Law Firm Branding – The Danger Of Illusory Brands

Over the last ten years, we have witnessed advances in law practice technology, the expanding roles of paralegals, and the outsourcing of legal work. Yet despite all of these cost-cutting and time-saving advantages, many law firms, especially the large ones, remain struggling for their very survival.

Only a decade ago, law firms were enjoying remarkable levels of growth and prosperity. Firm coffers were full and firms were spending significant sums of money on promoting themselves in order to enter new markets and acquire premium business. Some firms even began experimenting with branding. In those days, branding was mostly viewed as just another form of advertising and promotion. In truth, firm leadership rarely understood the branding process or what the concept of branding was actually intended to accomplish. But it didn’t really matter, revenue was climbing and profitability remained strong. But what so many of these firms didn’t expect was that, in just a few years, our economy would be shaken by a deep and fierce recession, one which would shake the financial foundations of even the most profitable of firms.

For law firms, the recession that began in 2007 had, by 2010, penetrated the most sacred of realms- the proverbial benchmark of a firms standing and achievement- profits-per-partner. For many firms, especially mega-firms, the decline in law partner profits were reaching record lows and it wasn’t long until the legal landscape was littered with failed firms both large and small.

In trying to deflect further losses, firms began to lay off associates and staff in record number. But the problems went much deeper. There simply were too many lawyers and not enough premium work to go around. It was a clear case of overcapacity, and it was also clear it was not going to improve anytime soon.

More than twelve of the nation’s major law firms, with more than 1,000 partners between them, had completely failed in a span of about seven years. Against this background, law schools were still churning out thousands of eager law graduates every year. Highly trained young men and women who were starved for the chance to enter a profession that once held the promise of wealth, status and stability.

As partner profits dwindled, partner infighting grew rampant. Partner would compete against partner for the same piece of business. The collegial “team-driven” identity and “progressive culture” that firms spent millions of dollars promoting as their firm’s unique brand and culture had vanished as quickly as it was created. While financial times were tough, in truth many of the big firms had the resources to survive the downturn. Instead, partners with big books of business were choosing to take what they could and joined other firms- demoralizing those left behind.

To understand why this was happening, we must first remove ourselves from the specific context and internal politics of any one firm and consider the larger picture. The failure and decline of firms was not only a crisis of economics and overcapacity, it was also a crisis of character, identity, values and leadership. Sadly, the brand identity many of these firms pronounced as their own did not match up against the reality of who they actually were. In other words, for many firms, the brand identity they created was illusory- and illusory brands ultimately fracture in times of financial stress.

Ultimately, the branding process must also be a transformative process in search of the firms highest and most cherished values. It is, and must be, a process of reinvention at every level of the firm- especially its leadership. The transformative process is fundamental to building a true and enduring brand. Without it, firms run the risk of communicating an identity that does not represent them, and this is the danger, especially when the firm is tested against the stress of difficult times.

How this miscommunication of identity was allowed to happen varied widely from firm to firm. But generally speaking, while firm leadership was initially supportive of the branding process, in most cases these same partners were rarely willing to risk exposing the firm’s real problems in fear that it would expose their own.

While decline of law firm revenue was clearly attributable to both a bad economy and an oversupply of lawyers, from an internal perspective the firm’s inability to come together and develop effective measures to withstand these pressures could usually be traced directly back to the lack of partner leadership. A firm that proclaims to be something it is not- is inevitably doomed to failure. Say nothing of the psychic damage it causes at the collective level of the firm. It is no different then the psychological dynamics of the person who pretends to be someone he is not- ultimately it leads to confusion, frustration and eventually self-betrayal.

It’s easy to indulge in self-praise when economic times are good. Some partners might even attribute their success to all that clever branding they put into place years before. But, when the threat of financial crisis enters the picture, the same firm can quickly devolve into self-predatory behavior- a vicious cycle of fear and greed that inevitably turns into an “eat-or-be-eaten” culture- which for most firms marks the beginning of the end.

For any firm playing out its last inning, it is simply too late to rally the troops or reach for those so-called cherished values that were supposedly driving the firm’s success. In truth, when times got bad, these values were nowhere to be found, except on the firms website, magazine ads and brochures.

The point is that when a firm is actually driven by its cherished beliefs and core values, the firm will begin to live by them, especially in times of adversity. The firm will pull together and rally behind its leadership, and with clarity of purpose, each person will do what needs to be done to weather the storm. But when there exists a fundamental contradiction between what a firm says they are, and how they actually conduct themselves both internally and to the world- the vendors with whom they do business and the clients they represent- the firm will never reach its full potential. It will remain dysfunctional and it will risk joining that growing list of failed firms.

The financial collapse and deterioration of so many law firms in the past few years is a compelling testament to the importance of insisting on truth and integrity in the branding process.

In 2014, it is clear that business-as-usual in our profession is no longer a sustainable proposition. For this reason I am convinced that firms driven by fear and greed are firms destined to eventually self-destruct. That is because, no matter how much these firms try to brand, they will never be able to brand truthfully, and therefore they will never be able to compete against more progressive and enlightened firms- those that do not worship wealth and power, but rather cherish personal and professional fulfillment.

