A Blog About Law Firms And Their Clients

This post is a bit off subject to how I might normally approach the topic of business intelligence, however, in the context of finding “actionable insights” from mainstream media this post should fit right into a discussion of why mainstream media newspapers and many publications are not only not a good source for business intelligence, but neither do many of these sources align their stories with the interest of mainstream America.  Today, while traveling cross country, I picked up a Wall Street Journal (WSJ).  Granted, the title of the publication after all  is “The Wall Street Journal,” but does that mean that its content should be irrelevant to 90% of its prospective readers –everyday business people?  Shouldn’t the publication at least try to appeal some of those on “Main Street” and not only Wall Street?  After all, last I checked small businesses account for something like 80-90% of employers.  It’s this segment that is expected to drive growth.  And, don’t individual investors make up much of the investing pie in this country?

I first started to read the WSJ in the 80’s when I was in college.  I recall there used to be at least attempt at appealing to the masses, interesting stories on small business, leadership, etc.  Not to mention, there may even be a competitive insight gained having read a well thought out column that a competitor of mine may have overlooked.  I think the point I am trying to make can illustrated be easily illustrated by simply looking at the titles of the various stories within the WSJ.  A sampling of headlines from today:

Front Page/Main Section Headlines:

“At UBS, Chief Pushes New Cuts” — not applicable to most small business

“Fed to Fix Flaws of Regional Boards” — again, how is this important to 80% of folks?

“One Man’s Zoo Turns Into a Killing Field” — story covered by just about every major newspaper in the country today.  Shouldn’t my $2.50 journal offer a bit more than a filler article that was a breaking story on every major news station this morning (why, I don’t know?  But that may be another post.)?

“Advice on how to clean up the housing mess” — heard this many times over.

Market Place Section (a space where I used to read about interesting case studies of sorts — analyzing new technology, management techniques, etc.):

“Groupon Discounts IPO” — this is great news for who?

“Expenses Fell Mercedes Boss” — great if you are buying a Mercedes.  Not really in most of our budgets.

“Is that Warhol Fake?”– really, in Marketplace we are talking about Andy Warhol’s silkscreen?

“Slow Start for TV’s X Factor” — hmmm, and a business person would care why?

“Microsoft & Others work on Yahoo Bid” — great, huge acquisition, newsworthy if you have a very big interest in either company.

“Apple Celebrates Steve Jobs” — a very worthy article.  The man was a living legend.  If WSJ ran an article or leadership series highlighting his career for three months, I’d read it.

“Big Abbot Charge Tied to Marketing”

“Google Touts Android” — why wouldn’t they?

Oh, here’s my favorite — finally, in Small Business (last page of Marketplace section), there’s “Retailers Brace for Holidays,” small merchants worry they won’t survive another season of heavy discounts.   Basically, the only item published that is directly applicable will introduce fear for small business retailers.  How about some advice as to how marketing tactics for small firms should change in tough economic climates?

Money & Investing Section:

“SAC Capital Faces Probe” — and why I care?

“Citi to Pay $285 Million to settle fraud charge”

Oh, and the journal even has a sport’s section, which features an article on “Have Goalies in NHL become too dominant?”  Why is the WSJ writing about anything related to sports?

There’s probably several issues implicit in this post worth discussing, but the one that probably matters to the readers of this blog, “A Blog About Law Firms And Their Clients,‘  would be a discussion as to whether there is any worthy business intelligence in major publication that you (lawyer or business development person) could use to develop a “unique” insight around a client – large or small?  I am having a difficult time believing so, and herein lies my conjecture: true market intelligence or worthy insights (strategic, competitive or otherwise) no longer exist in major media, or at least not that often, and, if so, the stories are disseminated so quickly that bringing to a client would not be seen as an advantage.  Rather, unique insights are in the thousands of blogs specific to your perspectives and interest (industry, practice, competitive or otherwise), not to mention new social media sources — Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn.  While we (business professionals) are not necessarily accustomed to monitoring these as a profession, I would argue it’s here you will find the insights that can be leveraged in conjunction with many of your firm’s initiatives to track client trends, competitive intelligence and developing issues.

