Legal Marketing Blog

In this economy, client satisfaction surveys are more important than ever. In covering this topic many times, I have emphasized the value of improving relationships with current clients and referrals sources. The value is obvious, more business in the form of new matters and additional referrals.

There are two main reasons why you should currently be asking your clients for feedback:

• Your competitors are asking your clients, and
• Your clients may be wondering why you aren’t.

An article by Martha Candiello in the March issue of the ABA’s Law Practice Today webzine tells us that those reasons are why client feedback interviews are so necessary. Not just for the reasons mentioned above, but also because it can lead to more work as a result.

Candiello also shares her insight on how to make a client interview program successful. Previously, she was both an in-house corporate counsel, and later director of general counsel relations at Reed Smith.

Her keys to effective client interviews include:

1. Develop internal support for the program by starting with a pilot program involving some willing partners;
2. Publicize successes and favorable comments by clients;
3. Overcome false perceptions by partners that they already “know what clients think about firm,” or clients “are too busy” to participate, etc.;
4. Ask in-depth questions about clients’ experience beyond “how are we doing?”;
5. Send someone other than the responsible partner to do the interviewing (e.g., managing partner, senior marketing staff person or outside consultant) to ensure candid and accurate information; and
6. Prompting respond to any client concerns expressed, even if solutions are not exactly what the client is looking for.

Your firm really needs to do this. As Candiello points out:

“As more firms institute such programs and evolve existing programs to capture even more of their clients’ attention, a firm without a first-rate program is disadvantaged because it is not effectively capitalizing on its client relationships and investment. Once you’ve seen the results of a client interview program, you’ll wonder why you didn’t start one sooner.”

The good news is that some firms are doing client feedback programs; the bad news is that they aren’t really getting the feedback they need. That is, the feedback questions are superficial, and don’t really offer the kinds of return that will actually benefit the firm in retaining the client over the long haul.

An article posted on the BrandThinking blog by Sue Allison contends that a firm’s feedback program may not actually “lead to satisfied clients.”

The Problem. Although 64% of the marketers in AmLaw 200 firms would like to conduct meaningful feedback programs in 2010, according to Allison “they’re having trouble selling the concept to attorneys and firm leaders who already believe they are doing client feedback.” (emphasis mine) But are they?

What a Feedback Program Is Not:

• Conducting just 12 client interviews (one per month) over a year;
• Fluid in terms of what questions are asked vs. structured questions to get at any in-depth problems with the relationship; and
• Thinking that by merely keeping in touch with a client, that will assure that the lawyer will “know if there were a problem.”

What is Needed:

• A “Continuous Client Value Program” that assures that “your clients feel your firm is really listening and acting to solidify the relationship,” and
• Conducted by an in-house staff person or lawyer not involved with a client’s matters, or an outside third party in order to increase the likelihood of getting candid feedback.

Law firm’s need to ensure that their client feedback program is one that really works, and not come across to clients as lame or insincere.

If you don’t know, shame on you. The most important element in marketing and business development is assuring the most solid, close, concrete, rock-solid, meaningful, close up, personal, etc., etc. (you get the drift) client relationships possible. If that is NOT your main focus, double shame.

Yesterday’s (today’s is below) “marketing meditation” from my good friend Larry Smith and his colleague Richard Levick at Levick Strategic Communications is:

“What keeps your clients up at night? This is the bulls eye (emphasis mine) of marketing. If you don’t know the answer, you are not marketing. You’re just busy.”

HMMM!

Knowing your clients business and his/her concerns relating thereto should be your apex. If you don’t understand that, you are really missing the boat.

Oh yeah, today’s missive from 365 Marketing Meditations: Daily Lessons For Marketing & Communications Professionals by Larry and Richard is:

“Law is about precedents, accounting is about rules, banking is about old relationships. But marketing is about being first” (again, emphasis is mine)

… in client relationships, I might add.

Meditations are good for the soul, and for developing business it would appear.

Paul Lippe of Legal OnRamp has an excellent piece in yesterday’s The AmLaw Daily which supports what I wrote about last week on the subject (I love it when really smart people confirm one of my viewpoints – notice I only said “one”).

Paul points out that ratings will happen whether law firms like it or not, and, in fact, always have (albeit less formalized) in the form of word-of-mouth ratings. And, just because the ACC Value Index evaluations can be negative, and not just positive (like Martindale-Hubbell, Super Lawyers, Chambers, Best Lawyers in America, et al.) doesn’t change a thing. If a rating system is an “effective” rating system, such will “provide clients and firms with information that helps them (both) do their job better,” according to Paul.

As I mentioned in my earlier post:

”The solution to all of this is quite simple. Talk to your clients. Ask them how you're doing. Correct any problems. Then the evaluations will take care of themselves."

Or as Paul puts it:

“If firms are worried about negative, but anonymous, assessments, they should be getting the feedback directly from clients before the ACC does.”

Take a look at his article where he lays out nine suggestions on what a “trusted rating system” might look like. If ratings are based on many of those, maybe the “fussing” will go away – certainly that would be the case for those law firms that get it and are talking with their clients now. 

As reported in today's The AmLaw Daily some "Law Firms Cautious About ACC Ranking System." You may recall that the Association of Corporate Counsel announced their Value Index at last month’s annual meeting in Boston; and that it involves ranking outside law firms "based on evaluations from in-house lawyers." Apparently a number of firms aren't too happy about that, and the anonymous nature of the evaluations.

Is it because they won't see the evaluations, or because they're being evaluated in the first place, that their unhappy?

Two thoughts come to mind. The chance that these evaluations will not be seen by outside law firms is nil. Even in-house counsel think that the outside law firms will get their hands on their evaluations. Why else would two thirds of them ask that their evals remain anonymous? So, it's a foregone conclusion that law firms we'll get to see their evaluations. Guaranteed. All they will need is one friendly in-house counsel.

Thus, it seems clear to me what firms may not like is the fact that they are being evaluated in the first place; and they may not like the evaluations, and the fact they don't know who made them. Some consultants have even suggested that law firms “get even” by starting their own value index of in-house counsel. What bloody nonsense. I hope they were kidding. Just what a law firm needs, getting into a pissing match with the sources of its business.

The solution to all of this is quite simple. Talk to your clients. Ask them how you're doing. Correct any problems. Then the evaluations will take care of themselves.

O-K-A-Y, I know it isn’t quite that simple. But, too few law firms even seek client feedback, and they should be very concerned about the evaluations they’ll receive. They could make a huge step toward favorable evals, if they institutionalized a client satisfaction program. End of fuss.

The Association of Corporate Counsel (ACC)’s Value Index was announced and shared with members at last month’s annual meeting in Boston. As reported in my earlier post, the criteria for measuring outside law firm’s performance is based on a grading system from 1 (poor) to 5 (excellent) relating to the following service areas:

1. Understands Objectives/Expectations
2. Legal Expertise
3. Efficiency/Process Management
4. Responsiveness/Communication
5. Predictable Cost/Budgeting Skills
6. Results Delivered/Execution

Joyce Smiley in her November issue of “Verbatim” relates that a key question is also part of the index; to wit: “Would you use this firm again?;” and the ACC encourages “law firms to adjust their client satisfaction criteria to match the Value Index.”

A wise move. Suffice it to say, every firm should ask at least their key clients how they stack up against those six criteria whether their in-house counsel belongs to ACC or not. And such inquiries should be made by the managing partner or an outside third party, but not the attorney(s) working on the clients’ matters. A firm is more likely to get honest answers that way.

In our fast-paced world, it seems like such availability is expected. Certainly, a partner at a BigLaw firm apparently thinks associates should, sorta. You can read about it on ABA Journal’s Law News Now and Above the Law. In a nutshell, a partner asked an associate to send a fax to a client before the latter left the office, but junior forgot to check his emails and never got the word.

My question to that partner is, “have you ever heard of the telephone?” If it was that important, why didn’t you pick up the damn phone and make sure it got done. Also, I don’t know about this guy, but I know I have failed to receive emails sent (or received them hours later – really) and others have not gotten some that I’ve sent.

But the issue is, do we really have to live our lives by the Blackberry or iPhone? Although in an earlier post I endorsed Dan Hull’s 12 Rules of client service, including “Be there for clients - 24/7,” I’m having second thoughts on the 24/7 part. Maybe it’s just because I’m getting tired of technology running my life.

Here's a couple of options (at least when it comes to clients):

• Set a time that you will read and respond to emails (maybe that research project shouldn’t be interrupted willy-nilly); and
• Tell clients that you will be checking and responding to emails at certain times during the day, but they should not hesitate to call if something is urgent.

Associates in BigLaw, you're on your own when it comes to firm emails.

There! I feel better, but I have to go. It’s approaching the hour, and I need to check my Blackberry.

In a down economy, more law firms are likely to fail for a number of reasons that might not cause their downfall in boom years. And the reasons can run from how the firm is managed to how it isn’t marketed.

Judd Kessler has an article in the October issue of the Texas Bar Journal in which he shares his “Six Simple Reasons Practices Fail.” Although the article is aimed at solo and small firm practices, the failures he addresses can easily be applicable to any size firm, just not as quickly. So, what are these “simple” reasons:

1. Poor planning and management of the firm’s finances,
2. Inadequate technology,
3. Ineffective leadership,
4. Poor management of staff and lawyers,
5. Lack of marketing planning and implementation, and
6. Inattention to client satisfaction.

Effective data systems can help resolve many of these issues according to Kessler, who is CEO of Abacus Data Systems, Inc.;  but, that doesn’t diminish one iota the value of his short article, and I commend it to your reading.

Of course, marketing and client service issues always seem to come last. Why is that I wonder? (but I digress). The value in effective marketing planning, according to Kessler lies in (a) “establishing a brand that builds awareness, loyalty, and trust;” and (b) differentiating your firm from the competition.

As to client service, I particularly like this comment:

“Clients don’t generally express their discontent. They often feel intimidated and avoid complaining directly. Yet dissatisfied clients are often the undoing of a healthy practice as repeat business declines, receivables go down, negative word of mouth swells, referrals fall, and most dangerously, ethics complaints are issued.”

The solution is so simple really. Successful firms communicate frequently, often, constantly, all the time…..you get the idea. And they do so by returning calls promptly and also keeping their clients abreast of what’s happening with their matter(s).

Avoiding these simple mistakes can go a long way in protecting a firm in these economic times.

We were taught in law school, especially as it relates to witnesses at trial or depositions, to not ask a question that we didn’t know the answer to. It’s a preparation thing - as in 90% preparation and 10% inspiration to take some liberty with an old adage. Unfortunately, some lawyers carry the concept over to their client relationships and marketing.

Not a good idea, as it is counterproductive in developing business and building client relationships. In addition, there is the “assumption-factor.” And that involves the thinking by too many of us that we can assume to know all there is to know about the clients’ businesses, concerns, values, and the clients’ knowledge about the firm. This is not only bad thinking, it is dangerous as well.

Both of these concepts are addressed by Janet Stanton in the current issue of Adam Smith, Esq.’s newsletter where she talks about “The Power of Asking.” She tells an interesting story of what Sloan-Kettering discovered when it sought a better “understanding of the real concerns of patients.” Like so many things in life, they learned among other things that communicating is key.

So should law firms. And the benefits of doing so are significant. Law firms could learn, whether by asking clients themselves or using an outside firm like Sloan-Kettering did, that clients are not reluctant – in my experience welcome – the opportunity to tell their lawyers what they need and value. As Stanton puts it, “you are likely to hear ways to increase your work, and high-value work at that… The important thing is to ask.”

Amen. 

