8 posts categorized "Legal Marketing"

August 23, 2017

How to increase new business through active listening (Part 2 of 2)

Part 1 of this series included about a dozen questions to get clients talking.  This post contains over 50 additional questions which could help you probe into the details of client needs.  We start with the following:

  • What do you like about working with our firm?
  • What could we do better?
  • What could we do to make your life easier?
  • Can you think of any other ways we could help clients like you, or any new services we could offer?
  • Could we better use technology to be of service to you?
  • What type of status reporting do you like? Weekly? Monthly? Email or phone?
  • Would you recommend our firm to others? Why or why not?
  • If you managed a firm like ours, what would you do differently?
  • How would you rate the quality of our legal product?
  • How well do we listen to your concerns?
  • How well do we understand your goals?
  • How well do we understand your industry?
  • Do we do a good job keeping you informed?
  • Do we explain legal issues in terms that are easy for decision makers to understand?
  • Do you perceive us as genuinely committed to your business success?
  • Do you perceive our lawyers as prompt, responsive, and accessible on short notice?
  • Are our billing statements accurate and complete?
  • Do our invoices include an appropriate level of detail?
  • Do you think our fees are fair and reasonable?
  • In the past, what are some of the things that you’ve liked most about working with other law firms, and with ours?
  • What have you liked least about working with law firms?
  • When you select outside counsel, what factors are most important to you?
  • When you rate lawyers’ performance, what factors are most important to you?
  • How do you decide when to do work in-house, and when to use outside counsel?
  • What future trends in your business or industry will affect your need for legal services?
  • What are your biggest legal concerns?
  • How would you describe your overall impression of our firm?
  • What mistakes can be made when lawyers don’t understand your business and/or industry?

Note: While most of these questions address your service, they could easily be reworded to ask how clients perceive other law firms they work with. That can be an excellent way to get insights into where competitors are vulnerable.

With some clients, it may be better to start with big picture business questions, such as:

  • What are the biggest challenges that you face in your job?
  • What keeps you up at night?
  • Where do you see your industry going in the next few years?
  • What does your ideal customer look like?
  • What works best in finding new customers?
  • Who are your biggest customers?
  • What is it like to work for your company?
  • Who are the key people you work with?

Whatever specific topics you choose to explore, it is important to “master the art of the easily answered question,” as explained in Kevin Daley’s Socratic Selling.The book describes how to become an active listener by using simple prompts like these:

  • Tell me more about ____.
  • Would you elaborate on ____?
  • Give me an example of ____.
  • What else should I know about ____?
  • How does ____ fit the picture?
  • Talk to me about your experience with _____.
  • How do you handle _____?
  • What makes this urgent?
  • Why is this important right now?
  • What bothers you most?
  • How tough a position does this put you in?
  • How does this affect you?
  • Why is this important to you?
  • How does that sound?
  • Do I have it right?
  • If you were to go ahead with ____, when would you ____?
  • What else should I ask about?

To be honest, the first time I saw this list I thought it looked a little dumb.  By nature, I did not want to ask clients “tell me more,” or “do I have it right?”  I usually quickly thought I had heard enough, and of course I thought I had it right.  So I wanted to get right to the point and tell clients what I thought they should do. 

Many lawyers seem to feel the same way.  They’d like to get to the point faster by dominating the conversation. Probes like the ones above do not come naturally to many lawyers because they like to control the conversation. But guess what.  Clients do too.

Simple questions like the ones above can help clients think through a situation while assuring that they talk 80% or more of the time. 

Professional salespeople have an old saying that “Whoever talks the most will enjoy the meeting the most.” That’s one reason lawyers so often leave business development meetings thinking the meeting was very successful; they did most of the talking.   But then they don’t get the business.

If you want to improve relationships and increase new business, you want the client to be the one who enjoys the meeting more.

If you would like to create more specific questions to fit your client’s precise interests, one place to start is with Paul Lippe’s influential article, “Welcome to the Future: Embracing the New Normal.” Then use your background knowledge of the client to create specific questions about some of the trends Lippe lists: alternate staffing, predictable pricing, defined quality, client intimacy, technology, and process innovation. 

And if you want general tips on becoming a better listener, there are countless websites and books that can help.  You could even join the International Listening Association, which has members in 19 countries who “promote the study of listening… and pursue research into the ways in which listening can develop understanding in our personal, political, social and working lives.”

