Walker Clark Worldview

Why don’t more law firms conduct client surveys?

Our firm has been researching that issue continuously for the past five years, through surveys (of course!) and also hundreds of informal discussions with law firm managers and marketing directors.

Some law firms are simply afraid to ask for feedback.  They are not relevant to this issue because, refusing to solicit feedback in a systematic way, they are doomed to crisis-to-crisis improvisation and, ultimately, the deterioration of their client base and market position.

However, when we ask people from healthier firms why they have not conducted a formal client survey within the past five years (or, in a shocking percentage of instances, never!), we usually hear three excuses.  Each one of these reasons seems to make good business sense, but has been disproven by the experiences of successful law firms throughout the world.

“Clients already have to fill out too many surveys.  The won’t participate in ours.”

Most clients see a significant difference in a survey conducted by a hotel chain and a serious survey conducted by a law firm.  When clients fail to participate in a survey conducted by their law firms, it is frequently because:

• The survey questions are trivial; or
• They are not confident that their answers will make a difference.

Law firms that send out generic surveys usually learn this lesson the hard way.  Surveys that might work well in ordinary consumer businesses can completely miss the key points with respect to quality in legal services.  This is why we recommend that your survey be designed for a law firm — not a hotel chain — and  be tailored to the specific characteristics, practice specialties, and client base of your firm.

The truth is that even the busiest clients like to be asked for their opinions.  If at all possible, even busy clients will try to find time to answer serious questions.  However, questions such as “Do you like our website?” and “Are our fees fair?” (I am not making these up.) usually drive clients away.

A good law firm client survey should be as sophisticated and thoughtful as the clients to whom it is sent.

“Client surveys are too expensive and too much work.”

Like all myths, this one has a kernel of truth.  Client surveys used to be expensive and time-consuming.  With on-line survey administration and tabulation, a custom-designed survey, including an in-depth analytical report and benchmarking to other law firms, can be conducted at a cost that most law firms can recover, several times over, with one new client or one new matter. Whether you design and conduct the survey yourselves or outsource it to a firm like Walker Clark, your firm cannot afford not to conduct a client survey.

“Surveys don’t produce results.”

This myth also can be true if you merely read the survey and do nothing about it. The most important part of a client survey is the follow-up, both with the clients and internally. Even a dissatisfied client can become one of your firm’s biggest fans if you follow up specifically and systematically concerning the points of dissatisfaction.

Specific follow-up means responding promptly to the client about the client’s concerns. Systematic follow-up means making improvements in your firm’s internal operations and client relations practices to ensure that similar problems do not arise in the future.

What to expect from a survey service provider

Every Walker Clark survey, from our low-cost high-yield Snapshot survey (which we offer to any firm for a fixed fee of US$ 800) to our most sophisticated survey service, the Strategic Business Development Survey, offers these basic components:

• A predictable fixed fee
• Multilingual capabilities
• Customized, firm-specific questions
• Comparison of your results to benchmarks
• A written analytical report with specific recommendations for follow-up
• Post-survey advice and assistance with implementation

These features can turn a client survey from a marginal marketing exercise to a low-cost investment that pays for itself with one or two new instructions and can produce a higher return on investment than almost any other marketing activity.  They can also help your firm to identify opportunities to improve the cost-effectiveness and profitability of your internal operations, by responding to and meeting the clients’ needs and expectations better.

Visit the Walker Clark website for more information and examples.

Norman Clark

How do you and your partners typically refer to clients:  ”my client” or “our clients?”

The difference is very important. There are variations among individual law firms, of course; but there are also patterns that my colleagues and I have observed in law firms worldwide.

For example, “my client” firms typically:

• Rely disproportionately on a small number “rainmakers” to generate most of the new clients and new business.
• Prefer “eat what you kill” compensation systems.
• Have high levels of internal competitiveness among partners.
• Rely more on individual performance than group collaboration for the overall business success of the firm.
• Measure lawyer performance primarily in financial terms, such as billings and value of originated work.
• Do not make cross-marketing a priority.
• Must overcome internal resistance in making major shifts in the firm’s business priorities and marketing strategy.

“Our client” firms usually:

• Expect all partners, as well as experienced associates, to participate in marketing and business development.
• Have a more collegial partnership culture.
• Prefer compensation systems that reward professional development and mentoring of junior lawyers, as well as financial contributions.
• Emphasize teamwork and group effort as being of equal importance to individual performance.
• Make cross-marketing an important priority and are usually successful at it.
• Adapt to changing market conditions with agility.

The next time you are discussing clients with one of your partners — or even more importantly with one of your associates — listen closely to the pronouns. They will tell you a lot about your own firm,

Norman Clark

If one picture is worth a thousand words, a stupid picture is worth a million.

Yesterday, our office received a brochure from a vendor to the consulting psychology profession. It was marketing a certification program to help people improve “leadership abilities and inspire greatness throughout an entire organization.”

