Solo Practice University® » Marketing

You Ask…I Answer. Should I Put My Picture on My Business Card?

Susan Cartier Liebel — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 12:30:32 +0000

Question: Susan, I can think of no better person to settle this debate than you. Recently, I was in a law practice course and it was suggested that solos put their pictures on their business cards –like real estate agents commonly do, and make them “glossy.” Some say this is sort of unprofessional –again, like something a real estate agent would do. I can see the benefit of it, especially after considering the rationale –the person may forget your face and this is a reminder, etc. and the glossy surface can’t be written over. However, I also think it is a bit cheesey –especially when people use outdated pictures, etc. I will say that when my card (which has a nice logo, etc) was placed next to a glossy one with a picture and what-not, mine looked plain….What is your take on this?

I believe the ultimate answer is very personal to the individual attorney. And the individual attorney has to consider who their audience is. Using face recognition is valid because if after meeting you, whether an event or a free consultation, if they go to your website to check you out where you DO have a picture they know they’ve landed on the right site. This alone can make it worthwhile given the number of website’s out there.

More importantly, the more they see your face the further it pushes the potential client down the road toward conversion to paying client which is the goal, right? The more touching points a client has with you, the more likely they are to connect with you, again, and again. And if this idea of putting a picture on your business card seems cheesy, think of this; You put your picture on your website, your Facebook page, your YouTube videos, LinkedIn, Twitter, Google +, possibly brochures. Why would not put your picture on this small square of paper to reinforce the connection once having actually met the potential client?

You also mention in the same paragraph that some are of the opinion that real estate agents do it and therefore it is unprofessional. Is it? Or maybe they know something lawyers don’t – visual recognition is a powerful tool. In the next breath you say you believe it to be ‘cheesy’. Is it cheesy? Or is it that historically lawyers have never done it so you question the validity of doing it? Given what’s happening in the legal profession today, it seems to me we should all be looking for ways to break away from the pack. Imagine you are at a networking event just having collected thirty cards. Which one is going to stand out to you when you review them later? (A little secret? I’m a visual person. When I scan the Facebook Timeline, LinkedIn and Twitter I’m looking for pictures of those I follow, not names. I forget names easily, but never faces. When someone changes their avatar I get thrown off. How many potential clients are like me?) The better question to ask is ‘does it help me more than hurt me to have a picture on my business card?’

Personally, if I was practicing today. I would consider it and not dismiss it out of hand simply because realtors (who are professionals) do it and realtors are sales people and lawyers don’t like the association with sales people. If you think it’s cheesy because people use outdated pictures, don’t use an outdated picture! But do use the same professional picture on all your advertising such as your web presences and brochures so clients and colleagues can continue to make the connection to you. The more often they connect, the closer you get to a new client.

What do you think? Do you use a picture on your business card already? How has it been received?

Written by Susan Cartier Liebel

What is Marketing Anyway?

Susan Cartier Liebel — Mon, 23 Jan 2012 12:30:33 +0000

Last week someone I know sent me an e-mail and asked if I was following the hashtagged conversation #MPF12. I guess it was a marketing convention in Miami. I wasn’t following it; didn’t know about it. But the thrust of this lawyer’s concern was as he watched the tweets he was appalled as what he was reading…from lawyers! We good naturedly went back and forth about legal marketing but it reminded me of how misunderstood true marketing is by most. So I am resurrecting this post about marketing I wrote a few years ago which ultimately got highlighted by the ABA Journal Online. I certainly would like to know your thoughts, as always.

“If a young man tells his date she’s intelligent, looks lovely, and is a great conversationalist, he’s saying the right things to the right person and that’s marketing. If the young man tells his date how handsome, smart and successful he is — that’s advertising. If someone else tells the young woman how handsome, smart and successful her date is — that’s public relations.”S.H. Simmons

In the past week or so the great debate in the legal profession – legal marketing – has reared its head, again. And it has brought out the zealots on both sides. Within the profession legal marketing is a hot button issue like abortion, gay rights and stem cell research. There are extremists on each side of the debate and the majority who reside somewhere in the middle.

The problem is everyone talks about marketing as if they know what it really is. The reality is most don’t but they have strong opinions, nonetheless. While the above is illustrative and done with humor, here are some definitions which might help enlighten and provide you some intelligent dialogue when someone starts the ‘great debate’:

The Philosophy Marketing and the Marketing Concept.

The marketing concept is a philosophy. It makes the customer, and the satisfaction of his or her needs, the focal point of all business activities.

Marketing is not only much broader than selling, it is not a specialized activity at all. It encompasses the entire business. It is the whole business seen from the point of view of the final result, that is, from the customer’s point of view. Concern and responsibility for marketing must therefore permeate all areas of the enterprise. Drucker.

This customer focused philosophy is known as the ‘marketing concept’. The marketing concept is a philosophy, not a system of marketing or an organizational structure. It is founded on the belief that profitable sales and satisfactory returns on investment can only be achieved by identifying, anticipating and satisfying customer needs and desires. Barwell.

