As many people in the legal blog world know, Denise Howell, pioneer of legal blogging, was fired from her firm last week. Her post, Have Aeron, Will Travel gives her perspective on the situation.

What’s interesting to me is the amount of attention her firing is getting online. Her (now former) firm, Reed Smith, is getting the kind of publicity money can’t buy [Not that you'd want this kind of publicity if you could buy it!]. Some of the highlights:

“Denise is particularly mum about the whys and wherefores due to a confidentiality agreement (read:  severance package, I’m guessing).  Whatever the reason, what was Reed Smith thinking?  I don’t know about Denise’s rainmaking, but she’s certainly a forward thinker and more than creative.  There was a ripple in the fabric of the Internet the day that decision was made.”

J. Craig Williams from “May it please the court”

Dennis Kennedy has a longer, more speculative post giving his opinions on Reed Smith’s reasons for firing Denise (I’ve included his list below…..read the post for the longer version):

Based on my experience in law firms, inexplicable firing decisions (and sometimes inexplicable hiring decisions) almost invariably result in people inside and outside the firm drawing one of three conclusions:

1. The firm is slimming down for a merger.

2. The firm simply made a bad business decision. 

3. The firm may be having financial problems.

On the Between Lawyers blog, Mr Kennedy adds:

“How many law students interviewing with Reed Smith this fall will ask a question about Denise? How many of them will be satisfied with the answers they get?”

The fact that complete strangers are writing and commenting about a personnel move made by a law firm really illustrates how blogging has changed everything.

Popularity: 2% [?]

This morning, while going through my long list of RSS feeds, I saw the following headline from The Globe and Mail in Canada:

It’s okay to be gay on Bay
Far from being stigmatized, sexual orientation is becoming a non-issue at more firms. Indeed, VIRGINIA GALT writes, at some, it can even look good on a résumé.

The article goes on to talk about the changing perceptions and acceptance of people by employers, and how some companies even go so far as to have gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgendered (GLBT) committees and advocacy groups. So, I think to myself, how did this story come up in my search for “Law Firm Marketing” in Google News? The answer:

Vancouver lawyer Joseph Briante, 31, recently made headlines when he quit his firm, Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP, after going public with complaints that he had been subjected to “a barrage of uninvited comments” about his sexual orientation and colourful wardrobe.

The law firm, which bills itself on its website as a place where “everyone maintains their individuality,” has hired an independent expert to investigate Mr. Briante’s allegations that he had been harassed because he is gay.

Now, obviously this is bad PR for the law firm. But to me, it brings up an even larger issue: Should law firms take sides on an issue like this?

There are many issues that are extremely divisive. Say you’re a liberal and you are automatically dismissed by the right. Claim you’re a conservative, and the left wants nothing to do with you. If you support gay marriage, religious groups are against you. State that you’re against it, supporters think you’re bad.

Most companies try to stay as neutral as possible. Their approach is: “Since we want everyone in the world to be a client, let’s not alienate anyone.” And to accomplish that, they simply say nothing. And that makes sense.

Other companies, like Ernst & Young, take a different approach. From the article:

Twenty years ago, no one talked about gay and lesbian issues at work, except in whispers, and few employees dared to “come out,” he says. Now, E&Y regards its “policy of inclusiveness” as an advantage in recruiting and retaining employees, Mr. Goudy says.

…”There is competition for talent,” says Mr. Goudy, and the firm does not want to risk alienating good candidates or losing good employees.

There is a bottom-line reason as well: Employees are measured on results, he says, and E&Y believes that a more inclusive and accepting environment creates an atmosphere that allows people to do their best work individually and in groups.

So here’s the question: Is it better to not take a position on any issue and hope that no one will hate you….or is it better to take a stance and know that people on your side will love you and some people on the other side will hate you?

Hmm. Something to think about.

Popularity: 2% [?]

I’m back in Boston and have finally recovered from the long week in Montreal at the ALA conference. I’ve organized my notes from the event, and here’s the latest installment.

During the “Ask the Marketing Experts” panel, attendees were encouraged to move from table to table to discuss different marketing topics with the experts (hence the name). But since Larry Bodine was covering Blogs, Web Sites, and Other Technology, I stayed in one place for the entire session.

Here’s how I’m going to present this. I’ll first show the question, followed by Mr. Bodine’s response (beginning with LB:). I’m in no way quoting him verbatim. I’m just going from my notes and expanding upon them. I’ll then add my own notes. So here goes.

Subject 1: Blogs

Q: Why do a blog?

LB:To get clients. Using a blog, individual attorneys are now getting higher rankings than their firms. Since blogs are updated more frequently than regular web sites, search engines are giving them higher rankings. In addition, having a blog on a practice area makes the attorney an expert in their area.

