A decision tree can appear more complete than it is. An expert explanation should show when the tree helps and when the user must leave it.
Demonstrate a normal path and an out-of-scope case, with the responsible escalation route.
Explain the tree’s entry conditions
Before following a branch, the viewer needs to know when the decision tree applies. Ask the owner to identify the audience, task and information required to begin. A tree may be accurate within its scope while producing a wrong route when used for a different kind of request.
Record a normal example slowly enough that the viewer can see which answer selects each branch. Explain the evidence for that answer rather than treating it as obvious. This helps prevent the film from becoming a memorised path through one example.
Give the missing branch a legitimate outcome
Choose a case that the tree does not cover and show the approved fallback. The film should make it acceptable to stop and seek advice rather than force a request into the nearest available branch. Do not add an improvised branch during the interview without the owner’s review.
Preserve the tree’s version and source. An attractive redrawn graphic can lose notes, conditions or status information from the original. The subject owner should compare the production graphic with the approved reference, including any exceptions that the simplified visual treatment might omit.
If the tree changes, determine which sequences depend on the old structure. Replacing the final graphic may not be enough if the spoken explanation still teaches an obsolete route. The maintenance plan should account for the whole reasoning sequence.
For acceptance, ask a viewer to explain the entry condition, follow a different valid path and recognise an out-of-scope case. These are separate checks. The useful production outcome is an explanation of how to use a bounded decision aid, not a promise that the tree answers every question or removes the need for specialist judgement in cases its author did not design it to cover.
Commissioning checks
| Input | Why it changes production |
|---|---|
| Approved decision tree version | Show how to enter the tree |
| Known exclusions | Explain a boundary case |
| Named process owner | Keep the fallback visible |
An illustrative application
Suppose an internal support tree covers routine access requests. The film follows one standard request and then shows a situation that needs specialist review. The example avoids suggesting that every problem has a branch in the diagram. This example is hypothetical, not a Live Images project.
Ask viewers what they would do when no branch fits. Do not expand the tree during filming or let an illustrative shortcut become a new authorised procedure.
Discuss the production brief
Use the completed brief when you enquire with Live Images. Check the current service offering and agree who supplies the relevant subject expertise before committing to production.
Source and scope
Australian Government Style Manual plain language is relevant background, checked 30 October 2026. This is original commissioning guidance, not legal, employment, safety or regulated professional advice. Prepared with AI assistance for Live Images.