« December 2005 | Main | February 2006 »

January 31, 2006

Polling the Real Jury--Tom Kane's 3-part Approach to Client Interviews Makes Great Sense.

As others like Patrick Lamb have already noticed, Tom Kane at The Legal Marketing Blog has a short but excellent summary of a best practice 3-step approach to client interviews. Tom's formula nicely balances the need for honest answers from the client being interviewed against the importance of lawyer participation in the process. Why didn't I think of this? It's right here--and it's very good. Jim Hassett, Michelle Golden, Pat Lamb and me (although I got frustrated by conflicting good advices and un-valiantly checked out of the discussion at one point) have been having a lively and useful multi-blog discussion over the past week-and-a-half on this. Nice work. I learned something. And it was fun.

Posted by JD Hull at 04:33 PM | Comments (0)

Writing For Clients--Just Say It-Part 5. "Write Like You Talk"!

In December I tried to write four posts on saner writing: parts One, Two, Three--and finally Part Four, which set out the same 8 rules for sane writing which appears in our firm's Practice Guide for associates and paralegals. At the time I was flattered that Ray Ward at Minor Wisdom and Patrick Lamb at In Search of Perfect Client Service commented on these posts favorably because I know they both care about straightforward and sane legal writing. Long after finishing these posts, I noticed a wonderful post on marketing by Michelle Golden last October at her Golden Practices site. One of her writing rules: "Write Like You Talk. That's how people like to read. Even if you are writing to the most educated target market - keep it simple. The best test of writing is how it sounds when you read it out loud." I liked that.

Much writing by even the most talented lawyers, and especially by those just starting to practice, is characterized by an awkward and often wordy stream-of-consciousness quality in which the lawyer-writer is apparently "talking to himself/herself." This happens--especially on briefs or longer documents--because the writer is so familiar with the topic that he or she lapses into an archaic "code" and starts, in effect, to mutter on paper. If you just say "it" out loud in "people" language, often right away you'll hear a clearer and shorter sentence you can use. And you'll have a sentence an unwashed reader can pick up on and understand quickly and appreciatively. "Writing like you talk" is an effective way to get yourself back into gear when you're writing and you've lost your path. Thank you, Michelle.

Posted by JD Hull at 03:10 PM | Comments (0)

January 30, 2006

"Can Lawyers Be Taught To Market?"

Ellen Freedman at Law Practice Management has a thoughtful and fairly extensive post about whether marketing can be taught to lawyers, including the vast majority who may not be naturals. Her answer is clearly "yes". Her post follows recent commentary, including posts by Arnie Herz, Larry Bodine and Patrick Lamb, over the past few days in reaction to Dr. Larry Richard's comments to the Marketing Partners Forum in Florida noting that about 80% of lawyers aren't marketers by nature. (I chimed in, too.) Ellen starts out talking about developing networking skills early in a lawyer's career--and she's specific about how to do that. She promises more on learning to market in future posts. She seems to support the notion of some of us practicing law (including me) that everyone in a firm can effectively lend a strong hand to market--if not to "sell".

Posted by JD Hull at 12:25 PM | Comments (0)

January 28, 2006

Logos, Branding and What's in Your Name?

Julie McGuire and I are still waiting to hear from Bill Clinton in answer to Friday's ad to make WJC of counsel to Hull McGuire PC so he can help with both lawyering and branding--an idea which, by the way, we take seriously. Life's short, WJC's talented, branding is hard and, well, why not? In the meantime, while he's deciding what to do, we noticed an interesting post from Larry Bodine at Professional Marketing Blog called "For Law Firms, Names Are the Brand" based on an article printed in the Raleigh-based Triangle Business Journal reprinted on MSN.

Larry's post follows up quite a few good recent posts on the subject of logos by experts and authors in and out of lawyering and law firm marketing: Dave Opton of ExecuNet, Bruce Allen of Marketing Catalyst , Tom Kane, Patrick Lamb, Tom Collins, me (in the non-expert category) and Michelle Golden on branding generally. Okay, now we are getting somewhere. Shorter names are branding, according to the article Larry Bodine cites. That makes sense, and firms have been doing that. But let's get back to logos. Exactly what additional value beyond a professional firm's unadorned name--e.g., Jones Day, Freshfields, Clifford Chance, Butler Rubin, Hull McGuire--do you get in a "Coca-Cola" or "Nike"-like designed and copyright-able logo using the name? Does that help brand a firm?

Posted by JD Hull at 10:34 PM | Comments (0)

January 27, 2006

Wanted: Natural Born Marketer From Hope, Arkansas.