The achievement of corporate goals through meeting and exceeding customer needs better than the competition. Jobber.

Implementation of the marketing concept [in the 1990's] requires attention to three basic elements of the marketing concept. These are: Customer orientation; An organization to implement a customer orientation; Long-range customer and societal welfare. Cohen.

From the Marketing Teacher

Another popular definition is:

Marketing consists of the strategies and tactics used to identify, create and maintain satisfying relationships with customers that result in value for both the customer and the marketer.

Therefore, it is fairly obvious that true marketing is all about the customer or (in the legal profession) the client and client-orientation is the cornerstone to client satisfaction which results in profitability (hopefully) for the lawyer. If done correctly it is positioned as a 100%/100% win for client and lawyer.

To say in any way shape or form that lawyers, new or old, should not market, shows a lack of understanding about what marketing is. It is my experience that those who claim lawyers ‘shouldn’t market…it’s not dignified’ are not really talking about marketing at all. We all market in everything we do intentionally or not. What they are talking about, in my opinion, is less the actual concept or philosophy of marketing and more the manner in which a marketing plan is ‘executed’.

Strategies and Tactics

Strategies are best explained as the direction the marketing effort takes over some period of time while tactics are actionable steps or decisions made in order to follow the strategies established.

And this is at the heart of the great debate.

When one lawyer says, “that type of marketing drags down the profession” they are passing judgment less on the marketing philosophy and more on the ‘tactics’ they find distasteful. But is it to the benefit or taste of that lawyer’s potential client? If the goal is ‘customer orientation’ and ‘an organization to implement a customer orientation; long-range customer and societal welfare’ we have to look through the eyes of the client.

Strategies and tactics that would appeal to me or make me feel repelled or ashamed in many ways are irrelevant unless I’m the client purported to be served. Is it geared towards the needs of the client and societal welfare and does it reach them in the manner they need to be reached? In order for the service provider to achieve these goals that’s what matters.

If your client is an urban immigrant who takes the bus and speaks poor English, distrusting of lawyers for a myriad of reasons and your goal is to reach and educate that consumer on legal services they require, what is the best strategy devised and the best tactics to implement to get the message across to help them? It clearly isn’t bar association lunches, public speaking engagements at the chamber or high-profile articles in a national law journal (unless you have also developed a secondary strategy to cultivate professional referrals or some other goal.)

In this regard, the legal profession is no different. If you, my potential client, don’t know I exist, how I can help you? If the lawyer can’t overcome identified barriers for a successful client/attorney relationship through relevant ‘tactics’ how can a potential client decide to utilize the lawyer’s services and by extension, how will the client’s legal needs be met?

I’m a purist. I believe in the marketing philosophy. I believe all solos, especially, need to understand why ‘marketing’ is not a dirty word in the legal profession. As stated above, “it is not a specialized activity at all.” It includes among other activities networking, social media, public speaking, educational seminars, pro bono work, joining bar associations, traditional advertising, appropriate pricing and packaging of legal services. It is not a ‘thing’…it is a philosophy.

Let’s take it a step further. Not every solo can nor wants to utilize every strategy or tactic. Not every activity is suitable for every lawyer’s personality or professional mission nor can every strategy or tactic achieve the goal of reaching the client they seek to serve. And many lawyers simply don’t know how to assess their skill sets appropriately, nor do they know how to cost-effectively and efficiently reach the clients they want to serve. If the message can’t be delivered, both the legal provider and the public are harmed.

Do some lawyers choose marketing strategies and tactics which make me cringe? Absolutely. But I am also not their targeted client. If their behavior is egregious, I’ll leave it to those who govern the profession to take proper action. If those governors overstep their bounds, I leave it to the lawyers to sue to protect their rights and in doing so protect all our rights.

So, before people disparage those who would teach lawyers to create a client-driven solo-practice and the strategies and tactics necessary to reach their client base, remember, everything you do is marketing whether intentional or not. If I were starting out today, I would seek the help of someone who is knowledgeable to devise a marketing strategy to reach my clients while I created a client-centered practice.

It would be executed in a manner which reflects my ethics and morality and taste and be within the professional guidelines governing such activities. But I would be out there marketing my ability to serve clients with legal needs. And so should you.

Written by Susan Cartier Liebel

Learning How To Be A Lawyer Under Fire. Hitch A Ride On Someone Else’s Ego.

Susan Cartier Liebel — Mon, 19 Dec 2011 12:30:48 +0000

As you embark on your solo career never having experienced the fabled and elusive ‘tutelage’ under the wing of an experienced BigLaw employer, you are going to be extremely panicked you don’t know what to do. So, what have new lawyers been doing for the ages, those who never have worked for another?

If you commit to a 40 hour work week in the beginning of your solo practice career, unless you have hip-pocket business, the reality is you will see most of your weeks will be devoted to marketing and legal education and very little billing. In time, the ratio will change from 80/20 to 20/80 only because you must always have committed time to marketing and continued education.

