Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
It's the budgeting and planning time of year. And, if the legal industry literature is anything to go by, strategies are in for law firms. A well-defined and well-communicated strategy provides a tangible way for law firms to identify their strengths and differentiators. Once firms have determined their identity and how they want to communicate that to the market, practice and industry groups create business development plans around executing that strategy. This usually includes reviewing client targets (existing and potential), evaluating events and sponsorships to determine which ones gain most exposure, and looking for new opportunities to showcase firm expertise. Marketers are well aware of this fact and have been working with practice and industry groups toward this end-goal for a long time. The emergence of competitive intelligence (CI) functions in law firms provides marketers and business development professionals with another arsenal in their toolkit.
Below are three ways CI professionals can help advance your strategic initiatives:
We've talked before about the value of relationships. Relationships = visibility. Inviting the CI professional to participate in practice or industry groups helps them get to know the lawyers involved and understand the group's priorities. Include them on group emails, invite them to meetings, introduce them to practice group leadership. By doing this, you will not only provide a united front from the marketing team, but you'll provide the lawyers with a go-to resource for knowledge building.
As the group works more with CI and understands the intelligence outputs available, a level of trust is built and information between the two flows more freely. The intelligence report will be much richer when the CI professional understands the underlying drivers of a request and the purpose of the report. They can respond appropriately within context — is this an initial request, a deeper dive, is it as the result of a client referral, etc. The output of the intelligence can also be adapted, according to the objective.
The CI professional provides various support to practice groups in the planning stage.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
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 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.
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.
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.
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.