First, I noticed this blurb in Peter Lattman's new Wall Street Journal Law Blog about Bill Clinton's possible return to the profession. I like Bill Clinton. Face it--even a lot of Republicans like Bill Clinton. The guy's smart, knowledgeable, charming and connects with people. Second, earlier this week Larry Bodine and others reported on Dr. Larry Richard's assertions in a speech to the Marketing Partners Forum in Florida that only 1 out of 5 lawyers are natural born marketers. That troubled my partner Julie McGuire, allegedly a Republican, and me. So here's our new ad:

WANTED: Of counsel for growing Pittsburgh-based boutique business law firm. Must have at least 8 years of highest level federal Exec. Branch experience, world-wide connections, Yale Law degree, one year at Oxford, own money and people skills. Crowd-pleaser. Must be able to sell anything to anyone. And be originally from Hope, Arkansas. State government experience preferred but not required. Same for participation in Renaissance weekends, and fund-raising. United Nations experience also a big plus. You don't need to re-locate. Happy to set up the office for you. Wherever you want. Harlem or Chappaqua, New York are okay. Or DC. You decide. You can work out of your house. Whatever. NOTE: No previous private law practice experience necessary. Not a problem--no problem at all. Excellent benefits package.

Posted by JD Hull at 09:32 PM | Comments (0)

January 26, 2006

Polling The Real Jury-Part 4: Just Who Should Conduct Client Satisfaction Interviews, Anyway?

No puns intended--but I'm going to stay neutral in this. But would anyone care to join the fray in the multi-blog discussion of just who should conduct client satisfaction interviews? There's an interesting, important and I think relatively difficult discussion going on between Jim Hassett, Michelle Golden, Patrick Lamb and me. I'm just listening at this point. My instinct for years has been that only 3rd party neutrals should conduct them. Now I am not so sure. Shouldn't a senior member of the firm be present, even at the risk of dampening candor?

At this point, there seems to at least be an agreement that client/customer interviews are critical for any size firm. So roughly put, the issues are: (1) who should conduct the interviews--a 3rd party "neutral" (Michelle), a senior partner (Jim) or a hybrid of sorts (Patrick); and (2) what, if anything, should be the purpose of the interview beyond asking for feedback and improving the service rendered to the customer. This is an important practice management issue if you assume, as I do, that in the future client interviews or polling by professional service firms will be the rule--and not the exception--for firms to be competitive.

Posted by JD Hull at 07:37 PM | Comments (0)

Word-of-Mouth and Internet Top 2 Picks.

The consistently insightful and easy to read Tom Kane has a great post today in his The Legal Marketing Blog on what medias really work for small business (all law firms fit in this category, I think). Word-of-mouth and the Internet may be the top 2. Talk about flattening. Although personally I think that the more lawyers, staff and clients you have, the better position you are in to enjoy WOM power, the numbers Tom has in his post suggest that big advertising budgets may not rule where clients go in the future. Or even where they are going now. Malcolm Gladwell's The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference, which I posted about in mid-December, does an admirable job of explaining the dynamics of word-of-mouth--and WOM's great but fickle power to make or break us. I know, I know: there are hundreds of books out there people say you should read, and we are all mega-busy working and practicing law. But Gladwell's book is compelling to me because it strongly implies that there are ways to create and even control positive "buzz". And it's a great book for anyone who serves business clients. Read it!

Posted by JD Hull at 03:12 PM | Comments (0)

Will We All Be International Lawyers? Are We Already?

One of the things I've been trying to tell you all--like here in a September 30, 2005 post about the International Bar Association's meeting last year in Prague and the International Business Law Consortium my firm joined in 1998--is that law practice is changing. I am still not sure exactly why, how and how fast. But I am sure that the global economy's impact on competition in even the most basic and rudimentary service businesses is no New Age b.s.

Before law school I majored in History (not Economics) and wrote my honors thesis on something like "How the [Japanese] Shishi Got the Chutzpah to Overthrow the Bakafu". And, rather than Paul Samuelson, I read Chaucer, Melville and Hunter Thompson. So with these macro issues, I struggle. I speculate. I get comments and mail from people who imply I'm out of my area--and they are probably right.

So I'll stick to federal courts, the Clean Water Act Title VI appropriations for FY 2007, selling my firm's corporate tax and international practices, and making our clients happy. Besides, Adam Smith, Esq. (New Yorker Bruce MacEwen) discusses it a lot better in this recent post "Where Will Your Firm Be in 2015?" than I can, have thus far or likely ever could.

