In the day-to-day life of a legal marketer there always seems to be a battle to fight. Some are worthy of our blood, sweat and frustrations, while others are not. At the end of the day whether or not we go with Pantone 419u or 425u; engrave or off-set print; serve chicken or fish; include a client extranet button or not on the home page won’t make a difference in expanding the firm’s business.

However, fighting battles that don’t need to be fought can and will weaken my credibility (trust) with my lawyers. It’s simple client relations, yet time and again I see legal marketers duking it out over trivial matters: serif or san serif, is it period space, or period space space? (AP Style says one, but was happy to let that one go … for now).
I listen to my clients, guide them, and recommend actions that they can take. I listen some more, make alterations to my plan, and then move the ball forward a few yards. The more my clients trust and respect me, the more likely they are to accept my recommendations. It’s that simple.
That’s when the fun starts. We get to introduce client service interviews, client teams, strategic planning, CRM, SEO, blogs, and maybe some re-branding and a new website.
I have found that respect needs to be earned, and then earned again, and once again after that. I get to build on my successes. There is rarely a second chance to rebuild credibility, especially in a law firm. Once it is lost, it is gone.

For the past few days there has been some gossip swirling in my circles about Pillsbury, where I served as a Marketing Director in the LA office for several years. ATL is reporting that 15 attorneys have been laid off. I cannot confirm any of this. I can say that, if true, 15 attorneys, and what about the staff that supports them, have have lost their jobs in a tough economy.

Pillsbury isn’t the first firm in today’s economy, nor will they be the last, to right size, clean house, lay off, whatever you want to call it. However, behind the gossip are some shocked people wondering what they’re going to do.

It can happen to any of us.

As I said in my post Are You Redundant: what are you doing today to increase your value and strengthen your positions within your firms? What are you going to do today to avoid being seen as redundant?

I’m coming to see all of the surveys and rankings as just notches on the bed post. Look closely at the methodology, the actual numbers, what they choose to use and not use, and you have to wonder: WHY, OH WHY? I’m sure it has nothing to do with advertising.

American Lawyer Magazine, after the AmLaw 100 and AmLaw 200 issues, just released their “A-List” issue. Not to take anything away from the firms on the list, but what does this really mean? Are A-List firms better places to work? Are the clients more satisfied or loyal? Are the associates producing better work product? Oh, and lets not forget about the “staff.” Did they get raises this year?

On the surface, the A-List should be great places to work (Associate Satisfaction Ranks – check); better corporate citizens (Pro Bono Ranks – check); promoting diversity (Diversity Ranks – check); and making the partners rich (Revenue Per Lawyer Ranks – check).

While I am no Mark Greene or Ann Lee Gibson, taking a peek behind the methodology just raises more questions for me.

To come up with the A-List score, we double the points for both revenue per lawyer and pro bono and add them to the scores from the associate satisfaction and diversity surveys. Then we rank the firms by their total scores. The top 20 form the A-List.

I’m not sure why, but for the A-List the revenue and pro bono ranks are twice as valuable as associate satisfaction and diversity? Why is that? And what about all the incomplete surveys? And, are 10 responses enough to reach a valid conclusion on anything?

“Last year 164 firms had at least ten responses, which qualified those firms for a national ranking. The top-ranked firm gets a score of 200, and the bottom-ranked gets a score of 37 when we calculated the numbers,” p. 99, American Lawyer Magazine, July 2008.

As for revenue per lawyer, is this an indication of a more profitable or better run firm? Not according to Ann Lee Gibson’s article “Revenue Per Equity Partner— a Useful Metric of Law Firm Financial Performance”:

This article posits that the two revenue metrics used most often to describe law firms’ financial performance— gross revenue and revenue per lawyer—are not the only and perhaps not even the best revenue metrics to describe law firms’ operational and financial performance.

(skip)

The metric “revenue per equity partner” offers more useful and predictive information about a firm’s ability to produce revenue that actually winds up on the bottom line in partner profits.

I’m no math wizard, but the stats just aren’t adding up for me.

I’d call you to brag about my new iPhone, but it isn’t activated. Probably won’t be until later this afternoon. It looks cool, though.

So here’s the marketing angle. Why is Apple, the brand of brands, having such difficulty in launching a new product … again? Did you not learn anything the last time around? Did you not have the “what went right, what went wrong, what will we do different next time” meeting after last year’s bang-up launch?

