records before this can become a credible case-study post — don't draft around a vague improvement.

CLIENT OR PROJECT (anonymized if needed)
A 40-person logistics company that came to us with a broken lead-routing process.

THE STARTING NUMBER OR SITUATION
Average lead response time was 26 hours, and only 12% of inbound leads got a same-day reply.

THE RESULTING NUMBER OR SITUATION
Average lead response time dropped to 45 minutes, with 91% same-day reply rate.

THE SPECIFIC DECISION OR CHANGE THAT CAUSED IT
We rerouted inbound leads by territory automatically instead of a single shared inbox one person checked manually.

TIMEFRAME
6 weeks from implementation to the after-numbers being stable.

PERMISSION TO NAME THE CLIENT
Cannot name them by contract, must anonymize as 'a logistics company.'

PHASE 2 — DRAFT THE POST (only after phase 1 passes)
Lead with the after-number as the hook, stated plainly, before any context about who the client is — the number earns attention faster than a company name most readers don't recognize does. Follow with the before-state so the gap is immediate and concrete, then name the single specific intervention that caused the change — not a vague "we optimized their strategy," but the actual decision, tactic, or change made. State the timeframe explicitly since an unstated timeframe makes any number impossible to evaluate — a 40% increase over 3 years reads very differently than over 3 weeks. If client_permission indicates you cannot name the client, anonymize consistently throughout ("a mid-size logistics company" used the same way every time it's referenced) rather than accidentally including an identifying detail elsewhere in the post. Close with what this means for the specific type of reader who'd have the same starting problem, phrased as a takeaway they could apply, not a sales pitch to hire you — the credibility is supposed to do the selling implicitly.

WHAT NOT TO DO
Do not inflate or round the numbers I gave you to sound more impressive. Do not add a hard sales CTA ("DM me to get these results too") unless I explicitly ask for one — a case study that reads as proof outperforms one that reads as an ad, and adding a pitch at the end undercuts the credibility the numbers just built.

OUTPUT FORMAT
1. A note on whether phase 1 passed, and what's missing if it didn't.
2. The drafted post, formatted with LinkedIn-appropriate line breaks.
3. One alternate hook line using the same numbers, in case the first doesn't land.