Or you could just start with these five steps:

  1. Establish genuine interest by asking questions that you care about.
  2. Take notes. Writing down what people say shows that what they say is important, and that you are paying attention. Just put the pen down if the talk turns confidential.
  3. Respond to the speaker’s nonverbal cues and monitor your own, including eye contact, smiling, and frowning.
  4. Keep people talking. Paraphrase, summarize, and restate what you hear. When you agree with people, they will think that you are smart. Especially if you don’t interrupt them or argue.
  5. Come prepared with good questions.

If listening does not come naturally to you, practice.  Make a commitment for your next meeting to talk no more than 20% of the time, or some other percentage. (The actual percentage will depend on the client’s needs.  There are meetings when you should talk 50% or more of the time, if the client wants to interview you about your knowledge.  The client is always right.)  Then, after the meeting, compare the percent of time you planned to listen with what actually occurred. Track the results over time, using a simple format like this:

TrackingListening_Template

Obviously, the “actual” percent will be a very rough approximation. But the National Science Foundation is not going to review these results, so an estimate is fine. The important things are to track your behavior and to improve over time.

This series was adapted from the fifth edition of the Legal Project Management Quick Reference Guide, a frequently updated online library of LPM tools and templates.

August 09, 2017

How to increase new business through active listening (Part 1 of 2)

Over the years, I’ve written quite a few times in this blog about the importance of listening. But in my opinion, this topic cannot be emphasized enough, whether you are focused on legal project management, business development, or just relating to your own family.

In The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People, Stephen Covey wrote, “If I were to summarize the single most important principle in the field of interpersonal relationships, listening is the key.”

In the book Primal Leadership, Daniel Goleman explains that effective leaders must be good listeners so that they can sense how employees feel, and then channel that energy into the most productive directions.

In the book Advanced Selling Strategies, sales guru Brian Tracy explains four reasons why “Active sincere listening leads to easier sales”:

  1. Listening builds trust. In a survey of professional purchasers, the single biggest complaint was that salespeople talk too much. If you show that you are interested in understanding what people really need, they are more likely to believe that you will provide it.
  2. Listening lowers resistance. It helps to make customers feel relaxed and comfortable instead of tense and defensive.
  3. Listening builds self-esteem. Everyone wants his or her views to be heard. So when you listen to a client, it shows that you respect their opinions.
  4. Listening builds character and self-discipline. Hopefully, this fourth point won’t come up very often. But from time to time, you may sell to a client who is, shall we say, not overly dynamic. As they keep talking, it’s easy to start daydreaming about which type of salad you should order for lunch. But the more boring your client is, the more character you will build by listening. And the better you understand what the client wants, the more likely you are to get a new engagement.

Why is listening hard for so many lawyers? Because you have to talk less. (One of the reasons I am a bit of a fanatic on this topic is that, like many lawyers, I would rather talk than listen.)

Many experts say that when you are building business relationships, you should spend 80% or more of your time listening. But when lawyers meet potential clients, many think that they should spend all of their time listing the wonderful things they can do. This is a mistake.

The client is a lot more interested in her own problems than in your capabilities. If she did not think you were good, you wouldn’t be meeting. So you need to devote most of your time to focusing on what she wants, needs, and feels. As the old saying goes, that’s why you have two ears and one mouth.

Great listeners don’t argue. That’s another reason many lawyers find it difficult. To listen effectively, you must give up the need to be right.

Improved listening is not only helpful in finding new clients, it will also strengthen relationships with existing clients. From a project management perspective, this may include not just communicating about the details of a particular matter, but also asking general questions about a client’s perception of value.

This brief series lists over 60 questions that will be helpful in preparing for client discussions. Just pick a few key questions that fit your  situation, schedule a meeting, and let the client talk 80% of the time. Do not argue or object to criticism, just listen.

You could start with these very direct questions:

  • How could we increase the value of the services we provide?
  • How satisfied are you with our services, on a scale from 1 to 10?
  • What could we do to increase our rating?
  • What do other law firms do that you really like?