I understand you tried to lock the phone down so it won’t work on other carriers, and that has lead to many of today’s problems. Tell me, how’s that working out for you? Challenge a nerd that you can’t break their system and you know they will. Call it the Gary Hart Syndrome. It seems the only thing you got for forcing immediate activation is lots of bad press.

The systems are crashing left and right, and the 1.0 users can’t upgrade. Now I’m hearing it’s a software bug that is keeping the phones from being activated. Ugh. I think you need to hire some of those guys from Gizmodo to help you out.

Some Casual Observations from the Front Lines
There were long lines of people camping out in front of the stores (I got there at 6:30 and was 33rd in line) for no reason, really. Why not allow people to pre-purchase or reserve? That would pace customers coming into the store over a couple days, and alleviate some of the back-up on the systems.

Where were all the “chiefs” who could do the problem solving this morning? While everyone in my store was really nice, poor Dave was just being run ragged: “Dave, I need a 16 white.” “Dave, I’ve never seen this on the screen before.” “Dave, I need a jawbone.” Dave had to problem solve and was one of only two people allowed in the stock room to get the phones.

This one’s for the guy I met at 6:30 this morning: Thanks for all the free water while we waited in line. Now, how about access to your bathrooms?

And finally, why all the upgrading hassles? Stop changing the rules mid-stream. I’ve been an AT&T customer since three or four phone companies ago. I’m on a family plan with three phones, two of which are eligible for upgrade. Yesterday I was told no problem using any of the upgrades for the iPhone for my number. Today there was a problem and I had to shell out an extra $200 for a phone that isn’t activated yet.

But it looks really good sitting on my desk.

In an eat-what-you-kill law firm culture, associates are the appetizer. They might keep us from starving, but when’s the last time you made a decision where to eat based on the appetizer?

Most associates are viewed as disposable by the big firms and are churned in and out. The leveraging required to make the numbers work will prevent most associates from joining the partnership track. The high cost and salaries of the associates requires that they be seen as valuable from day one; they’re just too expensive to “wait and see” if they’ll develop from students to lawyers. I remember a time when associates were given a couple tries at passing the bar. Not anymore. You’d better pass it the first time, or you’re out.

Yet, time and again we read in surveys how associates want “work-life balance,” interesting work, mentors, a pathway to partnership, etc. However, when there are good alternatives presented, associates are still lured away by the prospects of the $165k firm.

The National Law Journal has an article on local Southern California IP firm Knobbe Marten and their business model. Buried towards the end of the story is the impact the system has on the firm culture and associates:

[Washington, DC managing partner William] Zimmerman, who joined the firm out of law school in 1998, said its short partnership track has the added benefit of giving more responsibility to younger lawyers, such as taking depositions and participating in trials.

Most of the firm’s hires are first-year associates who stand a good chance of making partner within five years, [managing partner Steven] Nataupsky said.

Knobbe Martens has hired more than two dozen associates in the past year.

The firm boasts a more relaxed culture; most attorneys work, on average, seven hours a day and bill about 1,640 hours a year.

The catch: associate salaries of $150,000, which are below market rates. Some former associates, speaking on condition of anonymity, said pay was a factor in their decision to leave.

Granted, if I was 25-years old and $100,000 in debt I’d care what the other firm pays, but a few thousand here or there will not impact your life 10-15 years from now as much as your firm culture. And while Knobbe’s PPEP at $475,000 doesn’t begin to rival the AmLaw 25, you have to admit it’s not a bad living for a 35-hour work week.

Seth Godin in his blog post today questions why, if George Costanza of Seinfeld fame has a Wikipedia page, shouldn’t your brand receive entries? My first reaction: sounds like a good idea to me. After all, I’m a legal marketer, not a lawyer.

I know that several law firms already have Wiki pages, including Latham, Skadden and Pillsbury. Several more have set up LinkedIn pages, including Skadden, Weil Gotshal and Dewey Ballantine. And while I am always eager to jump out in front of a new trend, lawyers are by nature cautious, weary of change, and definitely don’t want to go first.

As we coax our law firms and lawyer into the new frontier of Web 2.0 I sometimes wonder if “not right now” is the best answer as WE discuss: Should I promote the firm on Wikipedia? Does the firm need a LinkedIn profile? Do we need to open a branch in Second Life?