There is a choice for those who believe their firm is worth saving- reinvent yourself to reflect values that are truly worthy of cherishing, or risk devolving into something less than what you aspire to be and risk your firm’s heart and soul in the process.

Law Practice Optimization and Its Place in Today’s Law Firm

Law practice optimization (LPO) is the process of improving the services provided by the Legal Industry to their clients. In today’s modern world, always being connected to your office and your clients is no longer just a luxury it is an absolute requirement. As we all know, the internet has opened the doors for the Legal Industry and allowed Law Firms to market and advertise themselves to the World Wide Web, through business advertising campaigns, which reach tens of thousands and perhaps millions of prospective clients, by just the click of the mouse. It is the servicing of the clients and the ability of the Law Firm to conduct their business in the most efficient manner is where the LPO surfaces its necessity.

As clients awareness of LPO increases, they will in turn drive the Legal Industry to adopt LPO methodology. The Legal Industry can no longer hide behind antiquated methods that are still is use today when dealing with the voluminous amount of paperwork, telephone calls, research, as well as, all communication and document production that is involved when dealing with the resolution of a legal matter. Before LPO, the Law Firm has been able to past the cost of inefficiency directly to the client by way of standard hourly billing. Since LPO, the Law Firms are being held to a higher standard of expectations and efficiency, and with the use LPO, these efficiency savings are being passed down to the client with better service for less money.

The use of today’s modern technology is now being demanded by the client. Having the ability to receive mail electronically, receive SMS messages for reminders or court notifications, is now the standard that is expected in the industry. Older, much antiquated methods like regular mailings, are no longer being accepted by the client who expects more from their Law Firm.

The initialism “LPO” can refer to “legal practice optimization” synonymous with “law practice optimization,” which is a term adopted by an industry of consultants who carry out optimization projects on behalf of individual Law Firms. These consultants or Legal Practice Optimizers or Law Practice Optimizers, perform an in depth evaluation of the current practices of the Law Firm and then provide recommendations as to the lack of efficiency being used within the managerial sector of the Firm. Many times, the LPO consultant finds deficiencies pertaining to the lack of adaptation by the Firm to utilize current technology and software that is available in the current market place. In many instances, the LPO consultant will find the Law Firm has become complacent with respect to the managing of the Law Firm due to their ability to offset any extra costs of being inefficient, directly in their client billing.

Law Practice Optimization does not stop with streamlining the internal practices of the modern law firm. It also covers managing the online exposure and marketing of the firm when appropriate, through the creation of a custom web site for the firm, and in addition the application of the now well established practice of SEO or Search Engine Optimization. This is now a common area of focus for the practicing LPO consultant since legal firms are now relying on new client intake via the internet, a well functioning and effective presence online is now essential.

Seven Steps for Picking the Best Birth Injury Law Firm

Choosing a law firm is never easy. A commercial on television, billboard on the side of the road, or advertisement on your favorite web page tells you very little about the quality of the firm you select. Recommendations from friends are good, but only if you happen to have a friend who previously had a lawsuit in the same area as you. Referrals from other attorneys who may know the leading experts in the area you need can be helpful. Still, the process of choosing a law firm can be largely mysterious.

Let me help clear it up. If you suspect your child was injured by medical negligence and are looking for the right firm, here are some steps you can follow to choose the best lawyers for the job:

1) Make sure the firm specializes in birth injury cases. Wouldn’t you rather hire someone who is familiar and comfortable with the area? Law firms with lots of experience in birth injury will be far better equipped to deal with your case than those who are new to the field. If you are getting a recommendation, ask to be referred to a firm whose specialty is birth injury.

2) Look at the firm’s credentials and rankings. There are a number of websites and publications that rank attorneys and law firms. These can provide useful information about a firm’s value, success, and reputation. Check out Martindale.com, Best Lawyers, Super Lawyers, and the US News rankings of best law firms.

3) Choose a law firm with medical professionals on staff. Success in birth injury cases depends on nuanced knowledge of both the legal and medical system. If your law firm has doctors, nurses, and other medical professionals working for them, they are better prepared to handle the subject matter and win your case.

4) Make sure the law firm knows how to say “no” to too-low settlement offers. Defense attorneys may offer attractive settlements that may be, in reality, far lower than the actual cost of lifetime care of a severely disabled child. You need an attorney you can trust to turn down offers when appropriate.

5) Pick a firm that has sufficient financial resources. Law suits can take years from start to finish – and when the payout only comes at the end, some firms will not be able to make the necessary investment. By looking at the size of a firm’s staff, the number of years they’ve been practicing, and evidence of successes, you can get some idea of their financial depth. This is needed if you want them to keep experienced attorneys and staff working on your case, potentially for a long time.

6) Do not choose a firm who demands payment up front. Injury attorneys are typically paid a portion of the payout if they win or settle your case. A good firm won’t rush you to sign an agreement if you are still uncertain. Make sure they are easy to reach and keep you updated on the progress of your case.

7) Don’t assume your firm has to be confined to your geographic area. Some larger law firms are licensed to practice in many states.