Having been a part of several early stage companies, I once aspired to be in the WSJ.  Candidly, I am not so sure what this would get us now.  Probably a moot point– not sure WSJ editors will have much interest in a story on Manzama at this juncture.  This said, if by the off chance the WSJ decided to take my opinion head on, I’d be happy to respectfully share my opinion as a small business person that has helped to create jobs in a in a depressed economy, and, I may even blog about it, even if my opinion were ultimately changed or altered.

Peter

Manzama – Social Media; Beyond The Basics

With all the “buzz” on social media, it’s likely to sour marketing professionals when they are unable to ascertain and measure results.  While there’s definitely a growing concern to leverage social media within the legal profession, it’s often tough to translate into a working result for the busy professional and/or business development tasks of those within law firms.  My philosophy is not to sell it, but show and illustrate how others have benefited.   In our society, our natural tendencies are to compete, hence I think it’s more important not to discuss the virtues and potential value gains from blogging, tweeting and participating in social networks such as LinkedIn.  Just give me the testimonials – then I know efforts have translated to value.

On a related note, I hope to share some of these insights as I present side-by-side various clients in a host of social media events over the next several months, please feel free to join us at any of the following events:

Finally, we hope to see you at the many conferences we’ll be presenting/speaking at in the not too distant future:

September 15^th, Law Marketing Association’s Technology Conference/ Social Media Use Case, Peter Ozolin, CEO, to present (SF);

September 21^st, Social Media and Law: Beyond The Basics Panel, Peter Ozolin Panel Member (NY, Hilderbrandt Institute)

September 23^rd, Law Marketing Association’s Southern California Regional Meeting (LA, Manzama a sponsor;

January 18^th – 20^th, Marketing Partner’s Forum: GCs and Social Media Panel , Peter Ozolin, CEO, Panel Member (Miami)

Adrian is a gifted writer and he is also has an ability to see trends within the profession.  His latest article that appeared in the National Law Journal, discusses the “Evolving Lawyer,” and correctly identifies pressures to change and “evolve” as he puts started with solos and smaller firms.  These lawyers are evolving because of competitive pressures, not out of a desire to change, ie, the “Legal Zooms” of the world are encroaching.  His analysis causes me to pause and speculate — do I see the same happening in large law?  Well, yes of course.  It appears this trend toward AFAs, Fixed Fees is not going away, rather, the need to innovate is continuing — hence “productizing” ones offering is continuing to happen, even in large law.  There’s another, less well understood dynamic that’s emerging and it’s more social from where I sit.  Namely there’s an independence that people have become more and more accustomed to with the freedom that blackberry’s, cell phones, internet, chat, video all lend to the equation.  I am familiar with more than one firm that is quite comfortable with lawyers working in a contracting capacity from home, perhaps as a way to still be the big firm, without all the “big” cost, but also at play here is people — they recognize that there’s little that separate work from the personal, hence, they are expecting that the merging of these two once separate existences, is now undergoing a merger, and part of that benefit means more time with family.  Well, at least the ability to work from home, does not necessarily imply one is present, but seeing your kids for lunch once in awhile during the week can go a long ways toward the productivity/commitment level of an employee, not to mention their happiness.

In any event, here’s a link to the article I referenced: Evolving Lawyer.

Peter

Hello All,

This past week I had the opportunity to attend Marketing Partner’s Forum (gathering of 300-500 CMO/Managing Partner types from law firms of all sizes, although most were in NLJ 250).  The event proved to have some useful content — including sessions by Ann Lee Gibson (Consultant) and Kevin McMurdo (CMO, Perkins Coie) that dealt with Law Firm RFP response strategy, and a hands on workshop (with an element of self-assment).  Likewise, there was a good session on Social Media, where panelist shared some pratical advice/experience they have had in “mining” and assessing information in the public domain.  I was pleased that Manzama was referenced more than once in this session.  Law Marketing Partner Forum Leader, Larry Bodine, took some time to visit our booth, and had the following to share on his blog. 

Overall, there seemed to be a more general sense of optimism from the leaders of the law firms represented, and that was encouraging on a whole — not just for Manzama, but for the fact that innovating and leading are what set our economy apart — it’s not easy to get back on that horse given this last recession, but at the same time we are  society/culture that’s difficult to suppress (on more levels than one).  Looking forward to the remainder of 2011.

