Client Speak: Client Feedback

So what's the deliverable once you finally convince Firm Management and the designated Lead Partners to buy into a Client Feedback program focused ' at least initially ' on its Tier 1 or key clients?

Well, you should get a Client Feedback Report that will tell you a whole lot. In fact, the Report will often provide much more than you anticipated. The following excerpt is from a note we received from a Lead Partner at a top AmLaw 100 firm that fairly well sums it up:

“I'll confess that I was a skeptic with respect to this [Client Feedback] process at the outset, but having seen the process play out, I am a convert. There is info in this Report, particularly the detail in terms of the budgeting/cost issues, that we would not have gotten in the ordinary course of the relationship.”

Satisfaction and Loyalty ' The Basics

The Client Feedback Report will clearly cover the essentials of satisfaction and loyalty. For example, at some point during the course of our Client Feedback interviews, we ask two closed-ended questions. (Substantially all of the rest of our interview questions are open-ended.)

The first closed-ended question addresses the subject of satisfaction: “On a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the highest, how would you assess the firm's performance?” While ostensibly an objective question, there is no single correct answer. Therefore, the response is purely subjective, with one interviewee's 4.0 possibly being equivalent to another's 5.0. In fact, some have qualified their ratings with such comments as, “Only God gets 5's” or “I never give anything higher than a 4.0″ or “If I gave them a 5.0, they'd lose their incentive to do better.”

Therefore, an interviewee's quantitative rating is often not as important to us as the explanation that normally accompanies it.

Some examples of these explanations follow: justifying his 2.0 rating, a Vice-Chair said, “The firm has performed broadly below average because a couple of my direct reports have complained that something's wrong ' and these are experienced guys”; the head of a Risk Committee contended, “My 4.0 is a good grade because I'm a hard marker ' to have received a 5.0, the firm would have had to exercise more control over what their people were doing”; and a General Counsel asserted, “It's a 5.0 as I wouldn't tolerate anything less.”

Our second quantitative question relates to loyalty: “Would you recommend, or have you recommended, the firm to others within your company or at other companies?” Here, too, the explanations and qualifications are usually as important as the simple “Yes” or “No” answers. And it's understandable that some interviewees who have had positive experiences are nevertheless reluctant to recommend “the firm” as opposed to the specific individuals, offices and/or practice groups they've worked with. But, despite that reluctance, many claim they would still be willing to act as references.

Here are the types of responses we've received to this second question: from a CFO, “I have no reason not to recommend ' my only caveat is that I don't know everyone at the firm, but I haven't met anyone I wouldn't recommend”; a VP Tax indicated, “Overall, I wouldn't hesitate to recommend depending on the subject matter, although I probably wouldn't vary from a positive recommendation ' but it might also depend on who the questioner is”; an EVP/CAO commented, “I cannot recommend ' we enhance our brand by associating with others who are comparable in their field ' and I don't feel this firm is”; and a General Counsel enthused, “I would recommend them and I definitely have ' practically, you recommend the team, but this team is representative of the firm.”

These responses and comments are always supplemented by other applicable remarks and observations made by the interviewees during the course of their interviews to fully reveal their degree of satisfaction ' or dissatisfaction ' and loyalty.

Beyond Satisfaction and Loyalty

Other than the foregoing, questions posed during the interview are intended to elicit feedback pertaining to such general areas as:

• key expectations of the firm going forward;
• the criteria used in the selection and retention of outside counsel;
• use of, and comparisons with, other firms;
• budgeting and fees.

Because each firm/client relationship is unique, considerable time is spent at the outset with Firm Management and, separately, with each Lead Partner whose client executives are to be interviewed to determine specific firm and client goals and objectives to be attained and issues to be explored. This will often result in the pursuit of other areas of inquiry, among them:

• Perceived implications of a recently announced client or firm merger.
• Degree of coordination and control of a firm's network of offices and personnel.
• The need to enhance certain practice areas or geographic coverage.
• The effectiveness of the firm's guidance regarding proposed or recently enacted legislation.
• Awareness of and reaction to a firm's advertising and other marketing initiatives.

The discussion in the Client Feedback Report of the foregoing issues (and even others ' see List of Specifics, below) will include relevant findings (both positive and negative) as well as recommended actions for the Lead Partner and his/her Client Service Team to pursue. Some representative examples follow (only the headlines are indicated ' in the actual Client Feedback Report, each headline is supported by related interviewee commentary together with observations of the interviewer, where appropriate):

Positive Findings

2. [The Firm's] Relationship Building Efforts Have Been Most Effective.
3. “[The Firm] Would Be My First Call Based on Their Considerable Expertise in My Industry.”
4. “The Firm Is Truly Diverse: East Coast, West Coast, and Various Nationalities, Races, Genders.”
5. “The Combination of [The Partner] and [The Senior Associate] Is the Best I've Ever Seen.”
6. “[The Firm] Has Been Responsive with a Sense of Urgency and Discipline.”