For many additional questions, you could review the online resources published by the Association of Corporate Counsel.  For example, see their one page introduction to getting started with the ACC Value Challenge entitled “Meet.  Talk.  Act.”   It recommends that law firms begin by arranging “a two-hour bag lunch” with top clients “with a single question for discussion:  Working together, how do we improve the value of legal services?”

They then list seven issues that may be particularly relevant in the discussion:

  • How can we reestablish trust and improve our relationship, on both sides?
  • How can we assure an adequate flow of work so that outside lawyers understand the client better and can be more efficient in what they do?
  • How can we get junior lawyers better trained, priced at more reasonable levels, practicing law more on the front line, and less likely to leave?
  • How can we better budget and manage costs and staffing?
  • How can we better institutionalize the relationship?
  • How can we evaluate progress and performance?
  • How can we create a culture of continuous improvement, on both sides?

Part 2 of this series will list over 50 additional questions lawyers could use to improve active listening.

This series was adapted from the fifth edition of the Legal Project Management Quick Reference Guide, a frequently updated online library of LPM tools and templates.

July 12, 2017

Legal project management and business development (Part 2 of 2)

By Jim Hassett and Jonathan Groner

Stuart J.T. Dodds is director of global pricing and LPM at Baker McKenzie, one of the largest law firms in the world, with over 4,500 lawyers and 77 offices in 47 countries.  Dodds is widely recognized as a leader in linking LPM to business development, and he is the author of two related books published by the American Bar Association:  Smarter Pricing, Smarter Profit, and Pricing on the Front Line.

In a recent interview, Dodds noted that

In RFPs lately, we have seen very specific questions such as, ‘Do you have project managers who have certification? How and where have they supported client matters? Can you give us case studies for how you would deliver LPM concepts in a specific commercial situation?’ This gives the client a good basis to compare one firm with another. It’s more than the words on the page. It’s what the firm actually does. I think this is a very healthy development.

In fact, Dodds says, members of the senior project manager team that he heads (including over 40 project managers) typically become directly involved in the pitching process and interact with prospective clients as part of the business development team. 

This is how we tell the client that we will engage with them, if we are selected. We will take these nonlegal professionals into the client discussions in order to achieve the best result for the client.

When the firm begins work on a large client matter, a project manager is assigned to work alongside the attorneys. For smaller matters, the firm relies on a training program that it developed and executed in-house, in which all of its attorneys have been trained in project management to a high enough level that they can handle the basics of budgeting and planning, with occasional assistance from a project manager. As Dodds says, in those instances the use of LPM is “attorney-driven but expert-supported.”

Interestingly, as director of global pricing and LPM, Dodds reports to the firm’s Chief Marketing Officer. His 40 project managers are an integral part of the global firm’s nearly 400-person-strong marketing staff.

We see ourselves as part of the value proposition for our clients. We are not a cost to the firm. Rather, we contribute to the profitability of the firm.

This type of integration with the marketing department is currently unusual, but may reflect a growing trend.  In 2015, we published an article related to this topic in Bloomberg BNA’s Corporate Counsel Weekly™ entitled “Why Law Firms Must Change Their Marketing Priorities.”

The article started with an account of how Kramer Levin, a firm with over 350 lawyers in New York, Silicon Valley, and Paris, hired Jennifer Manton as its Chief Marketing Officer in 2014 in part because of her experience in using LPM to meet client demands for improved communication and efficiency.  One of the first things she did after starting at the firm was to arrange for seven lawyers to complete LegalBizDev’s one-to-one LPM coaching.  This pilot program led to increased confidence and ability to provide better price estimates, client communications and more.  Since then, Kramer Levin has gradually expanded this program with more coaching and other LPM initiatives.

However, our Bloomberg article also noted that

One of the many interesting things about this story is that Manton is a former president of the international Legal Marketing Association (LMA), which in the past reflected the nature of the profession by being associated with a more traditional approach to marketing. Marketing is often defined by the ‘Four Ps’: price, product, promotion, and place. Historically, law firm marketing departments have been involved almost exclusively in promotion. In today’s economic environment, that is a recipe for disaster.

It would be nice to report that since that article was published the approach of legal marketers has changed rapidly, but the phrase “rapid change” is rarely found in articles about law firms.

