Recent posts and discussions on the de-leveraging of law firms got me thinking. The thrust of the discussion is that BigLaw (and law firms in general) will not have the same leverage on the other side of the recession. I offer my evolving thoughts on this subject.

No leverage = no profit. The only ‘firms’ I have seen that are profitable selling partner time are called solos. I struggle to see how a law firm can be profitable without some sort of leverage. Partners (a.k.a. Owners) will succeed financially by having a pyramid-shaped organization (be it tall or short). This turns the discussion to “what will this leverage look like?”

I foresee firms adding to the bottom of the pyramid with non-partner track people (NPTPs). I’ve never understood why every lawyer hired has to be partner-track material. If (make that when) these people don’t make partner, they leave and take business and intellectual capital with them. Going forward firms would be wise not to build this destructive mechanism into their leverage. Additionally – NPTPs don’t have to be lawyers.

What would make sense for the future shape of BigLaw leverage is a cylinder in a pyramid. The cylinder would contain the partner track hires, allowing for NPTPs to fill in a pyramid around that.

This is not necessarily a new idea. The BigFour accounting firms already employ a similar approach, with some modifications. So it can work. It’s more an issue of whether BigLaw will figure this out — in time.

Cross your fingers.

Small Firm Success blog discussed the new Black’s Law Dictionary (8th Edition) that Thomson/West is selling for $49.99. At first, I thought this was a really great idea, and even though most iPhone apps are in the 99¢ to $1.99 price range, the $49.99 price didn’t phase me.

Then someone reminded me of something:

“Most lawyers have a BlackBerry, not an iPhone!”

According to this February Legal Techonology survey article, 95% of respondents said they issued their attorneys BlackBerries. If you watch the video below, you’ll see the excitement in the eyes of Dan Bennett and Jay Peyer about the product they’ve created. But, they clearly miss where their market is. They did make something cool, but if their customers aren’t on iPhones, then their customers can’t use it!!

I even got caught up in the whole “cool factor” of having Black’s on my mobile device, that I dared (even double-dog dared) Thomson/West into making a $9.99 version for the Amazon Kindle. By the way, that dare is still on!!

This is the sort of thing that happens when you let your “Techies” create something that they think is cool and cutting edge, while you’re business and sales people sit on the sidelines. What you end up with is a product that is cool and cutting edge, but on a platform that most of your clients can’t use!
My hope is that Thomson/West can take the effort that they’ve put into creating this create app, and push it over to the BlackBerry App World. And, I’ll pass along some words of wisdom that I learned many years ago when working between a brilliant technology staff, and a public that used our service — When you create a new product, you should constantly ask yourself this question: “Will my customer be able to use this?” — If at any point you question if the answer is a firm “yes”, you need to rethink what you are attempting to do. The coolest product in the world is useless if it cannot be used by your customers.

I spent the weekend presenting at Lexis’ Advance Management in Private Law Libraries (AMPLL 2009). Even though the weekend started out by my missing the flight to Dallas, and then having to scramble to make the 5 hour drive (I did it in a little over 4) to make it to the conference center in Plano, I had one of the most enjoyable experiences of my professional career.

The AMPLL conference brings together law firm library managers and directors to discuss current processes within their profession, and to discuss best practices. But, just like most conferences, the real information is found around the dinner table, or discussing issues over a glass (or, two) of wine.

In 2005, I was a participant in the AMPLL conference, and discovered that the best part of the conference wasn’t necessarily the presentations, or the wonderful presenters. It was the people sitting right next to you. It was a relief to find out that the problems you were facing back in the office weren’t unique. Granted, you assumed others were fighting these issues just like you were, but it really makes it a lot better when you have the opportunity to talk about it with someone that really understands.
This year’s AMPLL conference was kicked off by a COO from a Chicago law firm. We all listened as he gave us the C-Suite point of view. And we appreciated getting honest and frank answers. In return, I noticed that after the presentation, the COO remained at the conference to listen to what we had to say. He could have been on the golf course, or getting a massage, but instead he stuck around and continued to contribute. I even heard (second-hand) that he was amazed that “Best Practices” were being discussed, and that the attendees were getting actual “take-aways” that they could use when they returned to work on Monday.
At the end of the sessions, we all shared what we were going to do differently when we returned to work on Monday. Going individually through the 38 law librarians, it was apparent that we’d all had a rough time over the past 6-8 months, but we felt that we could turn the challenges into opportunities. Being able to bounce ideas off of each other, and getting the feedback we just cannot get within our own departments proved to be valuable to everyone in attendance. We’ve all learned from each other that we’re not facing impossible tasks. In fact we all walked away with tips, tricks, suggestions, and contacts that we didn’t have last week.
I’d like to thank the folks at Lexis for sponsoring the AMPLL conference. In this year of cutting Administrative Development costs, this conference (which the participants only had to cover travel costs) was extremely timely. I know that the batteries of a few of us were recharged over the weekend.
If you’re a law library manager/director in a law firm, I highly suggest that you apply in 2011 when the program cycles through again.