Negative Findings

2. “We Don't Universally Have the 'A' Team.”
3. “There Is Not A Consistent Level of Quality Outside The U.S.”
4. “The Firm Has Presented a Diarrhea of Recommendations with No Prioritization.”
5. The Firm's “Quest for Perfection” Has Resulted in “Inefficiencies.”
6. “[The Firm] Is One of the Least Diverse Firms.”

Recommended Actions

2. “Review How Our Legal and Compliance Group Is Organized in The U.S. As Compared with Others.”
3. “Make More Effective Use of Technology During Discovery.”
4. Focus on Establishing Certain Key Relationships in Anticipation of the Upcoming Expiration of Both the CEO's and the CAO's Contracts.
5. “Present Ideas in a Way That Takes into Account Our Organizational Structure and Hierarchy.”
6. Coordinate Cooperatively with Other Firms Whenever Asked to Share Responsibility on a Case.

List of Specifics

Each Client Feedback Report provides the respective Lead Partner and Client Service Team with a clear roadmap of impressions, perceptions, findings and recommendations. It also assists Firm Management in its due diligence responsibility as to how well each of the important assets in its client base is being looked after and attended to.

We have found, however, that significant additional benefit is realized by also providing Firm Management with a periodic Summary Feedback Report focused on such overarching issues as evolving perceptions of the firm and the competition, recurring topics of client concern, new areas of opportunity, etc. ' i.e., those issues that are primarily of relevance to the leadership of the firm or important practice areas as opposed to the individual Client Service Teams, and those issues whose significance may not be so readily apparent from reviewing the content of individual Client Feedback Reports one by one.

What follows are some of the key areas that have been highlighted in our individual Client and Summary Feedback Reports:

1. Specific areas of perceived strength and weakness ' firm and personnel.
2. Distinctive characteristics and qualities ' firm and personnel.
3. Competitive intelligence and comparisons.
4. Areas of unmet needs and cross-selling potential.
5. Resource assessment ' personnel depth and bench strength, locations, practice areas, industries, specialty areas.
6. Coordination, control and availability of resources.
7. The appearance of a one-firm firm ' or not.
8. Effectiveness of communicating firm attributes.
9. Criteria for selecting and retaining outside law firms.
10. Advice regarding enhancing the quality of work and service.
11. Perceptions of the firm's image in the marketplace ' identity, position, brand
12. Commentary and impressions useful for marketing training, PR, promotion, recruiting, business development and sales.

Reactions to the Process

We have found that client executives are overwhelmingly supportive of the Client Feedback process. They realize that they, as well as the firm, will benefit from it. Therefore, they willingly give of their time to participate and are typically very candid in their remarks. And, even where they are critical of some aspect of the firm's performance, they invariably offer their criticism in a constructive manner, as they are ordinarily far less interested in changing firms or personnel than in improving the present working relationship. A brief sampling of client reactions follows:

• “This is a good process ' I'm impressed [the firm] does it.”
• “We also use an outside firm to assess our customers' satisfaction using in-person surveys.”
• “This was painless ' I like things that way.”

As for the partners, once they become familiar with the process, they are normally highly supportive as long as they are convinced that Firm Management's primary purpose is not to use the feedback in a punitive manner. In addition to the partner quote at the beginning of this article, note the following partner reactions:

• “I am using the Report to develop follow-up action plans.”
• “Based on the favorable reaction to [a new practice area], I will be expanding this type of work.”
• “Some of the interviewees thought they may have come off as overly critical ' but that's the point.”

Caveat

Obviously, the benefit from surfacing all this valuable feedback for both the firm and its clients can only be realized if the Lead Partner(s) and the firm commit to proper and timely follow-up on all of the important issues raised during the interviews. In view of the time and effort invested by both parties, failure to execute such follow-up could impact more adversely on client relationships than if the Client Feedback process had never been initiated in the first place.

So the message here is that once a firm has decided to go forward with a Client Feedback program, everyone must be firmly committed to implement each step in the process from the initial orientation meeting between the interviewer(s) and Firm Management all the way through to the confirmation from the client(s) that all the necessary follow-up issues have been satisfactorily addressed. (In a subsequent article, I will address the dozen or so necessary steps in the Client Feedback process.)

As should be evident from the client and partner reactions cited above, you'll find the benefits and value will far and away exceed any costs involved.

Donald E. Aronson is CEO of D. E. Aronson Associates LLC and a member of this newsletter's Board of Editors. Don's firm conducts market research by interviewing executives of professional services firms' key clients with a primary focus on Client Feedback. Located in New York City, he can be reached at 212-874-4181 or [email protected]. Copyright ' 2010 by D. E. Aronson Associates LLC.