In fairness, LMA has recognized the importance of these issues by organizing an annual “P3 conference” (focusing on the “three Ps” of pricing, project management and process improvement, all of which are included in our definition of LPM).  However, to see how little integration has occurred to date between marketing and LPM, one need look no further than the titles of the speakers at this conference.  Of the 69 speakers at the most recent P3 conference, only 10% had titles that included words like marketing, business development or sales.

Nobody has ever said that implementing LPM will be fast or easy.  But the firms that are effective today in changing lawyers’ behavior, delivering more value, and meeting client needs will be tomorrow’s leaders in business development.

 

May 03, 2017

What lawyers could learn from other professions about change

Over the last few decades, many lawyers have gotten comfortable with their own success. But, as Microsoft founder Bill Gates has noted, “Success is a lousy teacher. It seduces smart people into thinking they can’t lose.”

As the law firm marketplace has become more challenging, a number of law firms have already lost. Just ask the lawyers and staff who used to work at Bingham McCutcheon, Dewey & LeBoeuf, Heenan Blaikie, Howrey, Heller Ehrman, Thelen Reid & Priest, or Thacher Profitt & Wood. Each of these firms had hundreds of lawyers at one time, but now the firms are gone.

These failures have often occurred with little warning to the rank and file. In a study of 37 large law firm collapses since 1988, John Morley of Yale Law School concluded that “law firms often go from apparent health to liquidation in a matter of months or even days and they never manage to reorganize their debts in bankruptcy and survive.”

Every law firm that has gone out of business had its own unique problems. But lawyers often use this as an excuse to think: It couldn’t happen here. Actually, it could. As Richard Susskind summed it up, “The legal market is in an unprecedented state of flux. Over the next two decades, the way in which lawyers work will change radically… Unless they adapt, many traditional legal businesses will fail.”

This type of rapid change has been seen in many other industries. In 2014, a medallion to operate a taxi in New York City cost about $1 million. According to a recent Bloomberg report: “Owning one used to be akin to owning a gas-guzzling, money-printing machine.”

However, thanks to the success of Uber, Lyft and ride sharing services, by 2017 a medallions’ value had been cut in half, and it is still declining.

There are many other examples of people who experienced great success and thought they couldn’t lose. Here are some of the companies they used to work for: TWA, Pan Am, Eastern Airlines, MCI WorldCom, American Motors, Montgomery Ward, Woolworth’s, RCA, Compaq, Digital Equipment Corporation, Wang, Drexel Burnham, E.F. Hutton, PaineWebber, and Lehman Brothers.

But the world changed and they didn’t; and now all those companies are gone, along with many others.

In the last few decades, the forces of global economic change and technology have radically transformed such industries as telecommunications, airlines, retail, mass media, and medicine.

Similar forces have now begun to transform the business of law. One of the most interesting analyses of lessons from other professions was offered by Clayton Christensen, author of the Innovator’s Dilemma and a professor at Harvard Business School, in a keynote presentation at a Harvard Law School conference on “Disruptive Innovation on the Market for Legal Services.”

Here's one example Christensen presents:  A few decades ago, steel was made in massive integrated steel mills, which were quite expensive to build and to operate. The products they produced ranged from low-quality rebar to the high-quality sheet steel used to make cars. Then, in the late 1960s, new technology enabled mini-mills to produce steel much more cheaply by melting scrap in electric furnaces.

At first, the steel produced by mini-mills was low quality and only satisfied the rebar market. Integrated mills were happy to let the rebar business go away because its gross margins were about 7%, and they could make 12% with higher quality steel.

For a while, everybody was happy. Mini-mills had a 20% gross margin and made a ton of money taking over the low-tier business. And the average gross margin profits of integrated mills went up when they stopped making rebar, because they had eliminated their low-margin work.

But by 1979, mini-mills had driven the last high-cost integrated mill out of the rebar market. When the mini-mills had only each other to compete with, the price of rebar collapsed by 20%, and none could make money. Naturally, the mini-mills concluded that if they could make better steel, they could go after a whole new market. So they attacked the next tier, angle iron with 12% profits.

Again, the integrated steel mills seemed happy to let them have it because they were making 18% on sheet and structural steel, and again their average profits went up. And the same thing happened again. Everyone’s profitability improved in the short term, until the last high-cost integrated mill was driven out of the middle-tier business in 1984 and prices again collapsed by 20%.

