Is your Web site so 1999 that it’s holding your firm back? Jonathan Thrope takes on law firm Web sites in his article Still Loading: Law Firms Lag Behind the Rest of Corporate America on the Web.

In general, law firms are behind the curve compared to corporate America, retail America, anything America when it comes to technology. And, there is a reason for it: Technology, both hardware and software, is expensive in both time and money, and it is difficult to articulate to lawyers why they need to invest hundreds of thousands of dollars, or more, for every new upgrade or roll-out.

Web sites are no different. We’re not selling widgets as an industry, we’re selling services. How then do you begin to communicate to a lawyer the value of a $40,000 – $1 million investment in a new Web site when they’re not selling a product? When the most profitable firms in the country make American Lawyer’s “worst” list of Web sites, the argument that we must upgrade to keep up with the “Lathams” loses steam.

I agree with Mr. Thrope that a firm’s Web site needs to be more than just an on-line brochure. The true value of a Web site is not about the look or “brand,” or how well you can “differentiate” yourselves from the competition, but the dynamic back-end which allows you to control and disseminate the information your clients need to read, and, better yet, to drive new readers (potential clients) to your site.

So before you get caught up in a 2.0 upgrade, how’s your 1.5 doing? Is your Web site database driven and does it allow the reader to easily jump from an attorney’s bio, to his or her recent articles, to their upcoming events, and then subscribe to your newsletter? Is your Web site uncluttered, easy on the eyes, and intuitive to navigate?

Most people coming directly to your Web site are looking for an attorney’s bio, an office address, or how to submit a resume. Everything after that is the hook that gets them to stay, look around, dig a bit deeper, learn something new, and keep you “top of mind” when they need your services.

So what will the reader find on your site? Is all the news about your firm, attorney promotions, new hires, new office openings and the like? When is the last time your news section had something new on it? Are your attorneys writing about the issues that keep your clients awake at 3:00 a.m., googling for a solution? And while I think it’s great that your firm has 50 blogs, when half of them haven’t been updated since the beginning of summer, well ….

If we as legal marketers cannot manage the basics, it will be hard to up-sell the attorneys a 2.0 model. And while my site has a long, long, long way to go, I am focused on taking the steps necessary to prepare us for a major upgrade down the road.

But as an industry? I say we’ve come a long way.

(part 2 – selling the updgrade to your attorneys)

Last week Ann Lee Gibson blogged extensively on her competitive intelligence blog about the predictive factors shaping the VP selections. This weekend CNET reported that Wikipedia was a site that many should have paid closer attention to as “Young Trigg” was busy setting the Sarah Palin record straight.

In a Web 2.0 world, transparency is greater than ever. How closely do you monitor or update your law firm’s Wikipedia page? Are you using Wikipedia to market your firm?

As URL purchases have alerted the marketplace of potential mergers, will law firm Wikipedia updates also become a predictive factor?

Vacation is over and I am back. Thanks to Jayne, Russ and Renee for keeping the cooler cool while I was at the water park, Disneyland, the beach, California Adventure, and then back at the beach. And while I didn’t bring anyone back a t-shirt, I did come back with a bit of wisdom.

The power of the delete button is liberating and has the ability to promote world peace. Okay, it can’t promote world peace, but it can make my professional life a bit less stressful, adds lightness to my in-box, and allows me to put aside our differences and focus on our common challenges and goals.

As I was being lightly roasted over on the LMA Listserv last week my first reaction was to hit the reply button and jump right in there. But I thought better of it and just deleted the post from my in-box. What use would it be to contribute to a discussion that really just needed to be put to rest? What would it say to those who have their eyes on me wondering what I would do? Should I take the high road and ignore it? It was difficult to hit the “cancel” button on my response, but it was the right thing to do.

So I began to run with the idea of the power of the delete button. I deleted all of the e-newsletters I get without reading them (it would all be old news by the time I got back to the office). I deleted the blog posts without following the links to the full articles. I then unsubscribed to all of the newsletters that I never NEED to read, but somehow seem to clutter my in-box on a daily basis.