So what's the deliverable once you finally convince Firm Management and the designated Lead Partners to buy into a Client Feedback program focused ' at least initially ' on its Tier 1 or key clients?

Well, you should get a Client Feedback Report that will tell you a whole lot. In fact, the Report will often provide much more than you anticipated. The following excerpt is from a note we received from a Lead Partner at a top AmLaw 100 firm that fairly well sums it up:

“I'll confess that I was a skeptic with respect to this [Client Feedback] process at the outset, but having seen the process play out, I am a convert. There is info in this Report, particularly the detail in terms of the budgeting/cost issues, that we would not have gotten in the ordinary course of the relationship.”

Satisfaction and Loyalty ' The Basics

The Client Feedback Report will clearly cover the essentials of satisfaction and loyalty. For example, at some point during the course of our Client Feedback interviews, we ask two closed-ended questions. (Substantially all of the rest of our interview questions are open-ended.)

The first closed-ended question addresses the subject of satisfaction: “On a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the highest, how would you assess the firm's performance?” While ostensibly an objective question, there is no single correct answer. Therefore, the response is purely subjective, with one interviewee's 4.0 possibly being equivalent to another's 5.0. In fact, some have qualified their ratings with such comments as, “Only God gets 5's” or “I never give anything higher than a 4.0″ or “If I gave them a 5.0, they'd lose their incentive to do better.”

Therefore, an interviewee's quantitative rating is often not as important to us as the explanation that normally accompanies it.

Some examples of these explanations follow: justifying his 2.0 rating, a Vice-Chair said, “The firm has performed broadly below average because a couple of my direct reports have complained that something's wrong ' and these are experienced guys”; the head of a Risk Committee contended, “My 4.0 is a good grade because I'm a hard marker ' to have received a 5.0, the firm would have had to exercise more control over what their people were doing”; and a General Counsel asserted, “It's a 5.0 as I wouldn't tolerate anything less.”

Our second quantitative question relates to loyalty: “Would you recommend, or have you recommended, the firm to others within your company or at other companies?” Here, too, the explanations and qualifications are usually as important as the simple “Yes” or “No” answers. And it's understandable that some interviewees who have had positive experiences are nevertheless reluctant to recommend “the firm” as opposed to the specific individuals, offices and/or practice groups they've worked with. But, despite that reluctance, many claim they would still be willing to act as references.

Here are the types of responses we've received to this second question: from a CFO, “I have no reason not to recommend ' my only caveat is that I don't know everyone at the firm, but I haven't met anyone I wouldn't recommend”; a VP Tax indicated, “Overall, I wouldn't hesitate to recommend depending on the subject matter, although I probably wouldn't vary from a positive recommendation ' but it might also depend on who the questioner is”; an EVP/CAO commented, “I cannot recommend ' we enhance our brand by associating with others who are comparable in their field ' and I don't feel this firm is”; and a General Counsel enthused, “I would recommend them and I definitely have ' practically, you recommend the team, but this team is representative of the firm.”

These responses and comments are always supplemented by other applicable remarks and observations made by the interviewees during the course of their interviews to fully reveal their degree of satisfaction ' or dissatisfaction ' and loyalty.

Beyond Satisfaction and Loyalty

Other than the foregoing, questions posed during the interview are intended to elicit feedback pertaining to such general areas as:

• key expectations of the firm going forward;
• the criteria used in the selection and retention of outside counsel;
• use of, and comparisons with, other firms;
• budgeting and fees.

Because each firm/client relationship is unique, considerable time is spent at the outset with Firm Management and, separately, with each Lead Partner whose client executives are to be interviewed to determine specific firm and client goals and objectives to be attained and issues to be explored. This will often result in the pursuit of other areas of inquiry, among them:

• Perceived implications of a recently announced client or firm merger.
• Degree of coordination and control of a firm's network of offices and personnel.
• The need to enhance certain practice areas or geographic coverage.
• The effectiveness of the firm's guidance regarding proposed or recently enacted legislation.
• Awareness of and reaction to a firm's advertising and other marketing initiatives.

The discussion in the Client Feedback Report of the foregoing issues (and even others ' see List of Specifics, below) will include relevant findings (both positive and negative) as well as recommended actions for the Lead Partner and his/her Client Service Team to pursue. Some representative examples follow (only the headlines are indicated ' in the actual Client Feedback Report, each headline is supported by related interviewee commentary together with observations of the interviewer, where appropriate):

Positive Findings

2. [The Firm's] Relationship Building Efforts Have Been Most Effective.
3. “[The Firm] Would Be My First Call Based on Their Considerable Expertise in My Industry.”
4. “The Firm Is Truly Diverse: East Coast, West Coast, and Various Nationalities, Races, Genders.”
5. “The Combination of [The Partner] and [The Senior Associate] Is the Best I've Ever Seen.”
6. “[The Firm] Has Been Responsive with a Sense of Urgency and Discipline.”