So, let’s talk about education. What does a new lawyer do other than wait for the phone to ring? She starts acting like a lawyer. Get yourself down to the courthouse(s) you plan to frequent; park yourself in the courtroom(s) of various judges and watch and learn. (You should actually be doing this during the time period between taking the bar and learning you passed the bar.) You will see the good, the bad and the ugly in legal skills play itself out, see who the ‘players’ are and how the court room is run. Watch short calendar or motion day. Watch a trial. Watch hearings. Watch whatever you are permitted to watch and take copious notes about judges, lawyers, language, protocol and more.

When you see a trial or hearing or lawyer you find good, get yourself down to the clerk’s office and pull the file. Read the file. Follow the flow of the case through paperwork. Spend a few dimes and make copies of motions, briefs and more and start building your form file from lawyers who are talented and respected. (Note: this is not a license to copy verbatim legal briefs as some may assert copyright privilege if they can.)

Talk to the courthouse personnel (including the marshalls) and find out who the core group of lawyers are in the courthouse. (There is always a core group of players in every courthouse, every practice area.) Find out when they are scheduled to argue and watch them argue. Learn through observation.

And some interesting things may just happen. First, if you are dressed like a million bucks, you may be approached by potential clients (do not solicit) who ask you if you are a lawyer and if you can help them. Second, lawyers and judges start seeing your face. They may even ask why you are present even though it is your right to be.

Introduce yourself to everyone and start to get known.

True story: Two of my clients were waiting for their bar results and were sitting in the court room. It was very disconcerting to the lawyers currently arguing because they were the only ones present and noone knew who they were. After the hearing was over the judge asked them who they were. They told the judge they were waiting on their bar results and were observing and were planning to open their own practice (partnership) as soon as they heard the results. The judge proceeded to tell them about the lawyers who were just arguing in front of him, told them they were lousy and why, gave them some pointers and then after a little more conversation invited them and their spouses/family to be sworn in at a private ceremony officiated by himself once they heard the results. Sweet.

Don’t be afraid to make mistakes or be fearful that ‘you don’t know everything.”

True story: When I started out and had one of my first court appearances on a short calendar day, the judge asked me if I wished to have the motion “taken on the papers.” I had no idea what he was talking about? I didn’t know the lingo. I stared blankly at him until a nice lawyer next to me pulled on my suit jacket and said, “just say ‘yes’.” I did. I didn’t know what I was agreeing to. The judge smiled. No harm, no foul. ( It simply meant the papers speak for themselves; no oral argument necessary.)

Learn from others through observation until you develop your own unique voice.

True story: When I first started practicing I had no idea how to do a deposition, never watched one, only had some protocol information from a book. This particular case was very big and I was sweating (but no one could tell.) I had all the information, some pretty nasty surprises for the other side but didn’t know how to commence. The other attorney was very seasoned and a nice guy. You could tell he was at the, ‘this is mundane and boring’ stage. I casually suggested he could go first and then I made it a point to object and argue (just so I could see how it was handled and he very obligingly was patronizing and professorial at the same time.) So when it was my turn I gave it right back at him!

When it was over (and I had gotten absolutely everything I needed and some bonus information) I mentioned to him, ‘by the way, this was my first deposition’. His jaw dropped. He said,”You’re kidding me, right?” I said, “absolutely not.” That was a sweet moment. He also offered me a job which I politely declined.

I would not have been taught this doing document review in the cubicle of some large firm in order to ‘get some experience first’ before I went out to practice law. This is the greatest myth out there. You have to be clever and have faith in yourself and do copious amounts of research. The key is your research. Your technique may be adolescent but your research will save you.

The same for examining witnesses. Worked like a charm.

In the beginning you don’t have to reinvent the wheel. Hitch a ride on someone else’s ego while you figure out the techniques. And as you develop your skills with practice, eventually others will want to copy you.

But spend your time marketing and self-educating through observation and acting like the lawyer you are.

And as an aside, here is a comment along these lines made by Victoria Pynchon on how she learned her trial and litigation skills retold in an article by the Illinois Trial Lawyer.

This is pretty much ENTIRELY how I learned to practice law — by watching my opponents. It takes a little while as you add discrimination to your monkey-see-monkey-do, i.e., “the usual stipulations, counsel?” — no no no, it’s meaningless. You also, of course, have to develop your own “voice” but trying on other people’s is a good way to start — it’s a lot like creative writing in that way. You sound like Hemingway and Kerouac in your twenties and your very self in your 30′s. The best piece of advice anyone ever gave me was this — no one can be a better Vickie Pynchon than you and you can NEVER be as good as — say — Gerry Spence is at being Gerry Spence. It’s much much easier to act through your own personality — but before you find your way — trying on those of people who are adverse to you — and then positively resisting behaving like people who you see are not effective — is one of the best ways to find your own voice as a litigator and trial attorney.

