Change is in the air. Change is all about us. And change is hard. But hang in there. Don’t close your eyes to the light at the end of the tunnel.

This is the year that TV changes from analog to digital. Is your TV ready? Did you know that the U.S. government has spent $1.34 billion preparing those without cable or satellite for the change? Yet, according to the National Association of Broadcasters, there is only 92% awareness of the change. With 72 million TVs operating on rabbit ears, that’s a lot of people who will be without their Oprah on February 17th.

Law firm websites, blogs and Google searches have changed the way we search for and find lawyers. While some companies are adapting well to the change, others are withering on the vine.

The same holds true for print media. With circulation down and stock prices tanking, how will print media survive? Some innovative editors, such as BusinessWeek.com’s editor-in-chief and “Digital Journalism Advocate” John A. Byrne, are embracing the change.

The Legal Marketing Association is also in the middle of change in regards to their listserv technology. In December, the Association rolled out LMA-Connect, which will soon replace the listserv.

Since its inception, the listserv provided an e-mail ready tool for the membership to ask questions and receive replies from their peers. There were no opportunities to customize the delivery of messages, and the archive/search capabilities were poor, to say the least.

With his permission, below are Per Casey’s, chair of the LMA Technology Committee, comments on the transition:

By way of some background, the decision of the LMA to move away from the listserv to LMA Connect was not made in haste. From what I’ve experienced and heard, it’s been a topic for discussion for years as many members voiced frustrations with the ‘serv’. It was only last year that we found something (eGroups) that seemed like it could meet our needs. eGroups is from HigherLogic a company that makes software for associations like ours and they’ve taken into consideration many of the needs and challenges we face.

In the end, the main reason for the decision to change systems was efficiency. Numbering over 3000, the LMA membership can’t effectively communicate using one straight listserv. We simply have too many different interests and the potential for too many discussions to cram it all into one thread. The listserv was (or is) great for its directness, everything coming through one pipe, but consider that there are 800 people subscribed to the listserv and, typically, only one to three conversations happening at any one time. That seems anemic to me.

With LMA Connect there are several topic-oriented groups and each could have several different threads, all of which can be easily pulled out and reviewed independently without having to read through a long string of emails, footers, disclaimers, HTML and other distractions.

I know it’s going to be a bumpy migration. We have anticipated that. But in a few months, if not sooner, I think that most of us will look back on the listserv with nostalgia for a bygone application that didn’t hold a candle to the new system. If not, we can always subscribe to Larry [Bodines]‘s listserv and have the best of both
worlds.

Upgrading technology and adapting to change is never easy, but that is not a reason to avoid doing it. Change is different and change is hard. But hang in there. The light at the end of the tunnel might just be the sun.

I hate marketing budgets, marketing plans and anything that limits my ability to move forward, and move quickly.

This doesn’t mean that I don’t have a budget or a plan, it only means that I want my plans to be fluid enough to allow me to change course and act quickly when necessary.

In October 2007, while the Dow Jones Industrial Average was hovering around 11,000 points and going up, and when most of us were planning our 2008 budgets, how many of us were forecasting the collapse of the worldwide financial markets, government bailouts, the collapse of Lehman Bros., law firm layoffs and dissolutions?

How many of us projected the rise of Twitter, and what might be the beginning of the collapse of print journalism, as we have known it?

Seth Godin had a great post today, Do ads work?, where he asks why have a budget for ads, if the ads work?

So, why, precisely, do you have an ad budget?

If your ads work, if you can measure them and they return more profit than they cost, why not keep buying them until they stop working?

And if they don’t work, why are you running them?

Can we not extrapolate this for most marketing activities? If it works, if we can measure the return on investment (ROI), or return on objective (ROO), should we not continue to do more?

How often do you hear the marketing person say, “that’s a neat idea, but we
don’t have the budget this year”?

Shouldn’t she say, “We have an unlimited budget for ads that work”…

In no way am I advocating the spending of money with wild abandon, but I am also not advocating the closing of the purse strings. I have a 2009 EMP (Evil Master Plan). It is driven by four key components:

  1. “Face Time” w/ clients, prospects & referral sources
  2. External communications driven by social media
  3. Internal communications
  4. Prepare to rebrand firm for 2010 anniversary

The details … well, that’s what they pay me to do.

