For my last session of the conference, I attended “The Digial Firm 2015 – The Changing Face of Professional Services Marketing Communications,” with opening remarks from Anthony Green, President of Concep, moderated by Dwain Thomas, Managing Director of Concep, and panelists Susan M. Snyder, Senior Consultant at Hay Group, Jodie Kaminsky, Vice President of J.P. Morgan Asset Management, and Royal Simpkins, Firmwide Communications Manager at Sedgwick, Detert, Moran & Arnold LLP.  The panel looked at new marketing channels and how they impact marketing professionals in a fee earning environment.  When the room was polled, we learned that a lot of the audience is using social media in their communications mix.  Jeannette McGarr wondered on Twitter what her attorneys would say about social media becoming the norm in firms. 

The panelists went into three case studies of firms using digital strategy with Concep, starting with J.P. Morgan.  They needed a reduction in cost, which for them, meant getting away from paper. They were looking for both strategic and tactical recommendations to help them to migrate their current contact strategies to digital, and used their competition to convince naysayers to get into social/digital communication tools.  It took 2-3 years for them  to switch entirely to digital communications, and now their marketing plans are much more integrated with digital media and have the same messages across platforms.  At the start of this process, they had 15 different databases, and have since merged all of them.  When all data repositories begin to communicate, the power is exponential for intelligence and relationship management. 

Continue Reading LMA 2010 – The Digital Firm 2015 – The Changing Face of Professional Services Marketing Communications

The client panels held during the LMA conferences always provide a wealth of useful information for legal marketers to bring back to their firms.  This year’s panel was no different – moderated by Michael B. Rynowecer, President and Founder of The BTI Consulting Group, the panel featured Eric Hilty, Senior Vice President and Assistant General Counsel of Apartment Investment and Management Company (AIMCO), Carmel Gill, Corporate Counsel, Legal Department of Level 3 Communications, Jeffrey K. Reeser, Vice President and Secretary of Newmont Mining Corporation, and Julie DeCecco, Associate General Counsel and Director of Litigation at Sun Microsystems, Inc.  The session was titled “What we love most about our lawyers,” and the panel started by saying that in order to stand above the competition and become a prefered provider, firms need to step up partner engagement and have a proactive knowledge of their clients’ business.  The clients listed a few of the law firms that they consider top of their lists, and one included ILN member, Holland & Hart.

So what gets a firm “on the list?”  One of the panelists counseled that lawyers shouldn’t make them jump through legal hoops, but should do as much for them as they can, so that they don’t have to do it themselves.  Another said that lawyers should identify the obstacles for their clients, think two steps ahead to the solution and articulate it.  Their impressions of firms come from their experiences with the attorneys of that firm, reinforcing the theme that it’s all about relationships.  The panelist admitted that she thought saying service was the most important thing to her might offend the audience, but as Kate Haueisen said via Twitter “we influence service too!”  The panelists suggested that firms have a dialogue with their clients about their expectations for communication, workflow, and sharing the work burden and they agreed that they are trying to isolate the firms that they have good relationships with and save some money. 

Continue Reading LMA 2010 – General Session: What We Love Most About Our Lawyers – A Client Panel

The first session on Friday was another session that delegates were excited for, and the big room was packed.  Moderated by Patrick Fuller, the Managing Account Director at Hubbard One, the presenters included Twitter favorites like Melanie Green, Director of Business Development and Marketing at Baker & Daniels LLP and Tim Corcoran, Senior Consultant at Altman Weil, as well as Robert D. Randolph, Jr., Director of Marketing and Business Development at Bryan Cave LLP and Steven B. Bell, Chief Client Development Officer at Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice, PLLC. 

Tim started the session by saying that the difference between business development and marketing is that marketing is the tactics to build awareness and identity, while business development is what you’re doing to further that relationship.  Steve wondered why there should be a distinction between marketing, business development and sales, saying that “we all want to ring the cash register.”  He said that everyone in the room is engaged in the buying process every day, and it’s marketing’s role to create awareness.  Anyone can take their own lessons from the things that they buy – buying legal services is no different.  Buying is emotional and justifying a purchase is logical, though he clarified that an emotional purchase doesn’t mean it’s illogical.  He emphasized that companies don’t make purchases, individuals do.  So you have to understand the individual.  As we all know, clients buy services from peope they trust, like, are capable, and understand their business.  This isn’t an illogical process, but they have to trust you.  Lawyers sometimes think that they can’t do this business development “stuff,” but it doesn’t have to be a close relationship.  They just need to build a relationship of trust.  Lawyers also think that they need to explain their capabilities in the buying process, but most clients are not even considering you if you don’t already have the skill set they need. 