Mini-mills then found a way to make high-quality steel, and they now account for 85% of North America’s steel production. All but one of the integrated mills has gone bankrupt.

Could something similar happen in the legal profession, with lower-cost competitors first taking away the simplest work (say e-discovery and contract lawyers) and then gradually moving to more complex matters?

It is always dangerous to generalize across industries, but if you’d like to consider whether law firms are immune to massive change, you might want to study the history of other industries that thought they were immune, including:

  • Travel agencies
  • Bookstores
  • Newspapers
  • Airlines
  • Video rental stores
  • Mini-computer companies
  • Railroads
  • Canal operators
  • Buggy whip manufacturers

As jazz great Miles Davis wrote in his autobiography, “The world has always been about change.”

Now it’s lawyers’ turn to change.

This post was adapted from LegalBizDev’s new LPM Tools and Templates.

March 22, 2017

Lessons learned reviews – Part 2 of 2

By Jim Hassett and Gary Richards

After action reviews

According to the ACC Value Challenge Briefing Package, law firms should “Conduct after action reviews at the end of each matter to help continuously improve performance” (p. 8).

The concepts are basically the same as the questions discussed above, but the details of the process and the term “after action review” originated in the US Army. This approach is organized around four key questions:

  • What was supposed to happen?
  • What actually happened?
  • What were the positive and negative factors?
  • What have we learned and how can we do better next time?

Jeff Carr has written and spoken extensively about how lawyers should adapt after action review concepts. (Jeff has worked with Valorem Law Group since retiring from his position as General Counsel at FMC Technologies in 2014.)

In an interview published on the ACC Value Challenge web page, he notes that:

It is important that the process focuses on continuous improvement as opposed to dwelling on the past. To do so, the team leader presents first and bases the comments on what they could have done better (as opposed to what other team members might have done differently). This helps avoid an accusatory and adversarial meeting that becomes a “blame game.”

One element of the approach is the “hot wash,” a simple brainstorming session that solicits comments at the end of a matter and classifies each under two columns: What went well, and Take a look at.

Ron Friedmann described in his blog how Carr used this approach in a conference several years ago at Georgetown Law School:

In a session lasting less than 10 minutes, Jeff led the audience in a review… He divided [a] flip chart vertically in two. On the left, he made a column for “What went well” and on the right for “Take a look at.” The idea is to get fast, brainstormed, uncensored audience comments on what worked well and what could be improved. He spent two minutes laying out simple ground rules (e.g., say what comes to mind, think of positives as well as negatives, as scribe he would write down whatever was said without judgment)… In just minutes Jeff filled several sheets with many helpful comments.

In a comment at the end of Friedmann’s blog post, Jeff Carr wrote:

The technique is called “The Hot Wash” and came from a brilliant podcast series known as Manager Tools. I highly recommend this podcast series to all managers—but especially to lawyers leading teams for, as we all know, most of us never had any training in project management, people management, or people development, upward management, shop floor management—or for that matter, playing nice in the sandbox.

We [also] do a more formal after action process as well at the conclusion of every legal matter. We call that L2A2 (“Lessons Learned/After Action”) where we examine procedural improvement (what could the team do better) and substantive improvement (how can the organization avoid similar problems, or continue to do what went well). The team leader always goes first and talks about what he/she could do better (not what others could do better). In theory and practice, this gives the group permission to focus on improvement as opposed to criticism of team members. It’s not about fame, not about shame, but rather how you play the game!

More questions to ask

The following list of questions was inspired by Jeff Carr’s ACES (Alliance Counsel Engagement System) Report Card, a system FMC Technologies developed to calculate performance fees awarded to outside counsel, based on their grades on six key factors:

  • Understands goals
  • Expertise
  • Efficiency
  • Responsiveness
  • Predictive accuracy
  • Effectiveness

If you plan a longer review, some or all of these questions could be adapted to your situation:

  • Would you ask us again to do this kind of work?
  • How likely is it that you would recommend that a colleague hire us?
  • How well did we understand and meet your legal objectives?
  • How well did we understand your business strategy and help you meet business objectives?
  • Did we provide practical real-world advice and solutions?
  • How would you describe our substantive legal knowledge and expertise?
  • Did we use the best team to meet your needs?
  • Were all deadlines met?
  • Did we handle changes in your needs promptly and effectively?
  • Were team members available when you needed them?
  • Did we proactively take the lead when needed?
  • How well did we communicate?
  • Did we do a good job of explaining risks?
  • Did we keep you informed and avoid surprises?
  • Did we manage fees and expenses well?
  • Were our original budgets and estimates as accurate as possible?
  • Was the total project cost fair and appropriate?
  • How could we do a better job of delivering value?
  • Did our work meet or exceed your expectations?
  • How would you rate our overall performance?