Negative Findings

2. “We Don't Universally Have the 'A' Team.”
3. “There Is Not A Consistent Level of Quality Outside The U.S.”
4. “The Firm Has Presented a Diarrhea of Recommendations with No Prioritization.”
5. The Firm's “Quest for Perfection” Has Resulted in “Inefficiencies.”
6. “[The Firm] Is One of the Least Diverse Firms.”

Recommended Actions

2. “Review How Our Legal and Compliance Group Is Organized in The U.S. As Compared with Others.”
3. “Make More Effective Use of Technology During Discovery.”
4. Focus on Establishing Certain Key Relationships in Anticipation of the Upcoming Expiration of Both the CEO's and the CAO's Contracts.
5. “Present Ideas in a Way That Takes into Account Our Organizational Structure and Hierarchy.”
6. Coordinate Cooperatively with Other Firms Whenever Asked to Share Responsibility on a Case.

List of Specifics

Each Client Feedback Report provides the respective Lead Partner and Client Service Team with a clear roadmap of impressions, perceptions, findings and recommendations. It also assists Firm Management in its due diligence responsibility as to how well each of the important assets in its client base is being looked after and attended to.

We have found, however, that significant additional benefit is realized by also providing Firm Management with a periodic Summary Feedback Report focused on such overarching issues as evolving perceptions of the firm and the competition, recurring topics of client concern, new areas of opportunity, etc. ' i.e., those issues that are primarily of relevance to the leadership of the firm or important practice areas as opposed to the individual Client Service Teams, and those issues whose significance may not be so readily apparent from reviewing the content of individual Client Feedback Reports one by one.

What follows are some of the key areas that have been highlighted in our individual Client and Summary Feedback Reports:

1. Specific areas of perceived strength and weakness ' firm and personnel.
2. Distinctive characteristics and qualities ' firm and personnel.
3. Competitive intelligence and comparisons.
4. Areas of unmet needs and cross-selling potential.
5. Resource assessment ' personnel depth and bench strength, locations, practice areas, industries, specialty areas.
6. Coordination, control and availability of resources.
7. The appearance of a one-firm firm ' or not.
8. Effectiveness of communicating firm attributes.
9. Criteria for selecting and retaining outside law firms.
10. Advice regarding enhancing the quality of work and service.
11. Perceptions of the firm's image in the marketplace ' identity, position, brand
12. Commentary and impressions useful for marketing training, PR, promotion, recruiting, business development and sales.

Reactions to the Process

We have found that client executives are overwhelmingly supportive of the Client Feedback process. They realize that they, as well as the firm, will benefit from it. Therefore, they willingly give of their time to participate and are typically very candid in their remarks. And, even where they are critical of some aspect of the firm's performance, they invariably offer their criticism in a constructive manner, as they are ordinarily far less interested in changing firms or personnel than in improving the present working relationship. A brief sampling of client reactions follows:

• “This is a good process ' I'm impressed [the firm] does it.”
• “We also use an outside firm to assess our customers' satisfaction using in-person surveys.”
• “This was painless ' I like things that way.”

As for the partners, once they become familiar with the process, they are normally highly supportive as long as they are convinced that Firm Management's primary purpose is not to use the feedback in a punitive manner. In addition to the partner quote at the beginning of this article, note the following partner reactions:

• “I am using the Report to develop follow-up action plans.”
• “Based on the favorable reaction to [a new practice area], I will be expanding this type of work.”
• “Some of the interviewees thought they may have come off as overly critical ' but that's the point.”

Caveat

Obviously, the benefit from surfacing all this valuable feedback for both the firm and its clients can only be realized if the Lead Partner(s) and the firm commit to proper and timely follow-up on all of the important issues raised during the interviews. In view of the time and effort invested by both parties, failure to execute such follow-up could impact more adversely on client relationships than if the Client Feedback process had never been initiated in the first place.

So the message here is that once a firm has decided to go forward with a Client Feedback program, everyone must be firmly committed to implement each step in the process from the initial orientation meeting between the interviewer(s) and Firm Management all the way through to the confirmation from the client(s) that all the necessary follow-up issues have been satisfactorily addressed. (In a subsequent article, I will address the dozen or so necessary steps in the Client Feedback process.)

As should be evident from the client and partner reactions cited above, you'll find the benefits and value will far and away exceed any costs involved.

Donald E. Aronson is CEO of D. E. Aronson Associates LLC and a member of this newsletter's Board of Editors. Don's firm conducts market research by interviewing executives of professional services firms' key clients with a primary focus on Client Feedback. Located in New York City, he can be reached at 212-874-4181 or [email protected]. Copyright ' 2010 by D. E. Aronson Associates LLC.