Survey finds consumers sceptical about banks and supermarkets’ legal services

So 69% of survey respondents ‘agree they would be concerned about the quality of (legal) service offered’ by banks and supermarkets. Hardly surprising– after all, banks are currently very much out of favour.
But the really discernable difference between the banks’ and supermarkets’ approach and traditional firms of solicitors won’t be in the quality of service offered. It will be in the definition of service- speed, efficiency, response -not personal service.
They will provide “transactions” not “relationships”.
This will enable these alternative providers to sell their legal services at a much lower price than their law firm competitors. And in areas that are susceptible to a high-volume, low-value approach, price will be the ultimate determinant of success. There is simply no reason why most consumers would pay more than they need to for a “transaction” – for example a Will, or Conveyancing.
The consequence of this is clear – firms that are in business in these areas must become as tightly run as possible, or they won’t be in business for much longer. They must be able to provide the same service in a shorter time, and at a lower cost. This means that IT and delegation become absolutely vital to processing matters as efficiently as possible. Not every task in a transaction requires a qualified solicitor!!

The other area where the supermarkets and banks will take advantage will be in the marketing of their services. Sadly, our analysis repeatedly shows that many firms do not even know what different services they sell to each client – and consequently they have very little chance of taking opportunities to cross-sell. This is a question of database management, and of a simple but coherent firm-wide marketing strategy to target existing clients. Most firms won’t be able to compete with the marketing budgets the banks and supermarkets will throw at potential clients. But not maximising opportunities with existing clients is unforgivable, and potentially fatal for the firm.
If firms want to compete with alternative providers, they need to sharpen up in those areas which affect the delivery, not the law – or current client perceptions won’t much matter for long.

There are surveys that say a majority of consumers will buy through large brands, and some say they won't. I suspect it's how the question is asked determines the answer! But even if 69% are "sceptical" (doesn't say wouldn't buy!), 31% aren't - and I'm not sure losing 31% of my customers is good for my business! I'd like to keep them and have some more!

I work for a respected medium sized (100+ staff) firm. We have spent a lot of time in “strategy meetings” debating these issues at my firm, planning for a changing future - our future -and ultimately our livelihoods.

My wife was talking to a friend a few weeks ago and the friend mentioned that she had gone to the Co-op for probate. I was intrigued (and annoyed!) so when I asked her why she simply said she searched for probate on the internet and "that was the only name I had heard of". The power of brand. The fact is, unless I can come up with defined and clear reasons why she should buy from my firm not the Co-op AND those reasons are relevant to her, AND I can communicate them such that she remembers them at the point she needs the legal service, the Co-op will probably win because "she's heard of them".

SO we understand brand is important. We're proud of our brand but our marketing team tells us that we have around 12% name recognition in our area - not great when compared to the probably 100% for Co-op, Tesco, Natwest etc..

We keep abreast of what's going on as best we can and I am a regular reader of this site and many others.

We've looked at a number of the new "initiatives". QualitySolicitors gets a lot of mentions on these blogs and "seems" to have members who are happy to sell its benefits like "solicitor in private practice" above (OK I'm a cynic). We've looked at them and other organisations which advertise and then send leads to the "appropriate" firm on their panel such as contact law, takelegaladvice, my solicitor etc. We know there are more launching soon. The barriers to entry are not high for this model - cash to advertise and a panel of firms. And of course the simple "yellow pages" type sites have been around for a while. It looks like it could well be a profitable time to be in advertising!

QS seems to try to want to create a shared brand and one of the differences between them and some of the other advertising sites appears to be getting firms to use the QS brand themselves.

Unfortunately we perceived risk in this. Brand and reputation is important to law firms. Sitting your firm's good name alongside another brand and other firms is a source of concern unless you can be sure that the other firms are as strong as you in service delivery and risk management. A quick google search and QS members seem to range from firms similar in size to ours down to sole practitioners. And then there is PR for the central brand - take Roll on Friday - http://www.rollonfriday.com/ThisWeek/News/tabid/58/Id/37/fromTab/58/Defa... and the editor of this site asking for less negative comments on the article http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/solicitors-launch-national-brand-bean-p.... I'm not sure how comfortable my partners would be with that kind of overt PR leading to criticism. The saying there is no such thing as bad publicity may apply buy tell that to Gerald Ratner!

But what is a brand? The internet says a “collection of audience perceptions about a product, service or organisation”. For these advertising organisations trying to "create a brand" I am not clear what the targetted "perceptions" are other than "you can access a solicitor here"?

For our part my firm chose to go with another organisation which launched at a similar time to QS. I’m not here to “sell them”, just to explain the thinking. We joined because their model is about delivering legal services through established brands and customer bases, not trying to “go direct” themselves and we think that gives better medium term prospects. Their member firms are similar in size to mine and they put in place compliance and quality reviews to give me comfort. They focus on local delivery across the country and we have an exclusive area where we get all work generated in our patch directly. We don’t know how well it will work but we like the strategy.

So we have a busy few years ahead. We have to get better at cash management, billing, repeat marketing, cross selling, value pricing, using IT systems, promoting our brand in our market – all the challenges we have had for years, but all now under the shadow of ABS and some big brands entrants who might take 31% of our clients (at least?)

Great questioning about brands. For law firms branding should be as a consequence of direct marketing and other pull marketing. In other words it should be a spin off.

Nike do branding because they have a commodity product, same as Coca Cola. The only difference between soft drinks or trainers is the brand perception. But that's not what you are about.

12% brand recognition? What does that mean? Does it mean you get 12% of all the business in your area?

