Matthew Clulow

Copied and pasted from an artilce I write for a telecom juirnal

Ilove the clients who ‘wing-it’ on

camera and get it right the first

time. We call them “One-Take

Charlie” because we shoot them

(record them) once and we’re done.

The production values for this kind

of project are relatively predictable

and easy to quote.

I recently video taped a group of

senior executives presenting a do-or-perish

initiative to their management

team in preparation for an

international roll-out. We had quoted

a flat fee for recording a live

presentation that would be

distributed to their international

offices, on a DVD. After the

presentation, we reviewed the tape

and it was a no-brainer that one part

of the presentation failed to make the

point. The executive was off-script.

The client concurred and we made

plans to re-shoot in a studio.

During preparations for the original

recording, we had left a camera

rolling while we tested equipment,

and we had a few minutes of tape

showing the empty stage. Our plan

was to reshoot one executive on a

chroma-key (green screen)

background and then substitute the

background with the empty stage

from the original event. .

When the client arrived at the studio

he had no notes. In fact, he never

worked with notes. I asked him if he

wanted to do a couple of practice

runs and he said, “No, let’s get it done

so I can get back to the office”. He

moved into position, the cameras

rolled and the executive launched into

his presentation. He stopped about

30 seconds later. After several more

stops his frustration level grew and

things went from bad to worse. He

left the studio and we used the

original footage.



When someone tells me they are

going to do it in one shot, I often say,

“go ahead - make my day!”



The executive’s original presentation

to a live audience was smooth,

polished, entertaining and engaging

but he failed to make the point. He

had the same problem in the studio.

In fact, many executives are quite

comfortable with on-camera

interviews but asking them to talk

direct to the camera when they are

alone, is off-limits. Why?

The answer came from an executive

in a management search firm. She

has interviewed thousands of people

and noted the stark differences

between extraverts and introverts in

an interview situation. Extraverts

were quick to engage, were energized

by having people around them, and

answered questions on the fly. In

short, they are quite comfortable

‘winging it’. Introverts were harder to

engage; they were more reflective and

usually paused to think before giving

a cautious, direct answer. Extraverts

would often drift off-topic.



Here’s the hook. When you’re talking

to a camera, there is no one to engage

or respond to! Whether you’re an

introvert or an extravert, the things that

normally prompt your dialogue are

absent and this causes people to freeze,

unless they are scripted and rehearsed.

I always recommend scripting and

rehearsing the presentation but

‘wingers’ often respond with,

“That will look phony!”

So why do it that way?

When you’re ‘live’ on camera, anything

that comes out of your mouth

is seen by the viewer and you can’t

take it back. As you climb the ladder

of success, the last thing you want in circulation is a permanent record of a

bad performance. It might end up on

You-Tube!

After reviewing thousands of hours of

tapes, I am certain that those who

take the time to script and rehearse,

consistently produce better results,

live or taped!



This experience is not unique to

executives! Professional speakers are

often smooth as butter on stage but

I’ve seen them freeze in a studio.

A local news reporter concurs that

presenting to a camera is different

from presenting to an audience.

Actors read a script, rehearse, and

then try several times on camera

before they get it right. I work with

a local television studio where we

pre-record parts of a live-to-air show

so fewer mistakes are seen on air.

Bad scripts can be re-written. A bad,

live performance, will always be bad.



But it goes much deeper than that.

Scripted, well rehearsed executives

spend less time in the studio. Their

message is clearer and the cost of

production is lower. That’s before you

consider the cost savings of online vs.

in-person communications.

Digital video is quickly finding its way

into corporate communications; it is

changing the way we communicate

with staff, channels, and customers.

ideo has its place in SME businesses but it would be reckless to jump in without looking at the Return On Investment (R.O.I.). Here are four examples that look beyond price-point and valuate the R.O.I.

I was recently hired to drive all over the region and capture short clips of people talking about my client. We filmed five people for a few minutes each. It took three days and a lot of miles to film them in their respective offices. It took a couple more days to review and edit the tapes. This was a video resume and the client was looking for a job. The cost was several thousand dollars.

Crazy or Brilliant? Where is the R.O.I in that and what has this got to do with SME anyway?

The answer to the second question is: ‘This has everything to do with small business”. A resume is just marketing material and a video is just a means of delivering a high impact message, at a relatively low cost.

The answer to the first question is ‘Brilliant!’ The five people we taped held high-profile, senior positions in different firms. The mere fact that five executives would be willing to speak so highly of one person, on camera, is proof positive that this person impressed her peers. This was a powerful validation of credentials and accomplishment.

If you’re applying for a clerical position you may not want to spend that much money, but this client was after a six figure income. The R.O.I. is obvious; she has an edge that gets her the job and she covers the cost of the video with the first month’s income.

We recently produced a video tour of a property. It took one day to tape it, and a couple days of editing. The production cost was $1,700. Most agents wouldn’t dream of spending that kind of money, over and above all the other required marketing costs.

Here’s the win.

Most agents show photographs on the internet; some do 360 degree panoramas. This property boasted the pastoral peace and quite of country living, with executive retreat income potential and simple photography can’t communicate that as well as video can.

The listing agent competed against discount agents to get the listing. Rather than discount the commission she added broadcast quality video as a bonus. It was for internet marketing. Moreover, the seller was emotionally attached to the property and loved the idea of having their memories captured on a DVD they could keep.

The buyer found the video on the internet and said “if the real thing looks as good as the video, consider it sold”. It sold! The win was a $60,000 commission. As the listing agent, she didn’t have to split her commission with another agent.

Getting the picture?

An independent salesman with a huge geographical territory was taking almost a year to introduce new products. Conflicting schedules and driving time were taking a toll on sales.

Rather than do the same dog and pony show 200 times for 200 clients over the course of a year, we proposed doing it once in the studio and then put the video on his website. The link to the video could be emailed to his contact list to generate awareness, interest, and immediate sales. In this scenario less time would be spent in the car and motels, and more time processing orders. This kind of video can be done professionally in one day for as little as $500.00. Gas savings would more than cover that cost.

Another small client had to educate a business community about economic changes in the region. The original plan was to make a large presentation in a conference centre and invite the community to see it. It’s very difficult to get people out for this kind of event due to conflicting schedules and travel costs. The decision was made to produce four on-demand webcasts and market the message via mail and email. Our experience suggests that online attendance trumps one day event attendance by 15-20 times or more, and it costs considerably less for the producer and the attendees.

Video has its place in small business. It’s a matter of looking for the R.O.I.