Thom Singer makes a great case for using this tool that some people think is mundane and “oh, so 60’s”. To those I say with all due respect – horsefeathers!! Nametags are very important in any networking situation. 

Heck, I was with a medium-sized law firm  recently that used permanent nametags (even for spouses/significant others) at their own retreat with only one or two outsiders.

As Thom points out there are important reasons for using them:

• Every event is a networking event,
• Everyone does not know everyone,
• Lack of “coolness” is irrelevant,
• They facilitate conversations,

And possibly most importantly,

• they help avoid embarrassing situations.

So, don’t let others talk you out of using nametags. They are an important tool.  

And if you are dying to read more about nametags, check out ole crazy (as in successful and probably rolling in it) “Hello, My Name is Scott” Ginsberg. I think he probably wears his nametag to bed, but I could be wrong about that.

An article by Les Altenberg of A.L.T. Legal Professionals Marketing Group on the subject, that appears in this week’s Law.com, talks about adjusting the four “P’s” (Product, Place, Promotion, Price) of marketing as one way to develop business in these troubled times. Specifically:

Product – Consider providing a mix of services most in need in such times, such as bankruptcy, loan restructuring, renegotiation of contracts, acquisitions of distressed businesses and, of course, litigation;

Place – whether services are delivered in the law office, clients office, over the telephone or Internet, the important part is to stay close to existing clients (and that in my mind includes visiting key clients in their workplace);

Promotion – a firm should focus its business development dollars on promoting the mix of services needed now, especially those things most likely to raise the firm’s profile relating to those services – speaking, writing, seeking feedback, entertaining and client visits (basically drawing from my Top Ten Marketing Tips list); and

Price – here, as a medium-sized or small firm, I would emphasize your normally lower rates compared to BigLaw, and offer alternative fee arrangements (such as fixed fees). As Les warns, be careful about reducing your fees in these times, as it will be extremely difficult to raise them when things turn around.

Whether you agree or not that the economy is in an actual recession, revisiting your marketing four P's is worth doing.

He mentions how Scottish Chef Gordon Ramsey on his TV show Kitchen Nightmares works at turning around failing restaurants. Bruce surmises that the establishments are failing because of “two key issues”:

• There are too many items on the menu, and
• The restaurant is not known as “the best place to go for ____.”

Now think law firm. Think brand.

No law firm is totally a one-stop shop. In fact, in most firms it is best to not even try. Due to the complexities associated with most legal areas today, a law firm – especially a medium to small firm – is better off limiting itself to niche practices. Not only will lawyers become more proficient in these areas of the law, but it’s easier and more efficient to focus the firm’s business development efforts on fewer practice areas.

Accordingly, law firms should consider reducing the size of their menu. It’s a good thing to be known for one or two niche areas, but, better to be recognized as “the best place to go for __________.”

The “sage” advice includes:

1. “Be risk-averse at all times. Clients have come to expect this from their lawyers. It's tradition. Honor it.
2. "Tell the client only what it can't do. Business clients are run by business people who take risks. They need to be managed, guided, stopped. Don't encourage them.
3. “Whatever you do, don't take a stand, and don't make a recommendation. (You don't want to be wrong, do you?)
4. “Treat the client as a potential adversary at all times. Keep a distance.
5. “Cover yourself. Write a lot to the client. Craft lots of confirming letters which use clauses like "it is our understanding", "our analysis is limited to..." and "we do not express an opinion as to whether..."
6. “Churn up extra fees with extra letters and memoranda and tasks. Milk the engagement. (If you are going to be a weenie anyway, you might as well be a sneaky weenie.)
7. “As out-house counsel, you are American royalty. Never forget that.”

