Bruce Allen has a nice, concise article on Law Firm Branding from an insider’s perspective.

Excellent stuff.

Popularity: 2% [?]

Suzanne Falter’s Painless Self Promotion Blog has a series of articles on why blogs are better than web sites.

Throughout the article, Ms. Falter argues that:

Blogs are, quite simply, the next wave. So if you’re thinking about setting up a site, stop in your tracks and turn towards blogs instead.

I’ve been seeing a lot of this lately. And I disagree and agree at the same time. Sure, I think blogs are great. I love them. But I don’t think blogs are in opposition to “web sites.” Instead, I see a blog as part of a web site. Sometimes web sites are just blogs, but blogs are never web sites.

Whoa! I’ve really confused myself there. Nice!

My point is this:
Ms. Falter is arguing against static html pages that can’t be updated often, and I agree with her there. I think that dynamic sites with a content management system in the background are the way to go. And a blog can definitely be a part of that site.

This is the way I think of it.

A web site is a house. It contains individual rooms, hallways, the basement, etc.:

This is the blog:

So, the blog is part of the web site.

So I’m getting into semantics here I know. My idea is this: You don’t need to choose between a blog and a web site. You can have it all!

The best solution:
A site that has all its content stored in a CMS, allowing you to change any content you want, whenever you want. That way you have the flexibility of a web site and a blog inside.

edit:After further review, I think Ms. Falter is right……it seems that her work focuses more on the individual than on businesses, so I now understand what she’s talking about.

Popularity: 14% [?]

I just found out a few days ago that I’ll be going to the Association of Legal Administrators annual meeting in Montreal May 1-4. I was curious if any other bloggers (or readers for that matter) will be going to any of the sessions…..

There will be a session on Blogging entitled “Blogs: The Hot New Technology for Communication and Information.”

Anyone going?

Popularity: 2% [?]

Congratulations goes out to the winners of this year’s Legal Marketing Association Your Honor Awards.

In the Identity category, the Boston-based law firm of Choate Hall and Stewart took first place for their comprehensive rebranding effort. The firm was given a special award for “Integrated Marketing”.

An article in Law Firm Inc. spotlights Choate’s marketing manager, Betsy Huntley and Burkey Belser of Greenfield Belser who created the new brand identity. I have had the pleasure to hear Mr. Belser speak, and was given the opportunity to interview him here.

Over the last few weeks, I’ve referenced the book “Your Marketing Sucks” a LOT. In the book, Mark Stevens says you should never hire a designer who applies for awards. In fact, he says:

Fire your advertising agency if it even thinks about applying for a Clio or other creative award.

Well, I think this is the exception. Because this award is not for making a pretty ad. It’s an award for integrated marketing, which, for a law firm, is the holy grail.

Congrats!

Popularity: 3% [?]

Last week I attended a Legal Marketing Association meeting here in Boston that included a panel of journalists discussing how and why they cover legal stories. The panel included representatives from both general and industry newsletters.

Though I think the meeting would be most useful to larger firms, the panel gave some advice on how and when a firm should contact the media for a story idea.

Marketing professionals at law firms understand how beneficial it is to be covered in the press. If an article gives a favorable impression of a firm, the exposure could be better than advertising money could buy.

However, it is important to know that the news is just that: news. News is not advertising.

Though introducing a new attorney may be a significant, interesting story within a firm, it may not be considered newsworthy for the outside world. Panelists agreed that though news of this sort is not likely to generate a story, they are happy to receive notices of this sort. In fact, one panelist (representing an area business newspaper) said that receiving notices of new partners, attorneys, etc. are useful to him, as it makes it easier to find experts to interview when a story breaks.

The most repeated theme of this panel was the idea that newspapers are interested in what firms are doing, but do not want to publish thinly-veiled PR pieces. There simply has to be an objective news story underlying anything they write about. They understand that the firm would love to be the subject of a glowing puff piece, but that’s not what they’re about.

I saw a good example of how a firm had an angle that helped them garner press attention in Your Marketing Sucks by Mark Stevens:

For one investment firm, we put a headline on a news release that read “Bulls, Bears, and Armadillos.” Everyone knows that bull is the term for an optimist on Wall Street, and if you are negative you are a bear. But an armadillo? It was a term we coined for an investor who armed himself against a prickly stock market. That was intriguing to the media, and, as a result, the investment firm got substantial press coverage.

(pg. 155)

The takeaway: Don’t try to put one over on journalists. They need content, so they’ll welcome your input and story ideas. Just make sure you give them an actual story, not just fluff.

Popularity: 5% [?]

No, not you.

That’s the title of a book I just finished by author Mark Stevens.

In it, Mr. Stevens puts forth one central theme: if every dollar you spend on marketing does not return more than one dollar in sales, your marketing sucks.

I think a lot of people think of marketing as an expense of doing business. We advertise because all our competitors are advertising. We do it because we have to. The book says it is necessary to scrap that way of thinking.

One thing that I have definitely been guilty of is looking at the competition first before coming up with ideas for a marketing campaign. When a law firm asks me to come up with a web site or ad campaign, I would look at what their competitors are doing. I would say to myself “Okay, if the other firms are creating clever, professional looking ads, I want to create something that one-ups them.”

Wrong way of thinking. Instead of the original goal (create a campaign that gets us new clients), the new goal is: create a campaign that looks better than our rival. It has shifted from something based on a measurable strategy to an ego-driven ideal. Bad.

One of the biggest complaints I’ve heard about law firm marketing is: Everyone looks the same. And sometimes that’s the goal of a law firm. The firm wants to be seen as an equal, so they set out to look like the competition.

When I think of this, I picture boxes of store brand cereal.

In the cereal aisle, having a box that looks like the name brand makes sense. The store brand has the exact same product, so they try to look similar (even though kids know the difference!).

But should a law firm do that?

Popularity: 14% [?]