MyShingle : Solo and Small Law Firm Management and Marketing

Many small firms wonder whether they should offer free or low cost legal services to start-up companies or small businesses in the hopes that those companies will generate more lucrative business as they grow.  Sounds great in theory, in many cases, once those baby start-ups mature, they may dump you for a more established law firm, irrespective of the quality of the work that you performed or the value that you created.   At least, that's been my own experience, recently confirmed in a post by Bruce Macewen of Adam Smith, Esq.:

Partners with those small clients will tell you (will they not?!) that "somewhere in here is the next Microsoft." Not true. Almost universally, small clients remain small clients. And experience has shown that those that grow into sizable enterprises are disloyal to their "starter" law firms and want to rapidly move up to more established and burnished brand name law firms as soon as they feel they have the stature to do so. How does it feel to be a money-losing doormat to greatness, which will decamp?

You can't blame these companies either, at least without being hypocritical.  After all, as we grow our law firms, don't many of us try to phase out small fry clients in favor of bigger fish?  As we begin to earn more money, we all upgrade our practices in one way or another, and for many companies (especially once VC enters the picture) upgrading means bringing in a name brand firm.  It's like buying the Lexus or BMW after having driven a Prius:  the fancy cars don't drive any better nor do they add value when it comes to gas mileage.  But they're a status symbol that many believe conveys an image of success.  (That's why salespeople and realtors often drive fancy cars).

Now, this doesn't mean that you shouldn't cut your rates for a start-up if you perceive a worthwhile trade-off.  Will representing the company provide an entre into a new industry?  Will it generate referrals or a positive testimonial?  Will it keep you at the cutting edge of your practice?  And of course, you can still take credit for helping to build a successful company even if it eventually leaves you for another firm.  So why not experiment with offering your services to a start-up once or twice and assess whether it's worthwhile.? Perhaps you'll even find a way to make yourself an exception to the upgrade rule.

What is your experience with representing small companies that grow? Have they kept you on...or moved on?  Send your comments below.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Some lawyers start their own practice, but rather than specialize in traditional legal work, opt for or incorporate alternatives like contract lawyering, mediation or lobbying.  If you're interested in how to build a practice in those areas, consider these resources:

Lisa Solomon, a nationally recognized contract attorney who practices as  Question of Law offers some quick tips on running a contract law business in the March 2008 issue of GP Solo Magazine.  She offers other products on starting a contract law firm at Legal Research and Writing Pro.

Victoria Pynchon, who blogs at Negotiation Law Blog shares a grab bag of ideas on how to make money in a mediation practice, including a link to blogger Tammy Lenski's book, Make Mediation Your Day Job.  I purchased and read Lenski's book a few months ago based on rave reviews from other  bloggers and even though I don't  have  a mediation practice, I found much of Lenski's advice applies to building any type of law practice.  If you're not comfortable with some of the hard sell, "get rich quick" genre of marketing materials, you'll particularly enjoy Lenski's book because she explains how to tools that you're already comfortable using in your practice (in her case, mediation, but it could just as easily be advocacy skills or writing skills) to  make your case to others.

Finally - and this is a bit late, but personal injury lawyer and marketing guru, Ben Glass of Great Legal Marketing is hosting a conference all on Wednesday April 16, 2008 - no registration required, where he'll be speaking with two lawyers and what they've learned (and more importantly applied) at his seminars.   I've never attended one of Ben's events, but I have trusted colleagues who have reaped value from his programs.  Here are the details:
 
Date: Wednesday, April 16
Time:  3:00 p.m Eastern
Dial In: 419-400-0202 Code 332894#

Notice: Dial in early, we only have 197 lines for this call.

For more information:
www.GLMSuperConference2008.com - More info on the SuperConference

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

I came across this Press Release about a Clean Tech competition that's awarding $600,000 in prizes to early stage clean energy innovators.  And guess what?  The awards include not just cash but also in-kind services offered by accounting, public relations and law firms - in this case, tech counsel to the "stars," Wilson Sonsini. 

Sponsoring a contest offers several benefits for any law firm.  By offering in-kind services, the law firm gets the benefit of whatever publicity that the contest sponsors use to attract participants, at no cost.  And the firm gains access to an early stage company with the potential to grow. 

So the next time you see a contest in your community, think about what you can offer to help you win business and good publicity.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

One of the five "high impact" marketing practices that I discuss in Solo by Choice is non-traditional consultations, such as house calls or an after hours practice.  Not only are are non-traditional consults a way to stand out and accomodate your clients, but they're also compatible with many solos' business models.  Making house calls or site visits minimizes the need for a physical office, thus enabling you to work from home or in less expensive shared or virtual space.  And an after hours practice lets you keep a day job to keep revenue coming in as you get up to speed, or enables you to stay home with your children and work at a time when your spouse can watch them. 

I didn't give many examples of non-traditional consults in my book because I hadn't found many at the time.  So I was glad to see this blurb about James Perullo's Bay State Legal Services After Hour Law is open for business from 6-10 for convenience to clients.  Many of the lawyers affiliated with the venture, like Perullo, work during the day.  My guess is that these hours will bring in clients who didn't want to lose work time to schedule a daytime meeting with a lawyer.  Why aren't more lawyers developing and implementing other types of nontraditional consultation times.  If you are, let me know in the comments below.

• Print
• Comments (4)
• Trackbacks

Consistent with the Second Law of Thermodynamics, the entropy (or in lay terms, randomness) of the array of online marketing options is ever-increasing.  But thanks to this diagram (and post) by Anita Campbell of Small Business Trends, there's hope of imposing some order on all of the chaos.

