Silly names and new law firms
Phew! Eduardo Reyes also thinks that 'some of the law firm franchise labels people have come up with sound so silly'. I have been thinking along the same lines for a while.
With all the talk of “brands” emerging within the legal profession, I wonder whether any of the new entrants (Quality, High Street Lawyers, Lawyers2You) have actually consulted a brand consultant?
These names remind me of the early days of the dotcom boom when everyone though that they could create an online brand by adding .com to the end of anything.
Consider if some the nation's most valuable brands had taken a similar approach. Would we have Groceries2you from Tesco? Booksinthepost.com from Amazon? Excellent chocolate from Green & Blacks?
Keystone Law used to be called Lawyers Direct, but rebranded - I know which name sounds more professional and reputable to me.
A firm’s name is only a part of the brand. The client/customer experience, in terms of its differentiation and consistency is a vital element. We all know to expect a different type of service when we fly Virgin compared to Ryanair, or stay in a Travelodge or a Hotel du Vin. The differences are about more than just price. Simply changing a name and corporate colours is not enough to create a brand.
I have a particular interest in ‘client service’ and know how hard it is to achieve any level of consistency amongst a group of highly independent individuals who guard their freedom fiercely. I watch with interest to see whether any of these “brands” are prepared to invest as much in developing service standards and performance as they are in the brand.
Sue Bramall is director of Berners Marketing
Comments
You're very right, what many
You're very right, what many people miss is that the key thing with establishing a strong brand is that as well as the proposition you need to get the delivery right.
I fail to see how taking an approach similar to that of gas salesmen in Sainsburys can help to build a brand affinity for a legal organisation based on quality.
I think it's also hard to understand how an association of small law firms can come together effectively under a single brand without operational guidelines - how can brands be managed effectively in this way.
Change to the way legal services are delivered and managed is bound to come but I think that at the moment we're at the early stages of the re-structuring process.
For these new organsiations to be successful they will have to sort out their act and ensure their service delivery meets the requirements of the market and fits with their brands.
Law Firms Brands
I wrote a blog post today on the subject of branding. The problem is that most firms see the name, logo or colour (psychographics) as the brand. It only tells part of the story, and perhaps less so than before. A law firm's brand is often so associated with its key people that in the mind of the consumer they associate the firm with that person. Yes, they know you work for a law firm, but is it a critical component in them making a decision to buy? Even if the strap line works, the substance has to be there to back it up. As firms move away the old school founders' names now is the time to think carefully about the whole issue of branding. Not enough attention is focused on this area - the driver is cost of course.
Julian
Law Firm Brands
Rather than being concerned about lawyers using poorly thought out brand names perhaps we should be more concerned about the number of non-lawyers now in the market who are happy to brand themselves in such a way that the public finds it hard to distinquish who are the real lawyers. Non-lawyer businesses are now frequently to be found with the words 'law', 'legal', 'legal services' etc. in their brand names and in the process create confusion and misunderstanding amongst the public. The majority of the general public has not yet caught up with the developments in the legal market and too many still assume that anyone using these sorts of words in their brand names must be qualified lawyers. Rather than stressing "quality" we should be emphasising "qualified".
Referral fee ban will make things worse
Couldn't agree with you more - an issue for me though is that the Law Society with its support for the ban on referral fees seems to be pushing the other direction.
I expect to see a flood of claims management companies with a single solicitor in the organisation setting up as an ABS. You can be sure these companies will be marketed very aggresively and will be doing their best to blur the difference between them and firms of solicitors.
How then will the profession be able to make sure the truly "qualified" firms with real expertise compete effectively?
Brand is name recognition and service delivery 2!
Sue makes a good point, your 'brand' has to mean something whilst stating clearly what you do and how you deliver your service to be properly recognized and understood.
With many new players offering 'interface' law, in choosing carefully the name 'face2face solicitors' it is clear to the public that we deliver legal services in a more personal way face to face. As the national law firm franchise for entrepreneurial solicitors wanting to be their own boss and run their own successful business, we recognise that our reputation and that of our franchisees' is built on delivering not only great law but exceptional client service too to our target market - those discerning clients wanting bespoke solutions for fair value.
Building a brand is about building sustainable long-term business with a great reputation. Reputation is key and that is why we have constructed a model that recognises the need to invest seriously in developing service standards and performance in an industry that to date has hardly been at the forefront of change.
Law firms will increasingly benefit from being part of a national brand provided that 'brand' is based on careful selection and delivers exceptional client service on a consistent basis. The 'face2face solicitors' Operating and Compliance Handbook incorporating OFR updated realtime clearly outlines our service standards. Franchisees also benefit from legal cashiering, case and practice management in partnership with SOS all within a hosted IT infrastructure. Our controls, ongoing business training (including sales and marketing), coupled with monthly mentoring, will provide franchisees with all they need to run their successful business in the increasingly competitive and demanding new world of legal services.
We believe 'face2face solicitors' sets clear standards and is the destination brand for solicitors recognising the need to deliver their services in a different and better way and also for discerning clients, their families and their businesses who will quite rightly demand exceptional levels of face-to-face service. The client is in control. If they don’t receive great service for fair value they will simply buy from another provider next time never to return – hardly a good or sustainable business model. Hence the face2face commitment to ongoing investment to delivering exceptional client service.
Lawyers R us.
You should see some of the names we discarded before we settled on HighStreetLawyer.com!!
