Same, but different

When is a business capability too different to be treated in the same way between business units?

We start with supply-chain to see how different the capability is between film production, film distribution and provide crew & equipment.

Film distribution

To sell a film, you need a few type of resources

• Rights for distribution

• Media to distribute

• Promotional material

• Optional subtitles

Provide crew & equipment

To provide crew & equipment to customers, you don't need much more, but different type of resources.

• Crew

• Film equipment

• Promotional material

Film production

Then compare these two business units to film production where we need much more to purchase or rent for the actual production, and everything needs to be just-in-time.

• Script / synopsis with rights

• Actors & extras

• Crew

• Props

• Makeup & wardrobe

• Set design

• Locations

• Music / score (rights)

• Archive media

• Film equipment

Summary

Film distribution resources differs very much from resources for Film production and Provide crew & equipment. Provide crew & equipment is a subset of Film production, and use the same resources. The assumption is no overlap between production and distribution, except when we do live events.

Process fit

Our supply-chain process have not been prioritized so far, as we have been concentrating on film production per se. However, better supply-chain for film production lower the costs and delays in production. Thus, we need to improve in this area. Both for allocation of cast and crew, but also for everything else needed in productions, including logistics.

Working assumption is to start with supply-chain in standard APQC, but also using APQC Broadcast as reference, when defining a proper supply chain process for all business units.

Application support

Yamdu supports managing crew & cast, props, set design, media, etc, in production, but not the supply-chain part of ordering from suppliers. What we need is a system that manages items and stock levels, in interaction with Yamdu, as well as purchase orders.

This will work well for film production and provide crew & equipment. However, film distribution uses different data, processes are not the same and you different skills as an employee to manage distribution. From a business perspective, there are no benefits of using the same system as for film production, more of concerns as it's getting more complicated and with higher license costs.

Conclusion

From a supply-chain perspective, keep film distribution autonomous.

Business model update

As part of the sixth article in the autonomous architecture series have I’ve updated the business model canvas to reflect how it relates to the different business units & value propositions.

For me, the business model is always the starting point to the enterprise architecture documentation.

The next step is then to collect relevant information to create a high level architecture (as-is and to-be), such as:

• Business vision

• Market trends

• Organisation

• Business capabilities

• Architecture principles

• High-level processes

• Information objects

• Main applications & infrastructure

• Integrations

and how all the above things fit together. Then we we can talk about scenarios and evaluate them.

Yes, I use a framework and different tools to create the documentation.

Where the film business is going

This article in the autonomous architecture series focus on the answer to the why question.

To select the best scenario for a future IT-landscape, we need to have a probable idea of where the industry is heading, not where it has been.

High-level trends in film business

When asking Copilot about the future of the film business, this is the answer I got today. Take it with a pinch of salt, but probably not so far off.

Hollywood is pivoting toward globalized storytelling and tech-driven workflows but faces structural decline in mid-tier productions.

Independent producers in both regions must embrace innovation—AI, blockchain, immersive formats—while navigating funding volatility and distribution fragmentation.

Europe emphasizes cultural sovereignty and sustainability, while the U.S. indie sector leans into decentralized financing and niche streaming strategies.

Next question is about the future for independent film makers.

Independent filmmakers face a rapidly evolving industry shaped by streaming dominance, tech disruption, and fragmented financing models. Based on the latest insights and internal resources, here are strategies to adapt and thrive:

1. Embrace digital distribution & streaming.

2. Leverage technology (AI and blockchain).

3. Innovative financing models.

4. Strengthen marketing & audience engagement.

5. Optimize production costs.

6. Build strategic networks.

The key takeaway is "Adaptability is non-negotiable. Independent filmmakers who combine creative integrity with business acumen and tech fluency will lead the next wave of cinema."

A documentary filmmakers viewpoint

Luc Forsyth who is a documentary cinematographer and YouTuber predicts the future filmbusiness (Q4 2025).

1. Money is looming away from broadcast.

2. Traditional filmjobb will be harder to get.

3. Gear will get meaningless.

4. AI will automate entry film jobs.

5. The indie film industry.

To survive, you need to change, unless you already have a very high profile in the business.

Conclusions for our business model

Film production will be a key component also in the future. Storytelling with an European perspective will be a value proposition even in the future.

Provide crew and equipment will be more difficult and have less margin in the future, but it's still close to film production. Self-service and automation with AI is key, together with strategic networks.

Film distribution will be more important in the future and we need to rely more on different platforms for content publishing. Marketing is the key area. Revenue streams will be both from ads on social media, pay per view on platforms as well as selling rights.