A lot of law firms are into taglines. I’ve been involved with the practice when I was in-house. At times I like them, and other times I’m ambivalent. The important question, however, is: Do they help bring in business?

I was talking with a large well-known firm last week that has had a slogan for a number of years that I really like. I’ve seen it in print and on the Internet. It’s cool, and it places the firm well geographically. So, what is it? Won’t tell ya. It appears that the slogan is very controversial within the firm. Some powerful partners love it, and others DO NOT. The solution: two different letterheads. I’m kidding, right? Afraid not.

I remember being in the middle of a similar controversy over a logo in one of my firms earlier in my career. Solution: two letterheads and business cards. So, what happened. One day an associate and partner met with a representative of a Japanese automobile manufacturer in the hopes of landing some business. The partner hands the gentlemen a card sans logo, and the associate hands him a card with the logo. His response in a nutshell: HUH! They didn’t get the work, although I can’t say that was the reason.

If your firm is thinking about getting a tagline or has one that is controversial, the best way to solve the problem is to ask your clients whether they like it or not—or whether they even give a damn. With sufficient input from clients, a firm should be able to decide whether a tagline has any business development value for them.

Thanks to Mark Merenda for getting me thinking about this topic today with his reference to “101 Law Firm Taglines – 2009 Edition” by Steve Mathews over on Stem.

Take a look at these taglines and let me know what you think.

Do you know the real answer or are you just guessing? Those of us who provide client feedback services, and have reported how favorable clients react to satisfaction surveys, have an obvious bias. But that makes it no less important to ask your clients how you are doing.  I have written a number of times on the topic (see Continue Reading below for some of them), and Aronson/Heintz Associates has a thoughtful piece on their web site. And, last week Joyce Smiley reported on an article in the August issue of The American Lawyer by Editor-in-Chief Aric Press quoting him as saying that “It’s time to talk to your clients…You can either be part of their (clients’) deliberations and process, or you can be surprised by their conclusions.”

Therein lays the rub. If you don’t ask your clients how you are doing, and they have issues, you won’t be part of the process. And you may never learn about possible problems, even after clients have “migrated” to another law firm. It just doesn’t make sense to not protect your most valuable assets – current clients – at least the key ones.

This is so important that I even wrote (to my own potential detriment) in “Of Counsel” last October that it made sense to hire someone in-house full time to do them, as four firms had done. (Unfortunately, two of the four firms no longer have someone in-house dedicated to that role.) Whether you pay a consultant to do the satisfaction surveys or do them in-house isn’t the important point. Doing them is.

Client satisfaction surveys are so simple and relatively inexpensive, when compared to overall marketing budgets in most firms, that it is a wonder that many firms still don’t do them. When one considers that 70%-80% of new business comes from current clients or referral sources (often clients themselves), it is baffling.

So again, why don’t more law firms ask their clients if they are satisfied with their services? I want to say I don’t have a clue, but unfortunately I do. Too many firms are afraid to ask, or think they already know what their clients think, thus negating the need to ask.

Unfortunately, both are wrong answers.

It’s easy! Listen to and communicate with your clients.

Not only will it cut down on malpractice claims according an ABA article on avoiding such claims. In this month’s issue of Law Practice Today the article highlights Mark Goulston, M.D., who states that lawyers can improve their communications with clients by doing one thing: “listening.” As we all know, listening is a critical element of communication. By letting the client talk and if “you listen to their real concerns…They feel gratified. The challenge for professionals is that they fear…the clients will waste their time with venting. But the opposite is true,” according to Dr. Goulston, a clinical psychiatrist.

Further, the article refers to the most recent Profile of Legal Malpractice Claims published by the ABA last fall. The startling statistic is that only slightly more than 10% of claims filed against lawyers actually involve possible malpractice. The remaining 88% of complaints involve lawyers’ failure to communicate with clients.

That’s where marketing comes in. If clients are unhappy because of a lawyer’s lack of communication, what are the chances that they will refer someone else to that lawyer. Does zilch come quickly to your mind. It should.  The failure to take every opportunity to communicate with clients is just plain dumb marketing – or even worse, marketing malpractice.

P.S. In a sidebar, the article contains the “Top 12 Ways of Avoiding Malpractice Claims.” Several of them, are also smart marketing tips.  

Some years ago at a seminar, I heard a story (likely just anecdotal) about the lawyer whose client called, but because he was busy and “knew” what the client was calling about, he did not return the call. As the story goes, the client eventually called and retained another lawyer after reporting that she was seriously injured by a Coca Cola truck that ran a red light.

Recently, I was sent a copy of Dangerous Law Practice Myths, Lies and Stupidity by Judd Kessler, Gunter Enz, et al. The 94-page book looks like a fun read, although I have only just skimmed parts of it. Myth #34 reminded me of the above story and is sub-titled “Potential clients will wait for a great lawyer to call them back.”

NOT!

In today’s world, it’s about rapid (if not instant) gratification. The book features parables by Arthur Simon, Esq. (a fictional law practice guru). So, what does he have to say about this issue?:

“Simon says: In our fast-paced high-tech society, clients seek instant gratification. If you don't take the opportunity to be the first lawyer to talk with the prospect (or a client), your competitor will, and there's better than a 90% chance that (the) prospect will become his client….”

Every lawyer should put a system in place to ensure that all calls are returned ASAP.

More and more it seems that in-house counsel are expecting their law firms to ask for their feedback. Even though “most general counsel and consultants say those law firms (seeking client feedback) are still in the minority and there isn’t nearly enough of this type of dialogue going on” according to an article on Law.com’s In-House Counsel.  I realize this is an old saw of mine, but it does appear that, with the growing popularity of the Association of Corporate Counsel’s Value Challenge, it will become the norm.

Dan DiLucco of Altman Weil relates that when the attorneys at one of its clients were asked whether their “largest client was forced to cut” its legal budget this year, no one had a clue. As DiLucco put it:

“So what does that tell you… And that…is reflective of where a lot of firms are. They don’t have these discussions. I don’t know what they are thinking.”

The managing partner of one firm mentioned in the article, that has sought feedback through a client panel, said that “reaching out to clients in a proactive way shows a firm cares about their opinions, isn’t afraid to hear them and isn’t going to wait for the clients to take the first step.”

A wise model to follow, I would say, for those firms that want to be out there ahead of the curve. Not only do clients want to provide feedback, they don’t want to have to initiate the discussion.

A new survey by The BTI Consulting Group, as reported in Law.com’s In-House Counsel, tells us that corporations are reducing the number of secondary law firms they use, not just to save costs, but to save administrative time in managing outside law firms.

Survey data show the following breakdown of the reduction (and intended drop) in the number of outside firms used:

• 2007 – 2/10/40 (primary law firms/secondary/other firms)
• 2008 – 2/9/32
• 2012 – 2/6/23

Okay, the data are telling but not conclusive, and 2012 is a long way off. Further, the “new legal model” (whatever that means) could be very different by then. What might this mean for medium to smaller firms, when they are not one of the client’s “primary” law firms.

The survey also shows that corporate counsel are reluctant “to work with firms that aren’t flexible in billing, staffing matters and communicating with the client,” according to Michael B. Rynowecer, president of BTI. Moreover, in spite of the reduction, it showed “the same companies making a marked migration to smaller firms.”

So, what’s up? Well, it seems that non-BigLaw firms that demonstrate billing and staffing flexibility, and effectively communicate with the client are very much in play even as the number of overall firms is reduced.

One suggestion, along the communication line, would be to ask corporate counsel how your firm can help in reducing the administrative time (and costs) of managing their outside matters. 

Many years ago when I moved to Columbus, Ohio, I needed a brake job on my car. I went to the dealer, and also a small shop I heard about. The mechanic’s quote was actually higher than the dealer, but I decided to use him anyway since his reasoning was sound. However, when I went to pick up my car, the cost of the repairs was nearly 25% cheaper than he had quoted because the brake shoes were less than he thought.

Okay, I’m never going back to that guy, right? Huh! I probably sent him 15 customers in the next several years (he should have paid me a commission), and I never asked again for an estimate of repairs in advance.

What brought this story to mind is an article in Trey Ryder’s recent newsletter suggesting that if lawyers instilled similar loyalty in their clients, they “would not even think about hiring another lawyer.” His story is also about his car and the value his dealer added to their relationship. Trey’s ideas for lawyers involve adding value to the client’s experience by “how fast you respond to clients, how accessible you are, the services you offer, and your staffing and client resources.”

Getting back to my mechanic story, consider this idea. Knock 10% to 15% off an invoice and let the client know you did so because the matter took longer than you thought it would or should? The client’s trust in you – and loyalty – might just grow exponentially. Do you think? 

Law firm clients often complain that their lawyers do not understand their business. It frustrates them to have to educate their outside lawyers about the issues they deal with, and which their attorneys need to understand, to represent them properly.

And that is only part of the relationship a law firm should seek with their clients. At a client meeting last week, I emphasized to a group of lawyers the importance of making friends with their clients. My point was that if the lawyer and client have a true friendship, there is no reason to worry about another law firm taking the client away.

In addition to knowing a client’s business, lawyers can build on a friendship by helping their clients prosper in their business. Ed Roach over at Small Business Branding discusses a number of ways to do that in his article “Feel the Love”, or what I might suggest shows that you’re a real friend by:

• Talking them up to others, when the opportunity presents itself,
• Referring potential customers to them and let them know about it,
• “Be(ing) honest” and admit when you make a mistake (helps avoid malpractice suits),
• Buying their products, if at all possible,
• Supporting their favorite charities, and interests,
• Treating everyone in their organization with respect,
• Increasing your face time with the client (see my No. 1 Marketing Tip), and
• Of course, delivering your best effort every time.

Meeting client expectations has been a recurring theme of mine, and one I have discussed a number of times in the past. (See Continue Reading below for links to several of them.) But, those posts dealt mostly with meeting client “service” expectations. What about the “outcome” or “results” side of a client engagement.

Chuck Newton’s Rides The Third Wave blog has a post about the dangers relating to client expectations that fall into that category.

Happy clients are the ones whose expectations have been met, and more work or referrals from that client group are a direct result of said happy clients. It makes tremendous sense to make sure you have done a great job of communicating with your clients as to what they can expect not only in how their matter and engagement will be handled, but how realistic their expectations are as to the outcome as well.

It isn’t easy to talk about potential negatives when attempting to sell your services to a potential client. But, the more straight forward a lawyer is in explaining what the client should expect, in both how their matter will be handled and the potential options as to outcome, the better the long term reputation of that lawyer will be.

So, make sure that you ask and understand the expectations of your clients in both areas. That is smart marketing.

It’s not too late for holiday cards, but if you do send ‘em this year (and I think you should) remember to do it with feeling. That is, Sign The Damn Holiday Card, and include a brief, personal, handwritten note. Oh yeah, hand address the envelope also.

I know I just lost a bunch of folks on that last one. But, think about it at least. What better way to show that you will go the extra mile, that you really care about your clients and those referral sources. I don’t buy the argument that it’s a waste of time to hand address the envelope because secretaries only throw them away. Not when the envelope is hand written in my experience.

Throughout the year, lawyers try to come up with ways to get closer to their clients, “bullet proofing” (Edge International) them as it were, and turning them into “raving fans” (Ken Blanchard and Sheldon Bowles). So, why not utilize one simple technique that so demonstratively shows that you took extra time during a hectic time of year (with holiday and year-end pressures) because you really do care about them.

As odd as it may seem, the chase and the capture of a new client ends marketing for some professionals. They get so caught up with gaining a new client that they forget that marketing does not end with obtaining a new matter, it is only the beginning.