You need to link here to view an enlarged version of Campbell's diagram of online marketing options for small businesses.  Arranged in a target, concentric-circle fashion, the business website lies at the bulls-eye center of the chart.  The second layer directly around the center consists of Search Engine Optimization, blog, email marketing, pay-per-click ads and online press releases.  The largest and outermost circle contains many of the familiar social networking sites - Twitter, Facebook, Linked-In as well as other media type sites such as You-Tube, Flickr and podcasts.  Here's what Campbell has to say about each of these:

Center circle – At the center of the chart is your website, which should be the core of your online marketing plan. Hopefully if you are reading this article, you already have a website and it’s not a question of IF you should have a website, but how you can improve it. First impressions count and today’s prospects and customers will form impressions of the quality of your products and services from your website. Plus, by investing in smarter technology you can make your website work harder to generate leads and sales. Consequently, spending time to improve your website can bring the biggest payoff. (If you don’t have a business website, get thee to a Web designer now!)

Second circle – The second circle outlines activities that most businesses will see a meaningful return from. Investing in search engine optimization, setting up a blog, growing and leveraging your house email list, issuing press releases through an online distribution service such as PRNewswire or PRWeb, and doing PPC ad campaigns are key strategies most small businesses in America can get value from commensurate with the time and money invested.

Outer circle – The light yellow circle on the outside contains activities that generate a lot of the “noise” that confuses most small businesspeople.  Not that I’m against those activities — not at all. In fact, some of them bring excellent results for the right kinds of businesses. It’s just that the return from such activities tends to be lower compared with the time or money you put into them.

While I like the Campbell's "concentric circle" way of prioritizing, I don't think that her model works as well for solo and small law firms, as I'll discuss below the jump.  

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

If you're scanning this in your news aggregator, I'll bet my headline, with its apparent misspelling probably jumped right out at you.  In fact, I meant to spell "ledership" just as I did.  A lede is the introductory section of a story, and New York Personal Injury Law blogger Eric Turkewitz's
 recent masterful April Fools' Day Spoof shows just why a lede matters so much.

For those unfamiliar with the story, on April 1, Turkewitz ran a lengthy post captioned  Supreme Court Grants Cert  in Fantasy Baseball  Case; Three Justices Recuse Themselves Due to Participation in High Court League.  Turkewitz's first paragrah then described how the court granted cert (even linking to the Eighth Circuit case on major league baseball that's now pending a cert decision) and wrote authoritatively about the justices seeking recusal - something that has been the subject of frequent discussion recently in the blogosphere.  As a result of his authoritative opening, Turkewitz managed to  fool multiple bloggers into believing the story without reading to the end, where they would have discovered telling clues.

My guess is that most of the bloggers taken in by Turkewitz's prank rely on aggregators to scan news stories quickly.   And Turkewitz's joke, cleverly executed as it was, might not have duped as many people a few years back when aggregators were not as pervasive.  Even today, while it's true that not many lawyers or consumer readers use aggregators, journalists and major bloggers all do.  So if you're interested in getting coverage for your blog at major sites, follow Turkewitz's example, and lead off with your best lede.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Over at my roost at Legal Blogwatch, I posted about ways that lawyers -- including solo and blogger, Ernie the Attorney are rethinking the concept of business cards.   As Ernie points out, these days, it's not hard (or at least it shouldn't be hard) to find a lawyer's website by running a Google name search on the Internet.   Thus,  a business card doesn't need to serve as a source of contact information, but rather, as a tool to encourage people to contact you.

Of course, Ernie's theory assumes that you already have at least a minimum presence on the Internet (which every lawyer should!)  Unless people can find you easily on line, you may not want to radically change those business cards any time soon.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

My friend and colleague, Allison Shields of Legal Ease Blog is starting the next round of her course Lawyer Marketing on A Shoestring, which she teaches with Paramjit Mahli, of the Sun Communcations Group.  I haven't taken the course, but the syllabus shows that it's value packed.  Plus, I am a huge fan of Allison's blog and her body of work and included several pieces of hers in Solo by Choice. 

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

I finished lawyer John Derrick's engaging and well written book, Boo to the Billable Hour several weeks ago (and in one sitting), but I'm just getting around to posting my review now.  As I'll describe in more detail below, Boo to the Billable Hour offers a great primer for lawyers who haven't even thought about getting rid of the billable hour as well as those who recognize some of the drawbacks but can't come up with a viable alternative. 

Boo to the Billable Hour is structured into three main parts.  The first section - and to my mind, the heart of the book - systematically dismembers the billable hour by showing its many drawbacks: its inability to capture the value (rather than price) of time spent, problems with the accuracy of record keeping, difficulties in fairly allocating time to avoid double billing, and (in the law firm context), the billable hour's incentive to associates to overbill or bill pad to meet a firm's billable hour targets.  However, I think that Derrick also overlooked another problem with the billable hour that is unique to solos.    Because solos can't leverage billable hours, they're salary is limited by the number of hours they bill.  If a solo bills 40 hours a week at $200/hr, they'll earn $400k a year (assuming 2 vacation weeks) - but they're also working not much less than large law firm hours.  Unless solos can find a way to get more "bang for the buck" out of their day, they remain slaves to the billable hour. 

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

I'm not squeamish about rodents.  As a youngster, I raised several dozen pet mice and even now, as an adult I find my daughter's Chinese dwarf hamster, Puck completely irresistable  Yet this morning, while out walking the dog, I screamed with fright when a tiny little field mouse scurried across my path.