Impact on IT-landscape

We foresee an impact on IT, based on the adjustments of our current business model.

We use Yamdu for planning film productions today, and the assumption is that it will evolve to support AI features in a very near future. (Beta testing is ongoing).

We have Spiris for finance & accounting, and it's good enough for the purpose, so no need for changes.

Severa is our current CRM and project planning tool, with integration to Spiris. Good features for allocation of resources to projects, but lacking markering and not so much customization available.

We have the ability to publish film and get revenue from pay-per view on Vimeo. They provide the platform and have customer interaction. We get statistics and monthly payments. For cinemas in Sweden, we have the same approach.

Yamdu is adding more and more functionality for project planning, and as Severa doesn't prioritize film business, or marketing, this CRM is not a long term solution.

Autonomous architecture approach

“Adaptability is non-negotiable” is a key message for independent film makers, and it suits the autonomous architecture like a hand in a leather glove.

If we design our IT-landscape to be more autonomous based on the differences in the business model, it will be easier to change. I.e. autonomy between the core cababilites, but use shared systems for supporting capabilities.

Film production is alredy autonomous, and well supported by Yamdu. The challenge is integration with supply chain, HR and Finance.

Film distribution need to be focused on distributing own content and content from close collaborators, to national and international festivals, cinemas in the Nordics, broadcasting in Europe and different global streaming platforms. We will not build our own platforms for distribution of content. For this, we need to be very flexible and adapt.

Marketing and selling for film distribution need to be separated from provide crew and equipment and film production as customer segments, channels and value propositions differ to much.

We need self service to provide crew and equipment and film distribution, but the platforms, Vimeo and others provide self service for the film viewers. Self service to film productions are not needed, but we should have much more support for AI to support sales processes.

Supply chain and inventory for all types of products as actives, crew, equipment, costumes, set design and props for film production and provide equipment should be autonomous. This capability differs from supply chain for film distribution, e.g. two autonomous systems.

Finally we need a case management system for all businesses units and internal purposes.

Answer to the question

The question was what we should do?

• Keep existing systems and modify if possible

• Get a new standard system that can be customized

• Build a new system from scratch

Based on the business model and information architecture, it’s very clear that we need to do all three scenarios.

The prioritizing order for what to is:

1. Keep Spiris, Yamdu and Vimeo as main systems as they are focused on specific capabilities.

2. Add YouTube and other platforms.

3. New standard system for CRM for film distribution

4. Investigate in a case management system that supports all customers, and internal users.

5. Investigate self service options for provide crew and equipment and supply-chain and inventory.

6. Decommission Severa and find a new solution for film distribution and provide crew and equipment. Time reporting is a key functionality.

7. Build master data platform for physical and non-physical products, cast and crew that integrates with Yamdu, Spiris and self-service portal.

Next step, update the documentation and start a few new internal projects as soon as possible before end of year.

The forgotten why question

Why do I need to change?

The situation

With film production and provide crew & equipment, the processes and tools are much better than for film distribution. Today, the time to create a new lead for a new customer is less than 30 min. For providing crew & equipment, this is acceptable. Order to cash is only a few minutes effort as well.

In my film production example, idea to market, market to lead, lead to order and order to cash for film distribution takes to much effort and to much calendrar time compared to the value of each order.

From a business perspective, a new solution must be faster and more efficient, but also cover the investment for the new solution.

The complication

The information architecture work I recently done, clearly shows that our existing platforms doesn't support film distribution, and neither does standard CRM systems as SalesForce. At least not out of the box. If we add one more system, we need to have more integration, and integrations are always costly.

If we change existing order- and CRM systems, we still need to make modifications to standard systems.

The question

Should we either

• Keep existing systems and modify if possible

• Get a new standard system that can be customized

• Build a new system from scratch

I will answer the question in a later article and explain there reasoning behind as part of autonomous architecture.

Autonomous architecture - information architecture

I have done a first version of the information architecture with business terms and an information model based on TM Forum.

The business terms are groped into main capabilities, and information objects related tov the terms are identified.

I’ve used Copilot to describe similarities and differences between the BU’s based on the information architecture.

Conclusion from AI:

Film production is about managing creative processes and resources.

Film distribution is about managing rights, platforms, and audiences.

Crew & equipment provision is about managing operational assets and services.

Each domain has distinct information objects, processes, and integration needs, but all must work together for a successful film business.

Next step is to dive into the details and verify.