Regards,

Peter

This is a great article from Venture Beat as to social media trends (Why Everything Will Become Connected).  I was most interested in comments as they pertain to search and retrieval of information — the trend is the information will now find you and be shared.  Here’s an excerpt worth considering:

“Sharing is the new search — While Google will continue to prosper in 2011, the role of “sharing” in how people discover information, deals, and products is changing how we search and what we search for. News finds us. Fun, entertaining content finds us. Deals and discounts find us.

In fact, from our own research across Meteor Solutions’ customers, we found that influencers –- those who share your campaigns across their social graph –- can directly influence 40 to 60 percent of all visits to an advertising campaign page. More and more, people will get product information through the social graph –- instead of directly from a brand advertiser. Search will remain the most efficient way for people to find something specific, but sharing will become the most efficient way for relevant, useful, and entertaining content to find us.”

Full story can be found by clicking here.

The stats are out there — blogging among AMLAW 200 is on the rise.  As one partner in an AMLAW 200 firm indicated that sent along this article “As much as I hate to admit it, this suggests …… use the new social media might just be relevant to buyers of legal services.”

A few days ago, Benzinga.com reported on a survey that asked corporate execs and their in-house counsel about their hiring practices when it came to retaining outside law firms.  The survey was conducted by Greentarget Strategic Communications, ALM Legal Intelligence and Zeughauser Group and underscored a growing trend among a large number of the attorneys who serve in these corporate legal departments, particularly those responsible for vetting and hiring law firms.  Strikingly, one of the factors taken into consideration and a determining one in who gets the company’s business is whether the law firm has a blog.

In addition to the blog factor, the Benziga piece pointed out social platforms, such as Facebook, LinkedIn, and even Twitter, as tools that are being utilized in the hiring process.

All this points in one direction – the lines between personal and professional use of traditionally “private” web-based social forums are becoming more indistinct.  Attention firms: on your mark, get set and tweet.

Below are a couple of post that discuss the regulation of law firm blog content by State Bar Associations.  This is another indication where institutions just don’t get it.  The future of marketing will be build on social frameworks and dialogue and the sooner law firms engage in the practice the sooner they will be in a position to manage their brands.  State Bars should just get out of the way.  The Groundswell (see book, excellent read) is here to stay.

1.       See Adrian Dayton’s post at

ABA, Social Media and a time to Panic - http://adriandayton.com/2010/11/aba-social-media-and-a-time-to-panic/

2.       Also check out the AVVO blog at

http://avvoblog.com/2010/11/05/should-state-bars-regulate-marketing/

“Should State Bars Regulate Marketing?“

For as long as I can remember, lawyers have resisted investing in business development, except for the few lawyers that are considered “rainmakers.”  I am not pretending to be an expert on rainmaking, etc, but I think the fear ultimately stems from not knowing how to sell or conduct proper outreach — fundamentally, it’s about letting the clients know you are thinking about them.  The below, albeit a bit dated, does a good job of discussing the new and evolving paradigm of business development….

Lawyers see the time is ripe for some business education

Philadelphia Business Journal – by Jeff Blumenthal

With the recession reducing available revenues, more law firms are instructing their partners to obtain business development training.

Chuck Polin of Training Resource Group has been running such programs for lawyers for 17 years. He said the difference now is that firms are sending large groups of lawyers to be trained and holding specific lawyers accountable for their subsequent performance.

“I have never seen firms really hold lawyers accountable,” Polin said. “But now, if you can’t perform, there might be repercussions. I have even seen some firms threaten to revoke equity partnership status in a couple cases. If firms are deciding which lawyers to keep, this could be a deciding factor. That’s never happened before.”

Polin has worked with one multipractice firm with more than 300 lawyers that had a 14-lawyer labor and employment practice that was sent to him because it was not profitable. He encouraged the group to ask clients if they could review their employee handbooks free of charge to determine if there were any issues that might leave the company vulnerable to lawsuits. That led to work helping clients fix those problems and the group was able to generate $1 million in additional revenue from existing clients in a totally new area.

Traditionally at law firms, Polin said, 20 percent of the lawyers generate 80 percent of the business. But with top producers seeing a revenue production decline during the recession, firms need contributions from more lawyers.

