Why one good film beats ten rushed ones
Most corporate video budgets get spread too thin. Kate Bennett on why volume is usually the wrong answer, and what happens when you put everything into one film worth making.
50 articles
Most corporate video budgets get spread too thin. Kate Bennett on why volume is usually the wrong answer, and what happens when you put everything into one film worth making.
Most people who say they are bad on camera have never been properly directed. The fear is real, but the cause is almost always a production problem, not a personal one.
Most studios lose the enquiry before anyone picks up the phone. The buyer has already decided, and they decided on evidence you either control or ignore.
A vague brief produces a polished film nobody wanted. Kate Bennett on the exact questions that have to be answered before a camera moves.
Every business that hesitates on a brand film is using the wrong unit of analysis. Change the denominator and the conversation with finance changes too.
A four-part video series, left alone for fourteen months, quietly produced twelve warm leads. Here is the mechanism behind it and the maths that makes the case.
The audio-only version was more convenient to consume. It was also watched by fewer people, shared less, and remembered by nobody who mattered.
Kate Bennett on the capability gap that isn't about cameras, and what changes when a professional team takes over the interview and the edit.
The client saved four thousand pounds on the production day. They spent fourteen thousand pounds fixing what that saved them.
A client called twelve months after we wrapped to ask whether we could reshoot. The film we had both been proud of looked wrong.
For years I thought a longer script meant a more complete brief. It meant a more boring film.
The deal had been in proposal for six months. Budget approved, champion in the room, legal cleared. A two-minute film from a reference client unstuck it in a week.
A marketing director showed me a £250,000 brand film with four thousand views. The production was excellent. The brief was not.
I nearly axed our internal video budget. A team member stopped me with a spreadsheet. Looking at those numbers changed how I think about corporate video entirely.
The creative team loved it. The CFO killed the budget in three minutes. He was not being difficult. He was asking the only question that mattered, and nobody in the room had an answer.
We spent three days on a film I was genuinely proud of. It got forty-two views in six months. The problem was not the production. It never is.
I tracked three shoot days across two London boroughs and added up the travel time. Four and a half hours of crew time. That is where most production budgets quietly disappear.
I sent a client into a Series B round with boardroom footage that read immediately as a company that had not thought about how it looked. The feedback arrived six weeks later.
Most brands reject virtual production on the strength of a technology they stopped using years ago. The assumption is costing them ground they will not easily recover.
I put a location shoot in front of a client as the aspirational option. A week of watching the invoices arrive taught me what I had actually done to their budget.
I sat in on a pitch we lost. The winning firm was not better. They were on screen more often, in three specific ways, and the buyer never met us in person to compare.
We set out to film one department's story. It ended up running in onboarding, in sales rooms and at the all-hands, because we filmed the truth instead of the brochure.
A client showed me a £30,000 brand film his sales team had never once sent to a prospect. It was beautiful. It was useless. That video taught me the five mistakes that quietly waste most corporate video budgets in London, and how to spot them before you sign anything.
A FTSE comms lead told me she'd stopped booking ballrooms. Her keynotes now run from a virtual studio in central London, and her board never noticed the room had gone. Here is what changed her mind, and what it should change about yours.
We make AI people at Disruptive Live. So this is not an argument against AI video. It is an argument about what happens to content at 18 months old — and why the calculation most marketing teams are running is the wrong one.
AI is brilliant for getting a first draft down fast. The problem is that ChatGPT and Copilot have default habits that sound fine on paper and fall completely flat on camera. A few small tweaks make all the difference.
Prospect Theory says people fear losing more than they want to gain. The deals that close are the ones where the cost of inaction was made concrete, not where the gain was sold hardest.
Executives scan email rather than read it. Lead with the conclusion. Put everything else below it.
Generic ROI calculators and pitch-deck business cases are being quietly filed away before they reach the decision-maker. The deals that close are built around the prospect's specific outcomes.
Buyers are using LinkedIn hashtags like #IAmBuying to pull vendors toward them. The traditional interruption model of cold outreach is collapsing.
Most first calls are product demos in disguise. A pre-meeting video that answers the questions every prospect asks changes that dynamic completely.
Buyers complete 57 to 70 percent of their purchase decision before they speak to sales. That changes everything about what the first call is actually for.
Buyers who feel hunted stop talking. The counterintuitive discovery from negotiation research: giving someone permission to say no opens the conversation that pushing for yes always closes.
Talking to a finance director about brand vision is like suggesting a surgeon rely on healing crystals. CFOs care about LTV to CAC, risk mitigation, and business outcomes.
No decision beats every named competitor in B2B sales. When a deal goes dark, it rarely means they chose someone else. It means nobody made the case for change compelling enough.
Winning the champion feels like progress. It usually isn't. The real buying decision happens in rooms you'll never enter, and most deals die there.
We spend thousands on video and wonder why nobody watches it. The problem isn't the camera. It's what we're pointing it at.
A brilliant testimonial shown without context reads as noise. A 1920s Soviet filmmaker explains exactly why.
The Peak-End Rule means your audience will remember exactly two things: the most intense moment and how you finished. Most speakers save the ending for last.
People share content to look good to their networks. Most corporate social accounts have this backwards.
Aristotle diagnosed this 2,400 years ago. Most business communicators default to Logos and skip Ethos and Pathos. Data convinces no one who doesn't already trust you.
The more confidently you claim to be the best, the less your audience believes you. The fix is structural, not stylistic.
Release all bad news at once. Stage good news in intervals. Most organisations do both the wrong way round and turn a bad story into a long one.
Naming your product's obvious limitation before anyone asks does not lose deals. It closes them.
The person who speaks first after naming a price usually loses. The silence after you state your number belongs to the room.
The budget you spend outsourcing your content is the authority you hand to someone who will be gone in twelve months.
The conventional wisdom that all video must be short is wrong. A buyer preparing to spend significant money will watch 20 minutes. Most corporate content gives them nothing worth watching.
Every element on a slide competes for the same attention. Hitchcock worked out the hierarchy problem in 1930. Most decks ignore it entirely.
A script gives you control over every word and no control over whether anyone believes you.
An About Us video is a vanity project dressed as a sales tool. Sales teams do not use them because they do not answer buyer questions.