Internal review meetings

In addition to your lessons learned discussion with clients, it can also be helpful to have a meeting strictly of your internal team to increase team efficiency and morale. For firms that have a formal knowledge management system in place, meetings like this can be especially helpful in capturing insights and experiences that can be of great value to the firm in the future.

Obviously, some of the questions you ask in an internal meeting will be different from those you would ask a client. In the book, Implementing Value Pricing, Ron Baker provided a long list of questions for such meetings (p. 317), including:

  • What could we do better next time?
  • Did we add value for this customer?
  • Did we have the right team on this engagement?
  • Did this engagement enhance our relationship with this customer?
  • What other needs does this customer have and are we addressing them?
  • Did we learn any new intellectual capital that we could leverage across other customers?
  • Should we communicate the lessons on this engagement to our colleagues and how?

The last two questions can yield important knowledge management results, including exhibit formats, checklists, briefs, innovative arguments, and more. And, as noted on the web page Knowledge Management Online:

Effective knowledge management should dramatically reduce costs. Most individuals, teams and organizations are today continually “reinventing the wheel.” This is often because they simply do not know… what is already known, or they do not know where to access the knowledge. Continually reinventing the wheel is… a costly and inefficient activity.… Knowledge management… should also dramatically increase our speed of response as a direct result of better knowledge access and application.

A final thought

Given the potential benefits of a lessons learned discussion at the end of every important matter and at critical junctures in large matters, why would anyone ever skip this step?

Because you are already too busy on the next matter? Because you hate to put time into non-billable activity? Because you feel awkward about discussions like this?

In the long run, these are terrible answers. As the legal profession becomes ever more competitive, lawyers who fail to find time to understand what clients want and need today may find themselves with a whole lot of free time tomorrow.

This post was adapted from LegalBizDev’s new LPM Tools and Templates.

March 15, 2017

Lessons learned reviews – Part 1 of 2

By Jim Hassett and Gary Richards

Some lawyers hold meetings at the end of every significant matter to review what worked, what didn’t, and what could be done better the next time. In large matters, they also conduct these “lessons learned” reviews after completing each significant milestone or phase.

These discussions are a learning opportunity and a marketing opportunity. Such a discussion can enhance your relationship, help you learn more about what an existing client values most, and enable you to provide more value. If a large matter is at a pivotal point, a mid-course review and redirection could be the difference between success and failure. Could you possibly think of a better way to develop new business?

The lessons learned review could be long or short. You could hold a formal group meeting and send the questions in advance, or you can simply ask your client some of the questions below. If you think of this as marketing, it will be obvious that it is better to have the discussion in person, maybe even over lunch. The phone can be a good second choice, but email is a distant third. You want to get people to open up and speak freely, and that is unlikely to happen via email.

The length and formality of the process should depend on the size and significance of the matter, your relationship with the client, and on how much work they are likely to have for you in the future. This section lists a number of different questions you might ask. In many cases, the first two will be enough.

The two most important questions

Unless there is a major open issue requiring an immediate joint review, or a client requests a lengthy discussion, we recommend that you assume that clients have little time to spare. This may mean limiting the debrief to two simple questions:

  1. What did you like about the way we handled this matter?
  2. What could we do better?

The first question is a classic “easy to answer” opening. Ask this one first, because it will get people talking freely.

The second question is the one you really care about, since you are likely to learn far more from criticism than from praise. No matter how much clients like your work, they can always like it more. And in today’s highly competitive environment, it is in your interest to turn every client into a raving fan.

If the second question opens the door to a laundry list of complaints, do not get defensive. Do not argue, disagree or explain your position. In fact, at most lessons learned meetings you should say very little and listen more than 90% of the time. Keep probing for more information. These meetings are designed not to understand reality, but rather to understand the client’s perception of reality. Because when it comes to client satisfaction and new business, perception is everything.

