• Hello, I am your new lawyer. I’m a chat bot. I will review your legal contract, for free.

    Meet my new lawyer. It’s a chat bot, aka, an artificial intelligence system. It’s smart, free, and gets the job done. Although it won’t be putting lawyers out of a job any time soon—that’s not its purpose—it may make their lives, and their clients’ lives, easier.

    Just yesterday I was putting the finishing touches on a Letter of Agreement—same basic boilerplate I’ve been using for years—when I decided to run it past my new lawyer atLawBot.co. LawBot offers a free online system that can analyze contracts and alert you to errors. Not spelling and grammar errors. Substantive legal errors. Keep in mind that, over the years, numerous law firms—of all sizes—have signed off on nearly the exact same contract I was going to upload. So, I expected it to pass with flying colors.

    It took me two seconds to upload the contract and less than 30 seconds for the system to review it. Turns out there are five clauses that need my attention—three protecting my company and two protecting my clients. Nothing major, but serious enough that I’m making the changes the chat bot suggested. Wow. And this advice was free.

    Let’s explore in broad strokes…

    Chat Bot Lawyers

    Joshua Browder is a British entrepreneur and founder ofDoNotPay, thefirst of its kindwebsite using artificial intelligence that enables members of the general public to appeal their parking tickets, automatically. The system prompts users to complete narrowly defined legal claim documents that are then sent to the appropriate people/authorities. Easy. Right? You bet.

    Since its launch, the chat bot has attracted over 175,000 successful users and saved UK and New York drivers an estimated $5 million.

    As the story goes, at 18 years old, Browder began to receive a large number of parking tickets. Having formed the perception that these tickets were disproportionately targeting the elderly and disabled, and noticing the “formulaic nature” of the process by which they could be appealed, Browder created DoNotPay. (He started learning programming languages when he was 12.) Watch his solution in action.

    Bankruptcy, divorce, employer relations, insurance, housing, criminal…and the list goes on…DoNotPay has expanded their legal claim system across multiple areas, in both the US and UK. You can see more here:https://youtu.be/-rabJDCBUbY

    Multi-layered Benefits of Artificial Intelligence

    Although DoNotPay is designed to circumvent lawyers, in many cases the relatively narrow form filling system escalates to the need for a real lawyer. The same goes for LawBot. Its provision of initial information often creates a pathway to lawyers, rather than replace them.

    Both services are currently free, but both also envision a paid service for law firms to take advantage of that pathway.

    It would work by embedding a button on the firm’s website that links the visitor to the chat bot system. After completing the chat bot conversation, the system then sends the user back to the original law firm site. Voila. As users move from asking a chat bot questions to wanting to speak to the lawyer at the firm, these systems become viable lead generators.

    Plaintiff Firms

    In general, we can agree that the unsophisticated purchaser of legal services, e.g. consumer / plaintiff based law like immigration, traffic citations, employment claims, etc., or criminal defense, is intimidated by the prospect of talking to a real lawyer, at least initially. They don’t know if they have a case. They don’t understand the jargon. They don’t want to waste any money. The idea of a courtroom with a judge is frightening.

    So, the chat bot is a solid bridge. It is a starting point for the person who needs legal counsel. It will analyze the user’s input, but it will also define legal terms and suggest next steps when it can’t automatically file the complaint or request with the appropriate agency or authority. Good for your clients and good for you. Why? Because legitimate prospects arrive at your door with some understanding and a little more confidence that they actually need legal counsel – your legal counsel.

    Such qualified lead generation, sans human energy, could be a boon for the law firm that represents plaintiffs.

    Commercial Law Firms

    For commercial law firms, the use cases for artificial intelligence are burgeoning. Along with proprietary knowledge management systems, law firms are beginning to deploy artificial intelligence systems to predict the likelihood of success in litigation. For example, LawBot offers parties in litigation a customized analysis of the litigation and reports on the factors affecting the prediction, as well as winning guidelines for the legal team based on previous litigation data and results for similar matters.

    For better or worse, many expect the litigation intelligence use case will soon shift from cure to prevention, allowing lawyers to provide specific advice for specific clients that will save clients time, costs, and the headache of litigation. I know real life lawyers do that now, but confirmation and detail can be an asset to business counseling model.

    Jason Koebler, writing for The Atlantic, (“Rise of the Robolawyers,” April 2017 issue), reports that in the past year “more than 10 major law firms have ‘hired’Ross, a robotic attorney powered in part by IBM’s Watson artificial intelligence, to perform legal research. Ross is designed to approximate the experience of working with a human lawyer: It can understand questions asked in normal English and provide specific, analytic answers.” You’ve seen the commercials. Wine growers, airline mechanics, etc. Same thing.

    All this and more suggests that artificial intelligence can not only extend an attorney’s capabilities, but can also free up time for business development and more challenging, enjoyable, or profitable work. (See video link at post end.)

    Looking Ahead

    Robots are not replacing lawyers anytime soon, maybe never. The McKinsey Global Institute estimates that artificial intelligence can replace 69 percent of paralegal time, while only 23 percent of a lawyer’s job can be automated. But, recovering 23 percent of a highly skilled lawyer’s time is significant, particularly when that lawyer can invest it in activity for new business generation.

    While you may not be ready or able to make artificial intelligence work for your practice at this point in time, most experts agree that its role and importance in legal will only continue to grow. This is a fast moving target and law firms are already behind the curve. Where artificial intelligence makes sense for a business model, such as it does for the legal business, you can bet the opportunities and offerings will not lag. Therefore, it is important to stay updated. Two recommended, practical sources are:Today in Legal Artificial Intelligence(Market Intelligence for Strategic Advantage) andArtificial Lawyer.

    Before you go…check out Andrew Aruda #OneTake, where he talks about “How Small Law Firms Can Use (Ross) AI.”

    As always, if you need help with marketing, analog or digital, I remain…

    The

  • Is Your Law Firm’s Social Media Worth It?

    Law firms were slow to catch the social media wave. But once it looked safe to go into the water—the firm next door was in—a majority followed. Law firm marketers got busy setting up a firm presence on Facebook and Twitter—featuring Super Lawyers, seminars, and seasons’ greetings. Those with greater resources launched firm branded blogs and played Instagram, Pinterest, etc. Followers, likes, shares, and comments were the goal, with thereward being greater exposureand business opportunities.

    But then something very disappointing happened. The “organic” social media produced by law firms—the stuff that was supposed to create conversation and conversion—appeared to be mostly seen and applauded by a handful of their own employees, lawyers, and a few IRL friends and relatives.

    Don’t take my word on that, there is more evidence.

    2017 Digital and Content Marketing Survey.

    According to a recently publishedGreentarget and Zeughauser Group survey of in-house corporate counsel, which annually explores various aspects of law firm digital and content marketing,social media ranks at the bottomof “most valued content created by law firms.” That’s right, just 4 percent give a damn about your tweets and status updates.

    Ironically…. a whopping 91 percent of marketers, who were also surveyed, report they are “investing in social media”!

    “Bueller? Bueller? Bueller?”

    To be fair to the 91 percent, buckets within a marketing budget differ from firm to firm. And although blogs are technically social media, intended to create conversation, they were separately considered in portions of this survey. (According to the survey, blogs were seen as a “credible source of legal, business and industry news and information” by 75 percent of in-house counsel compared to 65 percent in 2015.) But it is likely that many marketers consider blog writing, editing, posting, and maintenance to fall in a firm’s social media bucket, and thus the 91 percent. I hope I am not being generous.

    Still, the survey authors suggest that firms’ “methods for client alerts and newsletters are part of well-established practices, whereas [emphasis added]social media sharing and amplification is more time-intensive and expensive.” If true, it certainly begs the question: What are law firm’s getting in return for their time and expense?

    Kill organic social media for the enterprise.

    Avinash Kaushik blogs atOccam’s Razor. If you’re unfamiliar with his blog or the philosophical and scientific rule of Occam’s Razor, here’s the essence: The simplest of competing theories are preferred to the more complex. Avinash does this really, really, well.

