Thursday, 28 April 2011

"Hello - would you like to buy some legal services?"

What is the best way for law firms to market their services?  What's the secret to marketing success?  I'm not sure why as an in-houser I care enough about this subject to write about it, but for some reason I do.  Maybe it is because a lot of the advice I see given to external lawyers on how to market their services tends to come from people who do not appear to be clients of law firms.  Don't get me wrong, I'm genuinely sure they have a valuable perspective on this.  But, without wishing to sound immodest, I imagine that an even more valuable perspective comes from in-house lawyers, the potential clients of outhousers seeking to build up their client list.

So how should law firms go about winning new clients?  What works and what doesn't?  Is it the right thing to do at all?  I recently read something suggesting that lawyer’s time is best spent maintaining existing relationships, not on building new ones.  Maybe that is true in strict ROI terms, but that's a defensive strategy and not how to build a successful long term practice.  In reality, some time has to be spent as a loss leader in seeking out new people that want to work with you.

Successful law firm marketing means relationship building that results in winning work from new clients.  There are three simple principles which matter:

1. First impressions count;
2. Little and frequent is better than big one-off impact marketing; and
3. It’s a long game, not a short one.

I will explore each of these in turn.

First impressions count.  Obvious, right?  Yes, but so so easy to get wrong.  And to get it right also requires a wider consideration of what constitutes marketing.  About 2 years ago I telephoned the switchboard of a well known Silver Circle firm I had never instructed.  It was after core hours, but no later than 7pm.  I needed some urgent advice on an issue that a couple of partners at this firm are known to be expert in.  After a bit of polite back and forth with the switchboard operator in an attempt to be put through to someone, I was told, "you do know it is after 5.30 sir?".  Massive first impressions count failure.  A reminder for law firms, indeed all businesses, that often front office staff may be the first point of contact with a potential new client. 

The "first impressions" lesson obviously goes far wider than this.  As a newly qualified lawyer I remember going to an museum exhibition my firm (well, not literally mine) was hosting for clients.  Before we went, it was drilled into us by the partners that if we saw anyone on their own at the event, then we had to go and speak to them, it was unacceptable for anyone to be left alone.  As a newly qualified lawyer with very little to offer in the way of experienced business chit chat I was hesitant to put this into practice, but such was the 3 line whip on it, I did.  I still remember how pleased the client I spoke to was that I'd approached him for a chat when he was otherwise milling around the gallery on his own.  So much so, that he later mentioned it to my department head.  Again, obvious right?  But now I am client side, I can recall events I've been invited to where I've felt it is incumbent on me to introduce myself and even on one or two occasions where I've been the one left milling around the room on my own (could be my lack of sparking conversation I guess).  If you invite someone to something, make them feel welcome when they get there and make sure that your colleagues do too.  Your invitee will have a better time and a better recollection of the event they went to.

On the same theme, outhousers, if you are ever on the other side of a transaction or a dispute to an in-house lawyer, do regard this as an opportunity to make a good first impression, to show them what you are good at, you never know, you might win some work.  I've instructed someone in the past who was on the other side and did a pretty good job at making our life miserable but in a very nice way.  And I've also got a small mental list of firms I will never instruct because of the impression I got of them when being on the other side of the table.  You can do the best job for your client whilst impressing a potential client at the same time.

First impressions count massively.  I'm of the cynical mindset that law firms love potential clients more than they love clients.  If I don't feel happy after a first meeting when a firm is seeking to win my instructions, my view is that I'm inevitably going to feel less happy if I ever instruct the firm (and for that reason, I'm not ever going to do it).

When I think of the occasions that I have instructed a firm I've not worked with before, it tends to be outhousers I have known for at least 12 months, usually more, and who I have met a few times for an hour or so at a time - maybe a breakfast, lunch or even (preferably) just a quick coffee.  I don't seek out regular corporate beanos from external lawyers and I don't believe that big high impact marketing, for example Wimbledon tickets, results in very much other than stress at keeping up with the Blackberry.   So whilst such occasional days may be all very nice, I don't think they achieve more in successful law firm marketing terms than a simple cup of coffee can.  A few coffee meetings over the course of a year or so is far more likely to ensure that a particular lawyer is front of mind when an issue arises, than a single "big ticket" corporate event where inevitably you are mingling with a number of different people, not just the lawyer who would like the in-houser to instruct them.