I wont get into the discussion of what makes a brand other than to say it is obvious that it is more than a name and a colour scheme. A name has to be in the mix though somewhere.
If anyone wants a chat about what our brand stands for and how it might benefit them I would be very happy to answer any questions directly. gary@highstreetlawyer.com
Brand = Name
Brand Name is as important. Only a name can be developed as a brand. Naturally it takes a fair amount of forethought to be in with a chance of developing a brand. None of which can be sustained without client service, I' sure you'll agree.
Its more than branding...its relating to the consumer!
You really do make a good point Sue, as do Michael and Mike, I agree.
A 'brand' isn't just name, a logo, a catchy advertisement campaign or little ditto! It's an experience, and more to the point, a customer experience.
There has been a huge shift in professional services marketing in recent years, as I am sure we all agree, and the consumerist approach that is shaking the legal market is having a significant impact, or at least it should have. There are many firms out there who are lucky enough to have the cash flow and access to an expensive, experienced branding consultant who can create and deliver on the project, and even larger firms that have an entire team of specialists that can execute a branding campaign very well. As such, these firms will target an entirely different client base and not need to adapt to this shift in focus too much.
But what about the majority of the profession? Mr Smith for example of Smith & Co on the High Street market town. What does he do to respond? What does he do to target a more tech-savvy, price wise, demanding consumerist demographic? He doesn't, nor should, do it on his own because he doesn't have the resources and the skills. That's why 'brands' like this exist. Aware of the demographic and the changing needs of new business, and have the resources to make this possible. That isn't to say I necessarily agree with or like some of the campaigns that have been developed, and there are some design/creative elements that have missed the boat completely from my point of view as a marketing professional with a legal background...but, they are trying at least!
Silly names...or ones clients will remember? We all know Tesco and Sainsburys, but how many of us know Sunshine Corner on Oswald Street....
As a PS to my comments in the
As a PS to my comments in the piece that Sue kindly referenced, it is worth noting that the British client / consumer does seem to have a deep fondness for un-slick shop names.
I'd be sad to see my personal favourites get rebranded: -
Curl up and Dry (hairdresser in New Cross Gate)
Fags and Mags (newsagent, Ilford)
The Mixed Blessings Bakery (Walworth Road, London)
And my absolute favourite: -
Thistle do Nicely (gift shop, by the Royal Mile, Edinburgh)
I'm not suggesting an identical feel for legal brands, and the above have their faults. However, they would all finish above "Costcutter" and "Payless" in my preferred brand list.
It may be the individuality that attracts.
Oh, I love it when this sort
Oh, I love it when this sort of thing comes up. My all-time favourites:-
Jason's Doner Van
Cheeses of Nazareth
Now is the Winter of our Discount Tents
(and, for sheer "huh?" value, plumbing and bathroom supplier/fitter "Titanic Sinks")
On a more serious point, I'd disagree that a change of name and colours isn't enough to distinguish a new brand. Ratners had possibly the most suddenly-toxic brand in retail history, but almost none of that consumer bad will transferred itself to the Signet Group, Ernest Jones or H. Samuel. Nobody remembers Kattomeat, Mr Dog or Access cards, and even the widely-reviled "Snickers" has done what no observer predicted and supplanted "Marathon" in the popular imagination (albeit it took twenty years to effect!).
Brand Names
What about a national chain of criminal law firms Norfolk and Chance??
Silly names and new law firms ...
Exactly. But I'd have said 'Silly names and silly law firms'.
Only a matter of time.
Silly Brand Names
Amid all the current economic gloom, how about the following as a way to stand out from the crowd, and have a laugh?
X-Tractor Lawyers Ltd (Specialists in Debt Collection)
Splitz Solicitors (for expert advice on relationship breakdown)
Barista & Co (Licensing law)
Strictly Come Loaded (HNW clients our speciality)
Murdochs (the family firm that can hack it in the brave New World)
Swindle, Cheetham & Bent (in-house lawyers for the LeO)
Clarkson, Hammond & May (Fast track claims a speciality)
Location, Location, Location (High Class Property Solicitors incorporating free estate agency)
Conference Law (for the less well paid footballer)
Windsors (for Regal legal advice)
Come Litigate with Me (legal services in your own homes)
Thatcher, Major, Clarke, Straw & Djanogly LLP - Legal Aid Specialists (!)
But what about the majority of the profession? Mr Smith for exam
I believe "Mr Smith" and the smaller High St companies need to build an online presence. The majority of people will look online for a solicitor/law firm/service. Even if recommended by a friend they will still "Google" you. Mr Smith and the 85% of small law firms need to look closer to home. Building a brand is expensive. Surely it is more cost effective to be found through search engines and in particular Google. Where is "Mr Smith's" website when searching for a solicitor in his area?
Silly Name
What about that firm from Norwich called Norfolk & Good? They have since signed up with Quality Solicitors I believe...
Silly names and new law firms
Unless any new entrant offers THE best quality of any legal practitioner, the business will be average and ultimately flounder.
If they were good, why would those who have rebranded...er..rebranded?
But I wish them luck, as we always need a 'them' to make 'us' look even more attractive.
names of new law firms
"Where is "Mr Smith's" website when searching for a solicitor in his area?"
http://www.derby-solicitors.co/
Brand Lunacy
I am astounded at the number of law firms who believe that a certain large "Quality" brand will do anything to enhance their reputation - after all this is a big part of what branding is about.
One thi