One more great piece of advice from attorney Jim Reed of the Ziff Law Firm in Elmira, New York:

Don’t be afraid to ask one of the courthouse “regulars” if you can sit second chair for them (that just means you sit at counsel table and assist). You will be shocked to see how often an experienced trial lawyer will actually enjoy having some company and assistance. Offer to do anything no matter how menial: fetch lunch, pick up witnesses, make copies. Bottom line is that you will learn TONS and you will make friends with a “regular” who can greatly shorten your learning curve.

So, for the benefit of all the new lawyers out there who think they need to know EVERYTHING before they venture out….readers please share some of your ‘newbie’ stories and how you survived.

Written by Susan Cartier Liebel

Don’t Let Pro Bono Work Put You Out of Business

Susan Cartier Liebel — Mon, 05 Dec 2011 11:30:45 +0000

There is a lot of discussion about lawyers and their obligation to perform pro bono legal services. Pro bono publico (translation: “for the public good”) is a very admirable way to give back to society in the form of free or very inexpensive legal aid to those who otherwise could not afford legal services. Sometimes, depending upon the nature of the case, there can still be a financial award if you win for your client.

This column, however, is not about the morality of whether or not each and every lawyer has an obligation to give back to society in the form of free or inexpensive legal services. It is about business decisions. If the newly minted solo is inclined to do pro bono work, how does it fit into his or her business plan?

Pro bono work usually translates into, “I’m not getting paid … by choice.” It should be done as a calculated business decision. You only have so many hours in the day to represent your clients. When you make a calculated decision to donate a certain number of hours of your time, whether in an effort to attract more business and/or to satisfy some inner moral compunction, while not taking food off your table, that’s called “marketing” and/or “soul food.”

When you let a client take your time because you are incapable of charging them or steal your time because you are incapable of collecting your fee and there’s no hope of referred clients, all while struggling to pay your rent, that’s called “stupid,” or, “I’m not getting paid … but not by choice.”

You must learn the difference between pro bono work and bad business. One will help you prosper financially and emotionally. The other will put you under.

While you are starting out, pro bono work needs to be very thoughtful in terms of your business plan because if you are a bleeding heart you will help a few, go out of business, and not be able to help a lot more in the future.

There are pretty much two times in your career cycle when pro bono work is a win/win situation for you and the client. When you are first starting out, the likelihood of you billing 40 to 50 hours per week is small. You will be in a learning curve. During this learning curve you will have some time to take on a case others won’t because the client can’t pay. It can be a tremendous learning experience, a basis for referrals in the future and provide a lot of exposure to colleagues and the courts.

And most importantly, it’s not taking away from you earning money to support your business. It beats sitting around waiting for the telephone to ring.

The second time in your career cycle when pro bono work is a win/win situation is when you are well-seasoned, you’re financially comfortable and you genuinely feel the need to work on a case for a client without counting the nickels. The desire to help is great, the injustice of a situation strikes a chord or the substantive legal issues compel you. And because of your experience, what might have taken you thirty hours years ago now takes ten hours.

One very successful attorney who does a lot of pro bono work now that she can afford to once told me “there are a lot of barking dogs out there. You can’t feed them all.” This was very wise advice for a new attorney. There is no shortage of people who will look to take your time for free.

However, you are not in the business of extending credit or giving away your services. Unless someone is paying your student loan, mortgage and car payment, you are under no moral obligation to give away valuable time you can be using to network, educate and represent paying clients. There are only so many hours in a day. And, yes, even as a new attorney your time is valuable.

You must grow your business first, keep yourself afloat and meet your obligations to yourself and your family. You will know if and when the time is right to take on pro bono work. At that time you will calculate how many hours per year you can donate to those in need. Remember, your goal is to create a thriving business that will provide for your future. Only then will you be able to help others who might not otherwise have access to quality legal services.

What has been your experience doing pro bono work?

Written by Susan Cartier Liebel

The Misunderstood Virtual Law Office

Susan Cartier Liebel — Mon, 03 Oct 2011 11:30:47 +0000

In case you missed it there has been a very lively discussion between two faculty members, Jay Fleischman and Richard Granat, on their respective professional blogs. (For purposes of clarity I am going to use the phrase ‘online offices’ in lieu of Virtual Law Office). Jay threw down the gauntlet and Richard quickly accepted the challenge. Jay asked the question, ‘Is the Virtual Law Model Coming Up Short?‘

The ABA Elawyering Task Force tells us that, “[t]o be successful in the coming era, lawyers will need to know how to practice over the Web, manage client relationships in cyberspace, and ethically offer “unbundled” services.”

Bulls–t.

Richard ,who co-chairs the ABA ELawyering Task Force with Marc Lauritsen, wrote a powerful rejoinder.

Solos and small law firms, with existing methods of delivering legal services, are pricing themselves out of the middle class marketplace. This is the real reason that LegalZoom is rumored to be generating more than 100 million in revenues this year. LegalZoom and other non-lawyer providers continue to increase their market share at the expense of solos and small law firms. The assertion that lawyers don’t need the people as clients that purchase forms from non-lawyer providers is a misrepresentation of what is really happening in the solo and small law firm marketplace. The clients that are turning away from law firms are clients that law firms need and who they previously served in an earlier, pre-Internet era.