On the other hand, you may prefer to follow “The Ten Commandments of Good Client Relationships” developed by the Queensland Law Society of Australia instead: 

1. “Clients are the most important people in our practice — in person, by mail or by phone.
2. “Clients are not dependent on us. We are dependent on them.
3. “Clients are not an interruption of our work. They are the purpose of it.
4. “Clients do us a favor when they call. We are not doing them a favor by serving them.
5. “Clients are a part of our business. Do not treat them as outsiders.
6. “Clients are not “statistics.” They are flesh-and-blood human beings with feelings and emotions like our own.
7. “Clients are not people to argue with or match wits. Nobody ever won an argument with a client.
8. “Clients are people who bring us their wants. It is our job to meet those wants.
9. “Clients are the lifeblood of this practice.
10. “Clients are deserving of the most courteous and attentive treatment we can give them.”

Thanks to Jim Calloway’s Law Practice Tips Blog for bringing the commandments to my attention some time back.

 I feel a little guilty charging the firm of Ward and Smith, P.A. for my services. The firm is so incredibly with it, that I’m still not sure why they felt they needed me in the first place. Let me explain.

The firm over the last couple of years had already undertaken SWOT analysis, followed by planning and implementation of their strategies (without the benefit of an outside consultant). Additionally, they have focused heavily on clients and relationship building in general. Finally, they have created a family atmosphere (reinforced by spouses and significant others who attended the retreat).

Not only does the firm hold a retreat each year at a resort with the better half attending, but spouses and others are invited to all substantive sessions, if they wish to attend. Other family functions are held during the year. Good internal marketing!

What struck me the most about what the firm is already doing includes:

Planning:

• All lawyers meet quarterly to thrash out and build on efforts initiated at the annual retreats;
• The firm has practice groups responsible for administrative, CLE, practice development purposes, and interdisciplinary client or industry teams for marketing and client development purposes; and
• Client teams meet monthly and report in writing on business development progress.

Client Relationships:

• A full-time, dedicated marketing partner who visits with clients seeking feedback and business development opportunities;
• Teams visit with clients off the clock; and
• Invite clients to “lunch and learn” or after hours cookouts, either at a firm location or at a clients' (even towing their own BBQ equipment along), and responding to questions from clients free of charge.

Considering how much I hear (and write) about what clients want from their outside lawyers (and aren’t getting), I know of only a few that begin to match what Ward and Smith is doing. I haven’t had a chance to meet any of their clients, but I’ll bet you $10 to a donut that they have a ton of satisfied clients who believe that their law firm really “gets it.”

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!

I 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.

A few of those smaller firms and who they represent include:

• Kobre & Kim (19 lawyers) – representing Deutsche Bank A.G., Fluxo-Cane Overseas Ltd (Brazilian cane exporter), Telinor Telefonia (Mexican telecom utility);
• Rich & Intelisano (4-lawyer plaintiffs’ firm) – claims related to Bear Stearns, and claims against Merrill Lynch & Co. and Morgan Stanley being arbitrated before FIRA; and
• Girard Gibbs (15 lawyers) - representing some German and French banks.

If your firm does some of this work, you might want to crank up your legal marketing efforts in that direction.

And, so it should be for law firms. For instance, a client admitted recently that he doesn’t look enough at his firm’s numbers as a tool of marketing. He’s not alone. The fact is that a law firm’s financials provide a wealth of information that can save time in focusing a firm’s business development efforts.

By delving into the firm’s financials, a firm can uncover the strength of its practices. Further, by discovering which clients are the most profitable, and the industries they represent, the firm provides grist for its marketing focus. It just makes sense for a law firm to concentrate its primary lawyer marketing efforts on those type of clients and practices where the firm is already strong.  The numbers will tell you where your strengths are.

Ford’s point was that it is “insane” to spend a lot of time working on a “leave-behind” rather than focusing on who will say what at the presentation itself.  He considers the leave-behind a waste of time. I would agree, but how he arrived at that conclusion leads me to my point.

He conducted a series of post mortems (learning that potential clients didn’t even remember what was left behind). It reminded me of how important follow up after a competition really is. Not only when you lose, but when you win as well. The latter because you may get a false idea of why you were successful. (I remember a time I found out that the competitor had done a better proposal, but sent the wrong person to the oral presentation. So, we won, but not because of our proposal. Learned a valuable lesson on that one.)   