Continue Reading LMA 2010 – Creating and Implementing a Sales and Business Development Culture in Your Firm

The second social media panel of the day was one that we tweeters had been waiting for, since our friends and fellow “tweeps” (as people who tweet are often referred to) Heather Milligan, the Director of Marketing for Barger & Wolan LLP, Jayne Navarre, the Director of Law Gravity LLC, and Russell Lawson, the Marketing Director at Sands Anderson Marks & Miller, P.C. would be presenting.  The topic was Social Media Strategies for Small to Mid-sized Law Firms.  Jayne began by introducing the attendees to the term “social web” as a catchall for technologies like Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook, and blogging.  Russell commented that entering social media is “like drinking from a fire hose,” echoing sentiments from the earlier panel.  Because of this, he said that he did research before engaging online.  Jayne asked them what their greatest challenge in social media has been – Russell said that it is getting people to engage frequently and Heather answered that it was finding champions in her firm who are willing to speak up in and about social media.  She added that legal marketers would be surprised at who the champions at their firms can be.  Laura Gutierrez commented via Twitter that educating attorneys about social media and time are her biggest challenges. 

In terms of strategy, Jayne advised that social media should be part of your day – it’s important to integrate it into your work flow and carve out the time needed to make it effective.  She said that social media tools are things that lawyers are already using, just reinterpreted through technology.  The role of the legal marketer is to help them transform what they’re doing into the 2010 version.  At the heart of it, social media is about engaging people, and if you’re not doing that, you’re wasting your time.  The panel pointed out that social media doesn’t require that lawyers stop other kinds of business development, like attending alumni events, only that they consider it as another tool they can use.  Russell talked about his firm’s use of social media, saying that he is having a tool built that will allow him to feed attorneys topics daily, which they can then write about on the social web in blog posts.  He already sends a social media tip out twice a month to his attorneys, and his firm has started @sociallawyers to help educate other lawyers as to what his firm thinks works in social media.  To get buy-in from the attorneys within his own firm, they write an internal document called “Look Who’s Famous Now,” which shows the exposure that  lawyers are garnering online.  He said, “We think clients want firms who understand social media.” 

Continue Reading LMA 2010 – Social Media Strategies for Small to Mid-sized Law Firms

One of the most well-attended panels of the conference was “Leveraging Social Networking – Real World Applications of Web 2.0 That Have Led to New Business.”  On the panel were John M. Byrne, Director of Communications at Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP and John J. Buchanan, Chief Marketing Officer at ILN member firm Howard Rice Nemerovski Canady Falk & Rabkin.  The panel was moderated by Darryl Cross, Vice President of Client Profitability at LexisNexis. 

Though the irony of attending a panel on social media at a conference without any wifi for the attendees was not lost on those there, we made do Tweeting from mobile devices and using internet cards on laptops.  The panel started by saying that social media is a way to collaborate, and firms should do it to serve their clients and get closer to them.  Cross gave some statistics that lend credence to the idea that social media is a “trend” that is not going away: there are currently 400 million people on Facebook, 60 million on LinkedIn, and 50 millions Tweets per day.  91% of the users of social media connect through their mobile devices.  Though many lawyers are reticent to join social networks for privacy concerns, Cross pointed out that there is Sermo, an online community of 130,000 physicians who share and deal with highly sensitive medical information thorugh social media.  The message was that if doctors can do this, surely lawyers can figure out how to engage with social media. Cross also mentioned Martindale-Hubbell Connected, which is an online network for legal professionals (If you’d like to connect with me there, you can do so here). 

Continue Reading LMA 2010 – Leveraging Social Networking – Real World Applications of Web 2.0 That Have Led to New Business

My second session on Thursday, March 11, 2010 was “Examining the Current Use of Alternative Fee Arrangements,” with presenters Lindley J. Brenza, a partner at Barlit Beck Herman Palenchar & Scott LLP and Reed S. Oslan, P.C., a partner at Kirkland & Ellis LLP, and moderator Gabriel Miller, general counsel at Sokolove Law.  Because this is a hot topic in the legal industry, the session was well-attended and spawned some interesting conversation.