Why does a loose wild mouse terrify me whereas I don't mind cuddling a mouse-like hamster?  In larg part, I think it's the context:  the mouse appeared unexpectedly and caught me off guard.  And seeing the mouse in the wild evoked visions of wild rats, which have creeped me out ever since I read The_Plague back in college.  By contrast, the hamster lives in a cute Habi-trail cage, he smells of the sweet sawdust where he makes his nest and he scurries happily on a little orange wheel.  Nothing scary about him.

When it comes to marketing, context matters.  The pitch that may work for a consumer client may fall flat when we approach a business.  A technique that stands out in one particular niche and distinguishes us may be so over-used in another area that it just gets lost in the noise.  As someone who practices in multiple pratice areas - I serve consumer clients, mom and pop businesses corporate clients and municipalities and law firms - I've been giving some thought to what type of approach fits best for a given context.  At the same time, I find that some of the marketing materials that I read don't take context into account, but instead, assume, a one size fits all approach. 

Do you think that there's a "killer app" when it comes to marketing a law practice, a single technique that can guarantee success?  Or are the types of tools that work in some fields versus others as different as mice and men? I'm happy to hear your comments below.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

If you thought that large corporations had deep enough pockets to pay whatever fees their outside counsel demanded, you'd be wrong.  Turns out that corporate counsel are positively simmering over the way that many large law firms are ripping off clients with exorbitant mark-ups on contract law attorneys.  Indeed, corporate counsel are so steamed that they voiced their discontent publicly at the recent ALM Legal Tech Show, as reported in this story from Conde Nast Portfolio.

The upshot for solos here is ...opportunity.  For example, some corporate counsel take e-discovery inhouse, but they may still need to hire contract lawyers for review - and may be willing  to pay better after removing the biglaw middle man.  Or, corporations may have a need for more skilled outside counsel to help manage the inhouse discovery teams.  So if you've worked on massive  litigation projects at law firms, and decide to strike out on your own, you may find more opportunities for than you imagined.

Corporate counsel are looking to keep costs down in other area as well.  Although as this post at Law and More suggests that inhouse lawyers are looking for large discounts from brand name firms, if firms aren't forthcoming with lower rates, perhaps these clients will look to solo and small firms.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Like most of my solo and small firm colleagues,  I'm a fan of online networking, i.e., building meaningful and trusted relationships through listserves, Linkedin.com and Facebook.com and blogs.  Not only do these online tools help us find clients or share our knowlege and expertise with others and improve the quality of the profession at large, but they also mitigate against sense of isolation that many solos otherwise experience. 

For those who don't use online networking tools, John Jantsch of Duct Tape Marketing has an instructive post on how to get started.  Jantsch writes that ultimately, online networking isn't all that different from conventional networking - only the tools have changed.

Jantsch's advice is terrific, but I think he overlooks one important point:  ultimately, to get the most out of online networking, you need to take it off grid.  I've built many, many close relationships online blogging, listserves and email correspondence.  But in every case and without exception, what's always solidified the relationship and made it click is a personal  rather than virtual connection.  Maybe it's an in-person meeting, but even a phone call does the trick.  Hearing the sound of a voice or a laugh, seeing a smile or shaking a hand satisfies a human curiousity and conveys the kind of information that no amount of bandwidth is broad enough to carry.  And in person meetings or phone calls not only smooth a tense online relationships characterized by vigorous disagreement, but actually make them bloom --  because the personal interaction somehow makes us realize that because of our passion, we have more in common than our online discourse (and even namecalling) might suggest.  That's not to minimize the value of building relationships online - that process lays the groundwork for personal interaction and helps us to screen out those whom we'd like to meet.  But at the end of the day, an online relationship will eventually falter without a dose of human contact.  

So tomorrow before you head home for the weekend, why not pick up the phone and calling an online friend or colleague, with no other motive than simply to say hello or invite them to share a cup of coffee?  Taking that relationship off line will ensure that you keep it on course.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

This coming Tuesday, I'll drop my daughters off at school, return to my house, pick up my trial bag (which doubles as a suitcase and computer case for short trips) and walk 15 minutes to the $25 bus that runs from Bethesda, Maryland, where I live to Penn Station in New York.   I'm headed up to New York for an event filled 24 hours that will include a stop by the ALM Legal Tech Show (where I'll hopefully be posting some dispatches for Legalblogwatch), dinner with a bunch of NY based solosezzers, and a bunch of blog or book related meetings. 

So why am I taking a $25 bus up to NY instead of flying or taking Amtrak?   For me, it's mostly convenience -- the bus is so close to my house, I don't need to allow extra time (that I don't have with my tight schedule) to get to the bus, as I would with a trip to the airport or Union Station in D.C.  Plus, a benefit of taking the bus on mid-week is that the trip will be traffic free and the bus won't be filled, so I can expect a double seat to myself.  Still, more than anything, this $25 bus phenomenon intrigues me; it's a market that didn't exist back when I was in college and not even as recently as ten years ago and it's a market that's absolutely booming because it fills an until-then unsatisfied demand.

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

Most of the time, we give testimonials because we believe in the person who has solicited our recommendation and because it's a nice thing to do.  But if that's not enough incentive to give a testimonial, then consider this benefit:  testimonials can also make you look good!

For example, let's say that you've used a virtual assistant who asks for a testimonial for her website.  To give a good testimonials, you'll have to describe the matter that she helped you with, and in doing so, you're letting others know about your skills as well.  Consider this hypothetical testimonial:

I'm a solo practioner who stepped into a complicated appeal two weeks before deadline.  I needed a reliable paralegal to assemble the 2500 page record, insert cites into the brief and proof and cite check the product.  Further, I needed someone who could work independently so that I could focus on drafting the brief.  At the recommendation of a colleague, I called [VA].  She took over preparation of the Appendix entirely on her own.  However, she sent me daily emails so that I could stay abreast of her progress.  On deadline day, I emailed the brief to [VA] who took care of preparing the Table of Authorities, Table of Contents and filing.  [VA] was so efficient that the final product came in several hundred dollars below my estimate to the client - and ultimately resulted in a precedent setting decision.  The client has since retained me for another matter, and I will surely be calling [VA] to help out on this one as well!