LawFirmBlogging:I think that the higher ranking point is a great one. When you step back, the goal of every marketing effort is to attract clients. With that in mind, we have to ask: How are clients going to find us? Well, one way is through search engines.
I think we need to think of blogs as a completely different animal than law firm web sites. They come in at a different time in the selection process for clients, and that’s a very important difference. Here’s how I like to think of it:

• Step One: I have a problem- In this step, the potential client realizes that he or she has a situation that could require legal help.
• Step Two: Learn more about the problem- Here, they go out to the web to research the issue. And most likely, they’ll go to Google and enter a search term.
• Step Three: Seek advice- In this step, it’s time to find an attorney that can help with the problem.

Where law firm web sites can come into play at step three, blogs can come in at step two. Blogs are seen as an information source; web sites are seen as an advertisement for services. This is an important distinction. If you can get your content in front of the potential client at this step, it is an ENORMOUS advantage.

Q: Is a blog really a good marketing tool?

LB: Yes, if you update it frequently. There’s a blog out there called Patently O, maintained by Dennis Crouch. I talked to him, and found out that he gets over 10,000 visitors per week, and has brought in Fortune 1000 clients and lots of patent work. If you’re able to find a specific niche, add current events and court opinions, you can stay up-to-date. Then a blog can be a great marketing tool.

LawFirmBlogging: I agree with Mr. Bodine here. Yes, blogs can be great for your marketing. But I think you have to do it right. If you’ve got a specific topic and there are few experts already blogging on the subject, that’s a great opportunity.
I also think you need to look at what you’re hoping to accomplish. If your goal is to set yourself up as an expert on your subject, blogging is the best. If your goal is to attract clients directly from your blog, it can be done, but it takes work.

Q: Doesn’t it take a lot of time to manage a blog? Do you need to update it daily?

LB: No. You can do mulitple posts in one day and post date them. In theory, you could do a week’s worth of blogging in an hour, by post dating your entries. For law firms, I think the best way to maintain a blog is to have a blog on a practice area with multiple authors.

As for frequency of posting, no, you don’t have to blog daily. I think posting 2-3 times per week is fine for a practice area blog.

LawFirmBlogging: I think it all depends on the amount of dedication you are willing to give to your blog. I know some legal bloggers that literally spend 2-3 hours each day on their blog, and I know some that put up a post or two a month. Sure, the more you update, the better chance you’ll get a higher ranking, but I think you should focus on quality rather than quantity. I think you should blog as often as you’re comfortable with. Yes, this is a marketing effort, but you really should do it because you’re having fun with it.

Q: Won’t having a blog take away from my site’s content?

LB: No. The best thing to do is to write a short summary on the blog, and link to your firm’s content.

LawFirmBlogging: Agreed. I think you have to think of your blog as a separate venue for your ideas. It’s not a zero-sum game; people aren’t going to say “I’ve got this problem, and there are only two places to go: the firm’s site and this blog. I can only go to one or the other.”

Subject 2: Web Sites

Q: Do you have to ask clients’ permission to list their name on the web site?

LB: I think it’s a good thing to do it. Just shoot them an email and ask. It’s worth it.

LawFirmBlogging: I think the best way to do this is at the beginning of the relationship. I’d adivse firms to have this as an item on their client intake form. That way, you know from the beginning whether or not the client objects to being listen on your site.
In addition (at least for smaller clients), clients love this. It’s a plug for their site, and it shows that you care about them. It shows the client how much you value them, so much so that you’re willing to use them as an example.

Q: How do you convert site visitors into clients?

LB: The best way is to have some kind of interaction on the site. You should have an eNewsletter, or some way to collect information. If you’re able to get a name and phone number, that’s a great way to 1) know who’s visiting your site and 2) you can pick up the phone and ask the subcriber out to lunch.

LawFirmBlogging: Nothing to add here. Opt-in is a great way to get information about the human beings that are visiting your site. Your stats can give you numbers, but opt-in can give you more.

Q: How do you measure new business from the internet?

LB: You have to ask. Ask how they hear about you. Lots of time, they’ll say “well, I know the partner x.” But now and then they’ll say they looked you up on the internet. I do know for a fact that general counsel will come up with a short list. Then they’ll look at your web site. If you have a bad one, you just lost their business. If you have a good one, you stay on the list.

LawFirmBlogging: In addition to having web site/ blog as an item on your client intake form and an opt-in, there are a few tricks that you can use. First, I’d suggest using a different contact email address on your web site. That way, you can know that the person emailing you got your contact info directly from the web site. If you’re fortunate enough to have several phone lines, you could have a separate phone number on the web site as well.

Subject3: Extranets

Q: Are extranets picking up?

LB: Yes, they’re really picking up. Clients want their own extranet, pass-protected to see their documents, their matter, and how much the bill is so far.

It’s huge to manage but clients love it. It’s personalized and customized just for them. I really like it. I can login and see what’s going on. It makes you feel special.