Posted by JD Hull at 01:11 PM | Comments (0)

January 25, 2006

Polling The Real Jury-Part III--"So Then Michelle Checks In, and She Says..."

No sooner did I finish a post just below about changing my mind on who should conduct client satisfaction interviews that Michelle Golden at Golden Practices, who I greatly respect, tells me, in effect, that I was right the first time. In a well thought-out and highly persuasive comment Michelle says she believes--and by the way I can tell she's clearly not drumming up work on this--you should use a third party neutral and not senior lawyers in your firm if you want the truth about your firm's services (especially if there is a relationship issue). And, she continues, don't ask for a referral because it likely won't go down well. Michelle also has a nice post about it entltled "Satisfaction Survey or Marketing Pitch? Pick One". I like fights, disagreements and disputes of almost any nature--and always have. But I'm dazed, confused and still thinking on this client polling thing. So I'll just wimp out and watch. Anyone else? Rumble, maybe?

Posted by JD Hull at 11:02 PM | Comments (0)

Polling the Real Jury--Hassett Redux.

Jim Hassett at Law Firm Business Development has yet another nice post entitled "How To Review Client Satisfaction--Part 4" on the subject that I call client polling, or client interviews. For a variety of reasons, this is a truly important subject. I had commented after Jim's Part 3 post that I thought only third parties--to ensure more honest, candid results--should do polling. Both Jim and Pat Lamb suggested a senior member of the law firm should be present.

My new thinking is that Jim and Pat are right. Generally, you should have a senior partner, and one not involved in the work, if possible, to do the client polling. Jim's reasons are important here. While I think eliciting the maximum amount of candor is a key goal of the interview, he identifies an even more important, overriding objective. A senior lawyer with your firm has the most incentive to carry out the goals of the interview: protect revenue streams from the client, increase them from that client, and get referrals. These are the goals of a senior lawyer inside your firm. And aside from doing great work for clients, what else is there?

Again, this really is an important topic. Well-done client interviews not only get you the real skinny on how you are doing, but you can ask clients what they really want. I'd love to hear more commentary on this one.

Posted by JD Hull at 10:47 PM | Comments (0)

Tom Collins Has Got a Bunch of Things Right.

Not only does Tom Collins at MorePartnerIncome have by far the best name for any blawg I've seen, earlier this week he may have captured what blogging is all about in a moving post called "Blogs That Improve Law Firm Performance". If you haven't read this entire post, you should. It is more than the title implies. Genuine, humble and thoughtful--made me want to keep doing this. It's right here.

Posted by JD Hull at 09:09 PM | Comments (0)

January 24, 2006

Rule Seven: Know the Client.

Rule Seven: Know the Client.

The "12 Rules of Client Service" I have been posting one-by-one starting on November 19 appear in a booklet Julie McGuire and I prepared internally 5 years ago for associates and non-lawyer staff. We just call it Hull McGuire Practice Guide* (*or how to become a productive associate or paralegal). In the Guide, we call the same rules "Blackletter Rules for Practicing Law". The idea is that each of the twelve overall practice rules harks back to the idea that the client comes first. Clients, clients, clients. For us, that is practicing law. Except for some rewording, the 2 sets of rules are substantially the same. The first six rules are reproduced here.

Several lawyer-bloggers I respect have posted--and in some very eloquent and interesting ways--on the idea of Rule 7, really knowing the client and its culture. I think they say it all. See Tom Kane, Patrick Lamb, Tom Collins and Arnie Herz. Some of the discussion lately was triggered by the nerve jangling report of complaints of some GCs at a Fulton County, Georgia CLE conference in early December 2005. I've chimed in on that, too--here and here.

The client, it seems, actually wants you to know him, her or it. Take time out to learn the stock price, industry, day-to-day culture, players and overall goals of your client. Visit their offices and plants. Do it free of charge. Associates in particular need to develop the habit of finding out about and keeping up with clients (and a client's trials and tribulations) in and out of the areas they are working in. Learn about your client--and keep learning about it. Devise a system to keep abreast.

Posted by JD Hull at 10:10 PM | Comments (0)

January 23, 2006

Why Lawyers Can't Sell--And What To Do About It.

