Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

CD: 10/3/06 - Integrating and Maximizing Business Development Training

By ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |
August 24, 2006

LJN Web Audio Conference Division





Panelists:

Rene Kraus
Director of Marketing and Business Development,
Patent Group, Fish & Richardson P.C.

Jim Hassett
Founder,
LegalBizDev

Deb Cochran
Marketing Manager,
Winthrop & Weinstine
Moderator:
Elizabeth Lampert
Director, ALM Web Audio Conference Division


Join us
Tuesday,
October 3, 2006
12:00PM – 2:00PM Eastern
Web Audio Conference

Integrating and Maximizing
Business Development Training:
Following up on what you learned

Tuesday, October 03, 2006
12:00PM – 2:00PM Eastern

Business development training requires a significant commitment of time and resources, and a vision of where participants in such a program want to be in their practice.  A number of law firms have learned the hard way that simply providing a sales or coaching program does not necessarily guarantee results.  Learn what it takes to implement the necessary strategies to get the most from your training efforts.  Our panel of experienced experts includes a legal marketing professional, a training developer and coach, and a practice group leader.

This presentation will discuss successful approaches that maximize training effectiveness, including:

  • Developing a marketing plan that focuses on the best prospects, desired outcomes and best approaches.
  • How to begin by researching the options for implementing the best approach for the firm, and the ideal candidates for this training.
  • Specific training tactics that can be used to improve measurement, including pre-training planning meetings to decide how a firm will judge success, and weekly reports of such measures as pipeline statistics, listening, and sales meetings.
  • Building follow-up and measurement criteria into the training, to assure that participants' objectives are SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and timed).
  • Integrating the training and follow-up with other practice-wide initiatives, to assure synergy and to maximize impact.
  • How the approach can be altered or customized depending on different practice groups' objectives or the level of attorneys selected for the program, e.g., senior attorneys vs. new associates.

LJN Web Audio Conference Division

Read These Next
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

Legal Possession: What Does It Mean? Image

Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.

The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions Image

UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?