Long or short?  Of course, it is a long game.  But I will say this to outhousers.  A lack of instructions over even a period of months or longer does not mean that those instructions will not come and that you are wasting your time trying to gain them.  It is likely that an in-houser will only agree to meet more than once if they like you and are considering working with you.  But it might be a year or two and several meetings later until a matter comes up that leads to an instruction.  And I will say this to in-housers.  Don't waste your time or that of our private practice cousins by playing out this form of dating game if you have no intention of ever going on a proper first date, even if you are not sure when that date might arise.  To do so is, in my view, unprofessional and unfair.

Marketing external legal services is difficult.  Outhousers are slightly damned if they do (or at least are damned if they market them in anything approaching a hamfisted way) and damned if they don't.  Clients and potential clients like to feel wanted to some degree, like to feel that their lawyers and would-be lawyers are interested.  But they don't want to feel bombarded.  Treading that fine line between too little and too much contact is hard.  I think most sensible in-housers recognise this.  What we're looking for is simple, because in reality there are not many differentiators between the top 50 or even arguably top 100 firms.

We're looking for people we like, who we can see ourselves working with, who display an interest in our business, and who are prepared to get to know us over time.  It's no more complex than that.  And by way of proof, earlier this year when I needed some urgent advice, I did pick up the telephone to an outhouser who had been in touch with me on the above “occasional coffee” basis.  We chatted and exchanged a few emails and eventually I was able to fix the problem without his help.  And better, he did not send me a bill for the half an hour or so he'd spent trying to assist.  Which of course means that next time there is a fire drill, he is even more likely to get a call from me.

Of course, if any outhousers disagree and think that big bang one-off marketing plays do work, then I'm happy to test the theory.  I tentatively suggest having a chat about it in an executive box at the European Cup Final at Wembley in May as an appropriate test-bed.  All in the interests of research, naturally.

Friday, 8 April 2011

Grand National Tweepstake

Thank you for entering the Grand National Tweepstake.

Ts&Cs: Remember, no cash, it is just for fun!  Runners and riders are below, horses were allocated on a who replied to my Tweet in what order basis based on the list I also tweeted.  First place only wins, and the prize (which naturally is non-transferable although no doubt has great monetary value in terms of Twitter ROI) is that all losers agree to give the winner a belated #ff after the race.  No other prizes whatsoever.  Performance of the horses, jockeys and spectators invading the course are all outside of my reasonable control :-)  Have fun and good luck!  Oh yes, and my decision is final and binding if there are any disputes (a lot of the entrants are legal types so it is more than possible there will be).  By entering the Tweepstake you agree to these Ts&Cs.  You also agree to assign to me all of your worldly goods at the end of the race free from all liabilities and encumberances, thanks.  The last sentence was a joke in case anyone was half-thinking about withdrawing their entry out of caution.


Don’t Push It/mark_hague

Tidal Bay/pencil_case1

What a Friend/janeclemetson

Vic Venturi/ghconnor

Majestic Concorde/elainemacg

Or Noir De Somoza/legalbizzle

Dooneys Gate/vicmoffatt

Big Fella Thanks/tetchypear

The Tother One/simonjuden


The Midnight Club/lawyermageurope

Niche Market/daniel_barnett

Silver By Nature/ljanstis


Chief Dan George/jodiesue

Calgary Bay/employmediator


Oscar Time/madelineallen



Comply or Die/lawgirl247


Grand Slam Hero/creativetymes

State of Play/london_eagle

King Fontaine/legalchap

In Compliance/dylanwhite

Hello Bud/lau_lau1987

West End Rocker/shevvs

Santa’s Son/notguilty1

Bluesea Cracker/vanessabarnett

That’s Rhythm/padams06

Surface to Air/LBCwisecounsel


Can’t Buy Time/legalcostsnet

Character Building/jonbloor


Arbor Supreme/ben_hoff

Royal Rosa/helenups

Skippers Brig/connectegrity

Golden Kite/justgodirect