Berbay's Blog: Marketing for law firms, engineers, CPAs, architects and other professional services

I recently attended a two-day “AE Bootcamp 2.0” workshop in Las Vegas, organized by the Agency Management Roundtable, which was designed to teach account executives strategy development and client problem solving.  I’ve outlined a few take-away’s below:

• What do your clients expect of you?  During the workshop, there was a lot of discussion on what the client expects from the account executive versus the firm.  After much debate, the workshop coordinators showcased the results of a national survey answering this very question:
  • Industry/market knowledge
  • Making the client’s job easier
  • Organized and dependable
  • Empowerment to make decisions
  • Passion for solving problems
  • Willingness to be treated as a consultant and vendor
  • Don’t learn on the job
• How to be a consultant and not a vendor. Business is built on relationships and there are significant differences between being a consultant for your client and being a vendor.  Consultants take the time to understand a client’s goals and strategically help them accomplish them.  Conversely, a vendor typically provides tactical services that help move that vision forward, but doesn’t act as a strategist.  Below are ways to become a consultant:

 Below are approaches you can implement to be a consultant to your clients: 

• Trust: Perceived as caring intensely about the well-being of clients and their business.
• Manage expectations: Under promise, over deliver.
• Constantly look beyond today: Don’t get stuck in tactical mode, you always need to carve out time to be strategic. 
• Empathize with the CEO: What keeps your client up at night?  How can you create solutions to help solve these problems?

Attending workshops like these serves as a great reminder about what clients expect from you as an account executive, and what they expect from their marketing/PR firm.

What do you think clients expect from you and your firm?

I recently attended an intellectual property law event “Judge’s Night Panel,” co-sponsored by the Los Angeles Intellectual Property Law Association (LAIPLA) and The Judge Paul R. Michel Intellectual Property American Inn of Court. The event afforded the opportunity for intellectual property lawyers to hear perspectives from the other side of the bench.

The panel of judges included:

• The Honorable Milan D. Smith, Jr., Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
• The Honorable Richard A. Paez, Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
• The Honorable S. James Otero, United States District Court for the Central District of California
• The Honorable Andrew J. Guilford, United States District Court for the Central District of California

Questions:

Is there any difference in how they evaluate an Intellectual Property case versus a non-IP case?

• Judge Paez believes that in the Ninth Circuit there is no difference.

• Judge Otero said that in the District Court there is a difference because litigants are willing to spend money which requires early intervention and management by the court. They first look at whether the case has federal jurisdiction. Also, some districts have their own local patent rules and some judges have their own standing rules.

• Judge Guilford of the District Court also says there is a difference. Patent cases present highly technical issues and that there are special things to consider in interpreting a patent case. Patent cases have a greater focus on expert testimony; at times, he thinks there may be too much emphasis on experts.

Why do you always see the same judges on en banc panels? This question was directed to the Ninth Circuit Court judges:

• The same 11 judges are considered for the panel each time. It is an arcane system — like a roulette wheel. Someone throws a spindle and someone cranks the bin. One judge who does the selecting and one judge acts as witness. The chief judge always sits on the en banc panel, but besides that, it’s random. Several judges have been on five panels in a year, and then haven’t been selected for a while.

• The en banc panels are heard every quarter — March, June, September and December. The panel doesn’t discuss the case until after they have heard it.

It seems that a lot of IP decisions are panel-driven. What is the impact of this? This question was directed to those on the Ninth Circuit.

• Judge Smith said that attorneys shouldn’t be concerned about a panel-driven opinion.

• Judge Paez says you should be more concerned about how the panels are constituted. Every time he is with a panel, it is a different make-up.

• Judge Smith minimized this saying in an environmental or in some criminal cases, the panel make-up might make a difference, but in an IP case, he doesn’t think it does.

• Panels are set one year in advance. The cases are distributed randomly to those panels six weeks before the panel is set to begin. Judge Smith said that just because he is in Southern California doesn’t mean he will set be on a panel in this area. The cases are bundled by area, so he could be assigned to Seattle or Alaska.

Should there be specific local rules for patent cases?

• Judge Otero said only 4 of 13 Districts have local patent rules. He is in favor of any rules that help him better manage patent litigation.

• Judge Guilford said that local patent rules would create greater uniformity and predictability. He has his own set of rules he applies. Procedural rules wouldn’t affect the outcome of the cases.