Oslan started by saying that Kirkland & Ellis have been doing a lot of alternative billing, and believe there will be even more in the future.  Brenza agreed, saying that at his firm, they do nothing by the hour anymore for new matters.  To clarify for everyone, they put up a graphic of the four types of legal fees – hourly, fixed, contingent and hybrid.  Brenza said that his firm doesn’t do hybrid billing arrangements, because they are too problematic.  Interestingly, he added that the ABA considers non-hourly billing more ethically sound and client-focused than hourly billing.  The panel agreed that because of financial constraints in this economy, clients are willing to take more risks with their lawyers on how fees are structured – this was borne out in the general counsel panel the following day by clients who admitted to being reticent to use alternative fee arrangements, but felt pressured to find the most economically efficient way to handle legal work. 

One of the panelists pointed out that despite the industry’s seeming fear of moving away from the billable hour, hourly billing rates have only been around for the last sixty years.  When they took an informal poll of the room, most of those present were from firms doing some type of non-hourly billing.  Oslan said that it has taken his firm some time to get comfortable with the idea of alternative fees, and observed that clients aren’t always ready to take that route.  Brenza agreed and said that although his firm does work entirely on an alternative fee basis, clients come to them for their skill, and not their fee schemes, and it often takes some time for them to become comfortable with it.  But at heart, the panel said that basically, clients want less expense and more certainty.  Law firms can’t say that their work is too unique for a budget – it may be a leap of faith to handle work on an alternative fee basis, but other vendors are already doing it.

That being said, the panel agreed that the discussion over alternative fees is actually a lot bigger than the demand for them.  There are a lot of downsides to discounts, which the attorneys don’t always consider as part of alternative billing.  Oslan pointed out that most firms are pyramid-shaped, with the majority of the lawyers being associates, and billable hours are rewarded.  These types of firms can’t easily do alternative fees.  Firms built for non-hourly billing are structured differently – more diamond shaped with the greatest number of attorneys being experienced partners.  To be able to do alternative billing at a firm shaped like this, the partners doing it must be supported by the firm. 

The key takeaway from this presentation was that although the demand for alternative billing arrangements isn’t as high as it’s hyped to be, clients are looking for less expense and more certainty in their billing and firms will have to be able to adapt to best service their clients. 

For the first session of the day, I was in Track One – the Business of Law: Recovery: Refocusing the Inside Counsel/Outside Counsel Partnership to Maximize Profitability.  Presenting was Harris E. Berenson, Esq., the Assistant Vice President/Chief Counsel for Liberty Mutual and Senior Counsel for Liberty Mutual Insurance Company.  His presentation focused on the idea that inside and outside counsel have a partnership, and he started by saying that a partnership, at its core, is nothing more than a relationship.  However, although this is a simple concept, the challenge comes when trying to execute it.  Relationships, both personal and professional, must be built on trust, support, consideration, respect, caring and the mutuality of responsibility.  Inside counsel are looking for a long-term partnership – similar to what people are looking for in a relationship as they get older.  They don’t want someone who just wants to be “on the list;” they want a true business partner who knows their business and understands industry issues.  Because of this, they’ll often go with their gut instinct and recommendations from trusted friends and colleagues.  Berenson said when looking for outside counsel, he checks with his counterparts, industry peers, and internal teams – when later asked, he emphasized that he does not look at directories and rankings lists for outside counsel and said “they don’t matter.”   

Once the decision is made to work together though, how do both sides get the most out of the relationship?  Berenson said there needs to be a “mutuality of expectations.”  As an example, he said that if the client needs the firm to be available 24/7, the firm needs to be able to articulate how they will do that, not just that they can.  He said there must be “mutual hand-holding,” similar to being in a romantic relationship, but he clarified that by “hand-holding,” he didn’t mean constantly taking people to lunch or asking for their business, but showing the client that you’re a valuable business partner.  He also said that lawyers should show their clients that they can do what they said they could do, to suit up and show up, and to keep their promises.  Berenson said that each side comes with their own baggage, and it’s up to each side to figure out what that is, and how they can learn from each other. 

Continue Reading LMA 2010 – Recovery: Refocusing the Inside Counsel/Outside Counsel Partnership to Maximize Profitability

This morning, I was reading about Morrison & Foester’s launch of their free iPhone app, the first to be developed by a corporate law firm.  Reviews on this article in The Lawyer seem to be mixed – some think it was an expensive mistake, while others commented that they would be interested in it.  The app, which will have four function areas, will allow users to search MoFo attorney bios, read firm news, find information on the firm’s offices and nearby attractions, and even includes a maze game.