Most importantly, as we enter a polarized political season, when colleagues are already publishing their personal opinions and political commentary on Facebook and Twitter that might not be shared by their readers – who happen to include their clients, referral sources, potential employers and colleagues – I have my delete finger well trained and ready to go.

Monday I came across this CNET article and thought no big deal. Google Suggest sounded a lot like what Yahoo rolled out 13 months ago and their market share since dropped 3%. Besides this offering has been available behind the scenes since roughly 2004 so the coming out party didn’t seem that newsworthy.

Today Google Suggest is officially up and running as the default Google home page. While it is similar to what Yahoo offers, I noticed HUGE and interesting differences. In addition to providing the number of returns for each suggestion (isn’t it always a numbers game), it relies heavily on the power of the first word in a search. This feature ignores many popular searches and encourages first word centric searches. Instantly I noticed these differences were influencing my traditional search habits and most likely many others. I’m beginning to question if these changes are for the better. As it is introduced into the mainstream, I am paying close attention to how my search habits and others begin to change. Have you noticed anything different? Is it better?

While its goals include “helping to formulate queries, reduce spelling errors, and saving users keystrokes,” I’m concerned that relevancy is being sacrificed for instant gratification. Default searching has swayed audiences for years because the attention span of the average users doesn’t go much beyond the first page. Now we have to worry about the expanded power of default suggestions which may not get our content past the search box. As marketers will our messages become buried, ignored, or outranked? Let’s dig in, compare, and see how search is being redefined.

For instance, if I’m on a mission to research XYZ, at first pass, I’m happy that all things beginning XYZ will be proposed. However if I’m searching more broadly for XYZ, my attention will not be brought to many other relevant key word searches where XYZ may be the second of third word in the search. Sounds like a great way to keep the SEO experts employed.

Using the same scenario, let’s make “search engines” the object of our research and start with the word “search” on Yahoo and Google Suggest.

Yahoo auto suggested: google search, people search, google search engine, job search, and search the web, in that order.

Google’s first five suggestions were: search engines (70.5 million results), search engine (259 million results), searching for bigfoot (158,000 results), and search engine optimization (27 million results), and search rapidshare (31.4 million results).

My search is now heavily influenced by the options in front of me.

On Yahoo, I ironically gravitated toward a name brand like Google and moved my search down the road of “google search engine.” The top result returned was Google.

On Google, I was so attracted to the immense results that “search engine” yielded that I abandoned the plural for the singular. Dogpile a search site I’ve never heard of before was surprisingly in the coveted #1 spot. I’m totally impressed that it beat out Google on a Google search.

Clearly, the algorithms of searching are so complex that the search engines aren’t even returning themselves as the best or highest search result. If “Everybody’s doing It” and the currency of the web is backed by the mantra “In Google We Trust,” then this new Google feature can not be ignored. Instead it adds to the already numerous variables in play for grabbing the attention of users online.

Today I learned the subtle yet powerful influences a first word and huge Google results yield. As we continue to compete for relevancy, we now also need to compete for suggestion. Maybe it’s time to switch careers and get into SEO.

What do you think of Google’s switch? Was it so subtle you didn’t even notice it? Do you currently factor online marketing and search results into your Public Relations campaigns? If not, will you in the future?

How ’bout this for a couple of loaded questions . . . “What is the value of developing a law firm’s brand/identity?” How has the creation of a brand/identity resulted in benefits for your law firm?”

When those questions were posed to the Legal Marketing Association’s listserv last week I expected a hearty debate. I was disappointed. Maybe it’s because most of us who’ve been in the biz for a few years know that a firm has a brand whether you value it or not. It’s embedded in culture, service and practice. Sometimes by design, most times not. And, whether you recognize benefits from it, (shouldn’t a brand benefit your clients, too?) well, that is directly related to how cognizant you are of its existence and how well you design and manage the moving parts. As marketers, one of those moving parts is communicating the brand. And that, my friends, is easier said than done.

