What a Production Workflow Review costs and what moves the price

What the fee actually buys

A Production Workflow Review ends in a written document, and the fee pays for the time it takes to produce that document properly. Before any writing, I read your rundown templates, cue sheets and talkback arrangements, then sit in on a rehearsal or a live programme to see how they behave under pressure. The report that follows sets out what works, where the show relies on one person remembering something, and which fallback steps are missing or untested.

Because the output is a report and not a consultancy retainer, the price is set against the amount of material and the number of programmes involved. You receive findings in the order a producer would want to act on them, with each recommendation tied to something we saw or read. Nothing in the fee depends on you adopting a particular piece of equipment or buying anything further from us.

The factors that move the price

Four things account for most of the difference between one review and another. The first is the number of distinct formats: a single evening bulletin is quicker to assess than a bulletin, a weekly interview programme and an occasional live event, each with its own rundown logic. The second is how much written procedure already exists. A gallery with documented cueing and fallback steps gives us something to test; one that runs on habit means we spend longer drawing the process out of people.

The third is the number of people whose working practice we need to observe, from the director and vision mixer to the floor manager and audio operator. The fourth is the amount of time on site, since watching a full programme from rehearsal to close tells us more than a short visit.

• Number of programme formats covered
• How much procedure is already written down
• Roles we need to observe at work
• Hours spent on site during rehearsal and transmission

Scope choices that change the effort

Some clients want the whole chain examined, from how the rundown is built to what happens when a link drops. Others want one problem looked at closely, such as why talkback instructions are being missed during the final minutes of a long programme. A narrower question means fewer observation hours and a shorter report, and the fee reflects that.

Where the scope grows, it usually grows through the fallback section. Writing a credible procedure for losing a camera feed, a guest connection or a talkback line means walking through each failure with the people who would have to deal with it, and that conversation takes time. We agree the scope in writing before any work starts, so you know in advance which procedures are in the review and which are left out.

What we need from you beforehand

The more you can send before the first visit, the less on-site time we spend asking for it. Useful items include recent rundowns for each format, any cue or script templates, a plain description of how talkback is routed, and a note of any incidents from the past few months that the team still talks about. Even rough, handwritten procedures help, because they show how the gallery thinks about its own work.

Access matters as much as documents. If we can attend a rehearsal and a live transmission, and speak briefly with the people in the key roles, the review rests on observation rather than on what the paperwork says should happen. Autumn schedules tend to fill quickly, so allow time for booking observation days around your programme calendar.

• Recent rundowns for each programme format
• Cue sheets, scripts or templates in use
• A description of talkback routing
• Notes on recent on-air problems

How quoting and payment work

Prices for this service are listed on the Prices page, and the figure for your review depends on the factors above. You send an enquiry through the contact page describing your programmes and what you want examined. We reply with a written quotation setting out the scope, the observation days and the fee, and you confirm in writing if you wish to go ahead.

Once the work is done and the report delivered, we issue an invoice, which is paid by bank transfer. Nothing is paid through the website, and no work begins without a written confirmation. If plans change after you have confirmed, the payment and refund policy explains how cancellations are handled, so there are no surprises on either side.

Judging whether the cost is right for you

A review earns its fee when it replaces guesswork with a short list of changes the team can make themselves. If your shows already run steadily and you simply want an outside check, a narrow scope is usually enough. If you have had repeated near misses on air, a broader review that includes fallback procedures is the more sensible choice, even though it takes longer.

I would also ask what the cost of a single failed transmission would be to your organisation, in lost viewers, lost guests and the strain on the team. That comparison is more useful than the fee alone. Describe your situation in the enquiry and we will tell you honestly whether a full review or a smaller piece of work suits you better.