For the most part, I’m in Richard’s camp on this one. Lawyers growing their practices today and into the future will very much need this technological tool – an online office – as part of their practice or, in some cases, functioning completely on line in order to compete. What Jay does say and which I agree is the online office, as defined by the ABA ELawyering Task Force in the above quote, is just another method of working with clients. It does not displace human interaction. Anyone who tries to build a law practice model which relies exclusively on putting up a website billboard and marketing through social media in the hopes of attracting clients but never ‘connecting’ with them, is most likely going to fail. (Connecting does not necessarily mean ‘in the flesh’ but connecting as in talking via other technological tools such as SKYPE).

What was also discounted heavily by Jay (although he does suggest otherwise in the comments) is that there is a significant and ever- growing population of potential clients that is very comfortable doing their business on line. Being a lawyer who desires connection with clients and then projecting upon clients that they must want to have a significant in-person relationship with you may go against a growing body of evidence highlighted by Richard Granat.

It’s true that many clients are not interested in working with their lawyers online, but we think that as a connected generation comes of age and they have legal problems that they will prefer to deal with their lawyers online and prefer to text rather than even talk on the telephone, much less meet with their attorney face-to-face, unless it is unavoidable. For facts to support this assertion, see books like New Rules of Engagement: Understanding on How to Connect With Generation Y. and the work of Christine Hassler. In a study conducted last year by YouGov, a UK-based research and opinion firm, on consumer preferences for legal services, one of the conclusions was that:

“34% of respondents said they would be more likely to choose a law firm that offered the convenience of online access to legal documents over one that had no online capability; 22% disagreed and 37% neither agreed nor disagreed.”

Younger males were the most likely to choose a law firm with online services and access: 44% of 25-to-39 year-old males (and 40% of such women), along with 40% of 16-to-24 year-old males, would choose a law firm offering online access to documents over another law firm.”

There is obviously a generational shift happening. As a younger generation matures to the age where they have legal problems, their desire to deal with lawyers online becomes a requirement, not a preference.

But you don’t even need these statistics. Just look at yourself. What is your number one method of communication? How much do you (dis)like voice mails and having to get back to a client on the phone? How much are your kids actually ‘talking’ to you or their peers yet their communication with peers and even yourself has actually increased due to texting? How much socializing do you do on the web versus in person? When you want a document isn’t it easier to request it be scanned and sent as a .pdf? Of course, this is a sad commentary on social interaction in this country but that doesn’t change the facts.

What also got confused in the post and the comments is the assumption that an online law office equals unbundled legal services. As I noted in a comment on Jay’s post, an online office does not mean the lawyer is or must offer unbundled legal services. A desire to offer unbundled legal services does not mean one must have an online office. An online office does not mean there is no human interaction. And having a brick and mortar law office does not mean a client will automatically have meaningful human interaction with lawyers.

What struck me most of all, and it should you, is that if there is this type of misunderstanding about what an online office is and what unbundled legal services are amongst lawyers who are fairly progressive, how confusing must it be to clients? Clients remain torn between their idea of how lawyers interact with clients and at what cost and what they perceive as the only alternative to this idea - the LegalZooms of the world. The gap between these two perceptions is vast and this is where the majority of your clients will fall – wanting and needing a lawyer but believing they are unable to afford one who will work with them the way they need and want to work. Potential clients need to know they can have the benefit of a lawyer who will work with them in the way they can afford and need to due to time constraints or other issues which preclude them from constant physical interaction unless absolutely required. Otherwise, they go pro se or shop on price or try the LegalZooms and their ilk, hope for the best and…. systematically put you out of business.

(I must add one caveat. It’s my opinion that those who practice in areas which do generate a lot of forms feel threatened by this model as the average consumer has not been successfully educated they need experienced lawyers to walk them through the land mines. They are on the defensive. Other practice areas will never have to worry about forms or lack of human interaction such as criminal. It is a high touch practice area. So in many ways criminal lawyers have no dog in this fight. But the rest need to stay on their toes)

This is the biggest opportunity in the history of the legal profession to educate potential clients that there are alternatives to going pro se or utilizing the growing legion of LegalZoom-type companies. It is incumbent upon lawyers to disabuse clients of the idea they can’t afford to hire a lawyer. It is critical to educate clients they can afford a lawyer and why they can. It is critical to educate clients that you understand what they want and what they can afford and the answer is not to go pro se or to use forms companies. They must see that there are significant benefits that can flow to them as a result of you utilizing this platform for their convenience but not sacrificing the expertise that you can offer in the highly personalized way you wish.

Having an online office as a component of your practice or using it for your entire practice does not mean loss of human interaction if that is how you want to build your practice. If you want to incorporate unbundled legal services to catch that crowd caught between what they believe a law office is and the DIY services you MUST educate them on the benefits. Those who start now will be the leaders in their practice area and in the communities they serve because they will stand out for having addressed the growing need of clients today.