Since marketing is everything you do as a lawyer, how you handle the relationship after you land the new matter will really determine your long term success. Client relationships are what marketing and business development it is all about. Focusing on building those relationships is extremely important. And that should happen from Day One.

Michael Fleischner on The Marketing Blog has three suggestions on how to do that in his article “Focus on Renewals After the Sale.” Although his suggestions are not directed toward lawyers, they are just as applicable to our industry. They include:

• Frequent communications (whether that involves newsletters, law alerts, an article of interest, or any form of communication that assures constant contact);
• Client feedback in the form of surveys (preferably in-person, but at least by telephone); and
• “Share best practices” (let clients know what experiences have worked for other clients in similar circumstances or industries, and do so in whatever way works best for them).

So, keep in mind that business development activities do not end when you get a new client. They need to continue for the life of the engagement …and beyond.
 

Recently, I did a post on how important it is to stay close to your clients in these troubling economic times. Well, it seems that the idea is supported by Hildebrandt’s “Special Client Advisory: Fall 2008.”  

The special advisory suggests nine steps for firms to consider in weathering the storm; and includes such things as concentrating on collections early vs. end of year, work on next year’s credit line now, scrutinize vendor support expenses (even consider hiring an outside vendor contract negotiator like my client, Mattern & Associates), review under-performers and excess capacity, and consider shedding undesirable practice areas, while reassuring key partners and associates who may be anxious.

The one step mentioned that is closest to my heart has to do with marketing and client relations. The advisory states:

“… stay in close touch with your clients, especially those key clients that are important to the firm’s future.  Now is not the time to save money by cutting back on productive marketing expenses.  Your clients are experiencing the same anxieties and uncertainties as the firm itself, and ramping up communication to them will stand the firm in good stead when economic conditions improve.  Lawyers have time on their hands, so put it to good use with increased focus on client development, client teams, and appropriate business development training.”

As I mentioned in that earlier post, in times like these stay close to your family, and closer to your clients.  But, don’t just take my word for it.

It is important, particularly in the current, dismal economic climate to communicate well, especially with clients. Our message needs to be clearly, concisely and competently conveyed (how about that alliteration, huh? - yeah, you’re probably right).

Well, Garrett Saunders over at the New Marketing Rules blog apparently knows the devil. Because he informs us that he has “developed the following sins” that he relates in his article “5 Deadly Sins of Marketing Communication.” – whether they are used in promotional communications or marketing communications in the broader sense.

The sins include:

1. Failure to come to a point of what you really stand for,
2. Using passive vs. active communication,
3. Employing a vocabulary that confuses your audience (boy, can we lawyers do a number with legalese),
4. Difficult verb tenses vs. present tense, and
5. Lecturing instead of telling a story that is interesting.

So, “originality and surprise creates stopping power” according Saunders, but it’s important not to commit marketing communication sins by projecting messages that are complicated, confusing, convoluted, complex … (I know there I go again), but you get my drift.

 Some law firms will feel the pinch more than others during the current downturn. But all firms will feel it one way or another. Whether it is less work, losing clients because of mergers/acquisitions, or because of difficulty in collecting fees from financially stressed clients. When it comes to making payroll or paying your lawyers, what do you think clients will do?

Thus, it is very important for firms to do everything they can to minimize the impact of what certainly will not be a smooth road for the foreseeable future and beyond. One way is to work very hard at “bullet proofing” (as Gerry Riskin advises) your existing clients (or in Gerry’s words “crown jewels”) as much as you can. 

And as Thom Singer at Some Assembly Required accurately tells us in an article that applies to any company that it is the “relationships with those (with) whom you do business that…(leads) to beating the competitor in good times and in bad times." Those relationships are even more important in a down economy, because business is just that - “down”- and competition definitely gets more intense when times are tough.

So, how are your client relationships these days? Does everyone in the firm realize the importance of their interaction with clients, referral sources and prospects? From the receptionist to the firm couriers, to the associates and partners, everyone has a role in developing and enhancing client relationships – and avoiding damaging those relationships.

Two ways to improve client relationships are: by visiting your key clients, and seeking client feedback. Both will help reduce the adverse impacts of a recession on your firm.

A panel of general counsel at the September meeting of Legal Marketing Association’s Metro Philadelphia Chapter told the audience that they REALLY crave better communications and efficiency from outside counsel.

As reported on Law.com’s Small Firm Business by reporter Zack Needles, the GCs:

Don’t Like:

• “centralized attorney structure” (where client must go through a senior lawyer not working on the matter, rather than just dealing directly with lawyers who are);
• Relationship partner being too involved (thus, creating less efficiency in handling their matter);
• Glossy advertisements, “trumpeting “firm accomplishments, which have “little bearing on (the) opinion of a firm”;
• Formal RFPs (although apparently one or more have used them), and especially where firm sends big guns (who won’t be working on matter) to the presentation; and
• The firm adding new attorneys to a matter, and finding out about it on the bill.

Do Like:

• High-level partners staffing a matter properly, but being available to answer “a particular question”;
• “(W)illingness and ability to build trusting relationships”;
• Web sites with greater emphasis on qualifications and accomplishments of individual lawyers, rather than the law firm;
• E-mail alerts (vs. chatty newsletters) with “substantive law updates” relevant to their company (“No. 1 marketing tool” according to one GC);
• Keeping GC informed of what’s going on by providing regular status updates; and
• “Detailed progress updates” on bills (vs. just work effort).

It is no surprise that in-house counsel what better communications and efficiencies from their outside counsel; and it behooves law firms to do a better job of both, particularly in a down economy.

I’ve been doing client interviews since 1990, and I know they do two things well. One, they can save clients before they leave the law firm for another (I really have a dynamite story on that point, but it will take too long to relate it here, so call me if you want to hear it). Second, it leads to new work (first, because they didn’t leave you for that other firm; and because clients have problems sitting on their desk or nearby that they’ve been procrastinating on just like everyone else).

Bruce Allen’s recent article over on Marketing Catalyst hits the nail right on the head as to why client feedback works:

"Do not ever forget -- in any relationship, professional or personal, the best thing you can accomplish as often as possible is to remind someone that they matter."

Clients want to know that they matter. Furthermore, I have found they want to be asked what their opinions are on the legal services provided, and the relationship in general.

In my experience, the reason most often cited for not conducting client satisfaction surveys is that partners will argue that if the client has a problem, they would let the lawyer know about it. As Bruce states, that is just plain "silly." I might go a step further and say hogwash. Rather, since most humans tend to avoid conflict whenever possible, they'll just take their work to another law firm.

Bruce goes on to cite a blog post that my friend and colleague Jim Hassett did a couple of years ago over at Legal Business Development. I would concur that it is a good place to start, if a firm is interested in "getting (its) act together” about seeking client feedback.

To borrow from the quote by J. Wallace Day about keeping friends close and enemies closer, I might suggest that in a down economy, one should keep their family close and their clients closer. 

My colleague Jim Hassett over at Legal Business Development blog talks about some scary stuff that is occurring to law firms in the current economic climate . He recounts layoffs of lawyers and staff in NLJ 250 law firms, the large and well-known firms that have closed in recent years, how it is harder to become an equity partner, and so on.

Not all firms are hurting, and with the state of the financial world, there will be plenty of litigation for sure. But, there will be plenty of pain to go around as well, and the legal industry will not be spared.

His point: stay close to your clients and colleagues, and one way to do that is to “set up a free meeting with a top client or referral source.” I would include all key clients in a “client visitation” program, since it is the single most effective business development tool, as I have mentioned before. And, I would do so whether your firm is experiencing pain in the current economic downturn or not.

There has been an interesting discussion going on over on both the LMA (Legal Marketing Association)’s listserv and The LawMarketing Listserv (membership required for both) the past few days about what a small law firm should do when BigLaw moves into their marketplace.

My take: First of all sit down, relax and have a good laugh. Because, unless the mega firm is moving into town for reasons relating to an existing client or a local merger, they really aren't a threat in my opinion. I say that because:

• They're too expensive for most of your clients,
• They are an unknown quantity, unless they merge with a local firm (and that will only make your old/now larger competitor more expensive),
• Smart businesses will know that unless they are a large corporation themselves, they will just become a smaller fish in a bigger pond,
• Most of your clients don't know anything about the firm nor would have any reason to go to a larger firm, and
• Most importantly, BigLaw does not or is unlikely to have a relationship with your clients, and you do.

Secondly, over the years I've seen law firms move into different cities where my law firm was located, and where the new firm had no prior presence.  I've seen these firms struggle and I've seen some leave town after a few years. Moreover, I've been in a couple of large firms, where many of the lawyers were not particularly good marketers (not for lack of effort on the part of the marketing department, I might point out), but because they had no interest in marketing or were convinced that the work would always be there.

Finally, there really isn't anything to worry about, as long as you have excellent relationships with your important clients.

You do have terrific relationships with your clients don't you?  If not, stop laughing, because you may indeed have a problem.

But there is a solution.

Identify those clients that you would not like to lose. Let's call them your key clients. Immediately plan to visit these clients (off the clock), and seek feedback on how your firm is doing, and what you could do to be a better legal services provider. It’s pretty late to be doing this, but not too late.

So, I don't see a serious threat just because a large firm moves into your marketplace. Although they may be a gorilla, that doesn't mean they will be successful in luring your clients away. The only danger in my view is where your law firm has given your clients reasons to look to the new law firm for services. And that means you have failed in the client relationship department.

There is no wrong time to seek client feedback about your firm’s performance. Not only should law firms ask how they are doing on current matters, but how they have done in the past, and how they can provide better service in the future. Although nobody likes to get bad news, it is better to learn if a client has an issue or problem prior to their walking away and never using the firm again.

Ed Poll in a recent post on his LawBiz Blog recommends that a law firm send a short survey with the first bill to a client rather than at the end of the matter. He has a point. I would agree that if a matter was handled poorly, requesting feedback after the damage is done and matter concluded, may be too late.

So, I would say that asking for feedback during matter is a good idea. But it is also a good idea at the end of the matter as well. The damage, if there is any at all, may not be serious enough that the client won’t use the firm again. Further, it would show the firm's interest in how it did, and increase its credibility with the client for the next matter it might send to the law firm.

Moreover, in a recent roundtable discussion Ed tells us that the attending firms "concluded that it is very beneficial for the managing partner to periodically visit the top 10 clients of the firm."I agree. However, I would suggest that it is not enough. I would go further and interview all important clients. Further, I would suggest that it be done by someone other than the managing partner, who by definition has way too much on his or her plate.

In furtherance of that point, I would suggest setting up of an ongoing in-house client interview program, specifically for feedback. A few firms have started hiring full time in-house staff for that purpose, as I have mentioned. In this way, the program becomes institutionalized, and is not looked upon by clients as merely another law firm project.The important thing in all of this is that a law firm should be doing all it can to determine client satisfaction with its services, and how they can do things better in the future.

As Ed points out: "bottom line, we don't exist in a vacuum. We must understand and know the needs and wants of our clients... And what better way to find (out) than to ask, directly." He summed up his post by saying "this concept caused the managing partners (at the Roundtable) to vow to make changes in their firms."

For the sake of their firms. I hope that is true. Law firms should seek client feedback at all times.

Although I believe that law firms will gain more work from clients because they seek feedback on how they are doing, that cannot be the reason for undertaking such a program. The honest reason for seeking client feedback must be based on caring for the client and the relationship. All else will take care of itself.

Bruce Allen over at Marketing Catalyst has a post that spells out “The Wrong Reason for Client Satisfaction Programs.”  He advises firms to avoid conducting such programs simply to:

• Avoid losing a client,
• Keep up with competitors who are doing them,
• Stand out from competitors who aren’t,
• Keep clients from talking with competitors,
• Save money, since cheaper than trying to land new clients,
• Make firm look good, and
• Have firm help show the client that the lawyer cares.

