The Rise of Directors as a Brand

By Luke Lashley, Owner of Departure

In commercial production, the balance of power has evolved. Once defined by the prestige of production companies, the industry is now increasingly shaped by the individual brands of directors. While production companies remain essential, they have shifted from being the product to becoming the platform. When jobs are won, they’re not awarded to the production company; they’re awarded to the director.

In this article, I’ll attempt to prove a point I believe: production companies are platforms, not products.

The criteria for a platform are:

• It reduces friction between two parties trying to transact.
• Users of the platform can usually switch to a similar platform with ease (in the tech world, this is called multi-homing).
• All else being equal, users of the platform likely don’t care which platform they use, as long as it performs the necessary function.

Let’s look at a few example scenarios of directors and production companies to see how well they hold up to this platform comparison.

Scenario 1: A Director Switches Companies

Consider a busy, in-demand director signed to a fully exclusive deal at a production company. When they transition to a new company, there may be adjustments, but their career momentum largely continues, provided they move to a company with similar board flow and comparable production and pitching capabilities.

Scenario 2: A New Company Wins Big

Consider the new production company. A freshly launched company can win significant jobs right out of the gate. I know a company that won a seven-figure job within its first year of operation. They were able to win the project with a director whose reel and vision aligned perfectly with the agency and client’s needs.

Scenario 3: Idle Directors at Premium Companies

Even at top-tier production companies, not every director is busy. Some directors at A-list companies find themselves underutilized, often due to the constraints of exclusive deals. Others on the same rosters may have a steady flow of projects, creating a noticeable disparity in workload among directors at the same company.

How Do These Scenarios Stack Up Against the Platform Test?

Let’s examine these scenarios through the lens of the platform test. In Scenario 1, the director’s career momentum continues after switching production companies, provided they have access to similar board flow and pitching capabilities. This demonstrates multi-homing: the ability to transition between platforms without significant disruption. In Scenario 2, a new production company wins a major project almost immediately, not because of its name, but because it had the right director for the job, showing that the production company reduces friction for the transaction rather than being the deciding factor. In Scenario 3, even at premium companies, not every director thrives, further underscoring that the director’s individual brand and talent (not the platform) drive success. In all three cases, the production company functions as a platform, facilitating the work, but the director remains the primary factor in winning jobs.

Putting This in Context of History
Okay, all of that is fine and good, but what makes it really interesting is comparing it to how the industry operated not that long ago.

In the earlier days of commercial production, when directors and work were less abundant, following talent through production company rosters made sense. It was practical, like knowing which subway line to take in a simpler, less crowded system. Production companies served as clear hubs, and rosters were reliable maps for agency creatives navigating a smaller pool of talent and opportunities.

But today, the landscape has shifted. There are countless directors, production companies, and jobs, creating an overwhelming web of possibilities. Expecting agency creatives to keep track of talent through rosters in this environment is like asking rideshare users to memorize which service covers specific neighborhoods best. It’s inefficient in a world where buyers can follow their favorite directors on Instagram, view their reels online, and stay up-to-date without engaging with a production company at all.

If you’re an agency creative or producer reading this, ask yourself: if you opened Instagram right now and saw that your favorite director—the one who totally impressed you on set, stayed up with you until 1 a.m. having drinks, and told that hilarious story about shooting with XYZ celebrity that almost made you spit out your drink—had signed with a new company, would you suddenly be less inclined to work with them? Absolutely not.

The Bottom Line: Directors Are the Brand
The rise of the director’s personal brand is reshaping commercial production. While production companies remain valuable, their role has evolved. They are no longer the only stars of the show. They are the platform that reduces friction, facilitates transactions, and provides a stage for directors to shine. 

Like any effective platform, their value lies in supporting the real draw: the directors themselves. In an industry where talent is increasingly visible, accessible, and empowered, it’s clear that the director is the brand that matters most.