But before you can educate them on the benefits, you need to be clear about what an online office practice actually is. If you’d like to learn you can do so with Stephanie Kimbro and Richard Granat right here at Solo Practice University®.

Written by Susan Cartier Liebel

Think Like A Lawyer. Speak Like a Fish.

Lurie Daniel-Favors — Thu, 29 Sep 2011 11:30:10 +0000

“Think like a lawyer.” This phrase is pounded into our heads during three years of legal education like no other. In fact, so much emphasis is based on acquiring this skill set, that we spend the first few months of law school seemingly learning a new language. When we observe classmates suffer through formulating their responses in exactly the right way, we learn that just being right is not enough. You have to be right and you have to be able to phrase the right response in a lawyerly way. Otherwise, you might end up on the receiving end of a probing Civil Procedure professor’s seemingly unending list of questions on something like the Erie doctrine.

When we enter the profession, this phrase, “think like a lawyer” is repeated ad nauseum by colleagues and co-workers. We spend so much time learning to think like a lawyer that it is easy to forget that lawyers do not think like other people. In fact, lawyers tend to think in ways that non-lawyers may find confusing – if not down right obnoxious. What’s worse is when our highly lawyerly thoughts take over our voice and come out in the way that we speak.

I have yet to find anyone who actually likes to listen to “lawyer speak.” But if you spend all of your early years in the profession learning to think and talk like a lawyer – it can be very easy to lose your own voice.

You know what voice I’m talking about. It’s the voice your clients use when they call and ask for advice. It’s the voice your friends and family members may use when they pick your brain for legal tidbits. It’s very likely the same voice that you used before you bought wholesale into the “think like a lawyer, speak like a lawyer” mandate.

The challenge with learning to think and speak like a lawyer is that it can alienate you from the very people you want to serve.

I learned this first hand when it came to designing my website. My first website was a “think like a lawyers” dream. It was full of legalease, accolades and footnotes that I thought would make me more appealing to my audience. And if my audience were judges for a moot court competition – then I would have had no problems whatsoever.

But that was not my audience. My audience was full of working class people who needed to talk to someone who was able to speak in a voice to which they could relate. My audience did not have time to check my cross references and confirm the accuracy of my citations. They needed answers in plain English.

I knew this intuitively, but when it came to my website – I was pulled in two directions. On the one hand I wanted to attract clients. But on the other hand, I was concerned with how other lawyers would see me if my website did not use legalease. In a profession that is highly image driven, I was concerned with what other lawyers would think if I did not demonstrate my “think like a lawyer” skills on my website.

Classic rookie mistake.

When we spend our formative years in the profession surrounded by other attorneys in the making, we want to seem…well…lawyerly. For people who are caught up in thinking like a lawyer, using legalease is a surefire way to pull off the “I’m a lawyer” presentation.

We don’t often realize that there is a subtle hierarchy at play when we learn to “think” like a lawyer. We tend to place a higher value on that skill than on our ability to translate those thoughts into a communication style that works for our clients. Typically when I speak with other lawyers about this issue, they think I am advocating for “dumbing down” the conversation. They miss the point.

Thinking like a lawyer is important. But speaking like a human is key to your ability to attract and keep the type of clients that you want. Instead, focus on the words your clients use to describe their issues. Take note of the phrases and lexicon so that you can begin incorporating them into your own voice. When clients (or prospective clients) call with a question – write down the way they phrased it so that you can use similar phrases in the future.

When you write a blog article – remember who you are writing for and include those phrases and terminology in your article. Try to describe legal concepts in a way that might infuriate your Civ Pro professor – but that would make your parents proud.

I recently heard the phrase that in order to get good clients then you have to “fish where the fish are.” That may be true – but the end of the day – if your clients speak fish, then being where they are is just the first step. Growing and keeping a successful practice will also require that you to learn to speak fish.

Written by Lurie Daniel-Favors

Networking For Shy Lawyers

Susan Cartier Liebel — Thu, 22 Sep 2011 11:30:29 +0000

Networking for Shy Lawyers

I’ve resurrected this post from three years ago because it is a timeless piece and one which needs to be addressed on a constant basis. Please bookmark, save the links to all the great articles and keep reviewing as you need to. The posts incorporated really get to the heart of why some network better than others and why you can do it too regardless your personality type. Also, links to daily online newspapers may no longer bring you to the news piece. I’ve cleaned up as best I can. Unfortunately, I have no control over articles more than three years old…so just move to the next link!)

You’ve been told over and over again the way to get connections in the profession, drum up business, is network, network, network. You know I’m right. And you know for some people it is just so easy. They jump out there, do it as naturally as breathing. Yet you are more introverted, less comfortable in group situations, don’t know how to break the ice or get with the ‘in crowd.’ Honestly, don’t worry. But the question remains: how do you work with what you are to be successful as a solo practitioner?