Larry Bodine has an interesting post which points out that only about 1 out of 5 lawyers have the innate ability to market and sell. The conclusion is based on testing the lawyer population versus everyone else ("normal" people, I guess). So 20% of us can sell. And the remaining 80%? According to Dr. Larry Richard, a Hildebrandt International director, 55% are "trainable" to be rainmakers and the remaining 25% are "hopeless". A lot of this turns on the fact that many (if not most) lawyers are introverts and careful analytical people. Most of us do not have the people-oriented traits and interpersonal skills associated with selling. In short, the tests suggest, it's a personality thing. The conclusion is not that surprising.

But it is a bit ironic. The same "skill sets" based on logic and prudence that down through the ages have allowed us to do our jobs also have hamstrung us. We have trouble developing into people-oriented managers of living, breathing relationships with real customers. In fact, I'd go further than the tests Dr. Richards cites. My own sense (not a Hildebrandt study, of course) is that less than 20% of us--10% at most--can really put it together to be rainmakers. But I think that the remaining 90% can be taught to be marketing-oriented in very effective ways for both repeat and new business. Each lawyer can help and no lawyer should be given a pass. The discipline of getting everyone in the firm to be part of your marketing culture and making it stick is the hard part. Very few professional firms I know of have a client-focused or marketing culture. Even when they want it, they won't do "the work".

Posted by JD Hull at 08:35 PM | Comments (0)

January 21, 2006

Dial 'H' For 'Human': "Thank you for the opportunity to offer you excellent customer service. Please listen carefully to the following options as our menu has changed...."

Here's a sign of the service times. It's a Newsweek blurb from the upcoming January 23 issue on getting "live" customer service. A guy who apparently just wouldn't take it any more did something as productive as anyone could. I'll bet that several young couples name their next born son after a Winchester, Mass. man named Paul English.

Posted by JD Hull at 11:15 PM | Comments (0)

Law Firm Logos are Goofy, Useless, and a Waste of Time and Money.

At some point I'll reveal how I really feel about law firm logos. For the time being, Tom Kane in The Legal Marketing Blog has a nice recent post about firm logos. I agree that quality service and not logos should be the main event, as Tom and others say. And I would add that if you have a logo, don't change it--but if you don't have a logo, don't bother to develop one. Logos are really about your "look". Whether you know it or not, your firm already has this "look".

Your "look" is on your stationery/letterhead, envelopes and (if they match), your business cards. These all have your firm's name on it. Hopefully, these same patterns, lettering, and colors are reproduced on your marketing materials: website, brochure, blog. When people see Hull McGuire PC, usually underlined in burgundy with black Gothic lettering on pastel-colored stationery or business cards, that's us--our trade dress and our "look". Clients, agencies, courts, and contacts have been seeing it for 12 years. The repetition does it, and it likely has value. We wouldn't change that look even if we decided we didn't like it.*

A great example of repetition yielding recognizability and therefore value is the Yahoo! home page (and in fairness, I likely got this idea from Harry Beckwith's writing). First, forget about the easily recognizable Yahoo! logo for a moment (Yahoo!, Google, IBM and Coca-Cola have logos--but they've spent millions on them). Then go to the Yahoo! home page. It's very basic--even boring--but Yahoo! has stuck with it because people recognize it through repetition of the format you see when you open the page. To me, that consistency is bracing, reassuring. And, originally intended or not, it has value. Yahoo! knows the "look" of its home page is basic and boring, it can certainly afford to develop a new one, and it wouldn't change for the world.

* Besides, "HMPC" sounds more like a fuel additive than a symbol of quality legal care.

Posted by JD Hull at 08:47 AM | Comments (0)

January 20, 2006

Paul Caron, Assault of The Tax People & "The Top 10 Tax Stories of 2005".

I'm not one of them. But our law firm has several fine and very hard-working corporate tax and transactional lawyers. The tax people--Julie, Tom, Janet and Al--are curious and amused about this What About Clients? blog I've been writing since August 2005. Don't get me wrong. They're supportive (especially Tom). I am their friend, partner, co-worker--but I'm also a litigator and lobbyist who has lots of noisy, ambitious and aggressive friends and contacts--and not too many of them are tax or M&A people. My friends are mostly litigators/barristers, GCs, entrepreneurs, journalists, company officers, politicians, Congressional staffers and a few environmental and IP people.

But I'm here to tell my tax lawyer friends and co-workers that apparently there are lots of tax blawgs. And there's at least one that's well-written enough so that even I can understand it. It's edgy and funny, too. Nearly two years ago Paul Caron, a tax law professor at the University of Cincinnati Law School, launched TaxProf Blog. Tax profs from several fine law schools regularly contribute to it. The Wall Street Journal has called it a "must-read blog", and it's actually fun to read. Earlier this month, TaxProf Blog had a great post on the Top Ten Tax Stories of 2005. Near the end of that post, there are links to nineteen (19) tax blogs--10 by practitioners, 7 by professors and 2 by think tanks on tax policy. Nineteen.