When clients raise problems, you need to reassure them that things will be better in the future. But in most cases you should not get into the details at the initial discussion. You need time to think about the best way to solve the problem, and to assure client satisfaction. So be prepared to say something like, “That is an important issue. Let me talk to a few people about the best way of preventing that from happening again, and then I will get back to you.”

Of course, if you do promise to get back to your client with a solution, you must put a high priority on completing follow-up as soon as possible.

If your time is limited, and your clients’ time is too, you can stop here. But if you want to consider more questions, read on.

Two more questions you could ask

If you have time to probe deeper, you can also add one or both of these optional questions:

  1. Working together, how can we improve the value you receive in the future on matters like this?
  2. On a scale from 1 to 10, how satisfied are you with our firm?

The first question is optional and focuses on the issue which is most likely to lead to new business: how to increase perceived value. This is a slight rephrasing of a key question suggested in the ACC Value Challenge Briefing Package (p. 7). Note the phrase “working together,” which stresses the need to align interests and collaborate more closely.

The second question is also optional. There are many ways to phrase effective questions about client satisfaction, but the best way is to ask for a numerical rating, because it forces clarity and frankness.

We ask our own clients this question at the end of every program we deliver, and to be honest, many shy away from giving a number. The client is always right, so if they don’t want to be pinned down with a number, we go with the flow. The important thing is to begin a genuine conversation about satisfaction, and to encourage clients to talk about the things you really need to hear, rather than more comfortable vague praise.

If clients do give you a number, there’s a good chance it will be lower than you expected. The reason is that most people overrate themselves. Psychologists call this the Lake Wobegon effect, named after Garrison Keillor’s fictional community in which “all the women are strong, all the men are good-looking, and all the children are above average.”

The best place to see this effect in the legal community is in a series of surveys published in Inside Counsel magazine comparing ratings of satisfaction from clients and the law firms who serve them. In one such survey, 43% of lawyers thought they were earning an A for their work, but only 17% of their clients agreed. So if you think you deserve an A, you’re probably wrong.

Another way to get at this fundamental issue is to ask, “On a scale from 1 to 10, how likely is it that you would recommend us to a friend or colleague?”

In his business bestseller, The Ultimate Question, Fred Reichheld argues that companies should focus more attention on loyalty by measuring the response to this one simple question. Reichheld and his colleagues at Bain have published several books and many studies showing that companies with high customer loyalty rates grow revenues twice as fast as their competitors. They have also shown that companies can increase profits by 25% to 100% simply by increasing customer retention by 5%.

Clients who rate the likelihood at 9 or 10 out of 10 are called “promoters” and are responsible for generating sustainable growth. You might think 7 or 8 on this 10-point scale would also be pretty good, but Reichheld has found that these people are motivated more by inertia than by enthusiasm. He calls this middle group “passives” and notes that they will often jump to another company at the first sign of a better deal.

The most serious business risk comes from “detractors,” people who rate the likelihood of referrals at 0 to 6 on that 10-point scale. From a strict financial view, many of these detractors may be profitable in the short term, but Reichheld notes that, “Customers who feel ignored or mistreated find ways to get even. They drive up service costs by reporting numerous problems. They demoralize frontline employees with their complaints and demands” (p. 6). 

Eighty percent of negative comments come from this detractor group, and in this age of email and internet ratings, a single complaint can reach hundreds of potential clients in the time it takes to hit the send button. In short, detractors “suck the life out of a firm” (p. 30).

This post was adapted from LegalBizDev’s new LPM Tools and Templates.

January 18, 2017

How Agile is being used to increase legal marketing innovation at Fasken Martineau

Agile is a highly flexible approach to project management which law firms are just starting to use. I’ve written several posts in this blog about how Agile works and how some lawyers are applying it to improve legal efficiency by focusing on two key questions:

  • How can we deliver value more quickly to our clients?
  • How should we measure our progress?

So when I heard recently that one of our clients was using Agile techniques to increase innovation in their marketing and business development department, I immediately scheduled an interview with Brenda Plowman, the Chief Marketing Officer (CMO) at Fasken Martineau, an international business law and litigation firm with more than 700 lawyers.

