Know what works

More and more new providers of digital solutions are entering the film industry. With foreign apps and software, additional problems arise that cannot be solved by simple language translations. Number and date formats, different standards and a divergent legal framework increase the confusing error rate. Solutions that are developed on the drawing board rather than from practical implementation also have a negative impact. Supposedly disruptive ideas harbour problems for customers in the areas of compliance, data protection and trade secrets. If a solution seems like a good idea for improving your own processes, tomorrow the provider may integrate the entire process itself, thereby destroying what was previously your own added value - including experience and expertise. This applies just as much to service offerings as it does to percentage-based services. It has never been easier for economic pirates.

There's this hip, new provider with a really practical solution to an annoying problem? Wouldn't it be practical for the broadcaster to compare a submission calculation with other, comparable scripts, supported by AI? Decisions could be made much more quickly and the justification for budget decisions could finally be clearly understood by auditors and audit offices. Oh yes, films are all individual pieces and not comparable. So why should something like this be introduced - in times of cost and reform pressure?

Then there's this new app from a start-up, which is designed to make it easy for everyone to check in - green and simple. Target/actual comparisons and convenient management on set are simply fantastic. The data of all participants is recorded by the new provider, just like with the previous service providers, so almost. It's easy to overlook the small disclaimer that the data remains with the app and may continue to be used there. For the next production, the app or a sister company may then take over the direct approach - and recruiters, agencies or general contractors are left out in the cold. In other words, disruptive. There is already a similar balance of power between the commissioning broadcasters and streamers and the commissioned producer when authors and creatives are engaged directly. However, professionals act there in full awareness, with legal support and in opportunity-risk and risk-impact assessments, usually even in decision-making teams.

It is not technology or the possibilities of AI that threaten the production economy. This may change if, as Sora suggests, the programme content can be generated completely artificially. The current threats to companies and jobs come from the sidelines: young, committed founders whose products and solutions do not fulfil the legal requirements, are not sufficiently tested and thus generate risks for production companies or clients. Even worse, as liability also lies with the people involved, i.e. the decision-makers who allow themselves to be inspired by a brief presentation and then make fatal decisions. This is all the more painful today, as compliance is an essential component of non-financial reporting and documentation obligations in the context of sustainability.

So technology is evil after all? No, of course not. Experts who have a comprehensive understanding of processes and issues and create digital solutions with appropriate legal support help to increase speed, reduce errors and cut costs. Of course, this also includes digital solutions that have been on the market for years and whose products have passed numerous reviews and audits. The Digital employment contract, Cinelytics or also Yamdu here are positive reference projects showing how ideas can be implemented really well and sustainably.

Please write to us if you would like us to publish solutions and providers with advantages and disadvantages on Ensider.de.

We wish you a successful production year.