Posted by JD Hull at 06:11 PM | Comments (0)

January 18, 2006

Compete on Service--Don't Reduce Your Fees (Or You'll "Be Hating Life").

Both Ed Poll at LawBiz Blog and Jonathan Stein at The Practice have had good recent posts (respectively, here and here) on this subject. Unless it's a trade-off for volume work for a client you've worked with before, I am a believer in the idea you should not reduce your fees. Compete on service--not price. While I've posted on this before, I like Ed's and Jonathan's slightly different takes (for different types of clients) on this topic better than anything I've said on it previously.

The primary reason, for me: if clients come to you for price, they will leave you for price. And if you think about it, would-be clients who negotiate or haggle about price are not likely to know the difference between quality lawyering and "just going through the motions" anyway. They are out there in droves--well-meaning but unsophisticated users of legal services, both businesses and individuals, who think all lawyers are the same and doing the same fungible cookie-cutter stuff every day. These clients don't appreciate any lawyer; they don't and won't ever get it. If one becomes your client, very quickly you--as a popular Washington DC disc jockey used to say--will "be hating life".

Posted by JD Hull at 02:12 PM | Comments (0)

January 14, 2006

Know Your Client, Its Business and Its Culture--Great Post From More Partner Income

Thanks to a nice post by Arnie Herz at Legal Sanity, I focused more quickly on another great post on January 10 by Tom Collins of morepartnerincome called "Why Don't Outside Lawyers Understand Our Business?". I regularly read Tom's blawg, but I'll use his post in an upcoming rule in the "12-step" program I've been writing for us service-challenged lawyers (we're up to Rule Six, and one of the final six will be about really knowing the client you serve).

Because understanding your client deeply and thoroughly can't be emphasized enough. In December Pat Lamb posted and I posted on the actual "real life" Georgia meeting of GCs that serves as a springboard for Tom's post. And consistently Tom Kane at The Legal Marketing Blog has posted a lot of insightful things about the subject. But Tom Collins's recent post says it all for me in his concluding paragraphs:

The dialogue between the panel and the audience of corporate counsels highlights the difference between what clients perceive as “good service” and what attorneys continue to believe is their obligation regarding quality service. It is not about how competent you are. You are supposed to be competent. It is about your “bedside manner”. You are in the service business. You happen to be in the lawyering service business.

If you want to retain and grow your relationship, you have to invest in understanding the Client’s purpose, its goals, its culture, the issues it faces, and even its “words”. If the client calls its employees “associates”, you need to call them associates. If the client calls its trucks “package cars”, they are package cars!

Excellence must be earned through the eyes of your client.

I add only this. It's more natural for any sane shareholder or senior partner to know a lot about his or her firm's business client, what it does, where it does it, who the players are, what its words and phrases are, what it says it expects from lawyers, and what its "culture" is. Call it a touchy-feely concept or not--but a "business's culture" is a living and breathing thing. All businesses have them. But everyone in your firm--paralegals, support folks and especially associates, who in our firm have lots of contact with clients--need to (1) study new clients, (2) "get" them and (3) keep getting them as life for the client develops and inevitably changes. I'm glad Pat Lamb, Arnie Herz, Tom Kane and Tom Collins and others are talking about this.

Posted by JD Hull at 09:59 AM | Comments (0)

January 13, 2006

"Who's Greener--Democrats or Republicans?"

Mainly for fun, I tried to answer the above question in an informal article with a surprising conclusion I wrote for the January-February Water & Wastewater Products Magazine as part of a bi-monthly column I write called "Waterlawged." One of my firm's practice areas is environmental law--especially Clean Water Act compliance and NPDES (National Pollution Discharge Elimination System, if you really want to know) permitting. Even if you or your clients are not directly involved with environmental or natural resources law compliance--and especially if you have an interest in American politics or what goes on in Congress--you might find "Who's Greener--Democrats or Republicans?" interesting. Or at least funny.

WWP Magazine, as dull as it sounds, has great writing and useful (if sometimes technical) content. Put out by Stevens Publishing in Dallas, it is the best clean water industry publication I have seen. And WWP is fast becoming the Vanity Fair or Women's Wear Daily of the environmental trade pub circuit. It seems to be in search of sober latter-day Hunter Thompsons and good writers with environmental credentials; the writing, of course, must be dead-on accurate. And funny is not required.