Every photograph in the brochure was of a person who was white and of European or American ethnic background. The only diversity was hair color. There was not a single person of color — or even someone who might faintly suggest an ancestry other than northern European. Not even someone who looked even vaguely Latino!

Is this their visualization of leaders in a “great” organization?  No Asians or Africans need apply?

And this was from a company based in California, one of the most diverse and culturally aware states in the United States!

So what subtle message is your law firm’s website transmitting?

Is this the image you want to project?

Are you visually communicating a “thousand words” about being a diverse, progressive organization that welcomes people of different backgrounds and points of view?  Are you non-verbally reassuring people who have origins elsewhere in the world that they are welcome as clients?

You might might respond, “That’s not rational.”  You would be correct. There is a non-rational component even in the decision to purchase sophisticated legal services. In today’s international legal market, in which hundreds of good law firms and thousands of excellent lawyers compete, such subtleties could make an “irrational” but nonetheless decisive difference.

The vendor who sent that offensive brochure to our firm did not mean to suggest that only white people could lead  a “great” organization.  Nonetheless that was the non-verbal suggestion that comes through, particularly to people who are not white or of European background.

In all but the most extreme cases, the exclusion of non-Europeans from websites in North America and Europe is not intentional or malicious. However, for law firms that are actively trying to attract international clients — particularly multinational companies that consider their diversity be one of their most valuable assets –  such oversights might betray an indifference to, and lack of awareness of, the world around them. For some companies, a demonstrated commitment to diversity might also be a selection criterion for their outside law firms.

If these are merely benign oversights, why all the fuss about these stock photographs of people who are not even members of the firm? Please read the next paragraph carefully

Even with the very best of intentions, lawyers in North America and Europe who have enjoyed a cultural “white privilege” or “male privilege” all of their lives sometimes fail to appreciate how such images might be viewed differently by someone who has been disqualified by ethnicity or gender from such benefits. Even in countries with extensive civil rights laws and a general cultural revulsion at discrimination and bigotry, “white privilege” and “male privilege” remain social facts.

There is nothing wrong with having pictures of  “ordinary” people (not members of the firms or clients) on a law firm website (or a management consulting firm website like www.walkerclark.com). They can communicate personal warmth, humanity, and welcome. However, be sure that these same images do not also subtly communicate a million stupid words that you would never intend and would be horrified to hear yourself utter.

Norman Clark

Despite good intentions, some law firms seem to be unable to implement. The partners spend many hours rehashing the same issues, but there is little or no forward movement.

My partner, Lisa M. Walker Johnson, has developed a four-point agenda for partners and senior managers to discuss frustrating implementation issues in law firm management:

What are we NOT doing or achieving that we WANT to be doing or achieving?

What are the obstacles to our success in these areas?

What specific next steps will we take, separately and together, to begin to address these obstacles?

What do we need from each other right now, and in the coming weeks, so that we can become more effective and feel more motivated?

Invest 60 minutes in discussing the issue in the context of these four questions.  Stay focused and disciplined. Limit your discussions to that issue only. Avoid tangents and side issues. Document the results and assign one partner to monitor the completion of each of the action items.

If your law firm can hold only two of these “60-minute retreats” each month, each focused on a single issue,  you should begin to see progress on even the most frustrating issues.

Norman Clark

January typically marks the entry of newly-formed law firms into already competitive markets. Most of them are small in size, frequently based on one or two partners and a small number of clients that they bring with them from other law firms.

Some of these new ventures will fail — usually within 12 to 24 months.

Others will go on to achieve a significant presence in their respective markets.

Still others — perhaps as many as half — will struggle and strive, but never rise above a marginally profitable, month-to-month existence.

What makes the difference? We believe that it is a unique collection of behaviors that we call startup leadership.

The most important asset

Leadership is the most important component in the business success of a new law firm.  It is more important than a business plan, capitalization, or a portable client base.  These three things are needed, to be sure. However, the new firm will not succeed unless its owners can motivate themselves, their staff, their clients, and their external suppliers to make the contributions needed to sustain long-term financial performance.

Leadership from Day One

This is an exciting vision, but how can a new law firm achieve it?

Our experience and research convince us that not only can new law firms achieve effective leadership from Day One; they must do so. Leadership is an imperative during the start-up phase of even the smallest firms. Without it, even the most talented lawyers cannot realistically expect to achieve more than mediocre financial performance long term.

Moreover, a substantial investment by the owners of the new law firm in leadership skills will produce measurable business results. Law firms of leaders, even new ones, demonstrate at least these three advantages.  They might sound somewhat theoretical, but each one can be measured on a law firm’s profit and loss statement.

• First, they appear to anticipate better the stress that rapid growth can place on the firm’s capital, staff resources, and service delivery capabilities. They also appear to respond to unexpected growth – either faster or slower than originally planned –more cost effectively.
• Second, they deal more easily and effectively with the many minor, but highly stressful, problems that seem to arise almost every day during the start-up phase.  Morale appears to be higher. People work hard, but seem to be less exhausted at the end of the day.
• Third, communications, both within the firm and to the legal market, are more effective. Most importantly, they are consistent and aligned to the business goals of the firm. Good leadership ensures that everyone in the firm understands short term business priorities and longer range visions, and that they communicate them in a clear, consistent manner both internally and externally. This allows the new firm to establish its presence in the market, and especially among its desired client base quickly, and to achieve a better alignment of the firm’s service delivery functions to the needs of specific clients.

