Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
That's Where Planning Begins
By Bruce Marcus
I don't understand. For decades, I've been exhorting professional firms and the consultants who serve them that the first line in the marketing plan begins with knowing your prospective market. I even wrote a book (with August Aquila) called Client at the Core. And obviously, I preach that message in my latest book, Professional Services Marketing 3.0. I spelled it out in the first article I wrote in The Virginia Accountant in 1980.
And to this day, I get article after article, and many marketing books, that say you should start off by spelling out what you want your firm to be. The market is then an afterthought. In the immortal words of the great American philosopher. Yogi Berra: 'Ain't nobody here knows how to play this game?'
In that first article, I wrote, repeating in detail Professional Services marketing 3.0, Marketing is four things:
I would add, today, one more thing ' define your objectives in terms of the first three points. I said it in 1980, and it's still true.
The way a plan built this way works is to bring pragmatic focus to the plan, rather than wishful thinking. If each of these steps is conceived thoughtfully and realistically, your plan then becomes viable and productive. An important point ' a marketing plan should focus not on the firm, but on the individual practice. When this is done effectively, not only does the plan work, but this kind of program redounds to the entire firm. It doesn't seem to work the other way around.
Traditionally, developing the marketing has been the job of the marketing director and staff. And when non-marketers get involved, it can be disastrous. What you usually get is wishful thinking based on mythology. It dooms a plan from the beginning. True, partner participation is mandatory, but this participation should be based on the skills each practice group has to offer.
What is happening now, though, as reported in Professional Services Marketing 3.0, is the growing marketing sophistication of lawyers allows them to contribute realistic and professional marketing skills. I report this trend in Professional Services Marketing 3.0, which details the evolution of marketing since it first became legal under the U.S. Supreme Court 1977 decision, Bates v State Bar of Arizona. I call this phase Marketing 1.0. Marketing 2.0 is what happened in the interim years since Bates, during which marketing began to evolve to its current state. We are still in that state. This evolutionary process, which is impelled by the growing need to compete with frank promotional activity, is not only changing the face of marketing, but generating new law and accounting firm structures to better compete, Under 3.0, firms are changing for increased productivity and greater focus on client, rather than on firm needs. The focus on client needs is based on value to the client, rather than to the firm and its needs.
It's through this kind of practice that that an evolutionary process also begins in the contemporary firm. This is resulting in moving from the long-held traditional firm that resembles the Dickensian model, to one that's more streamlined and not surprisingly, more productive and profitable than the traditional firm.
Should marketing planning begin with 'what kind of firm, and how big, we want to be? Not if you really want to be your kind of firm and more profitable as well.
That's Where Planning Begins
By Bruce Marcus
I don't understand. For decades, I've been exhorting professional firms and the consultants who serve them that the first line in the marketing plan begins with knowing your prospective market. I even wrote a book (with August Aquila) called Client at the Core. And obviously, I preach that message in my latest book, Professional Services Marketing 3.0. I spelled it out in the first article I wrote in The
And to this day, I get article after article, and many marketing books, that say you should start off by spelling out what you want your firm to be. The market is then an afterthought. In the immortal words of the great American philosopher. Yogi Berra: 'Ain't nobody here knows how to play this game?'
In that first article, I wrote, repeating in detail Professional Services marketing 3.0, Marketing is four things:
I would add, today, one more thing ' define your objectives in terms of the first three points. I said it in 1980, and it's still true.
The way a plan built this way works is to bring pragmatic focus to the plan, rather than wishful thinking. If each of these steps is conceived thoughtfully and realistically, your plan then becomes viable and productive. An important point ' a marketing plan should focus not on the firm, but on the individual practice. When this is done effectively, not only does the plan work, but this kind of program redounds to the entire firm. It doesn't seem to work the other way around.
Traditionally, developing the marketing has been the job of the marketing director and staff. And when non-marketers get involved, it can be disastrous. What you usually get is wishful thinking based on mythology. It dooms a plan from the beginning. True, partner participation is mandatory, but this participation should be based on the skills each practice group has to offer.
What is happening now, though, as reported in Professional Services Marketing 3.0, is the growing marketing sophistication of lawyers allows them to contribute realistic and professional marketing skills. I report this trend in Professional Services Marketing 3.0, which details the evolution of marketing since it first became legal under the U.S. Supreme Court 1977 decision, Bates v State Bar of Arizona. I call this phase Marketing 1.0. Marketing 2.0 is what happened in the interim years since Bates, during which marketing began to evolve to its current state. We are still in that state. This evolutionary process, which is impelled by the growing need to compete with frank promotional activity, is not only changing the face of marketing, but generating new law and accounting firm structures to better compete, Under 3.0, firms are changing for increased productivity and greater focus on client, rather than on firm needs. The focus on client needs is based on value to the client, rather than to the firm and its needs.
It's through this kind of practice that that an evolutionary process also begins in the contemporary firm. This is resulting in moving from the long-held traditional firm that resembles the Dickensian model, to one that's more streamlined and not surprisingly, more productive and profitable than the traditional firm.
Should marketing planning begin with 'what kind of firm, and how big, we want to be? Not if you really want to be your kind of firm and more profitable as well.
End of year collections are crucial for law firms because they allow them to maximize their revenue for the year, impacting profitability, partner distributions and bonus calculations by ensuring outstanding invoices are paid before the year closes, which is especially important for meeting financial targets and managing cash flow throughout the firm.
Law firms and companies in the professional services space must recognize that clients are conducting extensive online research before making contact. Prospective buyers are no longer waiting for meetings with partners or business development professionals to understand the firm's offerings. Instead, they are seeking out information on their own, and they want to do it quickly and efficiently.
Through a balanced approach that combines incentives with accountability, firms can navigate the complexities of returning to the office while maintaining productivity and morale.
The paradigm of legal administrative support within law firms has undergone a remarkable transformation over the last decade. But this begs the question: are the changes to administrative support successful, and do law firms feel they are sufficiently prepared to meet future business needs?
Counsel should include in its analysis of a case the taxability of the anticipated and sought after damages as the tax effect could be substantial.