Marketing Tech: Getting to Insights and Acting on Them: That's All That Matters

What Is Actionable Information?

In the first part of this article, I describe how to ascertain if information is actionable, and then I share some thoughts on how a law firm might think about getting to those insights on a regular basis. It's no secret that we are drowning in information ' and the efforts to get the attention of stakeholders is often half (or more!) of the battle. Likewise, once we have their attention, getting busy professionals to focus on what it is that you as the marketer or business developer are sharing or communicating is the other half of the battle.

I enter every conversation with that in mind, and over the years, I have come to believe there are two categories of information/knowledge that really make a difference and cause action: Information that presents either a risk, or that presents an opportunity. Everything else is just noise. The real challenge is first, knowing what is a risk or an opportunity, and second, getting a busy professional to believe you.

Lawyers Deal with Facts

Assuming that you are at least in part convinced by my logic ' risk/opportunity orientation toward information ' the first piece of the exercise is figuring out what a lawyer or team of professionals (client teams, industry teams, etc.) would consider to be a risk or an opportunity. There are some obvious assumptions we can make, of course ' scenarios where we are seeing increased risk of lawsuits ' for instance, Foreign Corruption Practices Act (FCPA) litigation or trends in industries such as food and beverage, where there has been an increase in lawsuits driven by false or misleading labeling of products as “organic.” Most of us who have worked with lawyers long enough have some sense of how to assess risk. However, there's another way to understand the truly actionable pieces of information you are hoping to find: ask. Yes, that sounds simplistic, but this will help focus your own efforts on what to look for, and will prevent you from making potentially incorrect (and time-wasting) assumptions. Of course there are always the “risks” or “opportunities” that you cannot necessarily predict in advance, but even those have some sort of framework, e.g., news about companies as it pertains what's rumored to be happening or signs of distress ' perhaps executive changes, restructuring, etc. While the risk and opportunities in those scenarios may not be imminent, they could be actionable or indicative of a problem down the road.

What About Action?

Now that we have at least in part answered the first part of our challenge of how to get lawyers to identify risks and opportunities (and nothing else at this point), I often hear that the subsequent “action” does not take place. Hard to believe, but true, and common. I am a lawyer by training; I only share this because my whole frame of reference to problem solving is fact-based. Facts build a case, make an argument and, if manipulated correctly, can determine an outcome. So, if I want someone to act on a risk or an opportunity that I have identified and provided, then I need to present the recipient with the facts to support whatever action ' long- or short-term ' I am suggesting he or she take. The fact is, I may be 100% correct in my suggestion, but if I can't back it up with clear and convincing evidence, then I may not get the action I am hoping for. Here's a quick example: You tell a partner at your law firm that your research points to an increased possibility that the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) is or has evolved to the point through various court interpretations that many clients may be at risk if they are not in compliance. Now, let's assume you are bringing this information to this partner fairly early in the news cycle, of news, so, strong enough to elicit a response like, “Of course, I am well aware of this possibility.” How do you get the lawyer/firm to act? Bottom line: You are as good as your facts. At times, I think we assume we need more facts or evidence than are probably necessary.

For example, in the aforementioned case (FLSA), if one were to simply show that another major law firm had produced a publication discussing a recent court interpretation, provided evidence of a company that was recently sued, perhaps a plaintiff's firm that was blogging on the topic in order to build awareness in the public domain and/or in general that legal blog traffic had been increasing over the past couple of weeks ' is that enough? Frankly, I am not entirely sure, but I do know that my call for action is now based on the sort of information I know to be of increased value (risk or opportunity) and that my recommendation to act is fact-based.

Don't Paint Yourself into a Corner

While I titled this article “Getting to Insights and Acting on Those Insights: That's All That Matters,” that's probably not entirely true, as another important piece to any puzzle where we are attempting to get busy professionals to pay attention to news and information (intelligence) is to create a culture, process and workflows that enable decision-making to be efficient, scalable and effective. Generally speaking, this is not a one-size-fits-all application; however, there are certainly commonalities. First, I think it's a mistake to paint your process and people into a corner. I can't tell you how many times I have heard, “Our lawyers will never do/use/have interest in [fill-in-the-blank].” What's true today may not be true tomorrow. The tools lawyers use, other professionals in the organization use, changing priorities all contribute to a different interest and emphasis as needs change.

Second, systems and tools make a huge difference in not only how you approach getting to insights, but those that offer the most flexibility and can be leveraged for many types of cases/users, are often the best choices long-term. Even if a firm is only trying to accomplish one objective today, that same firm, if successful in achieving that objective, will inevitably ask more of that system, as well as the personnel of that company going forward. As a former CKO/CTO of an AMLAW 25 firm and in my current role as a CEO of a growing company, my experience has shown that partnering with a vendor has always been what gets you the best result.

To get the rest of the story as to “how” do to set up a culture and framework for sharing, well, that's another column for another time.

Peter J. Ozolin is co-founder and CEO of Manzama, Inc., a provider of business intelligence platforms for the legal profession and other professional services organizations based in Bend, OR.