    I’ve been a huge fan over the years, and I’ve read his published books,Web Analytics 2.0andWeb Analytics: An Hour A Day. I have dozens of flagged pages as proof. He’s smart and he’s practical. He is the Digital Marketing Evangelist forGoogleand The Co-Founder and Chief Education Officer forMarket Motive. He is on the board of advisors for USC Annenberg School of Communication and Journalism, University of California Irvine’s Web Intelligence Certificate program, and University of Toronto’s Social CRM program.

    I assure you that he’s one of the good guys and someone we law firm marketers should be listening to, on a variety of levels and topics.

    Most recently,Avinash challenged marketers of all industry to stop wasting enterprise resources on “organic social media”—defined as the kind where you post meaningful things about your firm/company in order to build brand loyalty. (And “hope” for increased sales to justify your efforts.)

    He writes, “You can imagine how gosh darn excited I was at the advent of Facebook and Twitter (first real social networks). There were a billion people there, spending a meaningful amount of time on these wonderful platforms. Excitedly, brands could have a presence (a “page”) where they could contribute meaningful updates (info-snacks) in order to be a part of the organic conversations people were already having by the tens of millions. Daily meaningful brand connections would be converted into brand familiarity, shifts in brand perception, feeding brand loyalty. #orgasmic”

    And goes on to say that:“None of the above transpired….”

    How does he know? He says all the data you need in order to learn that your organic social media on Facebook, etc. has tanked can be found in threepublicbits of information. You don’t need to understand analytics, you don’t need to dig, you don’t need to hire a consultant. You just need to look.

    Crunching the numbers.

    Hypothetically speaking, let’s say your law firm’s Facebook page has 6,000 warm bodies who “like” you. (Probably a stretch for most law firms, but I’m going for a round number.)

    – Applause Rate.Your most recent post—congratulating newly anointed Super Lawyers—has 50 likes or emotions (I heart this post!). Divide 50 by 6,000 to get your applause rate, which is…drum roll…a paltry .00833 percent. (“A painful stab in the heart.”)

    – Conversation Rate.Now take the total number of comments on your post—seven—including “Congratulations,” “Well-deserved,” “He gets his work ethic from his mom!” and etc. Divide that by your universe of 6,000 warm bodies and your conversation rate is a glass shattering .00116 percent.

    – Amplification Rate.This is the number that confirms whether you truly added value on a human scale or merely “pimped” your company. Let’s say you had three shares—one from a proud dad, one from a best friend, and one from the marketing manager who is paid to do it. Three divided by 6,000 is 0.0005%. Heart stopping, right?

    Are you still with me?

    With this simple analysis—the potential to engage 50+7+3 people per post—you can decide what portion of your marketing budget you should allocate to your enterprise social media. The answer is zero.

    Wait, you say that’s not fair? Alright, let’s add up the applause, conversation, and amplification rates on your Twitter and Instagram, and, being generous, your firm branded blogs. Let’s compute the monthly, quarterly, and yearly totals. There, is that any better?

    To be clear, marketing and enterprise brand building differs from business development (sales)— but, you need both. Arguably, a personal Facebook, LinkedIn, or Twitter presence in deft hands can be an effective tool for “networking” for business, but, it’s obvious to me that organic social media for the enterprise isn’t moving the needle—I’ve looked. (Please correct me if your firm is an outlier.)

    Are your social media platforms useless?

    No, says Avinash. From an advertising perspective, the couple billion people on Facebook and hundreds of millions on other social channels are an audience that might be of value to your law firm. Should you kill your organic social strategy and switch to a paid social media strategy? Yes.

    Don’t waste your money on fuzzy organic social media goals. Buy advertising from Facebook. Buy advertising from Twitter, Instagram, and yes, LinkedIn. All of which can give your social media strategy purpose.

    “Your [social advertising] strategy can drive short and medium-term brand and performance outcomes,” says Avanish, “You can set aside the useless metrics like impressions and 3-second video views. Set aside hard to judge and equally useless Like and Follow counts. Measure the hard stuff that you can show a direct line to company profit. Define a purpose for the money you are spending.”

    I completely agree. In tests I’ve run on organic posts verses promoted paid posts, paid always outperforms. Sure, the click ratio on a paid post can be dismal—particularly if you’re not using best practices—but at least your reaching a new audience. Even one inquiry from a potential client is a better result than a mom or brother liking your Super Lawyers post.

    End of story.

    Law firm content sets a low bar.

    Enterprise social media aside—yes, you should be advertising—from a pure content marketing perspective clients appreciate meaningful content in all its shapes and forms—words and images. But, according to the Greentarget survey we’re not doing an exceptional job at that either.

    Including social media, e-newsletters, blogs, and the like, the survey found that only 52 percent of in-house counsel ranked law firm content “very good-to-excellent,” an improvement from 43 percent in 2015. Ranking in the range of “satisfactory or better but not quite very good,” dropped to 42 percent in 2017 from 49 percent in 2015, suggesting that law firms are getting “better” at content. The survey’s authors purport that it is indeed possible that the (improved) results show that firms with “more defined content strategies” are “separating themselves from the pack while others languish.”

    After all these years of producing content and 48 percent of firms are falling below very-good means only one thing to me—nearly half of law firm content is either inadequate, incorrectly distributed, repetitive (you were scooped by other firms that acted quickly), or what you’re producing is just plain crap—excuse me, I mean legalese that has no apparent business value. That’s a low bar.

    The survey (and Avinash and me) suggests that you need a purpose, a strategy, and a plan. A topic which I promise for another, more uplifting, post—stay tuned.

    When you get that plan, then, you need great writing. Writing a legal brief is very different than writing something the public, even in house counsel, wants to read. I know “we’re” getting better according to this survey, but not quite very good is not where you want your law firm to be.

    More info:

    My company,JayneNavarre.com, has over 20 years’ experience working exclusively with law firms on strategy for content and communications. We are forward thinking, entrepreneurial, and work with some of the best law firms, both in the U.S. and internationally. Please give me a call.

    PS: Thanks,Technolawyer.comfor selecting this post as SmallLaw Pick of the Week!

    “Congratulations to Jayne Navarre ofVirtual Marketing Officeron winning ourSmallLaw Pick of the Weekaward:Law Firm Social Media Is a Waste of Time, and Here’s Why”

  • Did you get your invitation to ChambersConnect?

    There has a been a lot of chatter among us legal marketers regarding the “exclusive social network” that was just launched byChambers and Partners—ChambersConnect. This past week, lawyers flooded our inboxes asking for guidance after receiving their “personal invitation” to join the new network, which promises to be populated with “the world’s leading lawyers” and senior executives in major corporations—conjuring visions of sugar-plum A-list prospects to dance in their heads. Our collective response to one another? “Oh no, here we go again.” (face-palm) “Who wants (has the time) to do the due diligence on this one?” “Where are they getting the client information? I hope it’s not from our submissions.”

    So, as you ponder the value or non-value of a walled-garden propagated with lawyers—many of them direct competitors—and their clients (who, if they sign up, will be exposed on a daily basis to other law firms), here you will find my attempt to make some sense of it all. I draw my conclusion in this post’s final paragraphs, yet leave the door open, as always.

    Is this a fantasy, based on reality?

    The new social networking enterprise from Chambers and Partners, a well known and highly regarded publisher of jurisdictional directories that vet and rank lawyers, makes a very bold claim:

    > “ChambersConnect is different.”

    “ChambersConnect is different.”

    Among the features (not necessarily benefits) listed are:

    – It’s specialised – designed for lawyers and clients.

    – It’s exclusive – only open to the world’s leading lawyers (ranked in the Chambers guides) and to senior executives in major corporations.

    – This exclusive membership ensures continuing high-quality content.

    – Your posts and communications are organised by groups based on industry sectors, legal practice areas, and locations.

    To those of us who championed the (failed*) Martindale Hubbell Connected online social networking site, which launched in late 2008, it looks like Chambers just ripped out a page from their playbook. (*Martindale.com Connected will be shutting down in early 2017 in conjunction with a relaunch of Martindale.com.)

    And that raises a giant red flag:

    > Those who don’t know history, are destined to repeat it.–Edmund Burke

    Those who don’t know history, are destined to repeat it.

    –Edmund Burke

    Why did Martindale.com Connected fail?