So, let’s look at this a little deeper. For the most part, brands are determined by a few small hurdles; e.g. whether or not you can get 1,000 partners to agree on orange and whether or not you can get 1,000 partners to agree that the firm is, for example, “Results Driven” (Snicker). Then, if you are lucky enough to produce some well-designed collateral material or clever ad campaign that uses an orange gorilla to demonstrate that the firm is “Results Driven,” you can report to the partners that the firm is now BRANDED. You have designed your collaterals and by default you design your brand. Well, not really.

Today, BusinessWeek online reported that Coke has a new design direction. In the article I found a few good design lessons that law firms might take to heart. At the very least it is food for thought and comment. Not to mention that the new designs are fantastic and you can design your own bottle on the Coca Cola Web site.

Here’s a summary of my learnings. When David Butler, now V.P of Design, joined Coca-Cola (KO) he was told, “We need to do more with design. Go figure it out.” He drew up a 30-page manifesto. Then he did something different, he avoided the word “design” as much as possible. Instead he met with the manufacturing people to talk about the benefits of smart design. ‘How can we make the can feel colder, longer?’ or ‘How can we make the cup easier to hold?'” And he talked to the bottling partners. And surprise, he talked to customers about their experience buying a Coke from a vending machine.

….he found a lot that needed fixing. Coca-Cola was a global company with 450 brands, more than 300 different models of vending machines, innumerable bottling and retail partners, and no consistent global design standards. It wasn’t that the company had forgotten about design altogether. In fact, “our mission was to be innovative in any aspect that we could. We had this gigantic canvas.”

The article goes on to say that although their agency came up with “lots of interesting projects: the Coke Cruiser (a scooter with a cooler at its front conceived as a mobile vendor at festivals or concerts) as well as a tasting salon, a retail environment where people could sample a new drink like Coke Zero,” many of them never made it beyond the concept stage. Bummer, eh?

In the end ……

. . .for Butler, the lesson was to avoid cool concepts that would never see the light of day. Instead of generating ideas and then trying to find a place for them, Butler addressed his efforts on identifying basic problems that design can solve. His strategy has focused on three areas critical to Coca-Cola—brand identity, user experience, and sustainability. [emphasis added]

So what are the lessons a law firm can learn from the most widely recognized brand in the world? Instead of generating ideas, trying to find a place for them, and then convincing a tough partnership it all makes sense, focus on three critical areas: Brand Identity – know thyself; User Experience – let your clients be your guide; Sustainability –what really matters to your clients can determine your legacy.

Can design solve problems? I think it can. Can law firms design their brand? If so, what problems can a good brand solve? Can a well-designed brand help clients find you, know you, make a purchasing decision, ease the process? What do you think?

Easier said than done, but valuable for sure.

This seems to be the message of an article in this week’s National Law Journal, which was called to our attention by Ann Lee Gibson in her new Law Firm Competitive Intelligence blog.

Noting an increase in the reliance of law firm marketing efforts on competitive intelligence research, the author, marketing partner of the Texas law firm Winstead, frets about the extent to which fact-finding on the internet through diverse sources such as Facebook and personal Web sites may constitute unethical intrusion into the lives and activities of firm marketing prospects.

Ann dispenses with most of these concerns in an extensive post.

Frankly, I was never worried if some law firm or other firm CI manager was going to use my musical Web site or Linked In profile to gain questionable information about my firm’s marketing tactics or business development prospects. However, I have begun to recognize that promoting the use of social networking and other self-informational sites for business development has its downside.

The partnership of Martindale.com and Linked In has a persuasive effect on the use factor of these tools. For one thing, it enables Martindale.com to claim a social network function without having to build their own, and may cause lawyers and law firms to expand their “Martindale footprint” by participating in Linked In.

It also may cause lawyers who have been substituting social networking for a Martindale.com profile to reconsider exiting entirely. After all, why give up the credibility of a Martindale appearance if you can “double dip” the trust factor by going modern on Linked In and also being old school on Martindale.

