A list of frequently asked questions is a useful starting point for an expert video series, but it is not automatically a production plan. Several questions may lead to the same answer. Others may be popular internally because they let the organisation explain itself, while doing little for the intended viewer.
Before commissioning episodes, identify the decision each answer should help someone make. A question might help a prospective client recognise a relevant problem, understand a choice or decide whether a more detailed conversation is necessary. These are different jobs and deserve different evidence.
Sort questions by what happens next
Ask the expert what a viewer could do differently after receiving an adequate answer. If the response is simply “know more about us”, refine the question. Awareness can be a legitimate purpose, but it should not disguise a series with no useful progression.
Keep the audience specific. A procurement lead and a technical user may ask similar-sounding questions while needing different depths of answer. That can justify separate pieces, provided the distinction is real and visible in their titles and content.
Do not force every answer into a commercial call to action. Some questions are best answered by helping the viewer recognise that the service is not relevant or that another specialist should be consulted. A useful series can clarify boundaries as well as opportunities.
Detect episodes that collapse together
Write a one-sentence answer for every proposed question before booking interviews. Compare those answers. If three episodes share the same conclusion, examples and next step, they may belong in one stronger film.
The test is not whether their titles differ. Ask whether removing one would deprive the audience of a distinct explanation. Conversely, a broad question with several unrelated decisions may need to be separated so each piece can be found and understood independently.
This exercise also reveals questions that the available expert cannot answer responsibly. They may require another contributor, a narrower brief or removal from the schedule. Production volume should not determine the scope of expertise.
A hypothetical selection meeting
A fictional consultancy proposes separate films on choosing an adviser, finding the right adviser and comparing advisory firms. The draft answers all repeat the same selection criteria. The team combines them into one substantive comparison piece.
It then adds a genuinely different episode explaining what happens after an appointment, because that question involves process expectations rather than provider selection. The series becomes shorter on paper but more useful in practice, without losing a distinct audience need.
Prepare an episode decision card
For each retained film, record the audience, question, answer boundary, necessary example, evidence owner and intended next step. Add the nearest neighbouring episode and explain why both deserve to exist.
Use these cards during interview planning. A speaker who drifts into another episode can be redirected without discouraging a useful answer. The editor can also identify material that belongs elsewhere instead of repeating the same passage across the series.
After recording, reassess the plan against what was actually said. An episode that lacks a complete answer should not survive merely because it has a number on the schedule. The commissioning goal is a coherent collection of useful explanations, not a predetermined quantity of clips.
Discuss the brief
For a proposed project film, contact Live Images with the audience, available evidence and intended use. The production approach and any specialist requirements need an agreed scope.
Source and editorial note
Australian Government Style Manual headings provides background context, checked 30 October 2026. The film-planning guidance and hypothetical examples are original editorial analysis, not technical operating instructions or a claim about a completed Live Images project. Prepared with AI assistance.