In other words, client feedback programs need to be genuine and not solely based on self-interest. I know law firms and consultants who genuinely care about their clients, to the point of losing business. It may be rare but as Bruce tells us it should be ingrained into the fiber of a law firm. As he puts it:

“Sincere care for people (your clients) cannot be taught in schools or seminars. It's learned by example and mentoring. You have to teach it, evangelize it, tolerate nothing less -- the reward is the stuff of remarkable careers.”

Every firm should consider seeking feedback as a vital part of the client relationship. But, it should be done for the right reasons.

An article (available to Association of Corporate Counsel members) by Susan Jacobsen that appears in the April 2008 issue of ACC’s “Hands On” addresses some “Lessons for Law Firms” as a result of a GC panel discussion at the 15^th Annual Marketing Partner Forum this past January.

Fred Krebs, the president of ACC, was moderator of the panel and cited results from the 2007 ACC/Serengeti Managing Outside Counsel Survey, specifically

“…noting that half of the survey respondents terminated relationship with some of their outside counsel during the prior year, citing failure to perform according to client expectations, high costs, and poor work product or results.”

Krebs then asked the three panelists (GCs from General Electric Company, Royal Bank of Canada, and Hasbro, Inc.) to address a number of topics relating to outside law firms, including communications, cross-selling (two examples cited turned out to be disasters), conflicts, marketing activities, knowing the client’s business, satisfaction interviews, use of websites, views of $180,000 starting salaries, and loaning associates to clients.

The lessons learned (or should be) that particularly stood out for me relating to marketing and business development include:

• Constantly communicate with your clients (about their matters, problems, etc.),
• Learn all about their business (“More than anything,…the firms that stand out are the ones that know our business,” according to one GC),
• Seek client interviews to obtain feedback (all three GCs were in favor of doing this), and
• Higher associate salaries are not favored (“…the rise in associate salaries in the larger firms provided a good opportunity for smaller, regional firms to be positioned for the business”, according to Jacobsen).

Main Lesson: Don’t be one of the law firms that clients show the door. 

For Survey’s table of contents and benchmarks...

Whether you are trying to build a relationship after landing a new client, or to enhance existing client relationships, there are effective things a lawyer can do to accomplish both.

A Q&A article by Frank D’Amore that appeared in The Legal Intelligencer a couple of days ago, and on Law.com’s Small Firm Business, provides some good advice on the topic. D’Amore suggests five things that you can do to build client relationships:

1. Get to know the client’s business and industry (the failure to do so is one of the biggest complaints that clients express about their outside counsel. One way to overcome that is to offer to spend time off the clock at the client’s place of business in a learning mode);
2. Constantly communicate (ask clients about their preferred method and frequency of contact with outside counsel);
3. Focus on making the client look good (recognize your contact’s personal, internal needs, and help them gain credit from your efforts);
4. Maintain contact during “lulls in the client relationship” (even if not currently working on a particular client’s matter, keep in touch – by sending articles, newspaper clippings, e-mails, and telephone calls – and through client visits and entertainment); and
5. Suggest networking opportunities and potential introductions to benefit your clients.

If you think of ways to add value to your client relationships, rather than just how to get more work from clients, you will find that it will provide long-term benefits to your business as well.

Why?

Because clients, especially in-house counsel, continue to be concerned about the costs of outside legal services. As a result, both surveys tell us that corporate counsel are going to bring more legal work in-house and fire outside law firms:

• InsideCounsel’s 19^th Annual Survey of General Counsel (July 2008) reports that 61.2% anticipate bringing more work in-house, and 41.5% (up 8.5% from last year) have or plan to fire outside law firms in 2008.
• Altman Weil’s 2008 Chief Legal Officer Survey reports that 49% plan to hire additional in-house lawyers this year (up 9% over last year); and 48% of CLOs “are considering firing at least one” outside law firm this year (up from 32% last year).

Accordingly, it behooves (gosh can’t remember last time I used that word) firms to stay very close to clients, so they are not one of the firms impacted by such moves.

Maybe that is why more firms are hiring or have dedicated in-house persons focusing on seeking client feedback.  Best to know if there are issues that need to be addressed before your firm is one of those shown the door.

I have often preached at seminars and law firm retreats, that the key to successful legal marketing is to go out and befriend people. My formula goes something like this:

Make contacts, contacts, contacts

(to borrow a concept from my realtor friends),

+

Communicate constantly

+

Build upon relationships

+

Turn into friendships

=

Long Term Client Relationships

Of course, planning and focus are an important part of whom one should be making contact with in the first place.  And, assuming that a law firm knows the kind of ideal clients it wants, then time is not wasted on building the wrong or less desirable relationships.

An article by Lee Ann Bellon that appeared in the Fulton County Daily Report and on Law.com’s Small Firm Business emphasizes the friendship point.  She reports that a partner, in the 86-lawyer litigation firm of Carlock, Copeland, Semler & Stair in Atlanta, says that more than 75% of his clients are also his friends.  And she tells how he does it, and suggests five steps that firms can utilize to build friendships.

No rocket science here; but, reminders on some of the ways to go about befriending contacts who could become long term clients.

Seeking client feedback appears to be getting more attention in firms of all sizes. Ballard Spahr (500-plus lawyers) has hired a full-time “client interviewer,” and Stanislaw Ashbaugh (19 lawyers) prominently links to their Chief Results Officer from their home page, and Ward and Smith PA (80 lawyers) has a partner who is devoted to visiting clients nearly full-time.  Other firms with similar positions include Orrick (over 1000 lawyers) with a firmwide ombudsman, and Reed Smith (over 1600 lawyers) with a director of general counsel relations.

Are these firms pacesetters for a greater focus on client feedback? Or is it just a fad?  One can only hope it is an encouraging trend.

Client feedback is clearly one of the most important things a law firm can do to enhance client relationships, which in turn results in more work. That is why it ranks No. 3 on my list of Top 10 Marketing Tips.  Moreover, a recent survey by The BTI Consulting Group reports that per attorney profits increased by 41.2% when there is “single individual accountable for firm-wide client service.”

If gaining more client work is what marketing and business development is all about – Hmm, I wonder! – and seeking feedback is that effective, then hiring someone for the business development team who would concentrate on that role would make a lot of sense.

If you don’t buy into that idea, at least hire a consultant to seek feedback for you. In many firms the managing partner fills this role, and of course, he or she is a good person for that; but, with everything else on their plate, it just doesn’t get the priority and consistent effort that it should.

That is why the actions of these firms are so impressive. And I’ll bet clients just love it, too.  Moreover, I’ll wager that each of them obtains an ROI of at least double their salary in any given year in new work for the firm.

So, who is the dedicated person seeking client feedback in your firm?

Naturally, one might think every lawyer is responsible, or maybe the managing partner if it has to be brought down to a single individual. My initial reaction was the former, but after reading the article “The Power of One” by Marcie Borgal in The Complete Lawyer, I’ve come up with a different take on the issue. Marcie is a senior strategic analyst with The BTI Consulting Group in Wellesley, MA.

Her article starts with:

“A research study recently conducted (by BTI) … revealed a startling fact. Having a single individual accountable for firm-wide client service boosts per attorney profits by up to 41.2%”

I must admit I was startled by that myself. Marcie refers to these individuals as “client service executives.” Their job responsibilities include:

• “providing client-focused tools and programs,
• generating strategies to improve client service performance,
• delineating gaps between performance and client expectations, and
• regularly tracking and monitoring client satisfaction.”

Additionally, these individuals may conduct “annual interviews with key clients” to ascertain client service issues, as well as “clients’ goals and needs.”

Law firms “typically draw client service executives from the ranks of their most well-respected attorneys,” according to Marcie.  In most cases, I presume in most firms that person is likely to be the managing partner.   But, that may not always be the case.

For instance, Philadelphia’s Ballard Spahr has hired a full time in-house “Client Interviewer” and Seattle’s Stanislaw Ashbaugh has a Chief Results Officer on staff (with a prominent link from the firm’s home page).

It looks like some law firms are really taking client service issues – and, more importantly client satisfaction – seriously. As Marcie says, “[C]lients translate these approaches as an expression of interest and investment in them, their priorities and their concerns.” I think it is just smart legal marketing!

It certainly doesn’t hurt if, in addition to “happy-camper clients,” the firm’s profits increase by more than 40% in the bargain.

Thanks to Arnie Herz for the tip that led me to Marcie’s article.

Since I started interviewing law firm clients in 1990 (even used a film crew to capture five of them on a VHS tape – I’ll bet you remember what those are), I have never waivered from the belief that it is one of the most important things a firm can do to retain clients. And developing and enhancing client relationships is what marketing is all about. It is one of the reasons I put client feedback as No. 3 on my Top Ten Marketing Tips list.

Ballard Spahr in Philadelphia has made a major commitment to institutionalize its client feedback process. As reported on several blogs (Mark Beese on his Leadership by Lawyers, Larry Bodine’s Law Marketing Blog and Peter Darling's Business Development) over the past week, Ballard has hired a full time “client interviewer.” It is reported that the person has more than 30 years of experience as a journalist, so she should be conducting some serious interviews. I agree with Peter that it is a brilliant move.

Your firm may not be in a position to justify the cost of a full time in-house client interviewer (Ballard has 500 lawyers after all), but there is absolutely no reason why your managing partner, or an experienced outside third party, shouldn’t be doing client interviews for your firm. The purpose is to determine how the firm is doing in the relationship, inviting honest feedback on any problems, and to learn what the firm could do better.

It is better to find out if there are problems, that can be corrected, before your key clients decide to try another law firm for their next matter. There is no time to waste.

Okay, every lawyer knows that, right? It’s so basic, so common sense, so elemental, so essential, so basic (alright, I’ll stop with the synonyms). Why then are clients unsatisfied even when the result is good? Because some lawyers don’t:

• Understand clients’ businesses and/or personal situation,
• Return phone calls or emails promptly,
• Keep client informed so as to avoid surprises,
• Meet deadlines
• Treat client with respect,
• Meet client expectations as to how matter will be handled,
• Respect clients’ time by keeping them waiting without explanation,
• Keep clients informed as to the process or status of their matter, and
• Keep a handle on costs and fees.

The point is obvious. There is a lot more to client satisfaction that just getting a favorable result. And remember that satisfied clients are the best source of new business – in terms of follow on work and word-of-mouth referrals. Pretty basic isn’t it.

On Jim Calloway’s Law Practice Tips Blog there’s an ancient post (well, actually January 31) that I ran across, that refers to his presentation at the ABA TECHSHOW last year.  I meant to post about it earlier as I’m a big fan of Jim’s, so better late than never. He talked about client development in terms of satisfied clients. He boils it down to meeting client expectations, and his article has both good advice and refers to additional resources, such as:

• Careful screening of clients (with danger signals);
• Communicating with clients in the 21^st Century;
• Taming the Beast: Managing Client Expectations in a 24/7 World; and
• “Dealing with the Difficult Client” by Carole Curtis over at PracticePro (which by the way has a bunch of articles on various topics of interest to law firms.

A lot of good stuff thanks to Jim.

I found the responses to her request interesting. They ranged from fire her (great training) to a suggestion that she train the people who hired the receptionist.  While one responder, a former in-house marketer for a large firm, concurred that the receptionist should hopefully be “great,” he said that the “receptionist’s response… has nothing to do with marketing.” Double ouch!! In fairness, he did go on to concede the point that “doing anything well at a firm is good marketing,” which is exactly my point.