    Despite all good intentions and decent technology on the backend, it is my opinion that they failed because (1) the key players in the community—lawyers—weren’t ready, and (2) more importantly, they didn’t need it. It’s a basic sales strategy: first create the need.

    Martindale initially pitched a soft value proposition. It did not speak to any pressing need. For example; get online, make new friends, learn something new, share everything you worked your entire career to know and understand with your competition—stuff like that. This made it impossible for the target community to justify any significant investment of time, let alone understand what the hell Martindale was talking about.

    In full disclosure, I was contracted by Martindale Connected, shortly after it launched, to help them work on additional strategy and messaging. As I sat through meetings filled with all types of bright thinkers and talented doers, it was clear to me that the community’s success would be solely dependent on leading a paradigm shift, and I told them as much. For that, I suggested, you need a stronger (and clearer) value proposition. One that would touch on an explicitly known need.

    Unfortunately, the only known need (on both sides of the coin) was: “There’s a recession. What am I going to do to make more money!” Though certainly, I believe Martindale thought they were providing a venue that could advance a solution to address that need, in hindsight it was flawed. Hundreds of people looking and no one seeking, masked as a community forum, is a losing combination. It would have been better to be obvious and create a dating-type site, where everyone understood the terms.

    We named it “social media” for a reason.

    Visionaries described it, defined it, and planted it from seed long before most lawyers were seriously surfing the web.

    In 1999, just four years after the World Wide Web opened the internet to commercial business interests, Rick Levine, Christopher Locke, Doc Searls, and David Weinberger publishedthe CLUETRAIN Manifesto. There were 95 theses in their manifesto, prefaced in part with the following statement:

    > “A powerful global conversation has begun. Through the Internet, people are discovering and inventing new ways to share relevant knowledge with blinding speed. As a direct result, markets are getting smarter—and getting smarter faster than most companies.”

    “A powerful global conversation has begun. Through the Internet, people are discovering and inventing new ways to share relevant knowledge with blinding speed. As a direct result, markets are getting smarter—and getting smarter faster than most companies.”

    Of the 95 theses they presented in 1999, this one predicted the future as we know it today:

    > #6: “The Internet is enabling conversations among human beings that were simply not possible in the era of mass media.”

    #6: “The Internet is enabling conversations among human beings that were simply not possible in the era of mass media.”

    CLUETRAIN also predicted with alarming accuracy that “Corporate firewalls have kept smart employees in and smart markets out. It’s going to cause real pain to tear those walls down. But the result will be a new kind of conversation. And it will be the most exciting conversation business has ever engaged in.”

    And this is exactly what Martindale still didn’t understand almost 10 years later in 2008, and I am not convinced that Chambers does now: Lawyers and clients do not engage in “exciting conversation” in a public, or even semi-public forum.

    As an aside:Using the original value proposition of social media and networking that it enables one to “get ahead of the markets,” it is antithetical to the legal profession. It assumes a type of external collaboration that is a non-starter in the current state of the majority of the legal profession. Yes, I know for a fact some law firms/lawyers and clients are trying. That is the good news. The bad news is: Can you really collaborate effectively with a thousand people? No. Therefore, it is highly probable that if ChambersConnect succeeds, it will be that it is merely just another marketing platform. Any hope for it achieving something more necessary or urgent, such as moving the market forward, is a true stretch, and the wrong forum. (My free advice, given in the interest of the greater good: Put up the big bucks to hire thought leaders to drive the conversation on smaller forums that interface with places that require little or no additional effort. Stick that in your pipe and smoke it for while…)

    So, in a classic sense, I think ChambersConnect is DOA, leaving it’s highest purpose just another marketing tool. How “exciting” will those conversations be? I suspect we shall see…

    What could Martindale have done better?

    Martindale eventually embraced a key value prop: a “safe space.” At the time, not only were most open social networks banned in law firms, there were other legitimate concerns, some that still exist today. And at least this made sense on the surface. But while it solved one problem, it created others. It was isolated and uninteresting. It was an added distraction. No one engaged, no one got rich, and it died.

    To wit, my counsel to them was to take a more active, change-agent role. To create a common cause; e.g., to convince lawyers that they needed each other to move the market. But to do that, they would have to demonstrate how that works and invest in it big time. But they didn’t. It wasn’t really their mission. They viewed themselves as a service provider. They provided a shiny object platform, then threw a hail Mary pass, expecting that the community would catch it and hold on to it across the goal line. They’d be the heroes, the visionaries. More so, their primary product, the directory, would live to see another century. Unfortunately, that pass never “connected.”

    In hindsight, they should have been frank with the community: “Don’t worry, you can still make money. That is, as long as it’s not the only thing on your mind.” But of course, that wasn’t going to sail, either, as few lawyers had the time during that intense period for something unrelated to saving their business or making more money. Still, had Martindale been bold, taking that position, I believe it would have mercifully killed the idea of a walled-garden social network for lawyers, sooner. It would have saved hundreds of thousands of dollars on technology and personnel to run a community that never found its purpose.

    What must Chambers do now?

    Pay attention to the basics.

    > Thesis #94: “To traditional corporations, networked conversations may appear confused, may sound confusing. But we are organizing faster than they are. We have better tools, more new ideas, no rules to slow us down.”Thesis #33: Learning to speak with a human voice is not a parlor trick. It can’t be “picked up” at some tony conference.Thesis #34: To speak with a human voice, companies must share the concerns of their communities.

    Thesis #94: “To traditional corporations, networked conversations may appear confused, may sound confusing. But we are organizing faster than they are. We have better tools, more new ideas, no rules to slow us down.”

    Thesis #33: Learning to speak with a human voice is not a parlor trick. It can’t be “picked up” at some tony conference.

    Thesis #34: To speak with a human voice, companies must share the concerns of their communities.

    Perhaps that is too idealistic, so let’s just cut to the chase. The positive angle I see for the Chambers’ venture into social networking is that they have a captive audience of vetted “leading lawyers.”

    For example, to achieve leading lawyer status your firm has likely spent hundreds of thousands of dollars and unspeakable hours of lawyer and marketer time to develop submissions. You’ve called in your chips with client referees—over and over again. And you’ve spent more money than God knows to profile your rankings and purchase “badges.” In other words, you’re already invested. This alone may motivate people to register, which I did for one lawyer today. But that doesn’t create a community.

    Nor does any of this:

    – “It’s exclusive – only open to the world’s leading lawyers (ranked in the Chambers guides) and to senior executives in major corporations.”

    – “This exclusive membership ensures continuing high-quality content.”

    These statements assume four things that are just too easy to debunk.

    (1) Lawyers want to network with other lawyers online.

    Really? Lawyers may need to contact other lawyers for information on specialties or jurisdictions; but generally speaking, they are cautious to post anything in writing that could later come back to haunt them. If they need to find another lawyer outside their jurisdiction, are they going to log into a social networking site and post a cattle call? Not likely. They’ll check out directories, ask people they know, or tap into law firm network alliances; then they will pick up the phone, or email. It’s possible that some may throw out a query for help, I know that my colleagues in the “Legal Marketers Extraordinaire” Facebook group do from time to time, but we’re a rather collaborative and open-minded bunch. And, perhaps more importantly, we don’t have “directories” like Chambers and Legal500 to reference, which general counsel and other clients do. Our system grew organically; an important point for another conversation.

    Even expecting that social media natives, the millennials and younger, will want to network online with other lawyers is stretch. Truth is, they won’t be there anyway. Most have not yet reached the echelon of Chambers membership. They are not yet “leading lawyers,” so don’t look to them for help in making the community “exciting.”

    (2)  Senior company executives want to network with outside lawyers in a semi-public forum.

    Sure, some may, but overall (a) they will not likely ask or tell anything of importance—because they can’t—and (b) they do not want to be marketed-to, which is bound to happen if there is any whiff of prey.

    As an aside, one of the first posts I saw today in the pre-launch version promised an article on a substantive matter of law, but within the first paragraph, it spent two sentences boasting the firm’s practice. UGH!

    (3) Senior executives don’t already have access to enough high-quality content.

