Approved, but which one?
A corporate film is nearly done. The marketing manager emails that v6 looks great. The brand team replies to an older thread saying they approve, subject to the logo animation being fixed, which was fixed in v5. Legal asks for a disclaimer change, which becomes v7. The managing director watches v6 on his phone and says go ahead.
The producer delivers v7. Two weeks later, the brand team complains the end card is wrong. It turns out they approved v4. The managing director says he never saw the disclaimer. Nobody can show who approved v7, because nobody did, all together.
Why final approval is so slippery
- Approvals arrive by email, often replying to older threads about older versions.
- Different approvers need to see different things: brand checks the look, legal checks the words, the MD checks the message.
- Small fixes after approval create a new version that nobody re-approves.
- Approval subject to a change is treated as approval.
- The approval record is scattered across inboxes.
The cost of an unclear sign-off
Post-delivery changes are extra work that is hard to charge for when approval was unclear. Delivered films with mistakes damage the client relationship, and can be embarrassing if published. Disputes about who approved what eat producer time and trust, and the company has no record to point to. The final week of a job is also when everyone is tired and keen to be done, which is exactly when a quick yes in an email gets treated as sign-off.
How we build the sign-off step
- Each job lists its required approvers, set at the start: for example marketing, brand, legal and the managing director, with what each is checking.
- The final candidate is uploaded once. The system records the file's checksum, so the approval is tied to that exact file.
- Each approver gets a link to that version and can approve, approve with conditions, or reject, with a comment.
- Approval with conditions is not final. The producer makes the change, uploads a new version, and the approvers affected are asked to reconfirm, with a note of what changed.
- Once every required approver has approved the same version, the job shows as signed off, and the masters are released for delivery.
- The approval record, with names, times, the version and its checksum, is stored with the job and can be sent to the client.
| Approver | Checks | Approves |
|---|---|---|
| Marketing manager | Overall film and message | Final version |
| Brand team | Logos, colours, end card | Final version |
| Legal | On-screen text, claims, disclaimers | Final version |
| Managing director | Overall sign-off | Final version |
Tying approval to a checksum sounds technical, but it matters. It proves the file delivered is the one approved, not one with a small change made afterwards.
Sign-off on the next film
The final candidate goes to four approvers. Brand approves. Legal approves with a condition about the disclaimer. The producer fixes it, uploads v7, and the system asks brand and legal to reconfirm, showing only the changed end card. The managing director approves v7 on his phone.
Signed off. The producer delivers and sends the approval record with the delivery email. When the brand team later asks about the end card, the answer is already in their inbox.
Some jobs are simpler, with a single approver at the client, and they use the same step with one name on it. The record is the same either way, so the company has one way of working rather than a different habit per client.
Could this be your final week?
- Approvals arrive by email about different versions.
- Small fixes after approval are delivered without re-approval.
- Clients have disputed what they approved.
- Approval subject to changes is treated as final.
- You cannot show who approved the delivered file.