A marketing partner at one of my firms was not only a brilliant lawyer (Gonzaga, Harvard), but a brilliant marketer as well. His favorite line was “Everything a law firm does is marketing.”

In the personal services business, excellent client service (or lack of it in this case) is what marketing is ALL about, unless you don’t care about getting more work or referrals from your clients. 

Tom Collins at morepartnerincome.com has another post on voicemail where he raises the issue whether the device is a friend or foe. Since communications are so critically important for good attorney-client relations, Tom offers several good suggestions on how to ensure that the use of the system doesn’t have adverse consequences.

• If you give out your direct number, don’t hide behind it so callers always end up in voicemail, and begin thinking that you’re avoiding them (good idea to give the opportunity to bail out to a human);
• Have receptionist offer the opportunity to leave a traditional message or go into voicemail; and
• As to your outgoing message, make sure to:

1. State your name clearly (so they know they have reached the right person),
   
2. Update message often (if not daily),
3. Indicate whether you are checking for messages, or when you will be back,
4. Encourage caller to leave a detailed message (so they won’t fear being cut off prematurely), and
5. Give indication when calls will be returned – late afternoon, the next day, within 4 hours, etc.

Voicemail can certainly be a friend, if it is used to enhance communications rather than frustrate them.

Rather, the client wants to know what the likely outcome will be and how soon. They do not want a dissertation on how you have spent all those billable hours they are going to have to pay for. Their thinking big picture, bottom line… i.e., how close you are to a satisfactory conclusion or at least to the next significant step in the process. And you need to be prepared to do so in a succinct fashion. As Joey tells us, Powell’s “tight and simple answer inspired confidence.”

Why is that important to business development? Well, we know that most legal work comes from existing clients (either in the form of additional work or referrals to others), so keeping clients happy is a critical legal marketing tool. Accordingly, it is a good idea to have a well thought out answer to the question about how things are going at the ready, but keep it simple in order to enhance the client’s confidence in you, and in their decision to having selected you in the first place.

While there I spotted one of his posts of more than a year ago, that is so totally on point with a speech/training session that I will be doing at a California firm later this week, I just had to write about it.

His focus and mine is on the importance of remembering that the client is king. Dan’s post “The 12 Rules of Client Service” is taken from his firm’s Practice Guide that was written for associates and paralegals. The 12 rules are (details or comments in parentheses):

1. Represent only clients you like.

(As Dan points out, you won’t do good work for very long for a client you do not like.)

2. The client is the main event.

(“If client (or customer) ‘primacy’ were really the organizing principle for everything we do, isn't that in our interest, too? Doesn't that mean that the work is better, law firm staff and attorneys are pulling in the same direction, morale is good, we spend less time and money on marketing, we keep good clients and we attract new ones?”

3. Make sure everyone in your firm knows the client is the main event.

(This can be done with an amusing, but informative Practice Guide that every new employee reads.)

4. Deliver legal work that changes the way clients think about lawyers.

(by overcoming the stereotype thinking about lawyers, by changing the way clients think of lawyers by communicating that you care “deeply” about lawyering and that it’s a privilege serving them.)

5. Over-communicate: bombard, copy and confirm.

(For the purpose of keeping them totally informed, unless of course the client doesn’t want to such service.)

6. When you work, you are marketing.

(Everything you do reflects on you as a lawyer, and your actions will greatly determine whether you will get repeat work and/or referrals to other potential clients.)

7. Know the client.

(get to know the client by visiting their office and learning more about them, their business/industry, and their problems and concerns – off the clock of course.)

8. Think like the client--help control costs.

(REALLY help the client keep legal costs down, with a long-term relationship in mind; and share that goal with the client.)

9. Be there for clients--24/7.

(Enough said.)

10. Be accurate, thorough and timely--but not perfect.

(Clients likely can’t afford it. A satisfactory result in the clients mind often does not require perfection. Of course, we’re not talking about mistakes, rather lawyering that is successful without being perfect.)

11. Treat each co-worker like he or she is your best client.

(Clients like teams (theirs and yours) that play nice together in the sand box. It makes tough situations easier to transition, and causes less stress. Most importantly, it makes for a “more joyous place to work.”)

12. Have fun.

(If you can’t, then you are not doing the kind of work you enjoy for the kinds of clients you want to work with.)

If your firm is small to mid-size, let me assure you that you can definitely compete with large law firms when you follow Dan’s 12 rules.

• Cost management (fees/expenses) – 8%
• Mishandling one or more matters – 7.8%
• Lack of responsiveness – 7.2%

“While in-house counsel are prepared to spend the money to get the legal advice they need, they are equally prepared to hold their law firms accountable for their performance.”

1. Give new clients a starter kit (with contact names, telephone and e-mail info, firm’s policy and procedures in handling matters),
2. Get to know their business and the big picture (take time to ask smart questions and listen, even visit the client’s place of business at no charge),
3. Learn your client’s expectations and exceed them (goals for matter, frequency of communications, deadlines and the like),
4. Keep your promises (especially on deadlines),
5. Promptly return phone calls and e-mails (preferably the same day),
6. Ask client for the preferred method of communications (telephone, mail, e-mail)
7. Introduce (in-person, if possible, or by letter or e-mail) each member of the team (staff and professionals) who will work on their matter,
8. Don’t overlawyer (client may not want the “perfect” solution. See No.3 above),
9. No surprises (as to invoices or anything else for that matter), and
10. Show your appreciation to the client for their business (by sending a gift, a referral, entertaining them, offering free advice, etc.

• How Does Your Customer Service Rate?
• How Are Your Client Communication Skills? A Success or Failure?
• Managing Client Expectations

• Getting in Your Client’s Shoes – most likely, whether the client is an individual or business, there is “great anxiety” on their part, and a lack of awareness about your services and the costs (Thus, understanding and patience would be key virtues to bring into play here),
• First Contact – Wendy correctly points out that a firm can’t “overestimate” the importance of the receptionist’s impact on a caller’s first impression (I have addressed the issue of paying your receptionist well before),
• Setting the Course – spending the time upfront to fully explain the firm’s “practices and procedures” (as well as fully understanding the client’s problems and concerns) is time well spent, even if time consuming. As Wendy accurately states, it is likely to improve client retention in the long run,
• Managing Client Expectations – clients are unlikely to understand the Army’s motto of “hurry up and wait” also applies to the legal industry, so an explanation would be worthwhile (further, it would be advisable to find out what the client’s expectations are regarding how and how often they want a status report, copies of documents, best method of communications, etc.), and
• Client Frustrations – high on the client’s list is unreturned phone calls, and unfathomable legalese (talking in English with explanation of legal terms is solution to this common problem, but more important, is making sure that communications – whether by letter, e-mail or phone – are returned promptly).

• Lack of responsiveness to phone calls, letters, faxes (and you can add emails. There isn’t ever a valid excuse for you or someone in your office not responding to a client promptly, period),
• Voicemail hell (always give a caller the option to leave a message with a real person),
• Misunderstanding relating to the terms of the engagement (an engagement letter should spell out both parties understanding and expectations),
• Lack of status reports and information on the lawyer’s efforts on client’s behalf (as Ed states, send copies of all documents to client), and
• Inadequate detail on invoices (tell the clients, not only what you did for them, but what the benefits/value of your work effort has been).

• Return all calls the same day (as mentioned above, either yourself or have another lawyer or staff person do so),
• Have client names available to persons answering the phone (a client isn’t impressed when asked to spell their name to someone who should know),
• Explain the reasons for your advice and approach, and ask whether it conforms to what client wants to accomplish (helps keep both on track towards the ultimate client goal),
• Visit client off the clock for information/relationship building, and put time on the invoice as a “no charge” (not only is it a great communication tool, but a proven lawyer marketing strategy – see my No. 1 Marketing Tip from my top ten list),
• Seek client feedback (also helps uncover problems or potential annoyances before client takes business elsewhere), and
• Show clients that you appreciate them (and their business).

• Communications:
  • Instant response to calls or e-mails is not always required or sound practice (as she reminds us, instant coffee is not always best),
  • Let clients know that you or someone from your office will return calls within X period of time (I like four hours),
  • Ask client if returning calls after normal business hours, on weekends or by cell phone are okay (shows respect for the value of their time, and your willingness to communicate outside the workday),
  • Suggest client leave as detailed a message as possible on voicemail or with your secretary when they can’t reach you (will save time and you’ll be more prepared when you do speak).
    
    
• E-Mails:
  • Explain whether you will bill for e-mails (some clients expect that a quick e-mail response is a freebie),
  • Advise client regarding sending sensitive or confidential info by e-mail,
  • Like phone calls, set guidelines for returning e-mails.
    
    
• Emergencies:
  • Advise clients that they should telephone rather than fax or e-mail, if there is an emergency,
  • Depending on your type of practice, consider giving out your cell or home phone number, but request clients restrict their use to emergencies.
    

I was taken by the headline on a post by my friend Patrick Lamb entitled "Is Voice Mail A Good Thing?" in which he refers to Ed Poll's post "Voice Mail Is Killing You." Personally, I think voice mail can be a good thing if properly used, but as it turns out, Ed is not talking about voice mail per se. He is talking about a machine answering your phone, instead of a live person, that results in a trip through voice mail hell. It isn't that voice mail in and of itself is bad, but when it starts with a recording that answers your phone, I believe that will kill you.

As I mentioned in a earlier post I called "Answer Your Darn Phone," I actually know a law firm in Sarasota, Florida that answers their phone with a recording DURING THE BUSINESS DAY. Now, isn't that real smart lawyer marketing? Of course NOT! Patrick has a couple of good posts on the horrors of voice mail as well here and here. Both are worth a read.

As I said, voice mail can be a good thing. But first you need someone live to answer your phone, if at all possible. Then, that person should ask the caller whether they would LIKE to be put into voice mail or could they take a message. Yes, that takes more work and more contact time with a live person. However, we should not forget that we are in the "contact" (i.e., relationship building) business, and what better way than with human contact.

Now, that is smart legal marketing in my view.

Thom Singer has a fine post about how to repair a damaged relationship with a client.

His advice is right on:

*Approach the problem in a "fast and straight-forward fashion" (I like to refer to that as the Tylenol approach, an example of a brilliant strategy that likely saved that company when they were confronted with the bottle tampering crisis),

*Meet with the applicable person directly (don't try to utilize an intermediary),

*Apologize if you are at fault, even if only in a minor way,

*Even if you are not at fault, but the client perceives that you are, apologize for your part in any miscommunication (since there must have been a breakdown somewhere), and

*If the client is unreasonable and won't accept your apology, then move on (such people will never be satisified, will be looking to find fault again, and it is best to not waste your legal marketing efforts on a client like that).

Of course, if you did mess up, and the client accepts your apology, make sure you have safeguards in place to ensure against future foul-ups. As Thom points out, the client may forgive you this time, but the "smart ones will never forgive you twice." Good point.

Thanks, Thom.

There was an interesting article last Sunday by William Taylor in the Business section of The New York Times entitled "Your Call Should Be Important to Us, but It's Not." It addresses the problem encountered by many callers when they telephone some of the largest corporations - sometimes referred to as voicemail hell. Thanks to Larry Bodine for posting on this article recently.

The reason I picked up on this issue is that I actually spoke to the head of a 10- lawyer firm a couple of years ago in my neck of the woods that doesn't have a live person answer their phone. Not only would you have to go to a directory to get the extension of the person you wanted to reach (if you even knew a lawyer's name), but when you get the managing partner's extension, NO ONE answers his extension either. His message states that he will return your call during a couple of time periods during the day. How kind of him. What dumb legal marketing by him. I suggested strongly to him - free of charge - that he have a live person answer his phone. As of today, he still doesn't.