I have a real-life success story with Twitter: I actually called a lawyer that I met on Twitter to discuss a legal issue. Really.

The back story: @kentnewsome and I go back a ways. He, along with another partner, were the final word on all web decisions. After a few years, he decided to leave the firm for greener pastures.

Fast forward a couple of years.

I am bouncing around on Twitter, look at friends and followers. Who do I spot but @kentnewsome. Of course, we hook up. We tweet back and forth, I write a post about his technology blog, he updates me on his kids.

Then trouble hits.

As some of you may know, I am in the midst of buying a house. My first house. A custom-built house. Of course, as many of you more experienced home-buyers may know, pandemonium strikes: questions arise, trust is tested, integrity is challenged.

I need a real estate lawyer!

I am unsure if my issue merits hiring an attorney. So I need to talk to someone that I can trust to give me a fair assessment of my real estate issue.

Ah-ha! I remember that @kentnewsome is a real estate lawyer. And not just any real estate lawyer, but the head of the real estate department at a well-respected law firm. And not just the head of the real estate department but someone that I trust to have sound judgment and integrity.

So I call @kentnewsome. He was ever so kind to me. He allayed my fears, gave me reasonable legal advice and a common-sense solution.

So, you see, Twitter can lead to real legal business.

Its just in this case, @kentnewsome was kind enough to give me some free advice.

By the way, it’s all good. I’m getting the house 🙂

I stumbled across the Gartner Blog Network this morning while searching for legal news. For some reason I’ve never visited the Gartner blog before, but I was immediately impressed by what I saw, and the underlying concept of the network.
There are 69 Gartner analysts that contribute to the blog network, and according to Gartner, all of their analysts can contribute if they so desire. What an amazing concept!!
I dug into the FAQ section and was also amazed that they lay out the template of the Gartner Blog Network, and even include the guidelines they give their analysts. The FAQ lists the rules for posting’ what are appropriate topics; policies on posting comments; where blogs fit within their analysis reports; republication or quoting guidelines; and how complaints are handled. Basically they give you a template to take to your attorneys and administrative officials showing them how a firm-wide blog can be handled.
They even give you a canned disclaimer:

Comments or opinions expressed on this blog are those of the individual contributors only, and do not necessarily represent the views of Gartner, Inc. or its management. Readers may copy and redistribute blog postings on other blogs, or otherwise for private, non-commercial or journalistic purposes. This content may not be used for any other purposes in any other formats or media. The content on this blog is provided on an “as-is” basis. Gartner shall not be liable for any damages whatsoever arising out of the content or use of this blog.
With some minor changes, you can even present the guidelines for your firm on what is appropriate material to post on a blog:

1. All [insert law firm name here] policies apply: Know and follow [law firm] policies. 2. Think before you post: Use sound judgment and think about reactions to your post before you post it. 3. Respect your audience: Avoid negative personal comments or inflammatory subjects. 4. Have productive conversations: For [law firm] and its associates, the primary benefits of Web participation are for others to learn about [law firm] and for [law firm] to learn from others. 5. Don’t “give away the farm”: Avoid posting the kind of information and advice for which clients pay [law firm]. 6. Protect and enhance the value of the [law firm] brand: Present [law firm] in a positive light and avoid making derogatory comments about [law firm], our products, services, management, employees, or systems. 7. Protect confidential information: Protect [law firm’s] and our clients’ confidential information. 8. Be personable and have fun: Web participation is about enjoying personal interactions, not delivering corporate communications.

Check out the full explanation of the Gartner participation guidelines to see the details behind the guidelines.
Again, I was amazed and thoroughly impressed with how Gartner enables, trusts, but still guides its analysts in its blogging network. Perhaps you can leverage this information within your own firm to “enable”, “trust” and “guide” your attorneys to create and participate in its own firm-wide blogging network.

Seems there are a lot of “First To Market” believers running news aggregators. That became apparent when not one, not two, but three different news aggregators launched “beta” versions of their products to the public this week. I’ve been playing with two of the aggregators – Google News Timeline and NewsSift. The third product, SkyGrid, launched a media blitz (Scobleizer, Washington Post, and TechCrunch) about how they were opening up their product, but in my opinion fell flat on their face when you later learned that it was a private invite only, and apparently I couldn’t get my invite in fast enough. If anyone at SkyGrid wants me to do a review of the aggregator, then send me one of those valuable private invites!!

