p.103
In This Chapter
Talk of client opinions brings up the topic of just how to handle clients—and producers. Both of these individuals are your bosses on corporate shoots. The producer is typically a direct liaison between you and the client, and he is also your supervisor. Aside from producing successful programs, he’s intent on keeping his budget in line and making his department “shine” for his boss. The client, on the other hand, is not your direct boss, but what you might call a very “influential collaborator” regarding the look and feel of the program.
This type of reporting usually works just fine, but it demands that writers and directors show a healthy respect for their producers and clients. It is also critical to understand that at producer and client levels, politics, money and pride are often influential factors in their thinking and decision-making—that’s the nature of the beast. As a writer or director, you should accept this fact of life and make it work for you. Doing so will leave your clients and producers very happy, and, provided your work is of professional quality, it will virtually guarantee callbacks for future projects.
p.104
I have worked with many writers, producers and directors and I’ve found that the best rule of thumb is to respect their abilities and positions. This is a general rule that, of course, is applicable to any job, and it’s based on the simple fact that the producer is more likely to call you in for more work in the future if he is comfortable with you and feels you have respect for him.
When it comes to approvals, three letters come immediately to mind—PNA, i.e. the Program Needs Analysis developed at the show’s inception. You will recall that one of the key segments of the PNA was Objectives. If you developed them carefully, writing specific expectations of the program, now will be the time to compare what you and the client decided, and what has come to pass. In other words, having now looked at the final cut, do you feel the show does what you both had intended?
Let’s look back at some of the key parts of our example PNA from Chapter 3.
As I explained previously, the Problem may not be evident to many clients, but there is always a problem otherwise there would be no need to produce a video. In this case it was:
PROBLEM: Academic and community members are not aware of the long, rich and important history of Oxnard Adult School, including the fact that this year will mark its 75th anniversary.
Will that problem be solved by this program? We can find out in several ways. One is simply to watch the program and discuss whether it clearly conveys the point. You might also gather a room full of typical viewers, show them the program and survey their opinions. Another indicator might be the distribution:
UTILIZATION/DISTRIBUTION: This program will be shown at the WASC reception in the spring of this year. It will most likely be presented via computer projection. It may also be uploaded to the Oxnard Adult School website, and possibly be broadcast on local cable through Time Warner and the Oxnard Government Channel (26). To meet these distribution requirements, various formats may be needed, including standard DVD and MPEG.
p.105
A simple verification of the utilization steps that will be undertaken can help answer the question. Are the same distribution plans still in place? If so, that’s great, but there’s more to it. Assuming it is distributed per the original plan, once it gets into the hands of audience members, will it do what was intended? To find that out, how about a look at those original objectives?
Would reviewing them and comparing them to a viewing of the program give some indication of whether they have been achieved? Absolutely. An assessment of the objectives should be discussed and agreed upon in the client approval meeting, just as they were initially agreed upon at the project inception. A starter for that discussion might go something like this:
“Well, we’ve seen the program, now let’s have a look back at what we agreed it should accomplish. Here were the objectives we decided on in the PNA:
OBJECTIVES: This program will meet both motivational and informational objectives as follows:
Motivational: This program will motivate community members to regard the school in high esteem, value its presence in the community and, in appropriate cases, consider attending or seeking more information on how the school might benefit them.
Informational: Having viewed this program, audience members will be able to:
1. state that Oxnard Adult School has reached its 75th anniversary;
2. state that the value and scope of Oxnard Adult School in the community are both very powerful, though they often go unnoticed;
3. state that Oxnard Adult School has had a long, positive effect on students, enriching their futures and helping to create exciting new opportunities.
As we know, specific, quantifiable results are not normally expected from motivational objectives. Quantifying whether someone truly understands or is motivated is difficult. I think we can assume that if the other more specific objectives are met, the motivational one is assured. So let’s look at the other three.
p.106
Do we feel that if asked, viewers will be able to state that Oxnard Adult School is 75 years old? It was a topic of discussion in all the interviews, and we had graphics, and of course the titles, that presented it throughout the show. I’d say that’s pretty well assured.