Our partners Jayne Navarre and Heather Milligan have opined more extensively and more authoritatively on Linked In and Martindale here and here. And, like Ann Gibson, I find it silly to suppose that lawyers or their CI staff will slip over some moral or ethical line just to get an inside track on the possible legal services buys of a particular business or individual. (No cracks about PI lawyers, now, people.)

Still, when there are so many sites where we and our lawyers can “let it all hang out”, we certainly need to be wary of the same proprieties that we would need to recognize in a face-to-face networking venue. Be polite, be interesting, but keep the secret or strange stuff to yourself. ‘Nuff said.

Recently I participated in a twebinar on the subject of “Listening” where “Two ears and one mouth,” a shortened Epictetus quote was recycled throughout the sound bites and tweets. The entire quote is ““We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.” It got me thinking about the ratio of listening to speaking in different types of conversations I’ve observed. Here are some broad strokes of this quote taken to extremes:

When talking for both parties was significantly greater than listening these conversations became very one-sided. Both parties were so anxious to think of their next reply they failed to listen. If two people talk at each other no one hears anything and communication becomes a dead-end. Rarely does this stagnation inspire either party to move beyond the stalemate.

When listening was even with talking the conversation advanced but not with much depth. Answers in these types of conversations reveal that the both parties are somewhat disengaged. They rely on canned answers to keep the conversation at surface level. It’s a nice volley of words but little to no information is exchanged.

When listening was greater than talking, learning was taking place. This works best in the school years where kids are taught to be quiet and listen. Listening is after all a major tool for learning. After listening, students are instructed to go home and do some homework so the lessons sink in deeper. This basic communication dynamic must continue throughout life because it is critical to the learning process.

As business developers, it is even more important to listen twice as much as we speak. We are afterall in a service industry and good client service begins with “How may I help you?” In order to our jobs well we have to listen, ask, and listen again. Our audience wants us to understand their pain and locate areas where we may offer our skills. We can’t make bold proclamations that this CRM must be purchased for the firm or adding a new practice will raise revenue. We have to listen to the clients, the firm, and the marketplace before we can be heard credibly.

Attorneys all too often rush to produce a pitch book for a new client meeting with no due diligence. They are so eager to have a conversation that they forget to listen. Here’s a familiar scenario: “I don’t know if they need labor & employment; I’m a corporate attorney and I got the meeting. Let’s focus on my practice and throw in the general firm description.” Listening begins before the meeting.

In Heather’s earlier post “It’s My Reputation on the Line”, John Dent reminds those in the legal profession to do your homework. That really translates to listen! Listen to the newspaper, listen to our 10-K, listen to our press releases, listen to Google, and listen at the meeting. Please don’t assume!!!

Once the idea of listening becomes second nature to law firms and attorneys, I guarantee you the use of Web 2.0 will increase drastically. Why? Because you can be a fly on the wall and listen to what your audience is saying. You can once again have two ears and one mouth.

What do you think? My mouth is now shut and my ears are wide-open.

Wilmer Hale has leaped ahead of everyone with the recent launch of four associate blogs aimed at attracting recruits. In a brilliant move, the firm enlisted 4 associates in 4 different offices to officially blog about their life inside the firm and out. The Blog of LegalTimes reports:

They are meant to provide a glimpse into each associates life. Heather Hayes, Wilmer’s legal personnel and recruiting communications manager say recruits “want to have a good sense of what their life might be like were they to join us.” She says summer associates and other entry-level recruits often complain that it’s tough to distinguish one big firm from another. Hayes says the new blogs will hopefully help “personalize” Wilmer.

A quick review of the 4 blogs tells me she’s spot on. Here are posts from 2. You can see all four at WilmerHale Careers.