Posted by JD Hull at 09:16 PM | Comments (0)

Polling The Real Jury--"So Clients, How Are We Doing?"

Jim Hassett at Law Firm Business Development just finished the third of three excellent posts I've been reading--all on what I think of as client polling. Part 3 goes a little further and discusses the client service team concept, good for larger firms. I hope people pay attention to these. They are here, here and here.

Polling the degree of client satisfaction is a hard area. Methodology is everything here. I'm certainly not an expert--I have dragged my heels for a long time on developing a new way to do this which yields honest and useful answers. Most law firms, in my view, (1) don't have the will or the stomach to poll clients about what they really think, and (2) tragically, even when we do, we often do it the wrong way. From past experience, I don't think written responses work--particularly the multiple choice/check-the-box type. It should be face-to-face, as time-consuming as that is. Nor do I think it's a great idea, in many cases, to have someone in the firm conduct interviews. Using third parties known by the client not to be employees of the firm, while more expensive, is likely to get better (i.e., more honest) results.

Jim has done some great work here. It's comprehensive, well written, practical--and it fits any size firm.

Posted by JD Hull at 08:10 PM | Comments (0)

January 12, 2006

IP Theft and "Cultures of Piracy"--Sure those new Nike shoes are the real thing?

Even though it's a little (well, very) off-message for this blawg, I thought writer Sarah Schafer in next week's Newsweek International did a good job reporting and summarizing some aspects of IP theft--a problem not limited to just China, by the way, and one which has gotten worse. Twenty years ago in DC I got involved in IP theft issues for trade associations and single clients alike--the watch industry in particular. My firm and I continue to be involved.

These days, counterfeiters are bolder, bigger and better financed. Bogus American and European products which once circulated in just local Asian markets are now being exported. American businesses increasingly are confronting goods counterfeiting as they do more and more business abroad. And these days you don't have to be Disney, Microsoft or Nike to be adversely affected. One organization which has combated IP theft for years is the DC-based International AntiCounterfeiting Coalition which you or your clients can join.

Posted by JD Hull at 07:39 PM | Comments (0)

January 11, 2006

What Your Firm Website Needs Is...

Larry Bodine in a post last week tells you the answer. In the course of reporting a new study published recently in Law Firm Inc., he says that at a minimum a law firm website should have: (1) industry experience, (2) representative clients, and (3) success stories. My firm's website could certainly benefit from better "speak-for-themselves" descriptions of the industries we serve. I think I'll suggest using that idea.

And on the 3 minimum things, I agree. But on client identities (either in success stories or as representative clients), there's a wrinkle for me. I am not comfortable with listing specific clients--even though more than a few of our engagements involve courts or public record information. And I am very proud that several well-known companies here and abroad regularly engage us--and have for years. But I am not there yet. It may be me, a matter of form and smacking of old ways. But it seems to me that who we represent--while in most cases not technically confidential and maybe in some cases ascertainable from the descriptions in the site--is information not to be trumpeted on the website. I'd rather tell you in person. Love to.

So instead we have not listed clients (as some firms do in Martindale) on any marketing materials, and have described success stories on our website without identifying the client. Instead, we have made it clear in a summary/overview of who we are that we will make general counsel references available in a heartbeat.

Posted by JD Hull at 05:08 PM | Comments (0)

January 10, 2006

Just Drop Off the Key, Lee: "When To Fire A Client".

Here's a great self-explanatory post by Tom Kane of The Legal Marketing Blog. We tell clients who are potential defendants that it's better to have "no lawsuit" against them than to have a "slam-dunk defense". That's obvious. By the same token, it's better to have "no client" than the wrong one. Sometimes not so obvious?

Posted by JD Hull at 04:23 PM | Comments (0)

January 09, 2006

Patrick Lamb on GAL's Big Law Inquiry

In a Saturday post, on the question as I'd put it of "when, if ever, do Big Clients need Big Law", Patrick Lamb at In Search of Perfect Client Service advanced the ball the farthest to date using both sports (for Pat, non-critical Bulls and North Carolina centers) and military motifs. Since I'm a Lakers and Blue Devils fan, I'll stay with the military analogy, which Pat has drawn before and does effectively:

For me, I believe that the best answer is better explained using a military metaphor. Sometimes the number of boots on the ground matter. That's why we have the Army and Marines. Sometimes, and almost always for the really tough problems, you're better off with an elite Navy Seal Team or the Delta Force. Small and elite is where you get the best of the best.