    This is truly an error in thinking. There are numerous existing channels for access to high-quality content written by lawyers, for companies. In fact, so many that we can’t keep up with them; Mondaq, Lexology, JDSupra, The Lawyer, news media, industry-specific blogs and publications, RSS feeds, and legal journals; not to mention email blasts from dozens of law firms—which general counsels say they only have time to look at the first one over the transom, thank-you very much.

    Executives are suffering from content overload. If Chambers thinks they’re going to win with the content race, they had better have something new up their sleeve.

    (4) Lawyers (or their marketing staff) have enough time to spare that they will eagerly re-post the content they’ve already posted elsewhere.

    See #3.

    Conclusion

    While we may remain puzzled, there is a bottom line:

    (1) The Connect community is currently designated as free, but the devil sitting on my right shoulder tells me that a meeting room of executives conceived to establish this community in order to sell paid profile placements, ads, featured content, etc. etc. etc., ad nauseam. Be prepared to strike yet another check, but wait to see who shows up. And don’t rely on their statistics, they won’t be granular enough to assess with any veracity. Instead, get on the site daily and see what’s happening. If it’s exciting, you may want to take the bait.

    (2) The angel on my left shoulder says: “Wait, wouldn’t a platform that allows you to post substantive content that prospective clients can access in addition to the brief write-up in the ranking, or 150-word profile bio, be really helpful? It will allow prospects to dig deeper into the particular attorney expertise. It could help them determine whether they might be a good hire, e.g. if the attorney had written on specific subject that they were currently addressing.” “No, way,” says the devil. “You’re actually expecting the busy corporate executive/GC to visit the main Chambers website, then login to, or register for, the social network and acclimate themselves just to find what a particular attorney is writing about? Why not just jump to the attorney’s website bio page and find all their recent articles there?”

    (3) “Ah ha!” says the angel. “I’ve got it. Surely Chambers’ researchers and editors will be trolling the community, seeking insight regarding those they are being asked to evaluate. AND, they may even ‘reward’ those attorneys who publish subject matter content or engage in Q&A with a boost in rank!”

    That’s it! The true value prop goes to #3—the darling angel. If the network survives, it will make it easier to interact with those who hold your Chambers’ destiny in their hands. According to those in the know—former Chambers researchers and editors who now consult on boosting rankings and submitting winning applications—it is important to “keep in touch” with Chambers personnel during the year and to notify them of announcements and publications. The Connect community will certainly make that easier for you and them.

    All punchy stuff aside: I truly wish ChambersConnect the best. I will be at the ready to assist my attorneys in any manner that will help them and the network be a respectable success. With one caveat. As somevery wise marketing professionalsadvise: Don’t abandon the spaces you are already invested in, but give it a try if you have the time.

    I couldn’t agree more.

    Markets are conversations. Let’s converse!

    UPDATE:  New development. Chambers USA Guide firm profile package has US $250 cost increase this year. The reason? Added features. The features? The ability to add articles, media mentions, and press releases to the ranked attorney’s profile. Will this content be linked to the Chambers Connect? No. It’s separate. So, there you go. Another great example of poor planning. They are suggesting we post articles to the main Chambers directory, AND do it again on the social network. I’m afraid, all other issues aside, this alone dooms the network. Who has time for that?

  • What Steinbrenner Can Teach Law Firms About Marketing Budgets

    In 2007, George Steinbrenner, the legendary New York Yankees’ owner, re-signed Roger Clemens, who was near the end of his distinguished, albeit controversial, career, with a precedent setting $28 million contract. Although Clemens was one of the most dominant pitchers in major league baseball history, critics considered the move reckless. Not only was Clemens going to miss the first two months of the season, he would only play every fifth game after that. And, Clemens would earn over $1 million per start.

    To hell with the critics. Steinbrenner’s Yankees record did indeed improve significantly that year (94–68), placing them in the American League Division Series as the Wild Card.* But Clemens’ pitching arm was hardly the decisive ingredient—he pitched only 12 regular season games and finished 6–6, with a 4.18 ERA. What did Steinbrenner know that the critics didn’t?

    Surely GS knew he was getting a good pitching arm, but he also knew he was buying something more than that. Clemens added experience to the line up and leadership in the dugout—something Steinbrenner knew the Yankees could use—but more so, he sent a big message to the rest of the team: Winning is important.

    How important? THI$$$$$$$$ important.

    Marketing Budgets are not about “things.”

    A website, CRM, public relations agency, ad campaign, competitive intelligence monitoring service, BD coach, or other, can cost a hefty sum, but without a larger strategy…

    – A slick website alone is not going to move the dial.

    – An expensive client relationship database alone is not going to produce the win.

    – The top public relations firm alone is not what will make the phone ring.

    – Throwing money at a social media campaign alone won’t win the influence you really need.

    The best way to develop a law firm marketing budget is to treat that budget as an investment—something that delivers an expected, quantified return over time. I call it the Steinbrenner Rule: A wise investment is always part of a larger strategy.

    If you are the type of marketer that looks at the previous year’s spending to decide where you want to add more or less, you are treating the law firm marketing budget as an expense and the law firm marketing department as a cost center. While this may seem to be a logical tactic, and it is certainly an approach that has been followed by law firms for decades,it is the faulty approach.

    Why? Because all the smart, hard work that marketers do is doffed off as overhead. Worse, the marketing team is not given due respect. We all know that when profits stagnate or drop, the first thing to go is overhead. If you are a serious marketer, you, nor your staff, should be treated like “overhead.” So, take matters into your own hands. Always consider the Steinbrenner Rule. You might buy the pitching arm – the thing – but along with the thing there are broader possibilities and opportunity to meet higher objectives. And, make sure everyone in management is clear about your investment strategy.

    Marketing Budget Investment Strategy.

    You have 50 partners and another 75 or so attorneys. Your website looks tired and worn. You know you need to update the site, but when the bids come in around $100,000, your managing partner goes into shock: “Can’t we just add some new photographs?” Yes, you the savvy marketer explains, but that would be throwing money away because you can’t just paint over a chipped foundation.

    This project is an investment that will enable us to do X, Y, and Z, which are in our annual objectives. Things have changed in the past three to five years. The website is no longer a brochure. A platform must be strong enough to support integration and inbound tactics. Social media channels, analytic tools, and this and that will allow us to better understand the market and our performance.

    It is an investment strategy. Simple math: The bids come in at $100,000—which is pretty much what it takesat a minimumto produce a quality website for a 100+ attorney firm these days, including photography and content development. So, think of it as $2,000 per partner investment in infrastructure. Considering that the average lifetime of a decent website is about three years, that per partner investment is really only $1.82 per day.

    Although a $1.82 per day, per partner is ridiculously cheap—you can’t even buy a pack of gum for under $2—the objective is to get your law firm to understand it is not a cost, it is not overhead, it is an investment in your success.

    What will your investment achieve over time? Will it help you measure market interest; build your mailing list and advance your relationships; provide a platform for thought leadership, particularly for X, Y, and Z partner; or will it position your most promising practice area more prominently? What specific marketing plan objectives will it meet? Will it serve as a client resource; an inbound tool for lead generation; or an image upgrade to communicate growth, or etc.? Those are the answers you need to have before you proceed with your investment. Put them in writing so that you and others can be reminded of why you invested, and can monitor and measure your outcomes.

    Marketing Budget Valuation

    Although we don’t have the luxury of exact measurements like they do in baseball stats, measuring your marketing investments can be done, allowing for that fact that sometimes it is not one thing, but rather one thing that works in concert with other things, especially where there are measurable data points.

    Ideally, if you could conservatively project double the initial investment, so, $4K per partner or $200K for the firm, that’s not too shabby. Of course it could be more, but you have to be able to prove that.

    Voila! In a blink of an eye the $100,000 investment is a savvy investment strategy, not an expense, not overhead. And maybe that is just the “message” your management team and/or partners need to hear, and inspire them to “up” their game.

    Taking Risks.

    Another illustration can be found in social media. Is it overhead, expense, or an investment?

    Many firms balk at the cost of bringing in the level of talent and/or tools that it takes to be successful in social media. They will throw a few dollars at it to set up blog, train a few younger lawyers, or add a support staff and write it off to “costs.” Admittedly, even the best of the breed still report that a lot of trial and error is involved, but despite that, social media initiatives are showing returns in top line revenue, at least for those who treat it like an investment, not a cost.