First, before you go labeling yourself introvert and extravert (yes, that is the correct spelling), understand the difference and then realize you are what you are and you’re not going to change:

I’m going by the definitions used by the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. According to the MBTI, introverts get their energy from the internal world of ideas and images, and they feel drained if they spend too much time with people. On the other hand, extraverts (and yes, that IS the correct spelling as used in the MBTI) get their energy from the external world of people and things, and they go crazy if they spend too much time alone. It really has nothing to do with social skills, as evidenced by introverts like Jerry Seinfeld.

Whether you prefer the internal world or the external world, that preference is fixed. You can force yourself to act outside of your element, but an introvert can’t become an extravert and vice versa. (Pick the Brain)

So, how does one network if they are not an extravert? Are introverts disadvantaged as entrepreneurs in a profession which requires almost full throttle engagement?

If you feel you fall into the introverted category (and even if you don’t) here is a list of 17 great posts on networking for the shy which you need to take the time to read. It was compiled by The M.A.P. Maker:

How to network: For introverts

Personal marketing for the shy

Learn to love networking

How to network if you’re shy

Networking for introverts

Networking for the shy

Power networking for introverts: Tips & techniques

Networking for shy people

Tips for shy people who want to meet clients at networking events

Networking for the shy

The shy guy’s guide to networking

10 networking tips for shy entrepreneurs

Networking for the terminally shy

Business networking strategies for the shy

Job search techniques for shy executives

Skip Haley’s Networking Tips For Introverts

Beating Shyness In The Business World

In addition, I would recommend you absolutely read Endless Referrals by Bob Burg. It is a brilliant book which lays to rest once and for all that networking, building a sphere of influence and creating relationships (both professional and personal) are not just the province of extraverts. Whatever you choose to label yourself, you need to read this book.

So, if you consider yourself more introverted, how have you been networking to bring in clients? Please share.

Written by Susan Cartier Liebel

7 Time-Tested Ways to Dig Out From A Recession

Susan Cartier Liebel — Thu, 08 Sep 2011 11:30:27 +0000

John Jantsch writes a terrific piece called “7 Time-Tested Ways to Dig Out From a Recession”. My position, however, is a little different. You should be doing these things ALL THE TIME.

While you can read all seven ideas on John’s great site, I’m going to highlight numbers three, six and seven because I know the first two are the hardest for me and the last should be done religiously:

3) Get out from behind the computer – Building personal relationships is always in style. It’s very tempting to sit and write blog posts and participate on social networking sites, and while these aren’t always bad things – sometimes you need to go out and shake some hands. Make it a point to go to several industry conferences every year. Join an industry or chamber type group and go to events where you can make connections with prospects and partners. Join a referral group such as (fill in the blank) and participate. Go visit your customers and ask for referrals.

It is very easy to get comfortable communicating solely on the internet. It’s fast, fun and you are not locked into a schedule. However, if you are reading my blog or any blog on a regular basis, subscribe to RSS, sync your e-mail with your IPhone, the fact is you are in the distinct minority of all your potential clients. Most people are simply not as up-to-speed technologically and by the time they figure out what you already do effectively, you will have moved on to something even more advanced.

And while we socialize with like-minded professionals on the internet, the fact is there is a huge gap between us and the many potential clients and referrers of potential clients out there who could use your services. Get out, mingle, physically meet others, professionally socialize even if it is just a few select times a year.

6) Repackage your products and services with offers to act – This goes along with differentiating really, but sometimes you’ve got to give that tired old dog a new look. Find simple ways to relaunch yourself, your people, your products, your services, your packaging, to give yourself a new start in your market. You don’t need to start from scratch, look for innovative ways to repackage, reprice, redeliver, re-guarantee and re-communicate about what you do. Make them an offer they can’t refuse, make it so bold they must rehear you.

This is so true. Give your blog a face lift, create some excitement about a change in your services or products. Promote if you are switching over to a Virtual Law Office. Try to attract your market in a novel and exciting way. It will not only invigorate your potential client base, it will also invigorate you. Practicing in the same rut only gets you deeper into the ground. When you eventually try to step out you will feel like a neanderthal and overwhelmed at the changes you will now first have to make.

7) Fix the marketing gaps – In every way, shape, and form that your business comes into contact with your prospects and customers it is performing a marketing function – good or bad. You must look at all of your customer touchpoints and turn them into positive, brand-building opportunities. Tear down the lead generations touches, sales touches, service touches, delivery touches, follow-up touches, transaction touches, and billing touches and make sure that every single one of them is a performing a killer marketing function for your business.

Every word you write, every syllable you utter, every piece of paper with your name on it is a touch point with your brand and a business opportunity. You just have to realize it. Once you do you will see all the unconscious marketing opportunities you have available to you and will understand the phrase “you are on 24/7.”

Time to take inventory of all your touchpoints. You will be amazed how many marketing opportunities you may very well be missing which can help fill the client pipeline…especially when times are tough.

Written by Susan Cartier Liebel

Meet The Girls

Susan Cartier Liebel — Wed, 10 Aug 2011 12:30:33 +0000

If you live in Connecticut you have heard of John Haymond and the Haymond Law Firm. With a h/t to Norm Pattis, we discover that John Haymond has turned into ‘Simply Irresistible’ Robert Palmer and now has a bevvy of (cough in hand) beauties promoting his law firm to his biker audience.