LawFirmBlogging:Sure. I think extranets are great. That’s all.

Q: We’re a small firm. I don’t know if we have the resources. Are there services that do extranets?

LB: Get something that allows you to own all your code. Don’t use a service. Make sure you own the code. You can get a database-driven website for $5000 or less. It’ll include an extranet.

LawFirmBlogging: You can definitely do this. All you need is PHP/MySQL on Apache and someone that knows how to write a little code.

Well, that’s the bulk of the notes I took during Mr. Bodine’s session. I’d like to thank him for the opportunity to present this here.

Popularity: 9% [?]

Today I had the pleasure to attend the “Ask the Marketing Experts” panel session at the Association of Legal Administrators’ annual Conference. The following presenters were there:

• Phyllis Weiss Haserot- On Business Development Coaching
• Norm Mullock- On Business Intelligence
• Iris Jones on Client Service Teams and Sales Training
• Charles Maddock on Branding
• Jeff Reade on CRM/Databases
• Sally Schmidt on Client Surveys
• Larry Bodine on Web sites, blogs and other technology

The format of the panel was unique in that each panelist was asked to present their most “frequently asked question” along with a 2-minute answer. After this portion, each presenter went to a table for a 10-minute Q&A. At the end of the ten minutes, the session leader whistled loudly, indicating the end of that 10-minute period. Attendees then rotated to other tables.

Well, I decided to stay at one table. It’s not as if there weren’t very interesting and informative tables: there were. I just decided that since I write about web sites, blogs, and other technology for law firms, it would make the most sense to stick around. In my next post, I’ll give the “transcript” (not verbatim, but you’ll get the idea) from Larry Bodine’s sessions. In this post (it’s getting long already, but bear with me), I’ll lay out the presenters FAQs and their answers.

Phyllis Weiss Haserot- Business Development Coaching
FAQ: How does coaching work, and what’s the difference between coaching and training?
Training is structured and has a beginning, a middle and an end. It’s something that is pre-formatted and fairly rigid. Coaching is quite different in that it is custom tailored to the individual attorney. They may be different in the execution, but both coaching and training have the same goals in mind. Ms. Haserot is of the opinion that the best results come from mixing training and coaching.

Jeff Reade- CRM/databases
FAQ: What does it take to have a successful CRM implementation?
1. Data has to be all in one place. He gave the example of having all attorneys in one room, with their Palm Pilots on. Think of your CRM as that….only possible.
2. Keep it simple: If you actually get buy-in at your firm, don’t overpromise. Don’t make the mistake of giving the impression that having a CRM will be the be-all end-all for you firm. It isn’t. Don’t oversell what it can do. Otherwise, having some success with the CRM could be perceived as a failure. Not good.
3. Plan, plan, plan. Implementing a customer relationship management system isn’t something you’ll do overnight, and that’s a good thing. It’s not flipping a switch. Instead, you should plan out exactly how you want to implement it, and give reasons why you’re doing what you’re doing. It’s a daunting task, so make sure it makes sense.

Norm Mullock on Business Intelligence
FAQ: What is BI and how can firms use it?
Business Intelligence is basically a way of leveraging data. BI is the framework around your firm’s data that makes sense of the information you have. More and more firms are hiring marketing professionals from outside the legal industry because they have one thing in mind: What is my ROI? Business Intelligence software is a tool that helps understand the return on investment and how to maximize the data the firm alredy posesses.

Iris Jones on Client Teams and Sales Training
FAQ: Why client teams?

Ms. Jones is a former attorney, so she claims to be long winded. Rather than winging it for two minutes, she instead used bullet points and offered more details later on. Unfortunately, she talked much faster than I could type, so here’s what I have:

• Client service teams can drive profits from key clients
• Client service teams result in greater efficiency and enhanced firm integration.
• Client service teams can ensure a consistent approach and message
• Client service teams can result in new practice groups not seen from a traditional standpoint.

Charles Maddock on Branding
FAQ: What is branding and why is it essential to law firms?
Branding is: what you’re known for, what you could be known for. It is why clients and recruits pick your firm. It makes the marketing message consistent and concise. Branding is not just a logo or a website…it’s the culture, beliefs, and what you stand for as an organization.
One huge difference to Mr. Maddock is that clientsare now selecting law firms on reputation rather than individual lawyers. It used to be that clients would pick a firm because they knew an individual attorney there. New studies show that is no longer the case. Clients are now picking firms…not just single attorneys.

Sally Schmidt on Client Surveys
FAQ: What is the best way to conduct a client survey?
There is no best way.
It all depends on
1. clients- size, sophistication, amount of work, location.
2. firm- what are resources, $, etc., commitment
3. objective- what are you trying to learn? If you’re looking at high end clients, do a personal interview. If you’re trying to find something from a large volum of clients, do it electronically

The idea is that there really is no cookie-cutter, stock client survey. It all depends on what you’re trying to get out of it, who you’re going to ask, and what works best to support those goals.