    Social media is a platform for many tactics such as exposure, advertising, insight, relationship building, networking, lead generation, and a place to distribute thought leadership content. But it requires a focus on the bigger opportunity. Put marketing budget goals in writing. Know exactly why you are investing a $100,000 in a particular tool, personnel, or outsourced support. Will it send a big message to your law firm team that you are not content to hang around the edges? You bet. Will it convey that you are willing to risk new channels for developing business? Maybe that is just the thing your attorneys need to see in order that they rally around.

    The Steinbrenner Rule.

    Where there is a defined objective—a winning season and a chance at the title—it is not necessarily a direct path. A wise investment will consider all of the gaps that need to be filled. They may not be obvious to others (your critics), but your measured approach to investment should enable your progress.

    A strong pitching arm is not enough. You need leadership in the dug out, and send a message to the team: Winning is th$$$$s important. Don’t let the critics sidetrack you.

    *About the Yankees 2007 season:

    The New York Yankees were the 2007 American League Wild Card qualifier with a winning season of 94–68. Clemens re-aggravated a hamstring injury during Game 3 of the 2007 ALDS and was removed from the team’s starting rotation. With his last pitch, he struck out Victor Martinez of the Cleveland Indians, Central Division champions (96-66). Indians won the series, 3–1.

    About Roger Clemens:

    On August 18, 2007, Clemens got his 1,000th strikeout as a Yankee. He is only the ninth player in major league history to record 1,000 or more strikeouts with two different teams. Clemens has recorded a total of 2,590 strikeouts as a member of the Red Sox and 1,014 strikeouts as a Yankee. Of his nearly quarter century in the Major Leagues, 13 years have been spent with the Red Sox and 6 with the New York Yankees. He retired September 16, 2007.

  • Take one simple step to differentiate your law firm marketing

    Word is that in this economy law firm clients are willing to walk across the street just to get better value. Go figure. Value sells. Many law firms have begun competing on price—adopting alternative fee structures. I can’t help but wonder if law firms aren’t falling into the value box defined by theircompetitorsinstead of theirclients? Is there more to value than price?

    Alternative billing structures alone do not create loyal clients

    Instead of focusing on alternative billing structures—though arguably they can help under certain conditions—what if law firms focused their energies on creating loyal clients, the kind that love you? The kind that want to have legal questions just so they can be near you, and that would readily refer your services to others?

    What would that look like? A law firm that delivers on the generic category benefits—those benefits that essentially define legal services—better than the competition. That is the key to differentiation. And yes, cost is one consideration, but it is not exclusive. So, what exactly are category benefits and how do they play out in the law firm scenario?

    Generic Category Benefits

    Generic category benefits are those values, e.g., benefits, that customers, or clients, expect to receive, at a minimum, when doing business with you. To understand the power ofgeneric category benefits, let’s use a coffee shop illustration. Here are the things that people expect from a coffee shop—generic category benefits.

    – A convenient location.

    – Open early AM.

    – Cups, plates, stirrers.

    – Coffee.

    – Sugar, creamer.

    – A place to sit.

    – A server or cashier.

    – Pastries or breakfast.

    Starbucksstands out as a leader in consistently providing the generic category benefits of a coffee shop exceptionally well and that’s why we love Starbucks. We can trust Starbucks to deliver, and we love that! The manner in which they deliver on just the generic category benefits differentiates them and sets the bar high for all competitors.

    – Convenient locations in EVERY CITY and even some towns.

    – Consistent and reliable hours across the world!

    – Inviting surroundings: warm or cool, clean and welcoming.

    – Attractive cups distinguished with poems and art.

    – Soft seating, work tables, take out efficiency.

    – Friendly Baristas; most with a refreshing personality that delivers that “glad you are here” attitude.

    – Consistently outstanding coffee; lots of tasty varieties and more. Tea, specialty drinks, juices.

    – Fresh pastry, healthy choices; we like that.

    – Wifi, free music downloads, local newspapers, etc. to enjoy while we’re sipping Starbucks brand coffee.

    – 100 other items you really don’t need but make it interesting to browse while you’re waiting for your coffee and might pick up conveniently for a gift or a splurge.

    – A local flair, art, charities, special events.

    – A commitment to the environment.

    – And etc….

    I don’t know about you, but when I have a Starbucks I feel like I’m a member of a special club –a club that treats me right. Starbucks exceeds on delivering my primal coffee needs and allows me to savor the moment in their comfy surroundings. If I happen to have a errant experience I know who to speak to. If I tell my barista they got it wrong, they will make it right. If I need to escalate it to someone in management, or send out a Tweet, they will make it right and that gives me comfort. I trust Starbucks. There are many choices incoffee shops, but Starbucks sets the bar.

    There are many choices in law firms. Which one sets the bar? Is it yours?

    Generic category benefits of a law firm: Things people expect to receive from a law firm.

    – Legal expertise.

    – Ethical and confidential counsel.

    – Efficient and proper staff support for handling cases, matters and accounts.

    – Offices.

    – Conference area.

    – Telephone, email, and other technology.

    – Timely court filing services.

    – Bills.

    – Accessibility.

    What clients receive.

    Seems like the list of generic category benefits is not so high a bar. Yet, anecdotal evidence gathered from client satisfaction interviews suggests that many law firms fail. Here are the top 10 client service issues reported, year after year:

    – #10 Not understanding my industry/business.

    – #9 The surprise bill.

    – #8 Inaccessibility.

    – #7 Over-lawyering.

    – #6 Missed deadlines.

    – #5 Not discussing strategy and recommendations.

    – #4 Not being informed about who they can call when the responsible attorney is away.

    – #3 Not keeping client informed if case or matter status.

    – #2 Invoices for time or work not previously discussed with the client.

    – #1 Not returning phone calls!

    Of these top 10 complaints how many are generic category benefits? Nearly all of them! So, why don’t more law firms exceed them—set the bar higher—in order to to differentiate?

    Get the basics right.

    Surely there are many law firms that do perform well on the generic category benefits. But if you want to truly differentiate your services, stop thinking about adding practice groups and start thinking about how you can exceed on delivering generic benefits. Then, set the bar higher. When lawyers, staff, and others in your law firm turn their focus to consistently delivering generic category benefits you will have loyal clients who love you, won’t think of leaving you for another firm, and best of all….will refer you to others. Simple, right? Not! If it were simple everyone would do it.

    So, take a moment, an hour, a month, a year, to sit down and plan: How can we be the Starbucks of legal services? The formula is as unique as your firm, AND your clients. There’s not one single answer for everyone. Talk to your clients aboutwhat they likeabout your law firm and then reach to improve on that. Canvass your own staff to gather ideas as to how each department could do at least one thing better, or what new aspect can be added to the value mix. I can assure you that Starbucks didn’t get where they are today by relying only on top management for fresh ideas. The whole organization contributes and the feedback they get from their customers is heard and acted upon.

    Understand what it takes to go from good to great.  Jayne Navarre Associates can assist you in such processes; to guide your internal conversations and to implement a successful plan—both strategy and tactics. Although we do not specialize in client interviews, we have associates who do and can support you. If you believe alternative billing structures will help you, we have resources for navigating that too. We will return your call…

  • People do business with people they know, like and trust.

    You can’t afford to be anonymous! Hiding behind an info@yourdomain.com email address is a total non-starter—a black hole. Using this impersonal email address for gathering leads you have strategically planned for—on your website, blog, eNewsletter, or any other digital property—could be sabotaging your efforts. You could be losing business for no other reason than that it is so impersonal. Or, because a disinterested person, or worse, no one, is minding the inbox.

    I know the argument:

    > We’re lawyers, we’re a law firm.We use an info@ address and it goes to IT, Marketing, HR, Reception, or whomever because we don’t want someone inadvertently writing about facts of their case and cause us to be conflicted out of a matter.

    We’re lawyers, we’re a law firm.

    We use an info@ address and it goes to IT, Marketing, HR, Reception, or whomever because we don’t want someone inadvertently writing about facts of their case and cause us to be conflicted out of a matter.