Let’s look at Google News Timeline:

Visually, this immediately appeals to me. I like the columns set-up, with each column representing a different date. Video and images are build right into the results, and it is pretty easy to see what information you have at your fingertips. The video pops right up on the screen and plays without having to launch to another webpage. I’d like to see the images do the same. Currently, the images are pretty small, and if you click on them, you launch to another page.
Search options seem to be consistent with typical Google News searches. You can search for keywords, phrases, etc. Plus, there are some advance search options that you can select — such as specific news sources, dates, blogs, magazines or media type.
Google News Timeline is a great “start”, but I’d like to see more. The very first thing I’d like is the ability for me to send a search result to someone. Currently, I could not find a way to send a link to a search result (but, if I’m wrong, please let me know.)
NewsSift:

NewSift is a product from the folks at FT.com. Right away you can see what they are trying to do with the search tool by breaking down five different categories along with the search term text box. Enter in a term like “Banks”, and you get some suggested categories to either use, or add to your search. I like that it is set up to be “suggestive” and that it doesn’t actually take over my search by putting the additional categories in automatically. I’m hoping as the product matures, there will be more topics available based on the terms you enter. For example, I put in the term “lawyer” and I get no suggestions in Business Topic or Place categories.
The search results are very clean and easy to interpret. The results do not contain video or images like you see in the Google News Timeline, but do give you some pie chart information that breaks down the results by six different categories. The charts then give you an opportunity to narrow the results by clicking on individual categories. This type of post-results filtering reminds me of the way Factiva results work. You can also expand, refine, or remove portions of the search without having to recreate your search from the beginning.
NewsSift also allows you to send a results link by copying and pasting the results URL. So, a researcher can do a search and send it on to the requester pretty easily. There isn’t an RSS option, but I’m hoping that they add that at a later date.
As for SkyGrid:
There’s a section set aside for a review here ______________. (Although, Martha Sperry did a review of the product over on The Advocate’s Studio.
Go out and test them! If you have any other aggregators that you use, please list some of them in the comment section below.

Most presidents of this country have tons of media exposure, of course, around election time, at the inauguration and State of the Union Address. Usually it trails off afterwards except for sporadic events in history, exciting legislation or regularly scheduled press conferences. Not with Obama—he seems to be on television many times a day along with a spattering of talk shows form Jay Leno’s Tonight Show to 60 Minutes. Haven’t found stats on the number of press conferences he has held but it is probably staggering and more than any other President, to date. Plus, he has a weekly White House video address, a White House blog, Twitter and Facebook accounts. Let’s not forget the merchandise. John F. Kennedy has a watch, coin, bookmark, etc. And all presidents have books and videos. But President Obama has more merchandise than any other president we have seen: An Obama Chia planter, bobbleheads, iPhone case, shirts, stickers, posters, watches—the list goes on to even a collector series Obama Hot Sauce. Obama mania! While I understand the allure of the new President of change, one can’t help but wonder is he over exposed? With only a few months under his belt, it is hard to say where this exposure will lead. Will the media and merchandising mania continue over his term? Is this a tactic of his White House staff? Unfortunately, with all this marketing and public relations, he is being analyzed and scrutinized more than ever at every turn. When you put yourself in the media spotlight, you are open to everyone’s opinion&emdash;president or not. K. DeLia is responsible for the marketing and public relations activities for professional services firm to the energy industry. With 15 years of strategic marketing and business development execution, she has successfully marketed both small and large businesses in a variety of industries. Follow her: www.twitter.com/katdelia.

While monitoring Canada’s LegalIT 3.0 conference, I noticed something — I’ve seen all of this before.

Let me start from the beginning…
I’m a conference “lurker”. By this, I mean that I try to find out what’s being said at conferences that I’m not physically attending. I’m able to do this because those people that are actually attending the conferences are nice enough to pre-plan a Twitter Hashtag for the event, and they ‘tweet’ the highlights throughout the day. The “hashtag of the day” today is #legalit. (note: the link goes to the TwitterFall website which has a very, very cool method of following these types of hashtag or keyword searches — check them out!!)
I’m all excited about learning what , , and are going to tell us about social media and Web 2.0. Then the hashtaged tweets start coming in, and I see the same information I got while monitoring LegalTech #ltny or Legal Marketing Association #LMA, or the ABA TechShow #techshow.
This isn’t to say that the message is wrong, but if I’m seeing the repeat of the same message at each conference, chances are, the people attending the conferences are also seeing the same message. The presenters are facing an audience that ranges from social media novice, to social media experts. Judging from what I’ve seen through the monitoring of hashtags, they are keeping the message focused on the social media novices.
After some thought on the subject of presenting to the bottom vs. presenting to the top vs. presenting to the middle, I’ve decided that probably presenting to the bottom is the right approach (with some carrots thrown in from time to time for the middle and top tier.) But, the present should now assume that he or she will need to have a more informal meeting with the middle and top group after the session. Not only does this give people a chance to go grab a coffee (or, my preference, a beer) at the end of the day, it presents a great opportunity to network with social media peers in a Web 0.0 way (you remember face-to-face, right??)
There are two obvious advantages of having the two-phased presentation approach, and a third no-so-obvious reason. First of all, it helps educate those new to the social media concept and encourages them to stick their toes in the water. Secondly, it gives both the presenter and the experts in the audience a chance to bounce ideas off of one another in an informal setting. And lastly, it makes lurkers like myself get off the hashtag monitoring, and actually attend one of these from time to time.