What are your thoughts on this?  My initial question was whether they’d interviewed their clients to find out what would be of use to them in an application.  The article says that the app came about after “noticing that the lawyers at the firm used their phones and handheld devices as ‘portable offices.'” but doesn’t make mention of finding out why their clients would want to use it.  I can see how it would be useful for clients to be able to search attorney bios on the go and perhaps easily locate the firm’s address and contact information, but how can the firm make their app relevant to their clients on a longterm basis?

Are any of your firms working on deploying iPhone applications?  Do you think they have any value for clients aside from making a firm appear cutting edge?

Welcome to ILN-terviews, a series of profiles of ILN member firm attorneys, designed to give a unique insight into the lawyers who make up our Network.

For our latest interview, we chose ILN member, Ioana Racoti of Zamfirescu Racoti Predoiu in Romania.

In one sentence, how would you describe your practice?
I am a business lawyer assisting a broad spectrum of clients, particularly in the corporate and financial sectors, in M&A, Banking & Finance, Energy, and Capital Markets matters. 

Who would be your typical client?
Local companies and multinationals with business interests and business activities in Romania, no matter the industry area they focus on.  We offer a full business law service and this enables us to support our clients in all areas of operation.

What would you like clients and potential clients to know about you?
ZRP always meets and exceeds a client’s expectations, by delivering flawless and outstanding legal services.  We are always one move ahead and know how to play the winning game.

What has been your most challenging case? Why?
Every project has its own particularities and characteristics, involves and develops different skills. Starting with approach, vision, innovation, legal work, team structure, capabilities, client relationship, set objectives all the way to how these objectives are achieved, make a project unique and challenging.

Still, there is one project I would like to share with you: the IPO listing on the London Stock Exchange of one of our clients – it was the first project of its kind on the Romanian market, involving a multidisciplinary team of over 10 lawyers. We worked with prestigious law firms and financial companies, and it was a great opportunity to share experience and knowledge.

What has been your proudest moment as a lawyer?
The set up of my law firm in 1996, at the age of 26, in partnership with my colleague Catalin Predoiu, at present Minister of Justice in Romania.

What do you do when you’re not practicing law?
Travelling around the world. And wandering through the streets of New York at least once a year.

What would surprise people most about you?
I usually deliver bluntly my ideas and opinions, my likes and dislikes. This could sometimes take other people by surprise.

What has been your most memorable ILN experience?
The Annual 2007 ILN Conference in New York, where I had the chance to meet extraordinary people and outstanding professionals.

What career would you have chosen if you weren’t a lawyer?
I would have probably been a biochemist.

If a movie were made out of your life, who would you want to play you?
Definitely Uma Thurman.

How would you like to be remembered?
Professionally, as an outstanding lawyer. Personally, as a reliable friend and travel companion.

During the first morning session of the conference, the attendees were treated to a presentation by Andrew Zolli, founder of Z+ Partners, curator of PopTech, and exploration fellow at National Geographic.  His Z+ Partners bio says: 

“Andrew Zolli is an expert in global foresight and innovation, studying the complex trends at the intersection of technology, sustainability and global society that are shaping our future. His firm, Z + Partners, helps senior leaders at some of the world’s preeminent companies, institutions and governments see, understand and respond to complex change. Andrew is alsothe Curator of Pop!Tech, the renowned thought leadership forum and social innovation network. Andrew serves as a Fellow of the National Geographic Society, where he is leading development of a global initiative to envision new scenarios for a sustainable world in 2030 and beyond. He was also recently named the first Business and Society Fellow of the Boston College Center for Corporate Citizenship.”

In a presentation that was “engaging, clever [and] funny,” according to Lance Godard, Zolli focused on future trends affecting us both personally and professionally.  Using demographics as evidence, he showed the audience that by 2025, there will be more elderly people and children at the same time than ever before in history.  Additionally, the “Boomers” will be in the workforce even longer, which will cause “intergenerational chafing” between them and Generation X.  Those who were born after 1970 are likely to take care of their mothers longer than their mothers took care of them.  We are also seeing a shift in education, with statistics showing that the most educated man in the United States is 56, while the most educated woman is 28.  These ambitious women are having a hard time finding ambitious men, and there are more single women buying homes. 

Continue Reading LMA 2010 – Keynote Event – Insights Into the Future