The Fasken Martineau marketing and business development department includes people operating from eight offices, six in Canada, one in the UK, and one in South Africa. Plowman has worked in the department for more than 10 years. When she was promoted to the CMO position in July 2015, she noted that:

Over my history here I’d seen many underutilized talents with the potential to help us transform and offer better services to our lawyers. I wanted to reinvent our group. But how could I get people to change when I was coming to work at the same place and with the same people I’ve known for a long time?

We did a survey of the marketing and business development team because we wanted to see what they were thinking. One of the responses was, "The firm doesn’t ask us to innovate enough. It doesn’t expect us to be creative." People didn’t feel that they could bring their ideas forward and they felt that, frankly, they weren’t expected to bring their best game.

Plowman decided to start by adapting two Agile-related concepts: hackathons to creatively generate ideas for improvement and scrum to deliver them and “make sure we were actually accomplishing what we had set out to do.”

Hackathons originated in the software development world and consist of intense meetings in which groups of programmers and others collaborate intensively to solve a particular problem. With the help of a consultant, Plowman adapted the hackathon concept to legal marketing, and in June of 2016 they held their first three-hour hackathon with the team (two sessions with multiple locations involved in each) aimed at coming up with creative ideas to improve marketing efficiency and results on a specific topic. Candidly she admitted that:

At first people were saying, "I don’t know why I’m here." But when a second session was held in October, there was much more engagement and people began to focus on, "How can we go faster and get more done in the limited time we have?”

They created a list of key areas “in which we wanted to improve what we had been providing previously and increase the value we were delivering to lawyers.”

One of the unique aspects of these hackathons is that they were led by the Manager group. Historically, real opportunities for leadership and development were only handled by the Senior Marketing Team (the Director level). That team was committed to developing their Managers and creating opportunity for their growth and development. The Managers were empowered and did a great job working with the teams and bringing the recommendations forward to the Senior Marketing Team (SMT). This aspect is key in Plowman’s vision to leverage the talent on her team.

In addition, the marketing and business development team has started a significant transformation with many changes in place. The Directors have taken on pieces of this transformation and are leading this change with Plowman. There are a lot of moving parts and demands on the team. This led Plowman to adapt another Agile software development technique: scrum. Initially she provided the Directors (the SMT) a copy of the book Scrum: The Art of Doing Twice the Work in Half the Time as part of the “book club” for this group. After the SMT read it and met on it during an in-person meeting, they then expanded to the Managers as a part of their development and a way to encourage them to innovate and drive their project forward. (This book is an excellent resource for law firms and I will write a separate blog soon describing its key concepts.)

This has now evolved into a 30-minute weekly telecon held every Monday by this group to discuss four substantial projects and several other key initiatives that the team is working on (including digital transformation and social media), in which Fasken’s marketing and business development department is concentrating its efforts to become best-in-class:

The group is using some of the techniques from the scrum book to establish and measure specific goals for the next 30, 60, and 90 days. The Monday meetings are organized around three key questions familiar to anyone who has ever been involved with scrum:

  1. What did we accomplish last week?
  2. What is planned for this week?
  3. Are there any obstacles to progress?

One result of the Monday meetings is that, “People collaborate to identify obstacles. It’s also been really helpful for me as the leader of the group because I learn how I can expedite what needs to get done this week.”

This initiative is very much a work-in-progress, but participants in the weekly meetings have already produced results. “Scrum has helped us to go faster, do more, and get obstacles out of our way. It’s increased transparency, which drives efficiency and effectiveness. And it’s created cultural change within our team. The learning is coming faster and faster.”

Plowman and her team would like to expand the program in the coming year to include lawyers. She predicts that the next steps will be even more exciting “when we get to working with our lawyers and going through the process together with them.”

January 04, 2017

Tip of the month: Develop a defensive marketing plan for 2017

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: As legal competition continues to get tougher, it’s more important than ever to focus on protecting relationships with the clients you already have. What will you do in 2017 to protect your top client relationships? In the current competitive environment, no client can be taken for granted, no matter how long you have worked for them. If they are already happy with your service, what could you do to make them even happier? If you’re not sure, ask them. And then do it.

The first Wednesday of every month is devoted to a short and simple reminder like this to help lawyers increase efficiency, provide greater value to their clients, and/or develop new business.