The idea of “content marketing” is very big right now. And so is having someone else do it for you. But, in the legal space, there are so many reasons why lawyers should write their own content—on blogs, in particular. For one, the firm isn’t selling widgets; they’re selling expertise and the content needs to reflect that. Second, the lawyers need to speak to the content going up there.
Real-Time Legal Billing: Why Your Clients Absolutely Prefer It – Kia Motors Corporate Counsel Casey Flaherty
Everyone knows lawyers work hard. And everyone knows they put in a lot of time helping out their clients. That’s not the issue here—it’s just figuring out exactly how much work and how much time there really is. And when it’s all added up at the end of the month, it’s impossible to know for sure, and it creates an attorney-client relationship that is less-than-ideal.
Aside from possibly content marketing, there was no bigger topic of conversation at the 2013 Legal Marketing Technology Conference than business development. It’s obviously a core component of every law firm’s strategy, but now it’s a bigger focus than ever for the legal marketing teams. Joining LXBN TV to explain why is Jonathan Fitzgarrald, Chief Marketing Officer at Greenberg Glusker.
Why Law Firms Will Always Need People, Paired with the Automation, to Power Their CRM – Chris Fritsch
When efficiency and organization are at a premium—automation often seems like the best route to achieving that goal. But automation is rarely ever perfect, and that’s especially true when it comes to law firms and their customer relationship management software—due to a number of factors.
When Content Pilot CEO and Strategy Architect CEO Deborah McMurray revealed at the Legal Marketing Technology Conference West that the vast majority of websites from the country’s largest law firms were subpar, a member of the audience was incredulous. With all the resources in the world—or at least considerably more than their smaller counterparts—how could they all fall short with their sites? In speaking with LXBN TV, McMurray lays out a few of the reasons.
Instead of Using LinkedIn to Get Something, Lawyers Should Use It to Find Something to Give – David Ackert
LinkedIn, obviously, has many different functions. You can go there to find out information about an individual’s past career history, you can add connections, you can join groups, you cab find news, what-have-you. But instead of always going to LinkedIn to get something, lawyers should try using LinkedIn to give something to their network—say, checking the job opportunities section for a role someone you know might be interested in.
When it comes to competitive intelligence, gathering all the appropriate information is only half the battle. Once you have the intelligence, you have to sort it and present it in an impactful manner. Joining LXBN TV at the 2013 Legal Marketing Technology Conference West, Debra Baker of Legal Vertical Strategies explains the IRAC model for presenting competitive intelligence.
When you hear about pro bono work, it’s often coming from a plaintiffs’ lawyer, standing up for a wrong or injured individual who couldn’t afford legal representation. But, really, it’s lawyers of all types who do impactful pro bono work, as my guest on LXBN TV explains. That guest, joining me as part of National Pro Bono Week, is Pro Bono Net‘s Adam Friedl. This week, Pro Bono Net’s blog, Connecting Justice Communities, has been publishing a series of guest post by lawyers on their pro bono work.
More than three years and a trade later, star NFL cornerback has succeeded in trademarking a phrase that was once so popular, but you rarely hear anymore: “Revis Island.” But while Revis’s quest to obtain the mark was a lengthy process, it wasn’t ultimately a poor route to his ultimate objective. Joining LXBN TV from New York to explain why Revis took so long for him to earn the rights to this mark, and what athletes should do in situations like this is Sullivan & Worcester attorney Natalie Lederman—author on the firm’s blog, Trending Trademarks.
It’s been a big few weeks for whistleblowers, and an startling couple weeks for companies looking to stay compliant. After the SEC handed out a $14 million award, it was OSHA’s turn to deal out $1.9 million—their award going to a CFO who was allegedly fired for allegedly fired for raising financial concerns about a proposed merger. While the latter award dwarfs in comparison to the former, it’s still raising a lot of questions.