Larry Bodine on Web sites, blogs and other technology
FAQ: Are law firms really getting new business from web sites and blogs?

The answer: Yes.

Mr. Bodine cites new research that shows law firm web sites are the single best tool for corporate and transactional firms for getting new work. 82% of firms get work directly from their web sites.

Law firm web sites can generate business as long as they show your firm has:

• industry experience- you have to show that you know a client’s business. If you have the greatest web site and beautiful design, that doesn’t matter if you can’t do the client’s work.
• · representative clients- show you represent the right clients. List the kinds of clients you want more of.
• Success stories- have you ever won a case, closed a deal? Just name the client, the issue, and how you saved the day.

Well, that’s it for now. I’ll post more on Larry Bodine’s session later tonight (or early tomorrow). It’s time for me to go out and get some air.

Popularity: 10% [?]

..applause.

I’m still here in Montreal, and apparently live blogging from the sessions themselves are impossible. Due to that, I’m in my hotel room, blogging about the sessions I’ve seen thus far. Here’s my setup:

If you look closely, you’ll see the nectar of the gods on my left. Yep, look closely. It’s red bull.

Here in Canada, they have the regular red bull, but they also have this. It’s the original Thai red bull that really packs a punch. Anyone who knows me can surely attest to the fact that I love red bull and any energy drink that can lift me up a bit and make me type at inhuman levels. Well, there’s a full supply of this stuff here and I’m definitely taking advantage.

Yesterday’s session was entitled “Breaking Through the Barriers: Sales and Marketing.” The sesion was conducted by:

Alvidas A. Jasin: Director of Business Development at Thompson Hine LLP
Iris J. Jones, Esq: Client Services Advisor at Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP
Sally J. Schmidt: President of Schmidt Marketing, Inc.
Adam L. Stock: Chief Sales and Marketing Officer at Dorsey Whitney LLP.

Right from the start, these experienced law firm marketing experts wanted us to know that they use the “s” word: sales. Rather than using Business Development or Marketing, they wanted to stress that “sales” is what they are interested in.

What’s the difference?

Sales takes place after all the marketing initiatives have gone on. It’s like Glengarry Glenross “always be closing…” That’s how they think of sales. When you think about it, that makes sense; all the marketing in the world means nothing if it doesn’t result in a sale.

With this difference as a starting point, the panel began talking about creating a sales culture. It’s a sublte shift in thinking that can create an enormous difference. Take, for instance, the Thompson Hine sales organization shift.

Before implementing a “sales culture”, the firm had a Marketing Manager that reported directly to the partner in charge of the office. Remember, this is a multi-office firm. Now, the firm has a Business Development organization. It works like this: There’s a Director of Business Development and a Business Development Advisory Team. Reporting to them are separate “Business Development Managers.”

This way, each business development manager focuses on one practice group. Let’s use an IP group for instance. Rather than having a separate marketing manager in each office, marketing is instead divided by group. The IP Business Development Manager is focused just on IP in multiple offices. That way, each BD Manager becomes an expert in one group nationwide.

Another shift in thinking has to do with staff. Sure, it’s nice to say that everyone in the organization- from partners to secretaries are conducting their work with marketing in mind. But the panel gave some examples of how, in reality, it can be pulled off.

One example dealt with how secretaries should be involved in the marketing process. One firm decided that in order to truly understand a client, the legal secretary should know the client’s secretary. They actually had the legal secretary meet with the client’s secretary for lunch in order to foster a multi-level relationship. Now that’s practicing what you preach!

One other “duh!” moment occured when the panel showed a chart showing revenue by clients. In many firms, more than 80% of their clients are producing less than 5% of the revenue. In contrast, .2% of clients are bringing in over 25% of the revenue. Let’s say you have 10 clients that bring you over $1 million. Then you have 3,300 clients that bring you less than $50,000. Should you really be spending your time and energy trying to attract clients that don’t cover the overhead?

I’m not saying to drop all the little guys. That’s not the case at all. But when you’re trying to attract new clients, it’s very important to look at the big picture.

At the end of the session, Mr. Jasin told us we’d be getting a free gift. What was it?

Since the title was “Breaking Through the Barriers”, he had everyone break a block of wood with their hand. The idea, of course, was that you shouldn’t look at the obstacle, but rather look past it to see where you want to be. I took a couple of photos of the participants:

I am now leaving to go see an ask the experts panel. Though I’ve been sitting next to Larry Bodine at these marketing sessions, I’ve yet to hear him speak. He’s been keeping track of this conference as well at his blog.

Until then, au revoir.

Popularity: 8% [?]

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: 3% [?]