Online marketing for professional services, and in particular law firms, is a difficult proposition. Not only do legal online marketers have the challenge of overcoming lawyers’ sensibilities about legal advertising, we have to contend with 50 states bar’s advertising rules.

Then after dodging these two bullets, we are called to measure what may, at first blush, seem to be immeasurable: reputation, influence and persuasiveness.

Neil Mason’s ClickZ article, “Metrics for Non-Transactional Web Sites” brought me back to the early days of my web’s development when I would ask lawyers, “why do you want a web site?”

In those days of yore (!), law firm web sites appeared to be knee-jerk reaction to what their peers were doing.

But, if lawyers wanted a successful web site (or in this day and age, a successful blog), we had to decide where we were going. If there is no end-game in mind, we will just be wandering around.

This is even more true in the vast wasteland of the web.

Many law firms and lawyers struggle with this question: why do we have a web site?

In a nutshell, the answer is one, or a combination, of the following:

  1. Sell a product
  2. Display an online brochure
  3. Generate leads

Once the decision, it will color a site’s lay-out, design and content. And it will determine how we measure a site’s success.

I am in awe of Ashton Kutcher.

Ok, yeah, he’s cute. I admit it; I was charmed by his dopey good looks in That ’70s Show.

But after watching the 31-year old Ashton Kutcher on Twitter and the sway he has, I now believe that man is a marketing genius.

Yet another very successful college drop-out, Ashton Kutcher has managed to leverage his own cult of personality into a social media sensation. Right now, Ashton (@aplusk) and CNN (@cnnbrk) are in a race to reach one million Twitter followers.

Followers are basically Twitter subscribers who are tracking Kutcher’s own Twitter entries. In the first place, both Ashton and his wife Demi Moore are both on Twitter. Ashton, going by user id @aplusk, and Demi, going by user id @mrskutcher, have made their own little reality show on Twitter.

Every day, Twitter followers watch them interact with each other, their family, friends and, if you are lucky, a Twitter follower. Ashton and Demi are, as @glambert once said, their own paparazzi. But it gets better: Every Twitter profile has the opportunity to link to your web site of choice.

Most people choose to link to their blog or company. Actors will often link to their filmography.

But Ashton, who I believe is at heart an entrepreneur, links to BlahGirls.com. What’s Blah Girls? A portal to “an interactive, animated web video series and celebrity gossip blog.” Blah Girls is owned by Blah KL-DG, LLC, which is co-owned by Katalyst Media and David & Goliath, Inc. Katalyst, founded by Kutcher and his production partner Jason Goldberg, create original content for digital media, tv and films.

The company has produced the FaceBook Video series “(Kat)al+yst HQ”, tv shows “Punk’d”, “Beauty and The Geek”, “True Beauty” (a co-production with Tyra Banks), as well as the movies “The Butterfly Effect” and “Guess Who.” David & Goliath, Inc. founded by artist-entrepreneur Todd Goldman, is a $90+ million teen apparel line.

Kutcher spotted his Twitter opportunity when he noticed that: 1) he was fast approaching on one million followers, and 2) he and CNN were neck and neck. In the fashion of his personna of slacker/football player, Kutcher looked us straight in the eye and promised that if he beat CNN to the race, he would “ding dong ditch” Ted Turner.

Last night I watched as Ashton gained 1,000 followers in 15 minutes, then 10,000 in an hour. So what does one million Twitter followers mean to Ashton and CNN? Two million sets of eyes. Both “entities”–because Ashton is but a brand–are in the media business.

Both Ashton and CNN want you to watch them. Because, as all of Hollywood knows, eyeballs equal dollars. So what can we as legal marketers learn from Krutcher’s social media wizardry?

First, social media is about interaction: Twitter is much more interesting when watching two people interact online than a lone person shouting out into the vast TwitterSea.

Second, personality matters.

Third, we, as individuals, make the web interesting. And, as Ashton suggests, in the arena of social marketing, “we actually become the source of the news, and the broadcasters of the news and the consumers of the news.”

What Ashton demonstrates with his Twitter War with CNN is that “Social media and social news outlets can become as powerful as the major news outlets.” We have the power.

NOTE: (from @glambert): At 10:42 I checked the stats, and was temporarily amazed that Kutcher had not only passed the 1 million mark, but was actually approaching the 2 million mark.

 

But, then I realized this was another one of the Twitter glitches.