The testimonial shows that the VA is efficient, cost-effective and reliable.  But it also highlights the attorney's skills as well - skills that will come to light where, for example, a client runs a search for an appellate lawyer. 

So the next time someone asks you for a testimonial, you should jump at the chance.  After all,  it's not often that you have the opportunity to do something good for someone else, while doing well for yourself.

Related post on guerilla marketing techniques: Go Forth and Comment.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Here's a neat law firm business development idea reported in Scotsman.com, that initially struck me as a bit high end, but is actually quite feasible even for smaller operations.  The story reports that Pinsent Masons, an international law firm with offices in Edinburgh and Glasgow have launched a service to keep clients up to date on developments in employment law.  Clients who sign up receive a number of iPods programmed to allow users to download videos and news updates prepared by the firm.   Clients can then watch videos containing both news updates on the latest developments in employment law and monthly risk management programmes.  According to the article, the service is quite popular, with several large corporations signing on.  And the law firm won an award for "most enterprising firm."

When you think about it, decent iPod nanos start at around $150.  For most of us, that price doesn't even amount to a full billable hour.  Moreover, if that iPod helps  you lure clients to a monthly business and counseling service for which you can charge $500 or $1000 a month, then you've earned a great return on your investment.   Not to mention, making your firm look really classy besides.  

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

As my regular readers know, I'm a major fan of videos - and I've been tracking solos' use of videos for marketing in posts here and here. And I see today that my Third Wave colleague Chuck Newton has posted on the topic as well.

More and more solos are using videos to convey their message. Recently, I discovered this video series by Beverly Hills IP attorney, Michael Cohen. Cohen's videos are more polished than the usual YouTube fare; they're posted here at Video Jug.

If you're using video drop me a line - I'd be happy to link to it here at MyShingle.com

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Here's a video trailer that I created for my upcoming book, Solo by Choice: How to Be the Lawyer You Always Wanted to Be. It's a proof of concept in learning how to use my iMac software. Unfortunately, I'm still learning how to use the editing tools, so the transitions aren't entirely smooth and there's a very, very long dead space at the end, because I couldn't figure out how to cut the audio clip. But I'd spent so much time on the video, that I decided to put it out here in beta, and solicit advice from readers on how to fix some of these problems. So please send your input below.

• Print
• Comments (5)
• Trackbacks

For a few days now, the blogosphere has been abuzz with news of the dismissal of a class action lawsuit against lawyer directory and rating service, Avvo and the subsequent Wall Street Journal's endorsement of Avvo. These events evoked an impassioned post by respected solo-centric blogger Susan Cartier Liebel, who argues that Avvo's rating system harms solos, does not help consumers and unfairly generates investor profits off the backs of lawyers who never asked for a ratings system. As such, Cartier Liebel urges lawyers not to participate in Avvo's system. Since then, commenters to Scott Greenfield's Avvo posthave launched a debate over Avvo's benefit to consumers and its impact on solos. Though I'm a little late to this party (having been away and off the grid for two days), I wanted to chime in to make clear that not all of us solos oppose Avvo, nor should we. Here's why.

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments (6)
• Trackbacks

AP is reporting here on a recent study by Pew Internet and American Life Project that found that 47 percent of US adult internet users have searched for information about themselves through Google or some other search engine. That's double the percentage of users who did so in 2002. Mary Madden, a Pew research specialist quoted in the article expressed some surprise that more users don't engage in "self-searching," particularly with the increase in content that's posted about us on the Internet.

For lawyers practicing in an Internet age, self-searching isn't just an act of fun or vanity, but one of absolute business necessity. In this electronic era, we must assume that existing and prospective clients and colleagues will search for us on Google, so we need to stay ahead by always keeping on top of what's out there.

• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks

If you're still interested in registering for the upcoming Business Building Accountabilty Club, scheduled for December 5, there's still time...up until midnight tonight. To view more details on the event and/or to register (there's no cost), visit this link. And for those who have already registered, watch for the agenda and course materials in your email tomorrow.

• Print
• Comments (6)
• Trackbacks

As 2007 draws to a close, I'm anticipating my 5th Anniversary of blogging at MyShingle and the long awaited release of my book, Solo by Choice: How to Be the Lawyer You Always Wanted to Be. Yet, while I'm in the mood to celebrate, at the same time, I find that I still have a list of marketing initiatives and law-firm related projects a mile long. I'd like to finish many of these tasks to lay the foundation for making 2008 great. So to get myself on track and to celebrate my impending milestones, I'm forming a Business Building Accountability Club.

Are you trying to get a blog up and running? Interested in putting video up on your website? Finish up an article? Can't get your nerve up to make those cold calls? Have a marketing idea that you're not sure how to implement. I've got those items plus dozens more on my list! So why don't we work together to keep ourselves on track to finish up what we need to before the year ends? I'll admit that I have another ulterior motive in starting up this group: it's allowed me to cross one item off my list - figuring out how to use registration software and set up a teleconference.

So...if you're interested in joining my group, follow this link to the event registration. The kick off call is scheduled for December 5, 2007 and there's NO CHARGE! I hope you can join the call. [NOTE: For those who signed up anytime before today, Nov. 27 at 2:45 pm, you can revisit the link to obtain the call in phone number. I will also be emailing the call in number along with the agenda].

• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

I realize that these days, alternative billing is all the rage - and I too am a proponent of alternatives to the billable hour. Still, there are times when you have to resort to the billable hour, either at the insistence of a client, or under some of the guidelines for submitting a fee petition to the court.

So if you're billing by the hour, what should your invoice look like? When I started my own practice, I had the benefit of knowing what a sample invoice looked like, having reviewed many of the outgoing bills at my former firm. Since then, I've seen many other invoices: as a contract attorney for a federal agency (a part time position that I held in the early years of my practice), my responsibilities included evauating and ruling on fee petitions submitted by lawyers on behalf of clients who prevailed in litigation against the agency. And I've come across other fee petitions in researching caselaw for fee petitions that I've submitted on behalf of my own clients (which favorable results, I'm happy to report).

So while invoices are second nature to me, I realized that some lawyers, either those starting a practice from government, or those straight out of law school may not know what an invoice looks like. And because I believe that the best examples are those straight from real life, rather than create a "pretend invoice," I'm presenting a copy of this Fee Petition, one of several submitted by the attorney representing the defendant in Capitol Records v. Foster, who was sued for allegedly downloading copyrighted materials. Ultimately, in this decision, the court granted $68,685.23 of the $105,680.7 total amount sought. While recovering only sixty percent of a bill doesn't seem like much of a victory, chances are that the individual defendant in this matter could not have afforded more than a fraction of that bill. Plus, the court noted in its decision that once it had decided preliminarily to grant attorneys' fees, the defendants' activity stepped up considerably, thereby suggesting that some of the work may have been performed to run up the bill since the record company would be paying.

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

This week, Duct Tape Marketing features a post about SCORE, a non-profit association dedicated to entrepreneur formation, growth and education. Among its many services, SCORE can match you up with a counselor who can help with your business plan or advise on other issues related to getting a business off the ground.

What most lawyers don't realize, however, is that they too can use SCORE as a resource for their practices. Two years ago, I posted on how solos can use SCORE, after receiving a tip from a reader who'd had a successful experience using the group. Though SCORE may not suit your specific needs, since it's a free service, you have nothing to lose by trying it out. And don't forget other resources, such as law practice management advisors (if your bar has one) who can also provide advice on starting a firm at no cost. After all, you've been paying bar dues long enough; might as well get your money's worth by using an LPM Advisor's services.

• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

Michael Melcher, author of the The Creative Lawyer reminds us here of the huge impact that a mention in a
good old fashioned media source can have on blog traffic or book sales. Melcher reports that after his letter to the editor appeared in the New York Times, traffic to his blog increased substantially and his book sales jumped, placing him briefly at the atop the list of best selling law related books.

Incidentally, I've read through much of the Creative Lawyer so that I could review it here. But reading the book doesn't do the book justice; you've also got to do the exercises and complete the checklists to derive the full value, I think. I'm still working my way through some of those which has delayed my review. However, even now, I can say that Creative Lawyer will force you to rethink your practice and lead you to ideas to change it to achieve more satisfaction. With just eight weeks left until the end of 2007, you'd do well to purchase this book now and lay the foundation for making 2008 a more creative and personally satisfying year for your practice.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Here's an article from the ABA Journal entitled Billing by the Slice, which offers some alternative billing ideas by and for solos. With "billing by the slice," lawyers bill for a case in stages - a practice used by Ted Waggoner of Rochester Indiana. From the article, Waggoner describes that:

he might tell a client that for a certain fee he will make calls and write letters to settle a case. If the case doesn't settle, he will conduct discovery for another set fee. If the case still doesn't settle after discovery and the client wishes to continue and file the lawsuit, a third specific fee will be due.

On the other hand, a new lawyer, Harsharn Makkar admits that she sometimes lowballs prices to bring cases in the door. But she derives value from these cases because "she learns about an area of law that will make her more efficient the next time she handles a similar issue."

Both Waggoner and Makkar say that what's most important to clients is knowing prices up front. When clients know how much it will cost, they're less likely to argue about the bill down the line.
And clients are less likely to argue about their bill if it's what they expected, he notes.

That's what makes flat fees or alternative billing options preferable to open ended cases where lawyers charge by the hour. And solo and small firm lawyers aren't the only ones who fall prey to clients who can't pay. Consider this lawsuit filed by Fulbright & Jaworski against its high profile client, Bernard Kerik. The firm ran up a bill of over $200,000 - fees which Kerik claims were unexpected and which he'd have avoided with a lower cost attorney had he known.

Many litigation attorneys complain that they can't set budgets for their cases because they have no control over opposing counsel. While I agree that it's difficult to account for every variable in litigation, that doens't mean that lawyers can't at least attempt to ballpark an estimate - or give a "not to exceed cap" (subject to change for legitimately unanticipated events). But setting those kinds of budgets takes work. For a look at some of the factors that go into setting a fee estimate in a litigation case, consider this resource, John Tothman's Devils Advocate Managing Legal Fees Guide. Tothman's resources are not frequently cited by most value billing proponents, perhaps because he advocates for clients seeking to trim bloated legal bills rather than lawyers looking for creative ways to increase revenues. But Tothman does endorse alternative billing strategies and he's clear that cheaper is not always better. Also, for additional intelligent discussion of alternative billing, check out Allison Shields' collection of posts at her Legal Ease Blog.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

As I wrote in my upcoming book, back in 1993 when I started my law firm and worked primarily from home, I often felt as if I had a huge scarlet "H" emblazoned on my chest. Back then, I jumped through all kinds of hoops to prevent clients from discovering that I only had a virtual office and much of the time, worked from home.

