| |

Non Lawyer Staff and Marketing

I found it somewhat interesting that both of these articles came to my attention yesterday, as they both deal with something I haven’t seen many people talk about, let alone firms that actually embrace the idea. They both mention the importance of non-lawyer staff of law firms in building relationships, networking, and attracting clients to the firm.

Kevin O’Keefe, naturally, looks at it from the Social Networking aspect in After hours use of social media by law firm employees key to client development.

Meanwhile Melissa from Paralegalese has a post by Jay Fleischman titled Why Paralegals Need to Help Market Their Law Firms.

Both posts fit in to what I’ve been saying for a long time about Social Networking and why you should actually encourage it. It’s networking, and networking, assuming you’ve hired good people you can trust, is always a plus for your organization. When the good people you hired go out and represent you, they make your organization attractive to potential clients, potential hires, and the public in general. In turn, during a time when it’s absolutely vital that you can show your value to your organization, what better value can you bring to the table than attracting new clients or good hires to your employer?

I’m not saying this takes the place of doing a good job. Not by a long shot, but in a tight budget tough decisions about who gets promoted, or who gets a raise, or even who gets laid off, have to be made. Whenever you can bring in a little extra value, you have to try and do it!

Let me give you an example. Last year, we were facing a tough budget decision about whether I would be able to go to the ILTA Conference. No one questioned that there would be value in me going, but how much value was another question. However, when I was asked to speak, suddenly, there was no question. Now, not only was I getting the value of attending the conference and all the networking that goes with that, but I was also publicly representing the firm as a speaker. That extra value really helped clear the way to me going, and of course, that speaking opportunity was brought about by connections I’ve made through online networking.

Of course, I’ve also been heard to say that clients don’t hire a law firm because their tech guy is so good, even in Litigation Support. I do still believe that in general. If a lawyer is a jerk, me being a nice guy and great at what I do isn’t going to help push a client to hire us. Still, if a decision is being made between two otherwise equal attorneys, if the Lit Support person that you know you’ll also have to work with to some degree is someone you have interacted with already, that can help push it in the right direction for you. Sometimes, it really is just the smallest little “extras” you bring to the table that make all the difference.

What do you think? Should firms embrace the idea that even non-lawyer staff represent them and should be encouraged to engage online? Or is that still too scary for most?

Similar Posts

  • Linked: Strategy and tactics and Powerpoint

    I think many a public speaker would do well to remember Seth’s questions here about using a tool like PowerPoint: “Overall question: Who is this presentation for? And the follow-up: What change are we seeking to make? If you’re not trying to cause an action or some other change in attitude or belief, then what’s…

  • Links (weekly)

    Take control of YOUR career tags: LitSupport MM Ball in Arkfeld’s Court: Notes on Forensics tags: LitSupport MM How to Get an eDiscovery Evidentiary Hearing « Bow Tie Law’s Blog tags: LitSupport MM Tips for Saving Money in Litigation tags: LitSupport MM How Litigation Support Can Help Attorneys Make Informed Decisions tags: LitSupport MM Privacy…

  • Sadly, Lawyers Still Need To Be Told Not to Use Outlook to Review Email

    Maureen Holland at D4 lays out 9 Reasons Microsoft Outlook is Not a Litigation Review Tool. It’s 2015 and we still need to give people reasons not to use their own Outlook install to review email? We could add a tenth reason as well – the possibility that the reviewer will kick off automated process…

  • Would you Pay to use Twitter?

    Tim leaves out of his analysis accounting for how many users will no longer be there and how that much smaller user base impacts the value proposition. If I’m a journalist using Twitter to interact with readers and attract new readers to my publication, the ROI of paying for a fully-featured Twitter account includes considering how many people it helps me reach. Is it still worth it when my 250,000 followers get cut to 25,000? What about 2,500? What about less?

    Before you dismiss that as unlikely, I’d like you to remember that recent Pew research found that “the top 25% of users by tweet volume produce 97% of all tweets, while the bottom 75% of users produce just 3%, according to an analysis conducted over a three-month period in 2021.”

    I’m going to just assume that the 75% group who isn’t tweeting very often is not going to pay for Twitter. Of the other 25% we have to consider how many of them will fall into the $12 per year plan because they already don’t follow many people but use Twitter to interact with people who want to follow them. The question is, will those followers still exist? And if they don’t exist, is Twitter still a global conversation? Or is it just another place for privileged people who pay for membership to talk to each other?

2 Comments

  1. Mike, the key point here is that everyone in the firm – from the head partner to the receptionist – should be there because they believe in the firm's mission and point of view. Assuming that to be the case, why not give each person the opportunity to tell his or her story in an unfiltered manner? Microsoft did it with Robert Scoble, Google does it with Matt Cutts – and in both cases there was (and remains) tremendous benefit to the company and the public. In an era of transparency, any attempt to stifle the personalities of those working in a particular firm is a bad idea.

  2. Jay, I agree 100%. I've been spending a lot of time telling people that the things that scare them about social networking shouldn't scare them if they've hired the right people, and if they haven't, they should have been scared of the reputation damage those people have already been doing outside of the office. People have always talked about their work, and given others an impression of the organization, now they can just do it more efficiently!

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

To respond on your own website, enter the URL of your response which should contain a link to this post's permalink URL. Your response will then appear (possibly after moderation) on this page. Want to update or remove your response? Update or delete your post and re-enter your post's URL again. (Find out more about Webmentions.)