Report comment

Please fill in the form to report an unsuitable comment. Please state which comment is of concern and why. It will be sent to our moderator for review.

Comment

This issue has had me thinking about the way various professions 'dress up' to bolster their professional credibility. Doctors have their white coats, cabbies have their distinctively shaped vehicles, and police have their uniforms. Lawyers love to dress up as well, whether it's the antiquated robes and wigs of court dress, the immaculate power suits (together with the obligatory expensive pens, briefcases, and watches), or the vanity of simply naming your firm after three of your partners.

I am convinced this last habit is because it is thought that the general public will assume that anyone important enough to name their business after themselves (with no hints in the business name as to what kind of business it is) must be an expert to be trusted.

I understand the reasons behind these costumes- professionals struggling to be taken seriously by a consumer that knows a lot less than the professional. The costumes serve as a powerful and effective signals to the world at large.

However, the costumes are only signals, and signals can easily be co-opted by less qualified competitors (pharmacists wearing the white coats too, in-house debt recovery outfits adopting "firm-like" trading names). Perhaps worse (in the professions' view) is that consumers can find alternative (and perhaps better) sources of information about the marketplace (no need to scan the traffic for the familiar black cab, just use the Uber app to summon a car faster and more cheaply).

Solicitors are now dealing with both of these types of attacks on their economic position. Non solicitors are trying to get taken as seriously as solicitors by adopting their 'look', and the consumer is now able to do proper price and quality comparisions for many types of legal services, no longer limited by word of mouth recommendations or locality. Solicitors can only survive and thrive if they deliver a service that is actually worth the extra cost. But they also have to shed the work that need not (and in a functonal competetitive marketplace should not) be done be highly trained solicitors.

Solicitors are, in essence, upset that big potential clients like Wonga, the Student Loan Company, and Lloyds are not using solicitors' firm for their debt recovery services. Stop complaining about it and either figure out a way to make your service offering more attractive, or come to the conclusion that maybe this type of low-skill work is not for you.
AM

Your details

Cancel