But times have really changed. As Headquarters at Home and Proud to Be Moreover, there are advantages to home based businesses, There(9/27/07), fifty percent of businesses in the United States are run from home and business owners have grown more transparent about home based status. And with the advent of more home based businesses come opportunities to network and connect such as Start Up Nation's Home Based 100 rankings and resources as well as my friend Grant Griffiths' upcominghome office blogging network.

So for all you home office lawyers, go ahead and expose that big H - as in "Ha! - I actually get paid to say home!"

• Print
• Comments (3)
• Trackbacks

At my Legal Blogwatch beat, I posted here about marketing through building relationships with other lawyers and prospective and existing clients. As I discuss, one tool that is faciliating relationship building is Face Book - so maybe it's time that you got yourself an account.

• Print
• Comments (3)
• Trackbacks

Novelist and lawyer Scott Turow takes aim at the billable hour in this provocative piece, The Billable Hour Must Die, featured as (of all places!) the cover story of this month's ABA Journal (more on the redesign in another post). Turow acknowleges the usual litany of criticisms of the billable hour: the toll that the billable hour takes on our lives and the inefficiencies created. But he also goes a step further, and makes the case that the billable hour is downright unethical because it creates a conflict between the lawyer's interest in earning more money and the client's interest in a reasonable fee and quick resolution of a matter. And Turow offers good evidence to support his case, pointing out:

More tellingly, who among us can say he or she has never accused the lawyer on the other side of "running the meter"--of doing unnecessary discovery, filing frivolous motions or foot-dragging before engaging in meaningful settlement talks--all to pad the fee. And that's not just to make excuses to the client. When we say it, we mean it. Looking at the lawyer on the other side of the v., we can see clearly how the temptation to earn more might impact a representation. If we can see the effects of the dollars-times-hours system so clearly when we look across the courtroom, how can we be so fully confident about ourselves?

While Turow's view on the billable hour is accurate, his diagnosis makes me wonder whether any nilling system can ever align the lawyer's interest and the clients if lawyers are most interested in maximizing profits rather than protecting their client's financial interest. In my own case, I have billed by the hour and I have billed through use of flat fees and alternate billing. Yet even billing by the hour, I've never once recommended that a client undertake an unnecessary task or use a more complicated process when a simpler one was available just to increase my bill. If lawyers are driven by maximizing revenue, then any system - be it the billable hour or alternative fees won't bring relief, because lawyers will simply find another way to squeeze more money out of clients.

Perhaps the better way to resolve the ethical problems that arise when lawyers bill clients is through reference to another ethical obligation that we lawyers have: our fiduciary duty to our clients. Basically, in a fiduciary relationship, our client's interests come before our own. Until lawyers start realizing that we owe special duties to our clients because of our fiduciary relationship, not to mention our ethical responsibility, there isn't a billing practice in the world that will produce reasonable and fair fees - and let us sleep guilt free at night.

• Print
• Comments (7)
• Trackbacks

I haven't been checking in to Matt Homann's Non-Billable Hour site recently, which is a shame, because I nearly missed this amazing presentation on Building An Innovative Law Firm. Matt makes the presentation available using Slideshare, a very cool tool that I recommended back here back in February that allows you to embed a Power Point presentation at your website or blog.

• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

Over at my Legal Blog Watch Beat, I posted about the Walmart v. Nieman Marcus pricing dichotomy, initially described by Mike Sherman of Law for Profit. Now many of you have heard about this model before: basically, you have a choice between selling lots of legal services (volume practice) at a narrow profit margin or handle fewer cases with higher paying clients and larger profit margin. Clearly, the latter model makes sense; after all, why not work less and make more?

At the same time, because I'm a lawyer and part of a system whose very integrity depends on access to law, I wonder what's going to happen to all those clients who can only afford volume service. Services like We the People offer some hope, as do robust pro se programs. But frequently, the bar opposes expanding the scope of services that non-lawyers can provide because it vitiates lawyers' monopoly power.

We're at a cross roads where we can't have it both ways. If we solos want to focus on high end cases and earn more, then go for it! But as we do so, let's not stand in the way of options for those whom we've priced out of our markets.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Perhaps you've just started your firm, and you're already tiring of those "informational" interviews and "getting to know you lunches" with more experienced attorneys. Of course, you've met some jerks, but on the whole, they're all nice enough, incredibly supportive and genuinely interested in helping you out with advice and war stories. But at the end of the meeting or the lunch, you still come away empty handed, with no referrals, no offers of contract work and no idea of whether you've made a lasting impression or not.

Here's a thought that could make one of these meetings a win-win for both you and the other attorney. Consider this advice by Ari Kaplan, entitled
Summer Associates Can Write Their Way to Success (National Law Journal 6/19/07). Kaplan recommends that summer associates volunteer to co-author an article with a partner to distinguish themselves from the dozens of other eager colleagues. Why an article? Well, as Kaplan describes, it's tangible and lasts longer than a memo, but more importantly, it provides a huge benefit to the partner.

Though Ari gears his article towards summer associates, there's no reason why the same advice can't work for a newbie attorney looking to make a positive impression. For example, let's say that you're hoping to get overflow work from an employment law attorney? When you meet with the attorney, why not offer to co-author a quick article for a bar newsletter or local newspaper on a recent Supreme Court case or a list of how-to's or even a post for the lawyer's blog or an online publication. I'm not suggesting a scholarly piece that will consume hours of time, but just a quick piece that takes a couple of hours of time.