As co-founder of a firm which never wants to be bigger than 25 or 30, I really like Pat's last sentence. Anyone else want to enter the fray on this? See the post of a couple of days ago which incorporates some great questions and writing from The Greatest American Lawyer.

Posted by JD Hull at 09:01 PM | Comments (0)

January 06, 2006

"What About Clients?" Rules--So Far.

Here are the first 6 rules, and "commentary", posted between November 19 and January 5. Just 6 more to go. When all twelve are done, they will represent what I know about servicing clients. I am grateful for the insightful commments, posts or e-mails I've received in reaction to these since November 19. Often they made me re-think things--and it's bracing to know others carefully think about customer service. Hey, a lot of people providing services just don't:

1. Represent only clients you like.

2. The client is the main event.

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

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

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

6. When you work, you are marketing.

Posted by JD Hull at 01:10 PM | Comments (0)

January 05, 2006

Rule Six: When You Work, You Are Marketing.

Rule Six: When You Work, You Are Marketing.

Rule Six is more a truth to be kept in mind than a "rule." This is where the needs of clients and their lawyers come together. It's about value to both. But you can't forget this one. Keeping or not keeping in mind the germ of Rule Six--that "when you work, you are marketing"--is the difference between having a financially healthy practice and having to close your doors.

Repeating Clients. We as lawyers are always marketing when we work. Clients and customers need and want their lawyers, CPAs, doctors, auto mechanics, store clerks and bank tellers to do good if not first-rate work. Professionals and other vendors of all manner rely on pleasing the customer in order to get more work. If you rely on or shoot for repeat business, good work--which includes the quality of communication and follow-up while you are doing it--drives whether you get more of that type of work or, even better, make inroads toward doing other types of work. (For example, my firm often starts work for a client in the corporate tax or environmental area--but we are always looking to expand our activity for that client to, say, employment practices, commercial litigation and/or international work.)

One-Night Stands. If, on the other hand, your practice is more along the line of "one-night stands"--i.e., divorce or criminal work where you generally serve the client once for a discrete time period--use your good work and service to obtain word-of-mouth referrals. See Malcolm Gladwell's 2000 best-seller The Tipping Point for inspiration on scores of good ideas on creating word-of-mouth dynamics. If you are not sure whether a satisfied client will refer work, just ask her or him to do that.

So we are always marketing--and in doing that constantly sending to clients barrages of small but powerful ads. The ads range from "don't hire us again" to "we want to keep your business--and get more of it". Pretty simple. But it's apparently not all that intuitive to many of us in the legal profession. I am amazed at how long it takes us to learn it. For my money, "Rule Six" is the best single thing you could ever tell a lawyer starting out. And, hey, it's good for both clients and their firms.

Posted by JD Hull at 06:11 PM | Comments (1)

Branding Revisited--and Explained. Golden Comments.

In response to the December 29 post on the apparent failure of most lawyers to brand their firms, Michelle Golden at Golden Practices got to the heart of the matter in a couple of fabulous posts (here and here). And Tom Kane of The Legal Marketing Blog added depth to the dialogue in his January 3 post.

Michelle is saying to me that: (1) we lawyers (and other professionals) are all trying to distinguish ourselves from each other based on words, (2) the standards/words we claim are the same anyway, (3) the standards aren't too high to begin with, (4) we can't even meet those standards, (5) truly differentiating your law firm from "the others" must come from actions--not marketing rubric, and, most importantly, (6) the actions can't be just any action.

Even actually providing "quality service" is not enough. That, Michelle continues, should be a "gimme":

[S]ervice quality isn't going to be impressive enough as a differentiator. Most firms pay lip service to things like "responsive," "on time," or "proactive" in their brochures or on the web. These are basic expectations, folks. No one can argue that they should be the rule, not the exception! Just as competence is expected by a paying customer, so is good service.

In marketing, nearly every firm now claims the above traits (though few consistently deliver) so while doing these might actually make you different, claiming them doesn't at all differentiate you, rather it throws you right into the pack. And citing these as advantages of working with your firms just shows how low the bar is within the profession, doesn't it?

All this "timely, proactive" stuff just sounds like blah-blah-blah to the customer who has found that firms don't usually do a good job despite their claims....

Real distinction, in my mind, is stuff like:

Value pricing in advance (using fixed price agreements and change orders as necessary)

Specialization in an industry or a narrow area of practice whereby you become highly visible in the circles of your customers

Humanizing your people: some do it through unique bios/bio photos and others do it by featuring "a day in the life" of their people.

Service packaging/bundling for instance offering a level of all-inclusive services such as the "concierge model" with no charging for phone calls or other access to you.