What I'd really like to see your marketing do is get you into the top three results on Google, Yahoo and MSN (now Bing) so that you get quality "hands up I want to spend some money on you" business that the Co-op doesn't.

Have you checked your website ranking for all the major search terms in your area? For example
"Solicitor in Reading" "Lawyer in Reading" etc? And what do people do when they get to your website? Do you provide them with truly valuable information that proves you do what you say you do? With video?

Likewise do you measure your current marketing systematically so you know exactly how much it costs you to get a lead and which marketing is the most cost effective? If you don't measure it I would say stop it all. Because if you don't know something is working why keep doing it?

The great thing about your post is the definite of purpose to try things and take action.
As long as you are on the right path that is a good start.

One this is for sure. "Defending yesterday is far more risky than making tomorrow." (Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Drucker 1985)

The figure that astounds me is 69% of people don't have a Will. That's a fantastic market to aim at because a Will leads to Estate Planning, Trusts etc etc.

That's why it's a massive disservice for anyone to ignore their conveyancing list - you must market to them on a regular basis to get themselves a Will. A company I worked with had written just one letter asking for money in a decade. With a list of 7000 clients I expect that 200 new Wills a month can be sold if it is done in the right way.

There's money in peoples' pockets that they want to spend. You just have to make them WANT to spend it and JUSTIFY spending it. People don't buy things they need. They buy things they want. Even if it's dispute resolution. They are buying it because they WANT the right result. (ever make a special trip to the supermarket just to buy a tube of toothpaste you really want?)

www.greatlegalmarketing.co.uk

Hi, I don't know your exact circumstances but..........

Let's look at an answer to b) first.

What is your answer as to why he should choose your firm over anyone else's?

Because that is the question you have rightly identified is going on in your prospects "Theatre of the Mind".

Do you have a USP (unique selling point) for your business? Because without one it is difficult for someone to make a choice. After all what sales person can sell something as nebulous as "good service".

People have too many choices to make and not enough time. So making people confident in choosing you because of your USP and the way that you prove and communicate it is the way to go.

Examples of USP is Dominos - "Piping Hot Pizza Delivered To Your Door In 30 Minutes Or Less - Or Your Money Back." (Nothing about quality in it it at all.)

One you have your USP nailed you should find it easy to build your business and your communication around it. And I don't mean just out bound communication.

Marketing is everything that anyone from outside your firm sees, hears, touches or smells. So if your receptionist puts someone through to someone at your firm, make sure they say,

"I'm just putting you through to the Family Law Expert, Michelle Mann" rather than "I'm just putting your through."

Now let's take something you said and examine it.

Personal recommendation and internet for Mr Joe who is looking for legal experts.

How do you systemise personal recommendations through a referral programme? Have you done this? If you haven't then that's a good place to start. But you have to make it easy for the referrer.

On the internet are you offering valuable information in a non-archaic legal way. Audio/Video?
I hope so. Because if people are visiting your site you better make them raise their hand and say they want you.

This is the same pull marketing strategy for all media that you use to attract Joe and keep in front of him so when he is ready to buy he comes to a trusted source. Let's take an example of something you can do.

Are you the celebrity for your town or city? Are you the one that newspapers and radio stations come to for quotes and to appear on programmes? That's free. And you aren't going to be able to compete with Direct Line or Tesco for marketing budgets so you have to use Guerilla tactics.

As soon as a hungry prospect comes in to your firm for bait (valuable information) keep him hooked forever with a marketing sequence. That is the key. Because it takes sometimes years for someone to be ready to buy. But that's when you want to be in front of the prospect. And in that respect you can be even better than Tesco et al. (As long as you know your customer lifetime value of course, which tells you how much you can spend on this).

But it's all there for grabs. Just Do It. As Stephen Covey said, rule number one is Proactivity.

Do you have a formalised system that generates your firm's ideas to solve these problems? If you haven't get one going.

(You might have to make it anonymous because I have found the Partners to be the ones who may pooh pooh ideas which is terrible for those who put things forward. Remember how you felt at school to be singled out).

PS On the internet, I bet you aren't looking at who calls you once they look at your website? Because you will be getting calls and not just email forms filled in. And I wonder if you have unique phone numbers for all your marketing channels because I haven't seen a law firm that has all their marketing channels measured this way. Maybe you do. Maybe you don't.

www.greatlegalmarketing.co.uk

If at first you don't succeed - the big brands don't just run an advertisement once:

Most purchases of legal services are a distress purchases apart from the more commoditised purchases like wills and property.

Positioning is how you differentiate your brand. Positioning being defined as the unique slot of consciousness that a brand holds. Brands obviously have different associations for different individuals. You need to segment your potential customer base and come up with selling propositions that do not conflict with your brand.

Coupled with positioning you must understand that communication is not about what you want to communicate but what your audience are likely, willing and able to pick up. Research I was involved with a number of years ago produced very strategically helpful psychographs of different professional service firms but it was skewed by the nature of being regional FTSE 500 chief executives. It is much harder to understand the different needs and motivations of Jo(e) Public.

For all legal services you need to be perceived as a trusted advisor – all your competitors are trying to do the same thing.

The challenge is positioning yourself distinctly from your competitors when most of your potential Jo(e) customers see all lawyers as some form of “unexciting and remote grey mass”. You are trying to create an action and the only way that happens is when you present a vision, the customers are discontent and/or there is an easy first step that outweighs the perceived cost.

I believe that relationship is key and the aim should be to surprise and delight each client. Learn from the big brands and how they market successfully. Sky for example reward customers who recommend friends. But as others have encouraged “Just Do It” and then measure your response.