Of course, you'll have to do most of the work, with your "co-author" merely editing the piece. Still consider the benefits: the other attorney's credentials will make it easier to place your article in a more visible publication, you'll get your name in print and best of all - you'll be at the top of that attorney's referral list.

So why are you still reading...get in touch with some prospective co-authors and start writing!

• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

Imagine a lawyer rating system that assigns lawyers different categories of grading and purports to provide an objective way to assess a lawyer and through "third party validation of ethics and legal ability provides that extra level of confidence that the right lawyer or firm has been selected." A ratings system that takes years of experience into account in issuing ratings and removes positive ratings where a lawyer has a negative disciplinary record. A ratings system that even generates enough profit to fund a fellowship. And a ratings system that includes some errors and omissions.

If you thought that the lawyer rating system that I just described would be the subject of class action lawsuits, you'd be wrong. But that rating system sure sounds like this one, which is the subject of a class action lawsuits. And indeed, many of the claims alleged in the class suit (which you can access here) would seem to apply to both ratings systems: such as complaints of arbitrariness of ratings or that the rating service makes deceptive and false representations that clients can rely on the ratings in choosing a lawyer.

So, one of these ratings systems is sued, while the other is not. And if you're wondering about the reasons for the differential treatment, I can think of at least one: consider the ratings of the class action's lead plaintiff by this ratings service and this one.

Note: for the record, I have criticized both ratings services for various reasons here and here and here. In my view, ratings systems aren't worth much because choosing a lawyer isn't like picking a restaurant or buying a house. So if we lawyers allow ratings system, we should explain that they're one of many, many factors in picking a lawyer. But more importantly, if we allow ratings systems, we must tolerate all systems; we shouldn't be able to pick and choose by filing class actions between those ratings systems that we want (because they grade us better) and those we don't.

• Print
• Comments (3)
• Trackbacks

Over at some of the more conservatively inclined blogs, like Overlawyered, there's some interesting discussion over whether conservative judge and jilted Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork betrayed his conservative principles by suing the Yale Club for $1 million (both compensatory and punitive damages) for injuries sustained following Bork's fall from a dais a speaking event sponsored by the club. The discussion is interesting enough, but what captured my attention even more is Bork's choice of representation: Randy Mastro, a partner at Gibson, Dunn . Indeed, Bork's choice defies the advice of lawyer ranking systems like Avvo which advise clients to examine whether a lawyer has experience with cases similar to theirs. Mastro's firm bio doesn't indicate that he has any PI experience, and indeed, his Avvo rating is 6.5 (Apparently, the default ranking . Yet Bork chose Mastro anyway, which raises the question: Why?

The answer is easy. Because when clients choose lawyers, above all, they want someone who makes them feel comfortable, someone they know and believe they can rely on. I'm certain that Bork has some kind of relationship with Gibson, Dunn (through some kind of Ted Olson/former Solicitors' club affiliation, if nothing else). And even though Gibson, Dunn apparently has no experience bringing personal injury cases, Bork has enough confidence in their work that he must believe that they're up to the task.

So what does all of this mean for lawyer rating services like Avvo? That in spite of efforts to objectively rank lawyers, a lawyers' ranking is probably the last thing that a client cares about in making a hire. Clients will choose lawyers based on

their expressed opinions or as in the Bork case, a personal relationship. I've been hired for both reasons (my writings and personal recommendations) myself. In both cases, I wasn't necessarily the best lawyer for the job, but I was the right lawyer for the client. And at the end of the day, that's what matters - and what we can't lose sight of - when we market.

• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks

I'm not sure how I overlooked this gem that Dan Hull of What About Clients which asks why are lawyers so shy when it comes to asking for work.  In Hull's experience, his pitch to clients, which concludes with "we'd love to work with you.  How can I win or earn your business" typically wins raves because it's refreshing and direct.

Hull  concludes:

Is the careful, rational, polite, risk-averse "lawyer personality" to blame? I have no idea.....but I do know that business clients--whether or not they buy the image of the fire-breathing lawyer-AlphaHuman they see on television--expect lawyers to have the business instincts and the stones to ask for the work. So ask. Practice first if you must. Get a pitch and a strategy for each meeting. Don't wait until 30 minutes goes by or the table is cleared. Ask.

That's great advice, because after all, the worst the client can do is say no.

• Print
• Comments (8)
• Trackbacks

Many solos who'd like to perform more pro bono work can't do so for lack of time.  So why not multi-task, and make pro bono work part of your marketing activities portfolio?  Consider the example of lawyers profiled in this article, Creating a nonprofit helps others - and doesn't hurt business either (ABA Journal, April 2007), such as Anthony Hayes who created the non-profit organization Wills for Heroes (which provides no-cost estate planning documents for police, firefighters and emergency workers) or Wynnia Kerr who set up an animal adoption shelter in Seattle.  In setting up these organizations, Hayes and Kerr simply wanted to help their respective communities, but their groups have expanded beyond their wildest dreams.  And through their role as founders, Hayes and Kerr have gained positive visibility and developed contacts with other lawyers who have participated in their organizations.  And eventually, these connections and publicity can potentially lead to referrals or generate clients. 