And real branding is hard:

There is a price to pay--an investment--in becoming distinct. Most firms won't DO these things because they aren't easy. And they are non-traditional. They are different. Innovative. Not safe.

But customers and recruits eat them up.

Posted by JD Hull at 05:29 PM | Comments (0)

January 04, 2006

Diversion: "Has the NRDC Gone Hollywood?"

While my firm is involved in several practices areas focused on larger businesses--ranging from employment practices to international tax to IP--my law practice over the past 20 years has focused on commercial litigation and regulatory disputes. And for many years a lot of that focused on environmental law and energy law--as many of our clients have a connection with fossil fuels. In writing a bi-monthly column for an environmental magazine of Dallas-based Stevens Publishing called (brace yourself) Water and Wastewater Products Magazine, I developed a new respect for my clients' sworn "enemy"--especially on clean water and NPDES issues--the Natural Resources Defense Council.

The WWP Magazine column's fourth installment, an article entitled "Has the NRDC Gone Hollywood?", is a snapshot of two things: (1) the NRDC on the eve of celebrating its 35th birthday, and (2) Hollywood put to its very best political and public service uses. Since 1970, the NRDC has been a boutique of first-rate "pro-environment" environmental lawyers. But in addition to the group's substantive achievements in the environmental field, I was impressed with how the NRDC uses the cult of celebrity and celebrity money to effectively advance its increasingly mainstream agenda. This gets done in large part through its LA office, which I visited in the Fall at The Robert Redford Building ("the greenest building in America") in Santa Monica.

Posted by JD Hull at 10:37 AM | Comments (0)

Proofreading--Simple But Hard

I'm very happy that Pat Lamb had a short post on proofreading yesterday. Invoices--which if done correctly are a great way to communicate what you've done for a client AND a marketing tool--are of course one set of documents we all need to get right. Clients can be expected to read them. But generally we don't talk about proofreading enough. It amazes me that badly proofread pleadings and letters still emanate from some of the best American and European law firms. It mars and even desecrates otherwise good and sometimes brilliant work.

Mistakes will happen in law practice in any event--but the idea is to minimize them, and especially those you can control. Proofreading errors are avoidable, even under the gun, if you make ardor in doing it a habit. My recurring nightmare is that the GC of my best client says: "If at $___ an hour you guys can't spell, believe me, we can find a law firm tomorrow morning that can." For that reason, as mentioned in the last "Just Say It" post on writing for lawyers, Rule 5 (of 8) in the good writing section of our firm Practice Guide is:

5. Proofread, proofread, proofread. (NOTE: We have a written policy on proofreading you must actually sign.) Pretend that, for every typo you miss or grammatical error you make, you have to buy Dan Hull as many Heinekens as he could drink in one evening in his late twenties on St. Patrick's Day in the most expensive Capitol Hill watering hole he and his friends could find.

Together with writing simply and clearly, I can't imagine a more important habit for any lawyer to develop. Misspelling, omitted or misplaced words and off-the-charts bad grammar are often important errors which blot out otherwise good work--and ones we can control. It's that simple.

Posted by JD Hull at 08:17 AM | Comments (0)

January 03, 2006

Blawg Review #38 and WSJ

Speaking of blawg reviews, here's something fun. And intelligent. See yesterday's post from Evan Schaeffer's Legal Underground with resolutions for better blog writing.

And the Wall Street Journal has a new law blog written by lawyer Peter Lattman. Based on the first 2 days of posts, Lattman's site promises to deliver the 2 things a blog really needs: (1) thoughtful content; and (2) good writing.

Posted by JD Hull at 12:05 PM | Comments (0)

January 01, 2006

Best 2005 Blawgs--Upward and Onward

Everyone loves blog awards. Or they should. I'm a believer in the utility of envy. Here, for instance, a flash, in my case, of "what-about-my-award?" can push also-rans or neophytes to greater heights. Since I'm new to this, I'll just watch for a while as I figure out who's who--who writes the better blawgs, and who has the legitimacy to give the awards. In the meantime, who can argue with any award to a site as consistently insightful and intelligent as, say, Patrick Lamb's "In Search of Perfect Client Service"? Or with awards to the blogs of Tom Kane or Tom Collins?

Awards for blawgs. It does seem like kind of a free for all--with self-appointed academies here and there. Which is fine for now. But can we at least give the awards a name? And, please, something other than the "Blawgies"...that's all I ask.

Posted by JD Hull at 09:29 PM | Comments (0)