Greater agility, less burn-out, and better communications with the market — all three of these observations seem almost counter-intuitive to the experience of many lawyers, who start new law firms and sweat their way through those challenging first months in business. But we are convinced that any new firm, regardless of size, location, or practice specialty, can enjoy these benefits.

Norman Clark

Lisa Walker Johnson

How do you lead people in a law firm from an employee mentality to a performance mentality?

In my experience, the only way to do this is through goal achievement and teamwork.

Of course, groups don’t develop into high-performance teams unless they have a shared sense of purpose, which is why communicating the firm’s business strategy – at all levels – is so vital to getting results.

This is more than just setting goals.  Goals don’t work unless they are SMART: Specific, Measurable, Agreed, Realistic and Time-based.

Very simply, this is how I see it. I am using lawyers as an example; however, the same concept can be applied as effectively to staff and management.

The bottom-line question is this: What are the performance expectations and how will they be measured?

People will do what they are paid to do.  Period.

Some law firms look only at productivity for lawyers, i.e., “How much money do we expect each lawyer to bring in?” This is, at best, only a one-dimensional view of productivity in law firms, and, like most one-dimensional views, can be highly misleading. This approach, while simple, is also very short-sighted when used as the only indicator of performance. Productivity is more than working hard.

Other law firms add the origination of new clients and new instructions to the equation, i.e., “What do we expect each lawyer to generate in new business? Winning new work can also help to generate a sense of firm identity and team work, which is usually more productive than relying on one or two “rain makers.”

Another important performance factor is client satisfaction, i.e., “What feedback does each lawyer get from clients?” Of course, without a systematic way of collecting information, such as the Walker Clark Client Service Monitor, a firm must rely on anecdotal feedback, which often is incomplete and inconsistent with respect to the specific elements of client service that it addresses.

The lack of a consistent, systematic approach to client feedback is the principal reason why many law firms avoid using client satisfaction as a significant evaluative factor for lawyer performance. Not surprisingly, this also explains why many firms are surprised when they lose clients.

Sophisticated, progressive law firms set goals that are directed at institutionalizing the cultural values and professional behaviors that differentiate the firm in the market. When all lawyers and staff have goals that focus attention on matters such as quality improvement, effective meeting management, or teamwork, that has a powerful firm-wide impact over a short period of time. Clients notice it.

So the question for every lawyer in the firm is this:

What do you need so that you can perform better and earn more money?

This is what is at the heart of a performance mentality. It moves the individual from merely working for a paycheck to working to make more money through improved professional performance.

This is where the compact between the lawyer and the firm comes in. Improving individual performance in a law firm is more than management telling people to work harder.

If the law firm wants lawyers to achieve their full potential, it needs to be prepared to do at least these three things:

• First, provide at least monthly, if not weekly, feedback on a individual basis. This should include performance measurements, feedback from management, and coaching for improved future performance.
• Second, deliver the resources and training needed to meet performance expectations. Adequate support for individual performance also includes adequate work space, efficient technology, information, and the development of professional and business skills. Without them, most lawyers quickly — and accurately, under the circumstances — discredit performance goals as meaningless.
• Third, demonstrate strategic leadership and communicate the firm’s strategy. Everyone in the firm should know where the firm is headed and how their individual actions aid or undermine achievement of the the firm’s goals.

If you can place that kind of performance management system into operation in your law firm, the momentum and results that it produces will be beyond your expectations.

Many law firm partners like to talk about creating “a sense of ownership” in the firm on the part of associates and staff. This is empty rhetoric unless you have:

• A marketing strategy that is communicated to and understood by everyone in the firm
• A performance management system that links measurable performance with financial rewards
• Leaders who pay attention to what is happening inside the firm, get involved with the people and the work, and generate genuine enthusiasm about a shared future

Lisa M. Walker Johnson

This is a follow-up to Norm Clark’s post on the business case for business travel.

When you have the chance to meet face to face, business needs are often discussed in greater depth and with more opportunity for an exchange of information and ideas.

Subjects are brought up that may be glossed over on the phone.  Perhaps it’s easier to discuss sensitive issues when you can be completely engaged and able to gauge the other person’s reactions, verbally and nonverbally.

Especially with groups, face to face dialogue tends to be more inclusive of all parties and seems to  prompt more creative problem solving.  When we can build off of each others ideas it helps everyone renew commitments to shared goals which increases the chances that plans will actually get implemented.

Having some opportunity for face to face collaboration in a given year helps to sustain and strengthen even the best of client relationships.  Without it, the energy in the relationship starts to wain and it’s harder to pick up the deeper and more strategic discussions when necessary.

Lisa Walker Johnson