There is no single secret to winning a treatment. If you have been in the trenches of the difficult business of winning bids for commercials, you already know this is a multi-factorial enterprise: sometimes you win because you were the agency's pick, sometimes because you know the creative, sometimes because your schedule was open or your budget aligned.
Winning a treatment is not a simple pursuit. Luck plays its part. But after more than a decade in the industry, there are things that can add real control for whoever is involved in the treatment-making process.
Like everything else in life, in order to achieve anything, one must want it badly. So much so that it becomes a temporary obsession.
One factor that is often overlooked, perhaps for its esoteric nature, but is nonetheless extremely important, is the level of involvement. Time and time again I have seen this play out: like everything else in life, in order to achieve anything, one must want it badly. So much so that it becomes a temporary obsession, something you simply can't take completely out of your mind, even when other thoughts and obligations are competing for your attention at the same time.
This level of obsession, or commitment to a creative vision, is so much more important than most realise, because when it comes to a finished treatment, care is measurable and easy to spot. It usually comes through in a high level of attention to detail. Due to the hasty nature of the treatment process, it's very common to spot sloppy add-ons, redesigns, rewritings, and so on. Which means that when your treatment is flawless, it stands out.
From the receiving end, it comes across as though the standard for the work itself, the commercial, has already been set. And ensuring that your first impression is one of absolute integrity and polish matters.
At this point, I probably know what you're thinking: "But what about the tight deadlines?" No one delivers sloppy work willingly, of course. Imperfection, you could say, is just part of the process, which more often than not does not respect the time actually needed for the creative juices to marinate, soften up, and cook up something incredible.
While this is true, that is precisely when time management comes into play: it's part of the EP's job, and I would argue the director's as well, and hopefully the creative team's too, to prevent rushed wrap-ups as much as possible by starting with a clear timeframe for deliveries.
Although this might sound simple at first, from experience I've also come to learn that designing schedules and timelines has to be tailored for each job. Perpetuating the idea that, say, two days is all it takes for visual research to be completed is already pushing the treatment onto a potentially unsuccessful path.
That's because, just as we noted at the beginning of this chapter, the natural state of a treatment is multi-layered and multi-factorial. Deciding the number of days for visual research will depend on:
The Brand
Is this a highly visual brand, or a more understated one? Is the brand clear about their creative direction; do they know what they're looking for, or are they "open to collaboration"?
The Project
Is it live action only? Does it involve CGI? AI? Celebrities? Multiple locations? A studio? The nature of the project helps dictate how much work and how many references, roughly, will be needed to properly illustrate a given treatment.
The Size
Is it a single-script film? Or a multiple-script campaign, with deliverables of 2', 1', and 30" versions, plus socials with different timings for different posts, still photography, and so on?
This third point is usually not just overlooked but actively downplayed by EPs as they rush to hire someone to handle the job, and it's understandable. But it's also absolutely crucial for the creative team to be aware from the start of the actual size of the campaign.
That's because, very quickly, a 24-hour turnaround promise for delivering a first round of images can be broken simply because there's too much material to cover. And adding conflict to an already tight schedule is the last thing anyone involved needs.
If everyone is aligned from the get-go, the probability that plans will change midway decreases exponentially.
This is when clarity, despite perhaps causing a bit of delay or even friction at the beginning, becomes crucial. If everyone is aligned from the get-go, the probability that plans will change midway decreases exponentially, having a direct positive effect on the chances of a project being successful.
The Director
Every director works differently. Some will walk barefoot to the depths of Mordor to find the perfect reference, and "perfect" means something entirely different from director to director, while others are less precious about a specific image but more attached to the overall effect and mood of the selection. Some are very slow to respond, review, and select, while others do it instantly.
With time, EPs and the creative team, if working repeatedly with a given director, will learn what the workflow is with that specific director, making it easier to design a timeline of deliverables. But what you don't want is a timeline being set while disregarding this working style, because it's yet another factor that can take your treatment off track and diminish your chances of success.
Making a treatment is already a similar experience to wearing a helmet that slowly fills with water in under 72 hours, so any strategy to ensure the water stays as low as possible for as long as possible is a winning one.
What many winning treatments have in common isn't just a director with a strong creative vision and a team of competent professionals to execute it, but an EP who knows their directors well and can coordinate the treatment process swiftly and effectively.
The Timezone
This is one of the biggest unlocks when it comes to selecting the right treatment crew for a given project. It's a clever move to think about which time zone may benefit your project the most. For example: if you're based in LA, you might want someone based in Europe working on your project so that, when you wake up, you're almost a day ahead of everyone else.
And if you're in Europe, the opposite may be true. In some cases, it's more important for the creative team and the director to be working in the same time zone so that communication flows more smoothly (no unanswered texts at dawn in Europe when it's a perfectly normal working hour in NYC, for example).
Over the years, we've come to realise that the best EPs have something in common:
They know how to work out the most beneficial time zone configuration for a specific project, based on schedule, overall treatment deadline, and knowing where a particular director's favourite creatives are based. It's an exercise similar to completing a puzzle, but when the pieces fall into place, you get the best view of it all.
The Creative Team
This is a tough one for researchers and designers to hear, but unfortunately piecing together the right crew isn't always simply about skill. It's about compatibility. See it this way: Enya is a great singer, but you wouldn't necessarily place her as a band member in the Rolling Stones. The vibe just doesn't match. They also possess very different musical skills.
One could argue that combining unexpected elements is exactly what creates magic, and there's truth to that. However, in the fast-turnaround world of treatments, taking risks tends to take a back seat.
Usually, the most advisable move is to put together a team that understands the director's workflow, style, creative voice, and communication. This is vital.
Portfolio relevance, project genre strengths, and tools are all very important, but if the overall compatibility isn't there, it will rarely translate to a successful treatment.