Kevin Chambers’ Blog | Washington
Home Ownership and Workload Balance
August 22, 2008 11:59 AM
|
It’s amazing how much I’ve changed during the course of our blogship. When first we met last month, I was a care-free attorney mixing it up in Washington, DC Today, I am a bona fide homeowner. Fortunately (at least for buyers) the DC real estate market has softened somewhat. Sorry, Ross [link to Ross’s real estate post] and we were able to find a home that we loved in a great neighborhood. The commute into the office will be longer, but that’s the price you pay when you move to the ‘burbs, I suppose. Consider yourself invited to our first cookout. What’s that you say? I haven’t really changed at all? Well I have a recently-delivered SkeeterVac box in my office that says you don’t know what you’re talking about. For you urban denizens, a SkeeterVac is a device powered by propane and, quite possibly, magic that attracts, vacuums and dehydrates (read: exterminates) mosquitoes, allowing one to reclaim a backyard. Brilliant! Or bunk. I’m not yet sure.

A few posts back I mentioned that I was balancing a considerable workload involving two of my larger matters. A third, long-dormant matter must have felt left out because it has risen from the grave and is now running full-tilt. A governmental agency has asked for a substantial amount of information and wants it in a week. Feel free to consider that my excuse for being absent from the blog for so long. As one of my colleagues put it, while the matter is burning pretty hot, we hope it won’t burn long. ……[more]

Julie Smolinski’s Blog | Palo Alto
Of Waves and Financings
August 15, 2008 09:22 AM
|
Posted by Julie Smolinski
Not to make my fellow NY blogger jealous, but getting to the beach from Palo Alto, or San Francisco if you live there, as many of my colleagues do, is a pretty easy matter. Sunday was a gorgeous, sunny day, so my husband and I decided to head to the ocean. Within an hour of making the decision to go to the beach, we were staring at the impressive expanse of the Pacific, feet in the sand. The water was cold, but the sun was warm. As my husband analyzed the quality of the waves—barrels everywhere, short and sweet, but too cold, I listened to them breaking on the beach. On our way back, we hit up Alice’s, a well-loved burger spot in the redwoods. Just thinking about it makes me hungry … grilled veggie burger (excellent, even for you non-veggie types), fries (watch out, when they say “garlic fries”, they really mean it), locally brewed beer, cheesecake … Mmmm!

But instead of telling you about my gluttonous Sunday night, perhaps you’d prefer to know what’s up at work, because, after all, that’s presumably what you care about if you’re reading this blog. I really hope you’re not reading it for entertainment, in which case I’d like to suggest some other activities you may find fun and exciting, e.g., ironing your socks, alphabetizing the items in your refrigerator, or watching C-SPAN. So, this week has been about three financings: closing a bridge financing, diligencing a Series-E round and running a Series A………[more]

I think this idea really has potential to replace the tired old attorney bio! You’ll notice that each blogger profile reads like a mini bio but you could also link out to something more traditional if you needed to, but essentially, the blog tells the story. Wouldn’t that be cool. Of course, the idea is not for everyone, but I think it could work. Really. More firms are using video clips to personalize recruiting or their messages from the chairman, but, while videos are nice they often seem scripted and too long. I like the immediacy and transparency of the blog idea.

Anybody out there think the same? Would it work? How far would you take it? What would or would you not do? If I were seeking representation for my business, I’d lean toward a firm where the attorney’s voice was personalized and the first line of impression.

Over 10 years ago I convinced the firm I was working for to incorporate real quotes from the attorneys into their bios, [example] {Example} talking, in their own voice, about why they practice law and what they do for their clients, etc. Today it’s become pretty commonplace to have the attorney quote on a Web bio. And I know it is effective. Clients and prospects have told me they remembered them. And just the other day, I heard about one progressive firm that is planning to write the whole attorney bio in first person. Nice touch. This type of breezy personal/professional blog on a firm Web site is perhaps even better. What do you think?

Maybe it’s a sign of maturing, but I don’t seem to hesitate to ask for help these days when I don’t know how to do something, or when I am overwhelmed. Some people might find that asking for help is a sign of weakness, or opens the door to criticism. I, however, have found it has deepened the relationships with the people who respond to my SOS; and has enhanced my reputation with those who get my “I’m not certain on that, let me do a little bit of research and I’ll get back to you later today.”

So, thanks to Jayne, Renee and Russ who answered my SOS and will be watching over the Cooler while I’m on vacation next week.

Feel free to follow me on Twitter or Facebook