I’m not advocating a return to the era and comfort of ecru stationary, nor do I advocate waiting to see what O’Melveny does prior to making a decision (ask me about the light up pen story another time).

I have found, after spending 10 years as a legal marketer, I need to edit my enthusiasm for anything new around my partners. While they are willing to take a leap of faith with me, they would just rather wait until a few other firms have taken that one giant step first.

I just heard the wonderful news that Martindale-Hubbell & LinkedIn have hooked up. Not that kind of hooked up, the good kind that makes legal marketers like me scramble an e-mail out to all of her attorneys gushing about their products.

If you haven’t heard the good news, Martindale.com is now featuring LinkedIn social networking functionality.

Kevin O’Keefe broke the news here. And while Doug Cornelius finds it clunky, I just have to say Mazel Tov to the new couple.

Dell #1 in Laptops. Splashy headline in the ad on the front page of today’s WSJ. “Dell Laptops named the preferred choice for U.S. businesses,” the ad continues. Says who? The ad doesn’t say. I assume they have some inventory statistic to support that claim. My experience with #1 Dell Laptops was enough to make me switch back to Mac.

It made me think of the law firms who paste accolades on their home pages of Web sites. The only difference is that they reference the publication or peer group who says its so. Seems like a legitimate way to tell visitors why they should hire you. “These publications and peers think we’re really great and you’re going to want to be our client too.” (ha ha ha)

“Did we mention we’re #1 in Customer Satisfaction seven years running*?” says Wachovia’s Web site, billboards, ads, etc. Four years ago I put my money, and my trust, in Wachovia based on “*the American Customer Satisfaction Index results of the largest U.S. retail banks.” (ha ha ha.)

What does #1 mean anymore? If that’s what it is, I don’t want it.

Wachovia may satisfy a lot of customers but my experience with them has been any thing but satisfying. In fact, it must be that all banks have a 30% satisfaction index and Wachovia has a 30.5% satisfaction index –therefore they are number one. Among a number of frustrating experiences with the bank over the years, too numerous and painful to mention here, I think I’ve reached the tipping point.

For example; my “small business specialist” never picks up the phone, nor does he return calls. The “Financial Center Manager” at my branch never picks up the phone either. I’m always switched over to a mechanical voice prompting me through the commands till I finally get to a person. More often than not, the person transfers me to someone who can help me. But that’s never the end of it. I have been given incomplete or erroneous information several times and I had to go back through the drill on another day. More than once I was given a different answer to the same situation. Yesterday the operator told me the reason I wasn’t able to get a person to answer the phone at the branch was due to a special rate CD offer the bank was running. And everyone is really busy. WOW! That’s customer satisfaction – for the lucky person that actually gets to speak to someone. Perhaps if my question had a commission attached to it I might get a better response.

Is this what happens at the #1 law firms? I think it’s pretty scary to place yourself in that box. What happens when you don’t deliver? Does it do more harm than good to boast?

So, what do you think? Do you use rankings and accolades to market your firms? Does it leave an impression on visitors – if so do you know? Has it ever come back to haunt you when some one finds out you aren’t really what the numbers and accolades say you are? Is it authentic to publicize those rankings? Does it scare you when the lawyers want you to promote those?

Equally as important, does it matter? In today’s ABA Online Journal there is this item about Kevin Renfro and the Becker Law Office running a promotion at a local gas station on the first day of Kentucky’s gas tax hike: 99 cents a gallon for gas.

Apparently led to do this by their PR firm, the Louisville law firm gained a kind of populist notoriety by “slamming the man” and helping 250 drivers beat the high cost of gas, including the tax increase. Except, they didn’t. The law firm actually paid the high price of gas and the tax, but their beneficiaries didn’t.

So, this is the dilemma, I think. Shall we reduce marketing to slight of hand stunts where there is an apparent popular benefit and coordinate name recognition for the mere chance for a face-to-face fillup with a potential client or shall we, as others around the water cooler say below, aim at higher strategic ground?

Isn’t the answer obvious? Law firms can continue to buy the brief attention of their market with advertising, publicity gimmicks, giveaways, events, stunts and, egad, seminars, or they can actually learn something about their marketplace by asking their clients and prospects what it is they need and fitting their service array to those actual facts and requirements.

Please, no more 99-cents gas. I’m getting indigestion.