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

I don't attract any business through signs or billboards, but I found this story neat. This blurb from the New York Times (4/3/07) reports on a dentist who put her name up in lights. From the story:

This was about 18 months ago, after Dr. Correa had opened an office above a McDonald's, overlooking what was then the TKTS discount ticket booth in Duffy Square. She simply had a sign installed in one of the two windows in her office that faces Broadway. The sign cost $3,500, which is -- what? Three root canals? Now her message crawls by in not-so-little letters, about 20 words every 20 seconds, not counting her address and telephone number. The address -- 165 West 46th Street -- is necessary because the building is also known as 1560 Broadway. But the entrance is around the corner.
How many patients has the sign brought in? A dozen? "More," she said. "When the TKTS booth was there, there was a lady from Korea with a toothache. She got her tickets and came up here. She had very large decay. I wanted to do a root canal, save her tooth, but she was traveling and said, 'Just pull the tooth.' " She has patients who reported seeing the sign on New Year's Eve (when she was in the office, watching the ball drop). She has patients who work in Times Square, including one from Rudolph W. Giuliani's office.

Wouldn't you love to see your name up in lights?

• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks

Over at Legal Blogwatch, I posted about a case of outrageous billing by Debra Opri, attorney to Larry Birkhead, who claims to be father to Anna Nicole Smith's daughter. Exhorbitant charges included thousand dollar dinners where Birkhead wasn't present, substantial cell phone roaming charges and even expenses for personal laundry. The 112 page invoice totaled more than $600,000. Take a look at my Blogwatch post for more commentary.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Lawyer Mama, a 30 something female law firm attorney, expresses her exasperation when an older male to whom she's introduced by her boss (a firm partner) mistakes her for a secretary. While Lawyer Mama's wrath is justified, she also unfairly directs her anger. As I see it, manner in which Partner introduced Lawyer Mama caused the confusion to begin with.

As Lawyer Mama describes, she attended a networking event with a Partner with whom she works closely. After the lunch, the Partner took the opportunity to introduce Lawyer Mama to others at the event, at which point the offending incident took place.

As we were making our way through the crowd, Partner introduced me to several industry players. Everyone seemed pleased to meet me and, while no one ever looks forward to needing to consult their lawyers, I am sure that I will be working with some of them in the future. Then Partner introduced me to an Older Gentleman who placed himself in our path. Partner made some flattering comment about how I generally "keep him out of trouble." Polite chuckling ensued and then Older Gentleman proclaimed that he could use someone like that because he could never "remember how to work that pesky teleconference feature on his phone."

Seems to me that the Older Gentleman's reaction flowed from the Partner's introduction of Lawyer Mama as someone who "keeps him out of trouble." Come on - what kind of an introduction is that? Personally, I've always thought that lawyers make those kinds of remarks either are either engaging in false self-deprecation or trying to make themselves look good for respecting "the help." When I introduce the younger attorneys whom I've mentored or hired for contract assignments, I always try to mention some attribute of theirs that will make them attractive to a potential client or stimulate additional conversation.

Why didn't Partner say "This is Lawyer Mama, our firm expert on XYZ" or "This is Lawyer Mama who has taken the lead on developing our ABC practice from the ground up." Had Partner introduced Lawyer Mama that way, her status would have been clear from the beginning and the confusion that she gripes about would not have ensued. Moreover, Partner might have helped generate more business for his firm by mentioning matters that Lawyer Mama handles that would interest prospective clients.

Lawyer Mama's complaints also remind me of why women in solo practice rarely suffer these same indignities. When you introduce yourself as "I'm Ms. X, and I'm a lawyer with my own law firm" you tend to make your status crystal clear right from the beginning. I realize that women working at law firms can't claim ownership of a firm, but they can claim ownership of the work they handle at their firm.

There are lots of Older Gentleman types still out there in the world. You can complain about their neanderthal attitudes, but you can't avoid them. Nor would you want to, because some might eventually become clients. But what you can change is the way you present yourself to the world. So why not eliminate any confusion about your status at the outset and introduce yourself the way that you want others to remember you?

• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks

I've always been a fan of the cold call ever since I started my practice back in 1993. Not a fan of making the calls, because I'm not fond of doing it, but rather, a fan of the returns that cold calls can bring. Of course, like many of the techniques I write about here, I don't endorse them unless I've applied them myself. And indeed, I have cold called for a variety of reasons ranging from seeking advice from other energy lawyers when I started my firm, as I described here or attempting to drum up business, as I wrote in this short piece, Pick Up the Phone and Make Yourself A Better Lawyer . And I wrote a chapter on Cold Calling for the ABA Book,
How to Capture and Keep Clients.

So naturally, I was gratified to read that marketing guru Larry Bodine report that cold calling works; it is second only to referrals as the number one lead generation. Bodine also addresses why so many lawyers dislike cold calling. The study found that "people are doing cold calls the wrong way: the purpose of a cold call is to set a meeting to introduce yourself, and to learn about the prospect... not to go into a detailed sales pitch. Another expert who knows about cold calls is Rjon Robbins, who offers these resources.

As for me, as I said at the outset, I don't like making cold calls, though with the passage of time, I've toughened myself to rejection. But, as I've said in all my writings, if you can't sell yourself as a lawyer, how can you sell your client's case?

Update (3/19/07) - Somehow, in writing this post, I overlooked Chuck Newton's excellent post on the same topic.

• Print
• Comments (3)
• Trackbacks

I've always enjoyed the Harpers Index and its ability to convey so much information in so few words.  So that's probably why I was so impressed with Philadelphia based attorney Sharmil McKee's marketing sheet entitled Interesting Facts About Sharmil McKee.  In contrast to a lengthy firm resume, the fact sheet offers just the facts such as number of clients served, average dollar value of transactions, number of transactions handled by Attorney McKee.  It's a persuasive and attractively packaged document that answers all of the questions that you'd want a prospective client to ask.

Other advantages of the fact sheet:  you don't need to include dates which might reveal lack of experience (for example, you may have only practiced for 6 months directly out of law school) or too much experience (you may have been working as an attorney for 30 years but just started a practice and haven't had much experience