There is a perception that some of the districts’ rules influence the outcome. For instance, in the Northern District of California, there is a perception that the rules favor the alleged patent infringer.

• Judge Otero is concerned that parties are going to go to the District that seem to favor a case.

• Judge Guilford says that one size does not fit all; in some patent cases, the burden of local rules might make it more inefficient.

They also touched on the patent pilot program. There are now five judges, and the cases are randomly assigned. If a judge receives a case that is not on the patent panel, he has 30 days to decide if he wants to refer it to a judge who is part of the patent pilot program.

-By Berbay Principal Sharon Berman

“Great news,” I told my friend. “I’ve been in my first L.A. car accident.”

About a month ago, I was rear-ended on my way to work. Fortunately, no one was hurt and no damage was done, so we exchanged information and parted ways. When I received a voicemail from the other party’s auto insurance company asking me to call them back and confirm that I wouldn’t be filing a claim, I was more than happy to oblige – until I heard the last part of the message:

“Please call me back and reference the incident number: #2312465132132154913454134213…”

No, that’s not the actual incident number. I don’t know the real number because it was roughly twenty digits long and spat out at a rapid-fire pace. But it reminded me of experiences I’ve had with businesses that inadvertently constructed obstacles to communication with potential customers.

That being said, below are three tips to tear down common communication barriers between you and potential clients:

1. Have a “Contact Us” section prominently displayed on your website.
   According to a recent Nielsen report, the average U.S. Internet user views 2,803 web pages a month, and spends just one minute looking at each of them. If a potential client isn’t able to find something useful in under a minute, he or she is very likely to leave your website and visit your competitors instead. To combat this, give your visitors an easy way to contact you in case they have questions, whether you display a link to your information or just simply incorporate it into your page design.
2. Be accessible over the phone.
   How many times have you hung up the phone in frustration after your call was transferred for the fifth time? How many times have you left a message for a person who never called you back? The reality is that the people in need of your services may not always have the time to play phone tag with you. Unless they have a strong reason to pursue your services, potential clients may be inclined to choose a more responsive firm, especially if they are under pressure to secure an offer. From day one, show a client that you are reliable and accessible.
3. Keep track of important information so that potential clients don’t have to.
   If you do need to transfer a lead to another person in your firm, be sure to summarize the situation for your colleague and pass along any notes you may have taken during your initial conversation. Make a copy of this information and keep it on file. Don’t expect the potential client to be able to reference case numbers or recall industry-specific terms. Tracking this information streamlines communication. The potential client begins to view you as their trusted advisor, increasing the chances that they will engage your services.

I still haven’t returned the auto insurance company’s call because they made it difficult for me to communicate with them. Avoid this situation with potential clients by taking time to think about the communication barriers you may have inadvertently constructed.

Judith Weigle is a professional mediator at Extreme Mediation and performs attorney-client fee mediations for the Los Angeles County Bar Association. Having seen more than her share of attorney-client disputes, Judith has some ideas about how lawyers can avoid conflicts with their clients by changing their client communication and servicing them as other professional service businesses.  Picking Judith’s brain about this recently, it’s clear her recommendations can not only prevent disputes—they make for good attorney marketing strategy, too.  Here are Judith’s thoughts:

Many attorney-client disputes have to do with the amount of work estimated in the initial consultation compared with the actual amount of work, and the way in which the clients are billed: The client believes his attorney wasn’t up-front about fees and that he was overbilled. There are many reasons for this:

• The attorney painted too rosy a picture about the outcome, and the length of time needed to handle the case.
• The attorney didn’t ascertain the client’s budget, or didn’t accept the client’s budgetary parameters.
• Clients were unaware of everything that they could be charged for, such as depositions, expert witnesses, listening or reading to client’s communications–the lion’s share of the communication process.
• The attorney didn’t regularly invoice, resulting in a larger invoice covering several months.

Judith says that as an attorney, being transparent regarding your fees and your process at the inception of a client relationship goes a long way toward avoiding an uncomfortable misunderstanding later.  Furthermore, it demonstrates to potential clients (who are also potential referral sources) that you are trustworthy and client-oriented.