I’m not going to comment any further on this. I’ll let the video speak for itself. And then you can tell me what you think

Written by Susan Cartier Liebel

Will Legal Services Bidding Sites Gain (Real)Traction?

Susan Cartier Liebel — Mon, 13 Jun 2011 10:00:57 +0000

I’ll be honest with you. I’m not a fan of the concept but I haven’t dismissed it out of hand, either. As I piece various issues together I am seeing this may very well be a serious trend for the future for a number of reasons - least of which is the economy and our country’s love affair with technology and online bidding sites in general.

The question remains – who will do it right and win the race?

As you know, a while ago there was a whole lot of fuss made about a new reverse bidding site called Shpoonkle. It’s a crazy name and there was a whole lot of criticism leveled at the concept of this company, its founder being a law student who wanted to help new lawyers struggling under debt, give them a fighting chance to get clients while helping those with monetary challenges get lawyers to assist them with their legal matters. Established lawyers saw it as a nail in the coffin of professionalism and a new low in legal marketing.

However, legal (and other professional) services bidding sites are nothing new. (This Law Review Note is from 2001 which makes it even more intriguing to me.)

“An Internet market researcher recently predicted that consumers will spend $222 million for online legal services this year and that the market will grow to $2.8 billion by 2004.”7 Lawyers are readily taking advantage of this new market by advertising, providing legal services,8 and even participating in auctions for legal services online.9

At the end of 2001, there were “close to 100 Web sites that aim[ed] to match lawyers with clients online.”10 These included sites that were simply online directories of lawyers as well as online auctions.11 Many Americans see the appeal of online auctions.

According to one commentator, “At least thirty-one percent of Americans who access the Internet regularly, or about thirty-five million people, participate in online auctions.”12

Texas Law Review – Notes
Bidding by the Bar: Online Auction Sites for Legal
Services* December, 2003 82 Tex. L. Rev. 445

Four online legal services bidding sites were analyzed in this law review article to address the various ethical issues: Legal Match, LawyersQuotesFast, eLawForum, and FirmSeek. (These sites existed at the time the law review article was written and in the format described by the Note. They may no longer exist in this exact format or under the name or url posted.)

The point is legal services bidding sites are nothing new and have been reviewed, analyzed and challenged for over a decade and yet the concept persists whether with the companies named above or new companies. This ‘Note’ drew the following conclusion:

This Note concludes that most of the online auction sites for legal services are referral services; therefore, they must be regulated and approved by the appropriate state authority. These auction sites also must be designed to limit the risk of harm to consumers by avoiding the unauthorized practice of law, loss of confidentiality, conflicts of interest, and harm due to consumers’ lack of understanding of their rights and responsibilities in such transactions. These sites are beneficial in that they create competition and may result in a lower cost of legal services; but, given the risk to consumers, the sites that target individuals are generally not well suited for complex legal services. However, using these sites to match consumers with lawyers for routine legal services—name changes, simple adoptions, simple wills, and simple bankruptcies—poses fewer risks to consumers and should be permissible.

While this note concluded the ones mentioned above were referral sites and as such had to abide by rules governing referrals, companies such as Total Attorneys , won a highly publicized challenge to their business model, (which, by the way, is not a lawyer bidding site but does have a lead generating component to its services) getting ethics panels to concur their model fell outside the scope of ‘referral’ as defined under the rules of professional conduct.

The reason I’ve started to investigate further is because in my capacity as founder of Solo Practice University® I am approached frequently by startups (and very established companies) to look at their offerings and whether or not they have value to the solo community.

Recently, I was approached by a large publicly traded company with a lot of money behind them who is about to launch a new lawyer bidding site in their ‘legal vertical’. It’s fair to say they have done their homework about the market place, have more current statistics, and are seeking to capitalize upon it. They’ve also seen the weaknesses in previous models and are planning to rectify them. How successful they’ll be at it, I don’t know.

Many companies like this tend to forget there are two parties which must come together voluntarily – the consumer and the lawyer. Many forget that lawyers can’t be forced but must participate willingly without feeling it compromises the profession or themselves. They must feel they are actually participating in a public good because it is a radical change in their traditional thinking when it comes to reaching new clients.

Over the years, I’ve also talked to or had e-mail with other lawyer bidding sites which have changed their business models to shore up weaknesses or respond to poor perceptions. They have also seen rapid growth in the ‘bidding’ aspects of their businesses.

It was also why I didn’t out-of-hand condemn the concept/introduction of Shpoonkle when a press release came into my e-mail box.

At some point, there is going to be a breakout company/business model that is going to captivate both lawyers and the consumers at just the right time with just the right message and it’s going to capitalize effectively upon this country’s increased involvement (and love affair) with online auctions and need for access to affordable legal services.

I’m now pretty convinced it is inevitable…I just don’t know who this breakout company will be or when they will arrive.

What do you think?

Written by Susan Cartier Liebel