Kevin O’Keefe asked his followers this morning what Twitter means to us as legal professionals.

I could write 140 characters, 10 times over, on what Twitter means to me as a legal professional.

But for brevity sake I’ll limit it to the concept that Twitter is a true melting pot of ideas. For those of us who believe that diversity is more than skin color, Twitter is a Godsend.

Twitter brings together “Big Law” and solos, 1st tier and 3rd tier graduates, West Coast/East Coast, and gasp, Gulf state & fly-over state perspectives. This one little program has become a beacon for in-house professionals, law students and consultants.

Twitter is the great equalizer. No attorneys and “staff” here. On Twitter we — lawyers, marketers, techie, librarians, paralegals, and assistants — equally contribute to the conversation, adding our unique perspectives.

Twitter allows me to quickly branch out from my personal limitations of industry (law) and “practice” disciplines (marketing & business development).

By casting a wide net, I now follow people from different industries, practice disciplines, political persuasions, philosophies, religions, regions and countries. Through Twitter, I am learning how you are applying new concepts, tactics and ideas to your businesses and industries, and play with how I can interpret them to the practice of law.

As Twitter continues to take hold and grow as a business tool, Twitter-etiquette is starting to evolve as well.

Should you automatically DM people who follow you? Write a personal “thanks for following me”? Or, in my case, do nothing?

I’m not so concerned about that conversation, as the one taking place over whether you should unfollow the people who don’t follow you back.

Twitter is all about the conversation. It is not about how many followers I have, or how many people follow me back.

According to @zappos, Twitter is more about being interested than being interesting.

I think lots of marketers have trouble understanding Twitter b/c they try to be interesting rather than try to be interested.

I think it’s about both.

If I am interested in what YOU have to say, how blessed am I to have a venue like Twitter where I can listen in on your conversations? After a time, I might even contribute to your conversation. Who knows, maybe after contributing enough to YOUR conversations, you might come to find me of interest as well.

What other tool out there allows us this type of access to politicians, radio hosts, CEOs, media types, authors and thought leaders? Where else can we listen in on the likes of Shaquille O’Neill or MC Hammer?

While I find that @chrisbrogan and @johnabyrne have something interesting to say, it does not automatically follow that they will find me (legal marketer, mom, wife, girl scout leader, tired) interesting in return.

Why on earth would I automatically disengage from their conversations because they could care less about what I have to say? Is it not my responsibility to be interesting to the 375 people who are following me?

So follow the people you find of interest. Twitter about the things you find of interest. And, don’t be so concerned about those who don’t follow you in return.

Thank you all for joining me this year around The Legal Watercooler for our chats. All I wanted to do was spark some conversations, and yet so much more came out of it all.

I am so grateful for the new relationships that have been built, and for the old relationships that continue to deepen.

I will be posting throughout the holiday season, but hopefully just things that we can enjoy with a cup of coffee.

I wish you all a very, Merry Christmas.

Linus and the true meaning of Christmas

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKk9rv2hUfA&hl=en&fs=1]

I received an e-mail on Friday from a peer at LexisNexis’ Martindale division notifying me that not only was she let go, so was her entire department.

I want to let you know that I will be leaving Martindale-Hubbell at the end of the month. The Rating Specialist positions for Martindale-Hubbell have been eliminated, so that means that I will not be coming to visit you to review your firm’s ratings initiatives. I am told that some of the other people who visit your firm from Martindale or LexisNexis may add the ratings items to their meetings with you.

I don’t know if this is a case of chicken or the egg, but by eliminating the Rating Specialist positions, LexisNexis has shown what their commitment to the Martindale-Hubbell Ratings System product is. Or, was it our lack of support for the Ratings product what prompted LexisNexis to abandon it?

Either way, it appears that the Martindale-Hubbell AV Ratings System is officially dead, or, at the least, on “dissolution watch.”

For the past few years there has been a debate in legal marketing circles in regards to e-holiday cards. I’m holding on strong to the opinion that, with few exceptions, they should be avoided at all costs. Very few firms will get it right, leading most recipients to immediately hit the delete button.

