What you'll get
- 2 copy-ready blocks
- 1 table
- 6 min read
A business case template fails the moment it reads like the vendor wrote it, because its real audience is the room you are not in: the budget holder, the sceptical director, the finance reviewer. This template is one page, written in the buyer's numbers and neutral enough that your champion can put their name near it. The handover wording at the end is what makes that happen.
The one page
[THE PROBLEM, AS A COST LINE]
What is happening: [two lines, the company's own situation, no vendor
names yet]
What it costs today: [their numbers: hours, overtime, delays, risk.
Sources named: "ops team estimate, Nov", "finance report Q3"]
Cost of doing nothing for 12 months: [the arithmetic, shown]
[THE OPTIONS, HONESTLY]
| Option | What it takes | Cost | What changes |
|-----------------|----------------------|----------|----------------|
| Do nothing | Nothing | [above] | Nothing |
| Fix in-house | [their effort/hires] | [est.] | [honest view] |
| Buy ([category])| [effort to adopt] | [range] | [the change] |
[THE RECOMMENDATION]
[Two lines. Which option, why now, and the smallest first step:
a pilot with criteria, not a platform commitment.]
[WHAT WOULD NEED TO BE TRUE]
- [Assumption 1, checkable]
- [Assumption 2, checkable]
- [The risk a sceptic will raise, named first, with the mitigation]
Decision requested: [the small yes] by [date], owner [name].The rules that make it forwardable
- Their numbers or no numbers. One figure from their own operations ("two staff, every Monday, per the ops review") outweighs any industry statistic, and invented benchmarks kill the document on contact with finance. Where you have no number, write "to be measured in the pilot" rather than borrowing one.
- The in-house option gets a fair hearing. A case that strawmans the alternatives reads as a pitch and gets treated like one. Concede what in-house does well; the honest comparison is what survives the sceptic.
- Name the biggest objection yourself. "The obvious risk is [x]" written by the case disarms the person who came to say it. Your champion knows which objection lives in that room; ask them.
- Vendor names appear once. In the buy option's row, as a category with your name in brackets. The document argues for solving the problem; the selection argument happens later, on easier ground.
- The ask is small. A one-pager that requests a platform budget dies; one that requests a four-week pilot with criteria (the proof-of-concept plan attached) gets its yes.
The handover wording
"I drafted the one-pager we discussed, in your numbers. Two asks:
correct anything that is wrong, and make it yours: your name, your
edits, your framing. It will do more as your analysis than as my
attachment. If it is useful, I can also give you a version of the
numbers in a sheet so finance can poke at the arithmetic."The invitation to edit is not politeness, it is the mechanism: a champion who has changed four lines has adopted the document, and what they change tells you what the room actually worries about. The same principle runs the forwardable recap after meetings and the forwardable note before them; this is the heavyweight of the family.
Worked example (illustrative, not a real company)
Dana Whitfield is working Calder Cold Chain, where the champion is an operations director whose finance lead killed a similar project last year. The case opens with Calder's own number: two planners rebuilding schedules, quoted from the director's words. The options table gives the in-house fix a real hearing, including that their IT team could build it, and names its cost in maintenance after the builder leaves, which is exactly what killed the last project. The named risk is "another tool the depots ignore", mitigated by the pilot's adoption criterion. The director edits three lines, puts their name on it and presents it. Finance's question is about an assumption, not the vendor, and the pilot gets its yes. All names are invented.
Five mistakes to avoid
- Writing it in vendor voice. "Our solution delivers" anywhere on the page makes the whole document yours again. Neutral voice, their numbers, category not brand.
- A ten-page case. Nobody forwards ten pages, and the deciding reader spends four minutes. One page, with a numbers appendix only if finance asks.
- Round numbers nobody owns. "Saves a third" with no source is the line the sceptic reads aloud. Every figure carries where it came from, even when that is "ops estimate".
- Skipping the champion's edit. An unedited case is an attachment; an edited one is their analysis. If they change nothing, ask them directly what the room will push back on.
- Asking for the big yes. The business case's job is to win the small, safe decision that starts the proof. Cases that request the full rollout ask strangers to trust you; pilots let the numbers do it.
Why this works on named accounts
Common questions
What should a business case include?
One page: the problem as a cost in the company's own numbers, the cost of doing nothing over a year, an honest options table including in-house, a recommendation with the smallest sensible first step, the assumptions and the named risk with its mitigation, and a dated decision ask with an owner.
How do you write a business case when you do not have the buyer's numbers?
Get even one: a discovery question ("what does that cost you in hours?") usually yields it, and a single owned figure beats any industry average. Where nothing exists, structure the case around "to be measured in the pilot", which turns the missing number into the pilot's justification.
Why should the champion present it instead of the vendor?
Because the room discounts vendor claims by default and weighs colleague analysis seriously; the same page performs differently depending on whose name is on it. Handing over authorship, including the edits, converts your argument into their initiative, which is how decisions actually move in committees you cannot attend.
More from the Academy
The Forwardable Note: Get Introduced Inside an Account
For sellers with one friendly contact in an account and nobody else.
You leave with the ask, a note your contact can forward in ten seconds and the thank-you that keeps them involved.
Transcript to Forwardable Recap
For sellers who send meeting summaries nobody forwards.
You leave with a prompt that writes the recap for the absent decision makers, a length rule and a check that keeps it true to the transcript.
Post-Demo Follow-Up Emails
For sellers whose demos go well and whose inboxes then go quiet.
You leave with five emails in sending order: the same-day recap, the stakeholder add, the pilot proposal, a chase that adds something and the close that parks it.
Want this in your inbox?
Optional. We use your email only to send you this, nothing else.