    I get that, but it is not difficult today to plainly state the rules of contact, and you should be doing that already. Employing very accessible technology, you can make the visitor check a box that verifies that they have read the rules before they hit send. If you can’t do that, then simply don’t add an email to the firm contact information in the footer or contact us page. Put the phone number and street address, and leave it at that. Rather to be a bit quaint than to be an info@.

    Something as basic as EMAIL can be a game changer when used correctly in your marketing mix. It may take a little creativity and work to get beyond the info@ box habit, but I believe you will find it to be worthwhile, here’s how and why.

    How can we help you?

    To be honest, forms on websites are a bit impersonal, but they do serve a purpose: A call to action that creates an impulse contact or a tool that allows a busy person to check something off their list, leaving it up to you to remind them that they had a need or interest. Forms are also useful for you because when the mail arrives it will be clearly marked that it has come from your form, at least if you set it up properly. That helps to streamline things, but forms are only effective if you have systems in place to manage them with efficiency.

    I was searching around the web for a design company to handle a project for a fairly large client account of mine. I landed on a company that I knew and respected, but had never yet engaged for work. On the Contact Us page, I found a “Request for Information” form. It said: “How can we help you?” Swell, since I’m here, why not ask—the impulse CTA (call to action) was working. It is easy and rather than placing a phone call to the main switchboard, I thought I’d simply give them my story in advance and save some time.So I filled out the form, including a fairly detailed description of a project for which I needed help and included my email, phone, name and company. Ten days later, I still had not heard from the company. Nada, nothing. I never followed up again. I had lost interest. I had already moved on.

    Worse, though, was that a company I had previously admired, was now brand-damaged goods. I made a mental note: if I did actually hire them there would likely be issues with responsiveness. How different it might have been had I had received a simple response from a real person within 24 hours of my inquiry. The note could have said anything, including we’re not interested in your project, but at least I would have felt acknowledged. If you’re not willing or able to respond to the CTA you plant on your website or email blasts, it is better to skip it all together. Now back to info@…

    Who’s on First?

    If you’re like many, most of the mail received through your info@ box or contact form is junk. Still, the person in charge of these digital inquiries should be senior level. If they are out on leave or traveling, the box should be forwarded to a qualified substitute.

    I’m a small business, which means I’m really busy, being pulled in many directions. Still, I put my direct email on all my web properties and all contact forms. Statistically, only .01 percent of the time the query is legitimate, but even at that rate it has translated to new revenue that I am not willing to give up. If I ever change my mind on that, I will remove my email completely. The option is: You’re either there or you’re not.

    Also, an auto reply from an info@ box that announces that “your mail will be responded to as soon as possible” is just not acceptable. In 48 hours? A week? Or, at their convenience? Don’t let the person hanging. Be human. In fact, if you insist on using info@, even for your contact forms, the auto responder might include a real person’s email address and phone number in case it is more urgent than that which you are promising a response. When planning and executing your digital presence, only one thing works – be a real person.

    I know, it just seems so easy to use info@ to filter generic inquiries and avoid spam taking over your real address.  And although using an alias like managingpartner@yourdomain.com or concierge@yourdomain.com may seem a bit better, the best is when your prospects believe there is a real person behind it that can be known, liked, and trusted to respond in a timely manner.

  • Unlike the sales cycle for consumer products, purchasers of legal services often have a higher level of involvement and the process is longer. Luckily we do have a fairly clear map. The map includes three disciplines – marketing, business development and client development. These three disciplines are separate, yet inter-dependent in the sales cycle. The slide deck below explains the difference. This clever illustration, first found unattributed in Reader’s Digest magazine, should help you remember all three disciplines as you work to develop a client and, once landed, grow that hard-earned relationship. You will see how advertising, promotion, public relations, and publicity each play a role in sales.

    What’s the big difference between marketing and business development?

    It may make it easier to plan your strategy when you consider this:

    – Marketing is about influencing opinions and attitudes.

    – Business development is influencing and encouraging actions.

    – Client development is the retention, expansion and growth of revenues derived from an existing relationship.

    Your objective is to keep your services in the minds of the client and stimulate demand for them.

    – Marketing sets the stage, or prepares the ground for planting seed.

    – Business development creates connection with the audience, or plants the seed.

    – Client development nurtures and promotes seed growth.

  • SlideShare.net(aLinkedInpartner) makes it really easy to double down on that live presentation or webinar slide deck that you spent hours developing. In some cases, it will take just 30 minutes—the time it takes to revise your deck for the SlideShare audience—to exponentially increase your exposure.

    But tapping into the SlideShare audience requires more than simply posting your live presentation deck. It is apublishing platform, not a posting repository. So, to be effective—to offer value—your deck should be focused, visual and informative, and tailored specifically for SlideShare viewing.

    Here are 10 things to keep in mind when converting your presentation for online viewing.

  • > Content is where I expect much of the real money will be made on the Internet, just as it was in broadcasting.~BILL GATES, January 3, 1996.

    Content is where I expect much of the real money will be made on the Internet, just as it was in broadcasting.~BILL GATES, January 3, 1996.

    Content—news, information, entertainment—is finally getting the respect it deserves. THE hot tool in the marketer’s toolbox, indeed. According to a Marketing Profs’ 2013 study, “B2C Content Marketing: 2013 Benchmarks,Budgets, and Trends—North America,” 86 percent of B2C marketers use content marketing, employing an average of 12 individual tactics.

    “It’s safe to say that brand journalism, or branded content, is making a comeback in a big way, and it’s exploding on the Internet in the form of sponsored blogs, forums, digital channels and independent sites.

    “The idea of entertaining, educating or even inspiring your clients into making a transaction is nothing new in the world of marketing. But more and more businesses — from Fortune 500s to tiny startups — are realizing it’s a strategy that lends itself perfectly to social media.” ~“Social Media Breathes New Life Into Branded Content,”Alice Brennan, Forbes, 11/30/2012

    Of the 26 tactics identified in the Marketing Profs’s survey, “social media other than blogs” and “articles on your website” were used by 84 percent of those surveyed. Other tactics, by usage, include: eNewsletters (78%); videos (70%); blogs (69%); in-person events (63%); articles on other sites (61%); and mobile content (43%). I found it interesting that print newsletters (37%) andbooks(32%) still showed up on the tactic list. In fact, they topped digital magazines (29%), eBooks (28%), and virtual conferences (21%).

    BUT, with the volume of content being published online each day, it is essential that we create content that will keep us front and center. To accomplish this I am not suggesting that we do anything outlandish, controversial, or unethical. I am, however, solidly in the camp that thinks there’s definitely room for improvement—including improvement for law firm content.

    Content Strategy.

    Here are my top five content strategies. May they inspire and empower you on your quest to craft and position your content effectively.

    1.Clients don’t care as much about your services or products as they care about themselves.If we believe this, and we should, then the majority of the content we produce for marketing purposes cannot be about ourselves. In order to create a trusted, meaningful, and even emotional connection with our brand (either the individual lawyer’s brand or the enterprise), our content must be based on our desire to fulfill our clients’ needs and interests. By providing diverse and relevant content you can demonstrate what you do and what you know, without taking on the affects of a pushy salesperson.

    2.Be strategic, really.Know what you want your words to achieve BEFORE you even write, record, or utter the first word in your mind—content is not about words, it’s about communicating. Whether short or long form, taking the time to think before you write or publish is essential for ROI.

    (a) Think about your message—what do you want the reader to take away? Understand why readers should care. Focus on one key benefit. Skip the features. Don’t combine or confuse messages. Make your case. Tell your story.

    (b) In organizing your content—whether an article, video script, presentation deck, or social ad—start from the end and work backwards. Write a statementaboutthe message. Not the message, but rather a brief statement that defines what you want your message to achieve.

    Using this post as an example: What do I want my words to achieve?

    > “I want people to be empowered by the content they produce.”

    “I want people to be empowered by the content they produce.”

    Everything in this post should be empowering my readers to produce and distribute winning content.

    (c) Who is this content speaking to? How will it be received in real life—what will it mean to recipients? What does it feel like to be them? Where might they be? What might they be in the middle of doing (most of the content we consume is in the midst of trying to accomplish something important) when they encounter your content? Empowered content is sensitive to the needs and desires of intended audience—to make life better, to understand more clearly, to apply something new and improved.