It gets worse, the voicemail says what their office hours are, when they are closed for lunch, and what to do if you want their mailing address, fax number, a lawyers extension (if you know it) or how to reach the firm's directory. After all that, it does tell you how to reach the receptionist. Who would want to at that point?

I know I don't need to say it, but surely no smart lawyer marketer would allow such a practice at their firm.

P.S. Taylor's article tells us about a Paul English who was go aggravated by the practice that he created a blog with the steps (including some unpublished codes) on how to get around voicemail hell and actually get a human person in a whole bunch of major corporations. It is DEFINITELY worth your time to look at gethuman.com. It just might save you some aggravation one day.

Since we have had a pretty good discussion on client interviews over the last month or so (click here to revisit) by Patrick Lamb, Jim Hassett, Michelle Golden, Dan Hull and myself, some might say we've beaten this puppy up pretty good.

Possibly, but when I saw the article about taking client feedback to the next level by Donald Aronson and Bruce Heintz in Small Firm Business this month, I just had to see whether they have lived up to their promise and have taken the client interview discussion up a notch as my old friend Emeril would say (actually, he isn't really a friend, since I've never met him, but what the heck, he sure sounds real friendly on his show).

The authors concur that only one-third of law firms even solicit feedback; and that "a recent survey (of general counsel) conducted by The Corporate Legal Times (now InhouseCounsel) and Martindale-Hubbell indicated that "95 percent of outside counsel 'rarely' or 'never' ask for 'formal performance feedback.'" But, for those that do, the authors suggest taking feedback to the next level.

I'm still not sure what that means. They identify three primary goals of client interviews as:

*Client retention (identify problems that might endanger relationship),
*More work from clients (turn "good clients into great" ones), and
*Competitive advantage (determine and enhance "future competitive positioning").

Nothing new there. Then they identify subjects covered in typical client interviews. I guess the difference must be their preferred "unscripted in-person interviews" (or open-ended) vs. "scripted" approach (or prescribed questions).

So,I guess I'll stick with scripted interviews that include my typical open-ended questions such as:

*How are we doing?
*What is the firm doing well?
*What could we do better or differently to improve our services?
*Would you recommend the firm to others? Why (yes or no)?
*Anything I haven't asked that I should have?
*Are there any other issues you would like to discuss?

Of course, you could still ask specific questions about the firm's responsiveness, quality of legal product, knowledge of industry, reasonableness of fees, overall improvement of their situation, etc.

But, I keep thinking I must have missed something. Can anyone help me here?

In any event, the most important lesson to come out of any discussion on client interviews is that law firms NEED TO SEEK client feedback - with or without Emeril's help. Bam!

Only because I believe so strongly in the value of conducting client interviews that I accept Dan Hull's challenge and weigh in on a discussion already well covered by several other bloggers, all of whom I very much respect.

Client feedback is so important and critical for developing long-term relationships, which should be your ultimate legal marketing goal, that it is worth adding my two cents worth to the recent discussion involving Jim Hassett (here, here, and here), Michelle Golden (here and here), Patrick Lamb (here and here), and Dan Hull (here). Okay, I'm dizzy too.

In essence it boils down to whether client interviews should be conducted by a neutral third party, a senior member of the law firm, or a combo of the two. So, what's my take:

*I believe the initial client interviews should be conducted by an independent third party, without any representative of the firm present. The main reason, based on my experience (and I've done them both ways), is that the clients are likely to be more open (have had clients ask that their comments be kept confidential) and that is less likely with a member of the firm present;

*Then, a member of senior management should pay a visit to the clients to follow up, to thank them for participating, and address any issues that may have been raised; and

*Finally, the firm should form (if it hasn't already) client service teams for key clients, with one lawyer assigned as the client relationship attorney, whose responsibility, among other things, is to continue to obtain regular client feedback on how the team is doing.

As was pointed out in several of the posts, the most important thing is that such interviews actually take place. The process is less important than not doing them at all.

That is really the question that David Maister's article "Do You Really Want Relationships?" is asking, at least that's my take. I ran across the link to his article on Gerry Riskin's Amazing Firms, Amazing Practices blog. The article is well worth reading in its entirety as David is always engaging in his writings and seminars.

Gerry highlights one aspect of the question in his post "Do you want romance or a one night stand?" He lists five of Maister's examples of "client as enemy" behaviors, such as:

*Focusing on selling the client rather than starting a dialogue,

*Avoiding talking with the client since you may lose control or have to treat the client like a person,

*Failing to contact the client to just chat or share non-matter related information,

*Trying to sell more work, rather than serve the client, and

*Formalizing agreements and decisions, rather than trusting each other.

I am not sure all of the above qualify as "enemy" focused behavior, but clearly they do support the argument that the relationship is not one between friends. And, as I have stated before, if your legal marketing approach is focused on developing long term client relationships based on mutual respect and trust, then you should be trying to develop relationships that are also based on friendship.

Those who have been reading my blog for awhile, know I believe that a major thrust in terms of legal marketing involves relationship building - with clients, referral sources and prospects. In fact, I like to define marketing as the "development and enhancement of client relationships."

So, when I saw Jim Calloway's post about the 10 Commandments of Client Relationships which originated with the Queensland Law Society of Australia, I just had to share them with you as well.

Get a copy of the Ten Commandments of Good Client Relationships here.

They are well worth reproducing (with proper attribution of course), framing and displaying prominently in your reception area where your law firm's clients can see them.

Last month, I missed a post by Ed Poll at LawBiz Blog complimenting the medical profession for a growing trend in offering programs in "relationship-centered care" (aka improving empathy as well as bedside manners), while at the same time chastising law schools and bar associations for failing to require training in managing a law practice.

How a lawyer handles a client's matter has a direct bearing on whether the client will use his or her services in the future. Management issues such as -

*Returning phone calls
*Keeping client informed regarding their matter
*Being diligent in pursuing the client's best interests
*Treating the client with respect
*Avoiding surprises
*Failing to meet deadlines
*Etc. etc…

…all bear directly on how successful one's law practice will be. Lawyers too need to focus on "relationship-centered care." It is the essence of effective legal marketing. Unfortunately, such courses are not required in law school or as part of CLE requirements. They could add measurably to an improved impression of the profession.

Jay Foonberg, an icon of lawyer marketing, has an excerpt from the 5th edition of his book How to Start and Build a Law Practice that appears in this month's Law Practice Today. He provides us with a short lesson on how to listen to clients and otherwise treat them with the utmost respect during a meeting. Some pearls of wisdom:

*Tell your staff person to hold all calls (if there are exceptions, let client know up front),
*Let client know they have your full, uninterrupted attention (except as noted),
*Look at the client while they talk,
*Take notes, and frequently summarize your understanding of what client said, and
*At the conclusion of meeting, ask client if there is anything they want to say or ask - then pause for a period of time to give them a chance to respond.

In this way, the client will feel that you really listened to them. Jay notes that a recent ABA survey reported that 95% of satisfied clients believe their lawyer listened to them, but among dissatisfied clients, only 42% shared that feeling. As his father told him, with two ears and one mouth, you should listen twice as much as you speak. Good advice.

In a post by Suzanne Rose at riskybiz blog, we learn all the wrong ways of [not] communicating with clients. She reports on a lawyer-client of hers that does not:

*return client calls in a timely manner,
*have a procedure to deal with unhappy clients,
*welcome client calls, but rather considers most of them a nuisance,
*review files and update clients regularly,
*consistently send clients copies of correspondence and documents, nor
*explain the legal process involved at the beginning of the engagement.

Suzanne is much too generous in referring to those who fail to build client relationships by such actions as wrongly motivated rather than ignorant. My take is that it's the antithesis of good legal marketing.

In a real sense this lawyer is communicating with her clients, but in the worst possible ways. They certainly will not sing her praises. And if word-of-mouth is one of the best ways for lawyers to get new clients (and it is), this lawyer is committing professional suicide.

Further, it is not only dumb, but it is a risky way to run a law firm - if not in a pure malpractice sense, it could certainly lead to the filing of bar grievances by unhappy clients. Overall, not a happy scenario.

Having opined on the value of sending handwritten notes vs. other forms of communication in the past, I found two posts today, as I was trying to get my own post in before Hurricane Wilma hits us tonight, commenting on the value of handwritten notes.

The first item was from Jackie Huba of Church of the Customer Blog relating how she got a note from a sales person at her local J. Crew store and how it impacted her. The other thanks to John Jantsch at Duct Tape Marketing was a post by David Lorenzo (a consultant, strategist and advisor himself) on his blog reporting on how he sent 20 handwritten notes (with news clippings from local periodicals) to people that led to "seven e-mails, two letters, and a phone call," and potential business.

Handwritten notes are rarely used today, but as noted, can be very effective.

Spend more time with clients, prospects and referral sources. Even in this age of high speed communications, ready access to information, and demands on our time which seem (at least to me) to be getting worse, we may forget the importance of face time with those we wish to work with and for.

I was reminded of this basic viewpoint with a post by Matt Homann of the [non]billable hour on the need to get into the jungle if you want to know the tiger. He cites the passage from the Art of Innovation which states "New ideas(and I would add new clients and matters) come from seeing, smelling, hearing — being there."

So, get out of your office and spend time with clients and referral sources; and hang out where your desirable prospects can be found. You really do have to "be there."

There are several reasons that lawyers do not seek feedback from their clients, but the two most common are: I know my client is happy with our services, and not wanting to open up Pandora's box. There is no way to be delicate about this, those reasons are the opposite of smart legal marketing.

Thom Singer has a post about conducting a client reality check. He relates a good story about the opposing views of a particular relationship from both the client's and vendor's perspective. It is critical that lawyers get feedback from their clients as to both how they are doing, and what they could do to improve, before it is too late. As Thom puts it, before "your clients fire you!"

In my experience clients don't actually fire their lawyers, they just walk away. As one in-house lawyer told me yesterday, as part of a telephone survey I was conducting for a lawyer-client of mine, "I don't fire lawyers, I just don't give them the next matter." The difference may be considered semantics, but the distinction is important if a long time passes before you learn about it, and the relationship is beyond repair.

If you want to read more on my views on the importance of client feedback . . .

Both Patrick Lamb and I have covered this topic before. His recent experience reminded both of us of the dangers of improper use of the speakerphone - mainly client irritation or worse. Bad legal marketing!

Just a quick reminder of why speakerphone etiquette is important to person on the other end of your call:

*Considered rude - without asking permission and giving reason for its use
*Makes other person feel unimportant - unless asked
*Don't know who else is listening
*Don't know who else is overhearing
*Hesitate to mention ANYTHING of a confidential nature
*Tells me other person is lazy or self-important

In my earlier post I gave this link to Plantronics headsets which work great and eliminate the need for speakerphones (except where multiple persons need to be in on the call). I bought the CS50 wireless, which gives me freedom to move about the room, and I use it for all my calls.

In building client relationships (the best way to keep and build your client base), it can't be overstated how important and effective personal handwritten notes can be in setting you apart from the crowd. In today's hectic world - what with billable hours, family commitments, just finding time to get through all the emails and other clutter that impacts our lives - there is little wonder why we overlook a forgotten method of communication that can truly make a difference. Think how you feel when you receive a handwritten note.

Why don't we use this tool more often? Well, the telephone is quicker (and definitely better than nothing) and, of course, there is always the faster and quicker e-mail (I'm not sure that it is better than nothing, though). As I've discussed in other posts, the large amount of emails that come daily (and not just spam) is getting REAL annoying to a lot of people.