The trouble with e-holiday cards is that there is no excitement about opening up an e-mail. You can’t paste an e-holiday card to your door or file cabinet. They’re not going to linger on, for days, weeks or months, until I get around to cleaning up my office in late January or early February. There is nothing memorable about an e-mail.

So, unless you are going to create a viral, humorous or otherwise creative e-holiday card, such as Fish & Richardson, don’t do it.

I also have to give big kudos to my former creative colleagues at Pillsbury for creating this e-holiday card. Not only does it capture the levity and tongue-in-cheek humor that the firm enjoys, there was a space in my e-mail for a personal note from my colleague.


There certainly is plenty of bad news to go around. Enough so that it even has the good guys looking down at their shoes. What’s a law firm to do?

1. Passion And Leadership Are Imperative
Successful firms will have a strong, visible leader who oozes belief in the firm’s raison d’être and the client proposition. Passion spreads throughout the organization and becomes infectious.

2. Invest In The Future And Be Courageous
Defy conventional impulses and spend to grow market share. Studies repeatedly show that organizations that increase marketing investments during a recession grow market share, increase margins and have better long-term growth trends than their competitors who are not so courageous. See #1.

3. Creativity Is Not Optional
Best of all, it’s essentially free and populates the offices and break-rooms in your firm. You may have missed seeing it during the boom times. Don’t discount the potential contributions of secretarial, administration staff AND even those introverted lawyers. See #1.

4. Develop Trust, Connectivity and True Partnership
Give your clients voice. Give them what they need to be true “brand” believers and loyal forever. Innovation through client insights and experimentation can produce breakthrough ideas. Go to your core audience, ask them what they want, and give it to them. You may be surprised to learn that they truly want to be your partner. They want you to succeed so that they can succeed. Make sure it’s not just marketing speak on your web site. When they ask for something you think you cannot give, think again, they really don’t want you to fail. It may be just the right thing to do for both of you. See #1.

5. Integrate All Communications
Reach your potential client base through multiple channels, BUT, creatively deliver the same message across all platforms.

6. Be Accountable Together
Create a marketing culture of accountability. Partner with finance, technology, research and analytics to measure everything you can. Be grounded in a disciplined process that relies on a cross-functional marketing and finance team that reviews all activities. See #1.

7. Invest In People
Build skills, build capability, build knowledge, and watch the bottom line grow. Train even the most junior person in your organization to embrace the firm culture and philosophy. See #1. Aggressively pursue efficiencies and productivity. See #1.

8. Be Socially Responsible
Do good. Now is not the time to cut back too far. BUT, rethink your sponsorships and contributions. Do you have skin in the game? Now is the right time to go beyond cause “marketing” and have an inspiration and motivational reason for your firm’s brand to be involved in the community. Your clients will notice and reward you for giving back. See #1.

Thanks to Advertising Age staff writers for prompting these ideas. “Recession Proof Your Business”

With all the uncertainty the current economic crisis is bringing to the corporate marketplace, I am focused on how law firms are adapting.

Some firms are laying off staff and associates, some firms are holding off on welcoming new partners to the equity ranks, while others are closing down. In fact, this week’s trades are filled with reports that another AmLaw 200, #131 Thacher Proffitt & Wood, is in dire straits.

So perhaps someone out there can riddle me this: while laying off associates and staff, White & Case’s top partners have increased their billing rates to $1,260/hour. What?

I understand paying a premium fee for the expertise of marquee partners. But at what point does the client choke on the gall and close the purse strings?

The continued uptick in legal expenses means that law firms should expect clients, especially in a worsening economy, to hire more attorneys in-house and to rely more heavily on “flexible staffing,” said Pamela Woldow, general counsel and principal of Altman Weil Inc., a law firm consultancy. In addition, clients, such as pharmaceutical companies, that in the past did not demand alternative or varied fees will be “negotiating harder” for better deals on legal services, Woldow said.

So I started doing the math and came up with my own equation:

Legal Marketing Algebra

Higher rates = increase in legal expenses

Increase in legal expenses = bring more work in-house

Bring more work in house = less revenue for law firms

Less revenue for law firm = more lay offs

If your corporate clients are cutting back on expenses, laying off employees, shutting down offices or stores, closing down operations or preparing for bankruptcy, how do you justify $1,200 an hour for a lawyer?

But, then again, some people have no problem paying $5,000 for a hamburger.