    (d) What do they need most in order to consume the content? Do they need visuals, statistics, tips, more resources (links to similar content), practical suggestions, stories, or case studies they can use to influence decisions? Should you include or eliminate jargon, acronyms, or references that diverse readers may not understand?

    (e) With a clear picture in your mind, you can then begin crafting your content.

    The more specific you can be in the “thinking” stage, the better you will be able to leverage the content to mutual benefit. Planning will help you not only write better content, but will also help you benchmark your progress and revise direction when necessary.

    3.There’s more to content than content.Design, accessibility, and promotion can lift your content above the noise.

    (a) Design. How you present your content can make a difference in how it is received. Layout, typography, photography, charts, info-graphics, illustrations, and “share-ability” are important considerations. Some sites have built in styles so you can’t do much about that, but where you do have control use and trust the instincts of professional content designers on your team. At the very least try to be as clever as possible with what you have to work with.

    (b) Accessibility. Content should be available from multiple channels, and thus multiple formats. Repurpose your content across media. Sometimes this can be automated, other times it needs to be manually orchestrated. If you can put your content in a responsive container, do it; i.e. desktop, tablet, and mobile. If you can’t, then upload similar content minding the particulars of various channel formats appropriately. Don’t forget print. Some people still prefer the printed page and providing this, too, may actually be one of the great differentiators these days!

    (c) Promotion. Content deserves a real distribution plan. Get one and execute it well. Keep abreast of changes to search optimization. Include a component in each piece of content that can be easily shared on social media to increase your exposure. For example: images and graphics are great for sharing on Pinterest, Facebook, Twitter, and etc.; quotable material should be highlighted to make it easy for journalists and bloggers to use; add a 100 character call-out that can be dropped into a Tweet—leaving 40 characters for the person to add a few words or @you; give slide decks you use in live presentations new life on Slideshare and LinkedIn; and, video should lead with the answer—put the message brief (the take away concept) at the beginning of the clip.

    >>>Although YouTube makes it easy to share a clip starting at any point in the video, a lot of people do not know how to use that feature. Also, consider that the first frame of the clip displays on embedded or shared video, so choose that carefully, too.

    4.Get. Help.Copy editing and proofreading are essential to good writing – ask any professional author or journalist.

    I edit a lot of articles, blog posts, status updates, and book length material written by lawyers. I can honestly report that things like clarity, parallel structure, transitions, and grammatical conventions are often missing. The knowledge imparted in content can be top-notch, but if the writing is boring or lacks clarity, you will lose readers, and opportunities.

    Note to in-house marketing professionals: Considering that most lawyers think themselves great writers it may be difficult for them to accept the mark ups. But content for public consumption must represent the level of professionalism that your brand seeks to convey. A good copy editor and proofreader can help you with all of the above. If you don’t have in-house resources, hire an outside editor (which will also lend certain “authority” to edits). It will be money well spent.

    5.Content is a gateway.Every piece of content you or your law firm produces and publishes is a gateway to the buyer during any onestage of the buyer/seller process.There are five stages of the buyer process: awareness; knowledge gathering; consideration; purchase; and loyalty. Connecting your content to buyers in any stage can produce rewards. Therefore, you are wise to identify the stage that each piece of content you produce addresses, and use that to your advantage. Consider any comments or contact information from readers that you receive. These are live leads. Try to understand where they are in the buyer process and then reach out and follow up with them appropriately. Take the next step toward establishing personal contact. This is the hard part for a lot of people. It may help you to think in the big picture—your content is working FOR YOU. You do not work for it. Don’t ignore it or think that you can’t understand the data and act on it. You can.

    If your content is not delivering real world opportunities—those that serve to establish or maintain relationships in the marketplace and that lead to new business—then you probably skipped one of the previous steps. Go back to the beginning, and think smarter.

    Jayne Navarre offers content development, publishing, and strategic consulting. If you would like to learn more about how we can work together,please contact us.

  • The joint 2009 price tag on outside legal services for three large corporations is enough to run a small country—Office Depot: 12 million (excluding an SEC action); Wal-Mart: 315 million;BJ’s Wholesale Club: 9 million. These numbers represent significant revenue for the hundreds of law firms that serve them, so it was no surprise that the general counsel panel atThe Hildebrandt InstituteandWest LegalEdCenter’s 17th AnnualMarketing Partner Forumcommanded attendees’ attention.

    Elisa D. Garcia C., Executive Vice President and General Counsel ofOffice Depot, a panelist, told attendees:

    > “I want you guys to make money, but I also want you to bring your expertise in at a price that I can stomach.”

    “I want you guys to make money, but I also want you to bring your expertise in at a price that I can stomach.”

    Fair enough. And, while value was the buzzword of the day, attendees found out that “value” means way more than alternative fees. General counsel are looking atthe whole relationshipbecause there are different value triggers for different matters. It’s outside counsel’s job to find them and provide them—if they want a long term relationship.

    For law firms accustomed to having a captive audience for their expertise and bench strength, the rules are changing.

    Read on for the candid advice offered by four general counsels on how they evaluate and hire law firms. (All quotes are approximate or paraphrased.)

    How General Counsel Evaluates and Hires Outside Counsel

    On Directories…

    – “Everyone I know is aSuper Lawyer.”

    – “Super Lawyers, Chambers, U.S. News & World Reports, speaking generally they make no difference.”

    – “Doesn’t mean anything to us. The most important information we get about hiring comes from referrals from our colleagues, and surprisingly from other law firms.”

    – “Why do law firms spend money on directories? Because it makes them feel good. It is not definitive at all.”

    – “When GCs go out to hire someone, they first talk to trusted colleagues and friends and now they also check theAssociation of Corporate Counsel(ACC) Value Index.” (More on this below.)

    On Knowing Our Company…

    – “My outside counsel will show that they can help the company.”

    – “Delivering the right services that can help us save money (not talking about the legal bills exclusively, but the company’s bottom line) matters.”

    – “Know our business. Know our sector.”

    – “I heard a lawyer speak on the topic of negotiating credit card transactions with banks. He had great expertise. I hired him. His knowledge helped our company save a lot of money.”

    – “Lawyers who are willing to put in the time to learn my business, on their dime, are so valuable to us.“

    – “One firm came in, ‘on their own dime,’ and spent time at our stores observing operations, customers, and processes. That’s valuable.”

    – “We expect our law firms to know and understand what the company culture is about. We want them to know our expectations. They are:Cost effectivenessDiversityPerformance”

    – Cost effectiveness

    – Diversity

    – Performance”

    – Cost effectiveness

    – Diversity

    – Performance”

    On Getting in Front of Us—How law firms can get noticed…

    – “There is a glut of talent on the market now. Smaller boutiques with big law talent are getting our attention.”

    – “CONTENT.  Give us content that is targeted, relevant, and pertinent. Forget the wine-ing and dining.”

    – “Give us content that says we know about your business and we’re paying attention.”

    – “A law firm that is willing to come in and train 10 staff attorneys on a topic, on their own dime, gets my attention.”

    – “Time is a valuable commodity. If our outside counsel can help us find more ways to carry out our tasks in less time, that’s going to get my attention.”

    (Are you seeing a pattern here? “On-their-own-dime” was truly a theme of this panel!)

    On Word of Mouth…

    – “When I hear from another GC or staff attorney that a law firm, a team, a certain lawyer has done a great job for them, that’s the lawyer/law firm/team I want to meet and likely hire.”

    – “Doing a good job with the work you have is the best marketing.”

    – “More and more we are looking to the ACC Value Index as a tool to help us make hiring decisions.”

    – “It only takes a few seconds to do a quick ACC Value Index evaluation form at the end of a matter. Law firms should take the lead and ask their general counsel to take part.”

    – “I’m surprised at how many [in-house] lawyers are including very specific comments in their ratings [ACC evaluations]. It’s really helpful.”

    – “I can always call an ACC member for more information and for recommendations.”

    More on the ACC Value Challenge…

    According to Mike Roster, Steering Committee Chair for theACC Value Challengeand panel moderator, GCsareevaluating the firms they are using. Of the 1500 law firm ratings on the ACC website most scores are pretty high, 4.2 4.3, 3.9, across the board. The two areas most likely to get low scores are cost control and management.