So, it was good to see the article by Karen Young that appeared in Fulton County's Daily Record and Small Firm Business recently that reminded me of the power of the handwritten note. Karen talked with several lawyers who were believers in this tool. One, David Hollingsworth of Kilpatrick & Stockton, said he spends 20 minutes working on each note, so it will be personal and meaningful. WOW. And he says "If you have a good personal relationship, you're going to have a better client relationship, and that's going to be good for business."

That says it all!

Folks who read my blog know that I am not a ranter by nature ….(well, maybe when it comes to the failure of law schools to prepare law students for the business side of law here, and here).

But, I visited a doctor's office (not my regular MD) this week to get the results of a stress test (which was perfect, thank you very much). I was on time, sat in reception area cooling my heels for 40-minutes, to then have the privilege of getting 5 minutes of his time. Receptionist was stone-faced, people who came after me went in first, others came and went. When the nurse/assistant called me in and took my blood pressure, which she informed was a bit high, I responded "no wonder, considering how long I have been waiting."

Silence …

Not a word. No "sorry". Nothing!

Mentioned to the doctor (after waiting some more) that I "may" have annoyed his assistant by my comment.

Silence…

Not a word. No "sorry." Nothing!

I gave up. Good report. I'm out of there. Not likely to speak favorable about the experience or that particular practice….. not that they give a darn. But, why work so hard at bad marketing!! It's amazing.

So, PLEASE, if you must have a client wait in your reception area for ANY length of time, have someone, anyone (preferably yourself) explain the reason for the delay, when you will be able to see them, and at least render a perfunctory apology. Legal marketing is not rocket science, so why would a lawyer want to hurt him/herself by having clients/prospects getting ready to blast off in their outer office. Just doesn't make any sense.

Over on the LawMarketing listserv there was a discussion on "what clients hate about lawyers." There was input from several marketing/management consultants who I know and respect, including David Maister, and John Remsen, as well as others I haven't met but respect their views, including Nancy Myrland, Mark Merenda, Rod Sloane, and Patrick Valle.

Their collective views on the subject boil down to the following significant complaints:

*Unresponsiveness (and not listening, which is difficult if your not responding to phone calls or deadlines. One client reportedly said they'd "rather hire a good, responsive lawyer than a great, non-responsive one.");

*Poor cost management (treat their money as if it were yours, but don't take that literally by padding your bills), and over working a matter;

*Surprises (as in high invoices, or failure to keep them inform about their matter, or delaying bad news, or changing lawyers without telling them, etc.); and

*Not knowing their business (which can lead to poor advice and legal product).

That is not a complete list, but you get an idea of things you should be really concerned about, even if just one applies to your firm.

First, recommendation is to stop what you are doing, pick up the phone and return any unreturned client calls immediately. While you are at it, seek feedback on any possible complaints they may have. This suggestion ranks third in my top ten marketing tips as mentioned in an earlier post. Remember, it is better to learn about any "issues" now before the client sends the next matter to a competitor.

Unhappy clients who leave your firm or decide to not use your services any longer, aren't your only worry. You're likely to lose any chance of ever landing one of their friends as a client. Jeff Jarvis at BuzzMachine posts a "Dear Mr. Dell" letter to the company when he returned his computers. Gosh, as you can see Jeff was pretty unhappy, and it appears he stirred things up a bit with his blog and podcast. If I were Dell, I know I would be very concerned about future sales.

The point of mentioning this post is that it got me thinking how unhappy clients can hurt a law firm's future legal business. It is that multiple effect of telling others about their unhappiness, and in today's blogosphere, that is not a good thing. My advice is that if you have an unhappy client, deal with the issues now before the client leaves and tells others.

One way to find out whether you have unhappy clients, is to ask them. Client feedback is vital in light of today's competitive legal marketplace. Best to find if there is a problem before the client sends you a "Dear Mr. Dell" letter, or just doesn't take your phone calls.

Thanks a bunch to Steve Rubel at Micro Persuasion for the tip about Jeff's post.

Not to belabor a point, but as I mentioned in an earlier post on "marketing continues after client hires you," it is good marketing to give your clients your home and cell phone numbers. I realize this suggestion would not apply to every practice (criminal law, for example) or to every client, but if a client is important to you, there is no reason, that I can think of, for not giving your home and cell numbers so the client can reach you at any time. Yes, any time the client needs to (you can always turn it off, if you are doing something just too important, such as playing squash or whatever).

A post on The Great American Lawyer blog also suggests giving your cell phone number to clients. It reminded me of just how important communication with clients is, and when a client needs to make direct contact with you, having your cell phone number is probably the most important number a client can have.

In a discussion with my wife (who is a fundraiser) last evening, she pointed out there are many opportunities to over promise and underdeliver in both of our fields. I didn't realize at the time that that wisdom comes from a quote attributed to Tom Peters, specifically "Formula for success: under promise and over deliver." How true, and how dangerous the reverse is. It's just bad marketing.

No matter what business one is in, the best approach is to follow Tom Peters' advice; and that is especially true in the legal business when it comes to:

Client Deadlines - too often missed, and a good opportunity to over deliver. Let the client know when they can expect to receive your work product, and then (as I suggested in an earlier post) get it to them one or even two days early.

Promising a Favorable Outcome - dangerous area for many reasons. Not the least of which is Rule 7.1 of ABA's Rules of Professional Conduct adopted by most states. I can't imagine a responsible lawyer would do this, but even if subtly conveyed can raise unrealistic expectations which is unprofessional and dangerous to one's reputation.

Keeping Clients Informed - here is an excellent marketing opportunity (second only to beating your own deadlines) since the majority of complaints filed with bar associations is poor communication and inattention to the client's matter. Return calls promptly, send every appropriate document to the client, and give status reports regularly.

An important part of legal marketing, as I have preached for (maybe) too long is not rocket science, it is knowing how to give your client first class service, while not over promising and under delivering. It's part of effective client communications.

Steve Rubel's post, setting forth his 10 commandments for public relations professionals in this new world or his Golden Era of Participation, struck a cord with me as it relates to lawyers. As I read his commandments, I thought how much they should, and in my view, do apply equally to how lawyers should handle client relations.

Steve's commandments (with my lawyer applicability in brackets):

1) Thou shall listen - Utilize every avenue available to you to listen actively to what your publics have to say and feed it back to the right parties. [substitute "clients" for "publics."]

2) Remember that all creatures great and small are holy - It doesn't matter if it's the New York Times calling on you or an individual blogger, both have power. Take them all seriously. [Treat all your clients as being important no matter how much revenue they generate individually. They have friends.]

3) Honor thy customer - Create programs that celebrate customers and they will celebrate you. [through various forms of recognition including: client receptions, free CLE seminars for in-house lawyers, annual reports and ads featuring clients, entertainment and other means of "thank you."]

4) Thou shall not be fake - Keep it real; don't hide behind characters and phony IDs. [Don't blame other lawyers, opposing counsel, or the courts when things aren't perfect.]

5) Covet thy customers - Don't sue your fans. You will alienate them. [Substitute "clients" for "fans." Moreover, really let them know how much they mean to the firm (see 3 above).]

6) Thou shall be open and engaging - Involve your customers in the PR process. Invite them to help you develop winning ideas and become your spokespeople. [Substitute "service" for "PR" process. Create client teams to enhance client relationships and develop better ways to provide them legal services.]

7) Thou shall embrace blogging - It's not a fad, it's here to stay. Be part of it. [Ditto.]

8) Thou shall banish corporate speak - People want to hear from you in a human voice. Don't hide behind corporate speak. It will soon sound like ye olde English. [Substitute "legalese" for "corporate speak."]

9) Thou shall tell the truth - If you don't tell the truth, it will come out anyway. [This goes without saying.]

10) Thou shall thinketh in 360 degrees - Ask not (only) what you can do for your customer, but also what your customer can do for you. [Ask for work and referrals.]

These may not be the ten "most important" commandments for lawyers, but they certainly should be factored into the new age of the world and the legal profession.

It is an excellent idea to have your paralegal send a welcome letter to a new client as suggested by Dave Swanner at South Carolina Trial Law Blog. As Dave suggests, it is a good way to let the client know who they can reach in case the lawyer is unavailable or even if they just have a question they need answered.

The only issue I would take with his suggestion is that the paralegals letter should be IN ADDITION to a welcome letter from the lawyer. You would not want to send the message that the lawyer is already too busy to welcome them to the firm. Anyway, two is better than one, so I would do both. The client will be doubly pleased.

The problem with communications according to a post on Fast Company Now has more to do with the lack of communication that may be occurring. It is also more than just listening when someone is speaking. Rather it is about understanding what is being communicated. As the post says, speaking is only the tip of the iceberg. A lot more is likely going on.

I also like the quote that was included from the Irish playright, George Bernard Shaw: "The problem with communication is the illusion that it has occurred." How true, how true!

Client communications are critical to effective marketing and to long term client relationships. Do you understand what your clients are saying to you?

Preaching on meaningful client communications seems to be more of a recurring affliction of mine. It is so important, that I expect I will continue to do so. Dave Swanner at South Carolina Trial Law Blog has a post on sending documents to clients that reminded me of just how great a marketing tool this is. Dave even suggests a couple of ways to keep the process simple - get a COPY stamp and put preprinted envelopes in client's file to make it easy not to forget.

It not only is good lawyering, it is good marketing. It's another example of effective client communications that will improve your client relationship and future business prospects.

Oh yeah, give the client a nice folder (with your name and contact info on it) to put all the documents in.

The ABA's Law Practice Today has an article that talks about how to avoid malpractice claims, pointing out that the majority of claims according to Lawyers' Professional Indemnity Company involve client communication and management issues.

"Over the last five years a failure to know or apply the law accounted for 9.0 percent of LawPRO claims by count, and 9.6 percent of our claims costs. This makes it the third most frequent and third most costly error over the last five years, and far less significant that the over sixty percent of errors that involve communication and time management issues. Keep this in mind when you are taking CLE programs and other self-improvement course. Don't solely focus on substantive law. Take some course that will help improve your communication and time management skills." [emphasis mine]

Good advice.

As I have mentioned in an earlier post, poor client communication not only can result in grievances (or worse) being filed against lawyers, it is just bad marketing.

Ran across a succinct post by David Swammer of South Carolina Trial Law Blog about the importance of not avoiding clients when they call. You may think you have legitimate reasons for not taking a client's call, and, of course, there are times when you do. But, you are fueling the perception by too many clients that lawyers are unresponsive, and that is not good from a marketing perspective. Constant communications with clients is becoming more critical to successful business development, and such communications should not be conducted only when the lawyer feels like it.

Thanks to Doug Sundheim in a post on Fast Company's blog for the following quote:

"They may forget what you said, but they will never forget how you made them feel." -- Carl W. Buehner (1898-1974) Mormon leader, businessman and author.

In the same vein he tells a great story about the Dali Lama. Both lessons are important for lawyers as well. Relationships will be built more on how you make your clients feel than what you say or do for them. As I have stated before, a client relationship is an emotional thing. Doug also points out that one should "[r]ecognize that really listening to someone is often the best way to make a good impression on them." Obviously, good legal services are important, but how the client feels is more important for the good of your relationship. Friends feel good about one another. So, work at making your clients your best friends.

As stated by James C. Turner, executive director of HALT, a national legal reform advocacy group in Washington, DC:

"One of the most frequent complaints his organization gets is that "the basic communication between lawyers and clients is terrible." He cites one case where a client tried 13 times in a two-week period to contact the attorney. That's the type of situation that leads to mistrust and, ultimately, to a consumer fraud complaint."