Martin Belisario, partner at 20-lawyer intellectual property firm Panitch Schwarze Belisario & Nadel <http://philadelphia.bizjournals.com/philadelphia/related_content.html?topic=Panitch%20Schwarze%20Belisario%20%26%20Nadel> , said his firm began working with Polin two years ago. The firm had just spun off from 900-lawyer Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld <http://profiles.portfolio.com/company/us/dc/washington/akin_gump_strauss_hauer___feld_llp/1207106/>  and no longer had the resources of a large firm to create business opportunities. In addition, two or three of the seven partners were reaching retirement age. While he had a solid practice, Belisario is part of a second generation of partners who felt they needed to step up their business getting game. So he and two other partners began working weekly with Polin and he also sent six associates to a lighter version of the program.

“Most of us are engineers by trade and I never took a marketing class in my life,” Belisario said. “At the start, he gives each person a psych exam to assess their ability to generate business.”

Belisario said Polin can then tell him which lawyers will need a lot of work and which ones simply need to change certain behaviors. Belisario fell into the latter category. One suggestion he took from Polin was switching some of the professional organizations to which he belongs to focus on specific ones that could generate business.

“I recently looked at the firm’s 25 newest clients and nine of them were mine,” Belisario said. “A lot of those clients I got through suggestions that came during training.”

Jeff McCarron, managing partner of Swartz Campbell, a 110-lawyer insurance defense litigation firm based in Philadelphia, said a group of core business-getters began working with Polin last year. The firm followed with training for younger partners and combined the two groups for monthly visits to the firm’s offices by Polin, who works with between 20 and 30 lawyers per session.

McCarron said as the recession negatively affected revenue, the firm cut some personnel and implemented other cost savings but felt it needed to squeeze more business generation out of a wider swath of lawyers.

“Claims are down and litigation is down in some areas, so we encouraged our partners to focus,” he said. “Our firm has been around since 1924 and we have been able to live off institutional business passed down from generation to generation. And we can no longer rely on that in this environment.”

Schnader Harrison Segal & Lewis <http://profiles.portfolio.com/company/us/nj/cherry_hill/schnader_harrison_segal___lewis_llp/1371319/>  litigator Theresa Loscalzo was a service partner — one skilled at doing the work but lacking his or her own business — at the firm when the economy slumped in the early 2000s. Service partners are always viewed as expendable during recessions so Loscalzo decided to get some training to learn how to generate her own clients.

“Some of the things that are taught are so self-evident that you wonder whether you actually needed to take a course to learn it,” Loscalzo said. “But I did need to take a course. One idea was asking current clients for referrals or additional work. The results were almost immediately positive.”

Loscalzo recommended the program to firm Chairman David Smith who said Schnader Harrison had success in sending specific individuals but not so much when it sent lawyers indiscriminately rather than figuring out which ones would most benefit from the training.

“Some people were unable to take advice or didn’t care to take it,” Smith said. “Those who were willing and able to learn did well.”

Read more:  Lawyers see the time is ripe for some business education – Philadelphia Business Journal <http://philadelphia.bizjournals.com/philadelphia/stories/2010/05/24/story9.html?b=1274673600%5E3386561&ana=e_vert#ixzz0orzeaPtf>

Throughout my career I have always tried to sense — what’s the next big change or wave to occur in technology.  The    “Internet revolution,” and I am choosing my words deliberately, was just that — every aspect of communication was impacted as the framework of the web came together in a commercial sense.  I was fortunate to ride the wave forward and participate in this window of time that allowed for widespread creativity and paradigm shifts (young technology folks were able to avoid the corporate ladder — myself included).   Since then, there have certainly been breakthrough companies/models (Google, Amazon, etc).  However, it has not been until recently that I have sensed another groundswell, which I think many folks sense as well — what I like to call the bottom up revolution or the “voice” of the internet (blogs, twitter, facebook, etc).  It’s exciting to see that big companies and Corporate America alone cannot dictate the results of how businesses are perceived.  It’s not what you say about you, it’s what “Google” says about you.  This is just the beginning folks — your online brand, reputation programs are at their infancy — as the web move to greater interactivity (video, web cams), so will marketing and client/customer interactions.  I’ll leave this post with a look at an interesting article I came across in brandweek, a bit dated, but illustrates the point:

http://www.brandweek.com/bw/content_display/news-and-features/digital/e3i6f1a697eee327ba0e15676d4aea4263c