Number two said viewers should be able to state that the value and scope of the school in the community is powerful, but often goes unnoticed. Do you think that if asked, viewers would be able to state that? In the program, that idea was discussed frequently and we had interviews and support titles, so I believe that’s covered. And finally, number three states that the impact the school has on its students is positive, valuable and helpful to their futures. Do you think viewers got that? All the students interviewed were very complimentary of the school, its curriculum and its teachers.”
To be 100 percent positive the show accomplished these objectives, you would have to initiate a group discussion or a survey immediately after a viewing of the show. Sometimes this is the case, most times, however, a discussion with the client and producer is adequate. The important thing is to make sure that the client realizes that those objectives laid out in the very beginning weren’t just for show. They were actually guide posts used by the writer, producer and director to bring the show to a successful result.
Finally you may remember that we said another important quality, similar to objectives, was a determination of whether the program was produced with professional quality. Again, this can be discussed and determined by viewing the show in the approval meeting.
When it comes to approvals, never make excuses or place blame. Becoming defensive about changes a client or producer might want will quickly land you out of work and not likely the recipient of many future phone calls. Most Producers are much too busy to deal with disruptive people who feel they are special and take the client’s or your comments as an affront to their “elite creative status.”
p.107
On the other hand, there is no problem with professionally voicing your opinions based on your background and experience. The trick is to do it the right (tactful) way, and let the client or producer know that, although you have certain opinions about the project, you’re certainly willing to go with their ideas if need be.
BREAKOUT 10.1 “THE CASE OF THE DEFENSIVE WRITER”
Not many years ago I was placed in an awkward position that involved some very tense moments about a script. I was a writer at the time, asked to fill-in as a producer on a project at the script stage. The writer, who was a friend, had just turned in a first draft of the script—to me. When I sat in my office and read it, I became anxious. I felt the script was not structured well and the narration wasn’t conversational or effective from an audience standpoint. In short, it needed changes.
I found myself torn over what to do next. Should I let the writer know that I wanted changes to the script or should I keep my feelings undercover and forward it to the client feeling convinced that it would be sent back to us for revisions.
After giving it a good deal of thought, I decided forwarding a faulty script was not something our department should do. Instead, I met with the writer to see if I could tactfully let her know that I would like to see some changes before we sent the script to the client. My worst fears were realized when we sat down to discuss it and the conversation went something like this:
Basic introductions, then . . .
| ME: | So, I think it’s a good script, but I’m hoping you won’t mind making a few changes. |
| WRITER: | What type of changes? You mean like proofing? |
p.108
| ME: | No. Actually I was hoping you could change the structure a bit and see if you can make it a bit more conversational. |
| WRITER: | Conversational? You’re kidding! |
| ME: | No, I’m not talking about much, just include some contractions and loosen up |
| some of the word choices and phrases. | |
| WRITER: | What? I’ll stand by every word in that script and as far as I’m concerned I don’t need to change a syllable. Show me what you’re talking about . . . |
Well, the conversation went off the rails at that point, and the writer remained furious at me for a long time. She felt that because I was given a producer’s role for a short time, it had immediately gone to my head. She did make the changes I asked for, but she went to our boss immediately after he arrived back and complained.
As I’ve looked back on that experience across a span of almost 40 years. I’m not so sure that “doing the right thing” for the department was worth the damaged friendship. Today I’m still unsure, but I believe that because the personal cost was so high, if I had to do it again, I might just disregard the revisions, and send the script to the client.
It’s worth mentioning again that some writers and directors come into a production feeling that they have to project a kind of aloof or “Hollywood” image. They feel clients, and in some cases producers, should view them as media elites, “creative auteurs.” If you happen to be a new director displaying this kind of ego, there is a very good chance you will develop at best a “difficult” relationship with clients and producers, and at worst no relationship with them. Instead, remember that if you just be yourself and keep in mind that your skill as a writer or director will speak for itself, you will certainly get the respect of peers and those above you on the organizational chart.