Poor communication between attorney and client is also the most common reason clients file complaints with state bars. A failure of communication is not only unwise from a grievance standpoint, it is just dumb marketing. Even if the client may not need your services again, the client is likely to tell a number of people, who could be potential clients, about their unhappiness. That is one of the reasons I wrote Letters for Lawyers: Essential Communications with Clients, Prospects and Others. (I know, I know - terribly self-serving, but what the heck I'm just trying to help the ABA sell more books).

There are scores of opportunities (in addition to keeping the client informed about their matter) to contact clients, referral sources and even prospects; and the more contacts made the better. The best way to communicate would be with handwritten notes, next letters and lastly e-mails. Obviously, they are in reverse order of ease of accomplishing, but think about what impresses you the most. E-mails have become an annoyance to many, and not as personal in my view. The important thing, however, is constant communication.

An article by John Jantsch at Duct Tape Marketing gave me an idea on how lawyers can improve their marketing so as to get what he calls more:

-fulfilling work
-loyal clients
-referrals

Often lawyers overlook the relationship building opportunities that arise out of client meetings. Knowing that at the conclusion of a meeting, they will soon be going off the clock, lawyers think about rushing back to the office or to another meeting where they can start billing another client. With billing pressures being what they are, such behavior is understandable. However, it may be very shortsighted in the long term.

Rather, spend some marketing time building upon your client relationships. One way to do that, according to Jantsch, is to get to know what your client's "personal" goals are, and consider ways you can help the client achieve them.

Here are some of my favorite ways to show disrespect to clients (and the likely messages you don't want to send):

-Read your Blackberry® while carrying on a conversation or in a client meeting (Message: some more "important" matter may need your immediate attention)

-Keep them waiting in lobby beyond scheduled meeting time without explanation (that will really convey how important and busy you are. You can always apologize later)

-Don't return a client telephone call for several days (other matters are more important. Besides clients realize lawyers are busy, don't they?)

-Use the speakerphone without requesting their permission to do so (don't they know that I am too busy, important, lazy or whatever to pick up the phone. They should be lucky to talk with me at all)

-Express disdain at their suggestions or questions (after all they didn't go to law school)

-Raise billing rates without notifying them (heck, they'll see it on next invoice anyway)

-Have an associate or paralegal, whose name they have not heard, call with an important, sensitive question (obviously, it wasn't that important to the partner)

-Have receptionist switch callers within a nanosecond to your voicemail or secretary without her/him acknowledging caller's existence (always been one of my favorite you-are-not-important-enough for me to say "just a moment, please")

-Have your secretary call the client, put them on hold, and then notify you the client is on the line (another favorite "I'm just too important and busy" messsage. True story: The chairman of a large law firm where I worked in-house, who happens to be a close friend of and the recipient of bear-hugs from the President of the United States, never ever failed to personally place his own phone call to me - a mere member of his staff - and often he got my voicemail. He would still always place his own call. No kidding on that one. Funny thing is I didn't have any control over how much money the firm paid him, either.)

Successful rainmakers would do none of these things nor allow junior lawyers who work for them to do so. If, however, you feel a little defensive on one or more of the above, or you know a lawyer in your firm who would be, you may want to suggest a change in behavior before the client changes lawyers.

There's nothing to it. If you don't like your client, get rid of 'em. You could fire them outright (I know firms that wanted to), or you could simply be unresponsive.

I was reminded of this simple reality when I read an article on how to lose a customer on the Fast Company blog. Although the item dealt with an unresponsive home security company, it reminded me of the many complaints I have heard over the years about some in our profession.

Some of the simple ways lawyers can get rid of clients include:

-Not returning client phone calls promptly
-Failing to meet a promised deadline
-Keeping clients in the dark about their matter

If you would like to keep your clients, then of course you know, being responsive is the way to go. Clients don't often complain openly, they simply stop using the firm by giving the next matter to another law firm. If you are responsive, and regularly talk with your clients about your services, then your clients will not get rid of you.

Some law firms have gone to an automated answering system for incoming calls during normal business hours. The caller is instructed to punch numbers to reach various people within the firm. Often you only get that person's voicemail. This is one of the poorest examples of how to market your law practice that I can possibly think of - well, there might be a few others - but this is right up there. You should alwyas have a real person answer your firm's telephone during the work day. Remember, we are in the "personal" services business.

I got to thinking about this misguided practice as a result of seeing Tom Mighell's post a couple of days ago where he refers to a find-a-human page that exists on Intuit's web site. The page helps you cut through the automated system for a number of banks, credit card, and insurance companies among others. Although the listing is pretty limited at this point, the fun part is that you can add companies according to Intuit and tell your fellow humans how to get around impersonal automated systems you have encountered and beat.

Perception IS reality to the observer. If a client or prospective client observes a lawyer's office as disorganized, such disarray can strike fear into their mind as to how their matter will be handled.

On Reid My Blog, a posting on "Files that Talk" covered the issue very well. Succinctly put:

"Rest assured, clients reach conclusions about your qualities as a lawyer by extrapolating from the visible to the invisible. The condition of your office and files become vivid symbols of your skills and attitude toward your clients and their problems."

I knew a brilliant admiralty lawyer many years ago who had the most incredibly messy office. Suffice it to say that you could hardly see him on the other side of his desk. The rest of his office was no better. Yet he knew where a every document could be found. Amazing! His reputation was so good that he could get away with it. Don't assume in today's legal marketplace that a cluttered office, desk or files will impress a client. Most likely the opposite will result.

I can't help but recall the times I regretted a purchase. Was I too impulsive? Is it what I really need or want? And so forth. Reid Trautz recently posted an item about how clients can have second thoughts about the lawyer they just hired. He provides some very helpful suggestions on things to do after the client hires you, including:

*Calling within 24 hours to let client know you have started on their matter,
*Make sure they know it is just a courtesy call and they won't be charged for it,
*Send a thank you note and some token "gift". It could be your home or cell telephone number. (more on that idea below, if you are interested),
*I also recommend sending them a file folder, or binder to put their documents in.

Reid points out how such relationship building can help a client overcome any possible remorse. I like to think it's just good marketing. As a partner in one of my firms where I was an in-house marketer said: 'Marketing is about everything you do for a client." I couldn't agree more.

I found a new blog thanks to Dennis Kennedy that touches on the issue of unpaid legal bills that I think could send a marketing message. Reid My Blog! has an article that discusses some reasons clients don't pay (or delay payment) and suggests ways to overcome the problem. Some of the reasons include the fact that lawyers are:

-Not comfortable talking about money
-Often fail to discuss fees and payments up front
-Let bills go unpaid for 90 to 120 days or more
-Don't request a retainer, resulting in some work being completed before billing or payment

Further, the longer between the time when services were performed and the time of payment, the easier for the client to forget what you did for them and may now think that the fee is too high.

Another aspect, however, is that it might indicate you have a marketing problem. If the client is not paying promptly, there may be some dissatisfaction with both the services and the manner they were provided. It may reflect poor communications with client which could impact your getting future work. Seeking client feedback might have avoided the nonpayment or delay in payment.

Thanks to Rob Hyndman, a Canadian lawyer with a boutique technology practice, I have learned about a developing technology that should scare the heck out of law firms of any size. Rob refers to an article he found on developing research in France dealing with optical scanner technology moving to cell phones. Although not a marketing issue per se it could have serious ramifications for your firm's future if the technology is misused and your firm is sued for malpractice.

So, if you have confidential documents open in your office or in a conference room where there are "visitors." You might want to pay attention to which way the person's phone is pointing while he or she is supposedly checking a message on their phone. The technology has obvious advantages as well, but lawyers beware.

As I have mentioned before, hard copy newsletters are still a good marketing tool. Another article that sets forth some good basic suggestions for newsletters by Paramjit Mahli appears in "Small Firm Business" newsletter.

Another approach to "newsletters" that I like for keeping in contact with clients is the one issue, one-page (two-sided if you must) law alert or advisory on a new case, recent legislation or regulatory changes. It has several benefits:

-it's quick to put together and thus more timely,
-not delayed while waiting for others to contribute their articles,
-more likely to be read upon receipt, and
-creates more opportunities to make contact with clients, referral sources and prospects.

Remember, constant contact, contact, contact is basic to professional services marketing.

Here is a very scary thought and one law firms can avoid if they keep in constant communication with their clients and seek feedback on their services. Fast Company talks about the culture of complaint, and a Harvard study on handling complaints. This study could be helpful for law firms in dealing with complaints from clients, but first they must be communicating with clients and getting feedback.

Fast Company's article includes some complaint web sites. I am unaware of any sites for complaints against law firms, although some probably exist. The scary part is that it could happen to law firms and no one will want to see their firm's name appear on one. That's bad marketing! So, talk with your clients constantly about what and how the firm is doing.

I would not agree that you need to "love" your clients to be successful, but I do say that if a lawyer and the client are good friends, the better the chances for a long-term business relationship. Number 46 of Tom Peters' "100 Ways to Succeed" suggests being "Melded to your Client" as in being one with your client, as like being in "love." I expect Tom is overstating for affect.

In a speech to the General Practice/Solo section of the ABA last August on marketing, I stressed the importance of making friends to improve your client development efforts.

Most firms do not utilize or consider their staff important to the law firm's marketing efforts. This is unfortunate, since every employee can be an ambassador for the firm. If staff is aware of the marketing goals, and is considered a valuable part of the team, they can actually help bring in business. Marketing guru Tom Peters comments on a recent Wall Street Journal story on internal marketing, where he emphasized how critical it is for employees to help sell a firm.

On a basic level, staff often have more contact with clients than the lawyers. A receptionist can be vital to how the firm is perceived by the way he/she treats callers. Helpful secretaries who try to assist the client rather than push them into voicemail or simply take a message, can avoid turning off clients. Communications by everyone in the firm can have beneficial effects. Since most client complaints involve the lawyers' failure to communicate, empower your staff (secretaries, paralegals) to return phone calls and update clients on their matter. Such actions will not replace the need for the lawyer to communicate with clients, but it can supplement it and reap great rewards.

It is much easier to get additional work from existing clients than from new clients. But you need to communicate with them. Written or telephone surveys are okay, and better than doing nothing; but, the most effective surveys are in-person interviews. The latter allows you to ask the client how the firm is doing and get immediate face-to-face feedback as to how the firm is doing and what it could do to improve its services. A few simple questions are all you need to ask. Click here to download sample questions.

According to Larry Bodine of the LawMarketing Portal and the Professional Marketing blog "Email is Dead". His entertaining article is a fun read, and not entirely tongue-in-cheek. Although it might be a bit premature to say email is dead, he accurately points out the many headaches associated with spam. He is right in saying that blogs will become a more reliable way of getting your marketing message through. I totally agree with those that say blogs are the wave of the future.

However, for many smaller firms a bigger problem has to do with viruses and spyware that affect their computers, which Larry also mentions in his article. To these firms the bad guys' favorite -- Microsoft's Internet Explorer browser—is more of a serious problem than emails per se. Mozilla's Firefox browser which you can obtain as a free download from their site is rapidly gaining market share (albeit still in the single digits) as the more reliable browser. More and more users swear by it as the safer way to get around the web. You might want to give it a look. At least it might solve one of your major headaches until email finds a cure or indeed dies off.

Newsletters are still a good means of communicating with clients. E-mail newsletters, which have become all the rage, are okay but only if your clients and contacts want them. Some still prefer to have a hard copy that they can take on the train or plane to read at their convenience. Moreover, many people do not want to receive e-mail newsletters because they receive too many e-mails, period. I had one firm tell me they like the touchy, feely of a hard copy. Of course, you should give your clients and contacts what they want.

I ran across an article from Morningstar Multimedia which gave some basics on newsletters, and it may be worth a look. What ever format is best for your situation, newsletters are still a good idea.