Blog / Guide
Corporate video for the insurance sector: how to build trust without jargon
How I approach a corporate video for insurers and brokers: which formats work, how I explain coverage without jargon and what limits the sector's regulation sets.
Insurance is one of the hardest products to sell on video. You can't see it, you can't touch it, and most customers only understand what they've bought on the day they have to use it. That's where you find out whether the insurer or broker conveyed real trust or just nicely laid-out general terms and conditions.
I've worked with brokers and brokerages in Madrid who want a corporate video but arrive with the same fear: that the result will sound like a generic ad from a big company, with nothing to set them apart. Here I explain how I approach it so the video explains things well and it's also clear there's a real person behind it.
What it is and why it matters
In insurance, a corporate video is almost never a single institutional piece. It works better split into several formats: a brand video that explains who you are and how you work, short explainer videos for each type of coverage, and profiles of the agents or brokers who handle the direct relationship with the customer.
It matters because the decision to take out insurance is rarely made on price alone. It's made on trust that, when something happens, someone will respond. Video is one of the few tools that can convey that feeling before signing, when there's still no real experience to prove it.
There's also a regulatory layer that doesn't exist in other sectors. You can't promise coverage outcomes, or suggest that a claim will be resolved in a particular way, or show a real customer's case without their explicit written consent. That shapes the script from the first draft, not just the final edit.
How to do it well
Explain coverage without policy jargon
The most common mistake is recycling the language of the general terms and conditions for the video script. I work the other way round: first I identify the real question the customer is asking (what happens if I have an accident abroad?) and I build the explanation around that question, not around the clause that answers it in the contract.
Give the broker a leading role, not just the brand
In insurance, the relationship of trust is usually with the person, not the company. If the project is for a brokerage or an individual broker, I prioritise having them speak to camera with their own judgement, instead of hiding them behind a corporate voice-over. That's what sets one broker apart from another when the underlying product is almost identical.
Watch the tone: approachable, never alarmist
It's tempting to build the script on fear (an accident, a fire, sick leave) to justify the need for insurance. I avoid that approach whenever I can. I prefer an approachable, solution-focused tone: what happens, what is done, who responds. Fear grabs attention for a second, but it creates rejection if it feels forced, and in this sector trust weighs more than initial impact.
Common mistakes
- Promising or hinting at specific coverage outcomes, something the sector's regulation doesn't allow.
- Showing a real customer's case or testimonial without their explicit written consent.
- Copying the language of the general terms and conditions into the script, instead of translating it into the customer's real question.
- Building the whole message on fear, with alarmist music and imagery that creates rejection rather than trust.
- Hiding the agent or broker behind a generic voice-over when the person is precisely what keeps the customer.
- Using stock shots so generic that the video could belong to any insurer on the market.
Frequently asked questions
Can I show a real case of a resolved claim?
Only with the customer's explicit written consent, and avoiding details that identify them if they don't want to appear. If there's no such consent, it's better to build a generic case that illustrates the process without naming anyone real.
Which format works best: one long video or several short pieces?
Almost always several short pieces, one per type of coverage or frequently asked question, of one to two minutes. They can be shared by WhatsApp or email at the exact moment the customer has that doubt, instead of waiting for them to watch a long institutional video.
Do I need a fixed script for the agent or broker?
No, and it isn't a good idea. I work with a brief of key ideas for each question, not a text to memorise. If support is needed I provide a teleprompter for short takes, so it sounds reasoned and not read.
How long does production of this kind of video take?
For one brand piece plus three or four coverage explainers, I usually need one shooting day and between one and two weeks of editing, depending on the number of final pieces.
If you're a broker, an agent or you run communications at an insurer in Madrid and you want a video that explains things well without sounding like a generic ad, get in touch via /en/contact and we'll plan it around your coverage.