    > “Surprisingly, many highly rated firms (4.5+) are in the ‘will not use again’ category. Comments typically reflect that while they are excellent attorneys, they are totally out of control in what they are doing. Today, GCs will look for firms rating high in those two areas—cost controlandmanagement—when hiring. For law firms and CMOs this is a way for you to differentiate your firm from the pack.”—Mike Roster, Moderator

    “Surprisingly, many highly rated firms (4.5+) are in the ‘will not use again’ category. Comments typically reflect that while they are excellent attorneys, they are totally out of control in what they are doing. Today, GCs will look for firms rating high in those two areas—cost controlandmanagement—when hiring. For law firms and CMOs this is a way for you to differentiate your firm from the pack.”—Mike Roster, Moderator

    – “CMOs and lawyers need to impress upon their clients the benefit of adding to the Value Index on the Corporate Counsel site.”

    – “Seyfarth Shaw built it into their client assessment.”

    – “Consider asking GCs to evaluate, using the Value Challenge, half way through a matter. You can take corrective action for the second half.”

    On RFP’s…

    Law firms spend significant resources on the RPF process.  Each panelist had stories to tell about how law firms too often get it wrong.

    – “The presentation of the RFP proposal (and/or the first interview meeting) gives a pretty good idea of what it will be like to work with that firm. If the proposal or meeting starts with a firm history, they lose points.”

    – “Firms involved in an RFP should already be familiar with our company, subject matter, and geography.”

    – “Focus should be on what the lawyers on the team can do for the company; focus on substance. We want expertise.”

    – “The response of the losing law firm is important. Stomping your feet and leaving the room is not how you build a relationship with GC. If you don’t win the first day, play for another day. The RFP process gives losing firms a foot in the door to build a relationship. A lot of firms miss that opportunity.”

    – “Losing firms should stay engaged with follow-up after the RFP. Often GC will actually use the losing firm the next time around if they take the time to build the relationship. How a losing firm handles the follow-up reveals a lot about how the working relationship might be.”

    – “The law firm cannot be intrusive; but we are not annoyed by follow-up from losing firms. The point of contact should stay in touch. It is an important step to nurture and grow a relationship with us for future work.”

    On Firm Fees, Size and Location…

    Mike Roster also reported that, surprisingly, “legal rates have gone up 75% during a time when most companies have had to cut their operating costs. It makes no sense. But we are learning that value-driven relationships are changing the economy of the law firm in a great way. One big firm looked at the numbers of using an alternative pricing and delivery model and found it amazingly profitable to deliver value and they are changing their whole model.”

    – “The price differentiation is shocking between large and smaller firms.”

    – “GCs are moving down the curve of cost; similar to a time when banks moved from the more expensive financial centers such as New York to more affordable cities like Charlotte.”

    – “Office Depot has 40 smaller law firms in their approved counsel.”

    – “When GCs evaluate whether the large firm or small firm is better, they look to find the right person in a lower cost model that is highly capable, often with greater geographic convenience.”

    – In some instances, like international expansion or class actions, GCs will have to use large firms. However, for local issues like real estate, zoning, and tort litigation they all agreed; they will go to smaller, local firms.

    – “Make more money selling value.”

    – “Keep in mind that different matters have different value triggers.”

    On Fixed Fees…

    – According toJoseph K. West, Esq.,Associate General Counsel responsible for managing outside counsel forWal-Mart, their overall spend on legal services this past year is much lower than normal due to more fixed fee arrangements with outside law firms and a ramp up of in-house capacity. He also predicted that more work on an alternate fee arrangement basis is forthcoming.

    – GCs, several who formerly worked for “BigLaw,” understand the business side of law firms and say they are not trying to rob them of making money.“I know they know what it costs to do it, I know they can do it, I know they will make money at that price.”

    – “I know they know what it costs to do it, I know they can do it, I know they will make money at that price.”

    – “Legal issues are reasonably predictable; including extraordinary stuff. It has a certain rhythm and can be put into a fixed fee box, but at some point it may come out of the box. The relationship should allow you to work in and/or out of the box.”

    – In instances where they are looking for extraordinary lawyers in extraordinary cases, all panelists said they were willing to pay a premium for it.

    – “I know they know what it costs to do it, I know they can do it, I know they will make money at that price.”

    On Metrics…

    – “Billable hour and average profit per partner is offensive to the client. Get rid of it. When numbers are reported in the Wall Street Journal, our CEOs wonder what’s up?”

    – “It’s a disaster to mark up associate fees to raise profits. The best-run firm, one that delivers value, is typically at a 2:1 leverage rate. These metrics work. But we still see 3:1 leverage and we don’t like it.”

    – “For one outside counsel firm, no matter how many hours the partner spends on the matter, if the deal doesn’t go through, they don’t send a bill. Of course they get a nice percentage if the deal closes.”

    On Talent…

    – “First and second year associate rates are not worth it. And, if there’s churn in that spot it has a multiplying effect on the client.”

    – “Don’t pass through training costs of new associates to the client. Give them two years to get to know the client, then start to bill for them.”

    – “We are looking at retention issues, training, and flex time. They are all creeping into the alternative fee discussion.”

    – “No other company would treat its most important commodity poorly enough to cause a turn over rate of 85% for first year lawyers who are gone by the 6thWhy are you doing it? How can you get away with that?”

    – “We look for our law firms to institute linkage to balanced work arrangements to retain female counsel. We want our outside law firms to work hard to retain women who need alternative relationships.”

    – “Firms that offer to put an associate in the client’s legal department communicates that firm’s desire to keep the relationship.”

    – “When a firm does lose an associate, they rarely debrief. Firms should consider using a 3rdparty person for the debriefing to aid the client in transitioning the work.  It saves us time. Time we don’t have.”

    On Relationships…

    – “Expertise leads to success. Success to relationships. Relationships to more success.”

    – “Point of contact is absolutely critical.”

    – “We want someone in charge at outside counsel.”

    – “We want to be on a first name basis with partner leaders who are putting the team together.”

    – “We want to meet the people who are actually going to do the work. Don’t send in the wow person who isn’t going to actually work on the matter. In most cases I would rather meet with the associate working on it.”

    – “Once a year I am happy to meet with the firm, someone not on the account, to go over the relationship from objective point of view. Someone with whom I can be honest and frank. Be it the managing partner, client service officer, or a third-party.”

    – “Our geographic reach disperses information and sometimes law firm politics erupt when we’re only dealing with the relationship partner in the main office. We’re not interested in the politics of the firm. We’d rather have the relationship with the practice group or lawyer we’re working with in the geographic location pertinent to the matter.”

    On Communication…

    – “Large in-house departments HATE surprise. They do not want to be caught off guard.”

    – “The relationship partner needs to have the gravitas to make sure the needs of the client are important to the larger scheme of things, for example, the rest of the firm.”

    – One panelist noted that they did not receive even one congratulatory call from any managing partner or relationship partner when they took over the General Counsel position at their corporation. Worse, not one called to learn about the new management style until they fired an outside firm; then theyALL

    – In another example of poor communication; an outside counsel called the CEO directly with a golf invitation. The CEO called the GC to ask if he should go. The situation infuriated the GC. Hmmm… don’t do an end run around the GC for anything.

    On Community…

    – “Actively helping and linking in with the client’s passions is helpful in building the relationship.”

    – “We want our law firms to align with us on foundations, charities, causes, etc., when possible, but it’s not why we hire a law firm.”

    – “I like it when my lawyers can get involved in our communities and when law firms partner with us. But, it’s not definitive.”

    – “No golfing or lunch, please. Don’t ask me.”

    So there you have it! Seems to me that law firms interested in some of those corporate dollars would do well to:

    – Learn their client’s business—truly. No lip service.

    – Ask, listen, and acton client preferences.

    – Communicate appropriately.

    – Understand and address the unique value proposition for each matter.

    – Manage talent strategically.

    – Be flexible.

    This content was first published onwww.VirtualMarketingOfficer.com,Jayne’s blog that has covered social media, marketing, client service, and evolving management strategies for law firms since 2009.