Of course, the main reason for a post mortem is to learn what the competition did right and what your firm could do better in the future, no matter the outcome.

According to a post by Mark Beese on his Leadership for Lawyers blog entitled “We’re Not Going to Take It,” the ACC reps laid out the realities in-house counsel are facing, specifically:

• Pressure to contain and predict legal costs,
• Frustration with double-digit rate increases,
• Off-the-scale associate salaries (and corresponding hourly rates); and
• Perceived unwillingness by law firms:
  • to discuss alternative fee arrangements, and
  • create lower cost methods for commodity work.

So, what's my point? Talk to the in-house counsel you know about your fee structures, and willingness to discuss alternatives to the traditional hourly rate. There’s a lot of work out there for medium-sized and smaller law firms because of their lower fee structure and flexibility. 

If large firms aren’t yet fearful as to how serious corporate counsel are about finding solutions to these pressure points, they will be soon enough. And just think how you can help them along by picking up more of their corporate work in the meantime.

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.

My friend Trey Ryder has an article “How To Build Your Image As An Authority” in his recent newsletter; and writing and speaking play an important role in building that authority image:

• Write articles for publication,
• Appear as a guest on a radio talk show,
• Offer opinions and advice on the TV news,
• Present seminars to other lawyers,
• Present seminars for your prospects,
• Write and publish a newsletter,
• Write a book, and
• Host a web site (or blog).

Trey also offers five additional suggestions dealing with the trappings of authority for consideration from titles, and office status to the car you drive. Take a look.

Reasons to do a blog:

1. “Blogs give Individuals, Companies and Brands ‘Voice’;
2. “Blogs are Conversational;
3. “Blogs build Trust;
4. “Blogs build Profile;
5. “Blogs are Immediate (meaning that you don’t have wait for your writings to be published); and
6. “Blogs are a doorway to Search Engines and Social Media.”

Reasons not to:

1. “Blogs Take Time to Mature (so don’t expect a quick return);
2. “Blogs Take Daily Work (not if you don’t post daily, two or three times a week can work);
3. “Blogs Take More than Writing (it can also involve monitoring comments, having a good design, marketing your site, etc.);
4. “Bloggers Can be Anti-Trust/Profile Building (meaning that depending on what you write and your tone, you could actually impact your reputation adversely); and
5. “Blogs Rely Upon YOU as a Conversation Starter.”

For higher visibility for your law practice, blogging may just be the answer. But if you aren’t going to make the commitment to sustain it, then maybe not. 

So, the question is: Do you want to increase your visibility, dialogue, and credibility with your intended audience? Blogging is one vehicle to consider as part of your business development mix, IMHO.

Check out Darren’s article for more, such as whether to turn your web site into a blog or start a new site, as well as some recommended reading.  You may also want to look over the 38 comments he got in response to his post to see what others think about the idea.

• 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.

But, if you are having trouble identifying the “ideal” clients for your law firm, think about this for a minute. Try using the reverse approach. By that I mean determine your ideal clients by deciding the clients you DON’T want. Some may say that is a negative approach, but what the heck if it works for you.

I can thank my friend (actually I’ve never met him, only spoke with him once or twice, but I really like his stuff, so maybe he’ll be my friend) John Jantsch over at Duct Tape Marketing for the idea on this approach.  He explains in his post “Who don’t you want as a customer?”:

“ It’s just human nature I guess, but we seem to have a much better grasp of what we don’t want in our life than what we do. So by first categorizing things like the types of customers that you can’t serve well, the kinds of people you don’t work well with, or the size of projects that don’t fit you may be on your way to better understanding your ideal customer.”

And…

“Now, while you are at this exercise you may discover that you are currently working some of these customers you now admit you don’t want. Do what you can to move them to someone who can serve them better and begin the process of narrowing your focus only to your ideal customer profile.”

Thanks, John.