Transparency in fees begins with declining to “ballpark” your costs.  Ballparking often fails.  An attorney might say, “I really don’t know how much it’s going to cost. I’ve seen divorces go as high as x; I’ve seen divorces be as low as y.”  Judith suggests that lawyers address budgets openly and early, and discuss what you can control and what the wild cards are. An attorney could say, “Let’s talk about your budget and our game plan. Here’s what I can and can’t control.”

Judith also recommends that attorneys provide clients a basic outline of the work they’re planning to do for them, saying that even when one is preparing for a mediation, “you receive an outline for the steps in a litigated case.” She says, “Let the buying public be privy to the process of their case.”

Clients aren’t aware that, in many instances, the lawyer is legally and ethically obligated to continue providing services, and that there are hoops a lawyer needs to jump through if he wants to stop working with a client for financial reasons.  Too often, the client in a fee dispute claims that the attorney kept working when the client told them to stop – and the invoices kept coming – yet the client kept engaging in the relationship.  The client’s rationale becomes, “Well, I told them to stop.  Since they kept working I didn’t think they were going to charge me or charge me as much.”

Judith suggests that at the onset of the relationship, when they legally can, attorneys should consider attaching the Substitution of Attorney form to their contract and explaining to the client that at any time the client feels that the attorney isn’t properly representing them, or because of financial hardship, the client can proactively dissolve the relationship with this form. The attorney would be making the client responsible for ending the representation.  This would eliminate the argument in a fee dispute that the client told the attorney that funds were dwindling; the attorney didn’t listen, kept working, thereby making the attorney responsible for the money owed instead of the client.  “No good business person allows a client to run up their bills to the extent that I’ve seen attorney bills mount.  Clients without legal backgrounds aren’t of the same mindset as attorneys; they don’t see attorneys as people who continue representation out of duty to a greater good.  They look at attorneys as salespeople of legal services.”

One of the most important things I learned early on in my career is that consistent communication with clients is critical and will set you apart from your competitors. This may sound obvious but the less obvious point is the significance of staying in communication even when there isn’t anything definitive to discuss. For example, let me share two instances where communication made all the difference in my opinion of each service provider.

I recently had my bumper replaced after being involved in a car accident (I was not at fault), and concurrently, I was planning a birthday party at a venue.

Let’s start with my repair shop experience:

A week after my bumper was replaced, I found it to be defective. To their credit, the repair shop immediately ordered a new bumper and told me to come in that Friday to have it installed. However, I went in on Friday and the owner smacked his forehead saying, “We have your bumper but my guy forgot to paint it this morning.” I stood there thinking, “Fine, but a call would have been nice.” So the following Tuesday I returned to then be told that the painted bumper was the wrong model. They assured me once again a new bumper would be ordered that week. Four days went by and I have yet to hear from the repair shop with any sort of update – “Your bumper will be in on Wednesday and you can bring the car in on Thursday,” or, “The bumper is on backorder for a week so we will call you when it’s in.” Things happen – repair shops get busy; the wrong parts are delivered – this I can look past. What I can’t look past is the lack of communication on the repair’s shop part.

In comparison, the following is my experience with the party venue:

I called the venue and was told that the evening I was requesting had already been reserved by another person, but they had not put down a deposit; there is a grace period of a week to do so. Instead of just saying was reserved and moving on, the person helping me, Will, said he would contact the original person to confirm and obtain their deposit so we’d know if it would be available or not. Within two days, Will and I spoke four times. Not one of those calls was to tell me that I could or could not have the venue, it was merely to update me on the status of the booking. Will tried the other party a few times with no response, and then ultimately, said he would proceed with getting his manager’s approval to allow me to reserve the night. He went on to apologize for the back and forth and asked what the best way to contact me with a response would be – phone call, text or email. I was amazed each time we spoke that, although he didn’t have an answer, he understood that this evening was important to me, and I appreciated being kept in the loop. Taking the extra step of asking the best way to contact me was also much appreciated.

Status updates can make all the difference. For our clients, we continuously follow up multiple times on their behalf with the media and vendors. They appreciate knowing the status of our follow-ups even if we can’t say at that moment, “The editor plans to run your article in next week’s issue.” You’ll never hear a client say, “I didn’t like that firm because they always kept me up-to-date.”

Ultimately, I will be hesitant to recommend the repair shop in the future, but whether I am able to reserve the party venue or not, I plan to call Will’s manager to compliment the way he handled our interaction.