Law Firm Marketing Catalyst

The podcast "Law Firm Marketing Catalyst" aims to fuel revenue growth through thought-provoking interviews with forward-thinking lawyers, law firm management, and legal marketers who bring fresh perspectives and innovative approaches to marketing. Your host, Sharon Berman, founded Berbay Marketing & Public Relations more than two decades ago. Since then, the firm has implemented programs for both plaintiff and defense firms across a range of practice areas and industries.

Episode 115: Want to Generate Leads? Start Tracking with Ted Lau, Owner of Ballistic Arts, an Award-Winning High-Touch Digital Marketing Agency 04/28/2023

Episode 115: Want to Generate Leads? Start Tracking with Ted Lau, Owner of Ballistic Arts, an Award-Winning High-Touch Digital Marketing Agency What you’ll learn in this episode: Why B2B companies are often underserved by traditional marketing companies and strategies What the different parts of the digital marketing funnel are, and how understanding the funnel can help you generate and convert qualified leads Why websites are still a key part of a marketing strategy How giving away expertise for free can actually generate more business Why the most successful companies are the ones that resolve their customers’ pain points About Ted Lau Ted Lau is the owner of Ballistic Arts, an award-winning high-touch digital marketing agency that focuses on growing sales leads for small and medium sized businesses. He leads a team of creative professionals in digital marketing strategy, video production, graphic design and web development to provide effective ROI for businesses that want to raise brand awareness and garner tangible leads for their business growth. Ted is also a host on Canada's #1 marketing podcast Marketing News Canada where he discusses the latest insights on all things marketing, advertising, and communications with today's brightest minds in the industry. Additional Resources: Transcript: Small and mid-sized B2B companies may not draw as much attention as B2C companies, but their business makes up the majority of North America’s economy. While their marketing may not be as flashy, B2B companies still need no-B.S. strategies that generate leads. That’s where Ted Lau, founder of digital marketing agency Ballistic Arts, comes in. He joined the Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast to talk about the importance of the digital marketing funnel; why tracking is the key to generating qualified leads; and why likes, followers and impressions mean nothing if they don’t increase revenue. Read the episode transcript here. Sharon: Welcome to the Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast. Today, it’s my pleasure to welcome Ted Lau, founder of Ballistic Arts, a digital marketing agency. Ted is speaking to us from Vancouver, Canada, although they have an office in Bellingham, Washington and they work all over the West Coast. Ballistic Arts combines innovative, creative storytelling with leading-edge analytics so they can really move the client’s needle. Ted leads a team of experts in design and branding video production, web development and lead generation. We’ll hear all about this and more today. Ted, welcome to the program. Ted: Thanks, Sharon. Happy to be here. Sharon: So glad to have you. Tell us how you got where you are. Ted: That’s a long story. I’m starting to age a little, hopefully in a good way like fine wine. Basically, right after university, I started the business. I was trying to get into the film industry. I graduated four months or so after 9/11 so nobody was hiring, so I thought, “I’m just going to freelance and what not.” I worked on an indie film. I met the director at the time, and he and I got along quite well. He was like, “Do you want to start a business together?” I was kind of naïve in my early twenties, and I was like, “Well, yeah, how hard could that be?” There you go. We started setting off on our journey. We started as a video production company, and then one thing led to another. A lot of our clients were SMBs, small and medium-sized businesses, that didn’t have the wherewithal or the budgets to hire large agencies to help them do all their marketing. This is, again, in the early 2000s. I had to make DVDs that people could stick into their machines, and a lot of them said, “I don’t even have a TV in here, but I notice that you design your own brochures, and it’s quite lovely. Can you design mine?” In your early twenties, you’re like, “Well, yeah, I’m starving. I’ll do whatever. Yes, I can do that.” So, we immediately got into the graphic design biz. A few months after that, people said, “Ted, this web thing, this interweb, the internet, I don’t think it’s going away. I noticed that you designed your own website. Can you help us?” I was like, “Yes, I think I can.” We started becoming a full media marketing agency, and we did creative work up until probably 2018 or 2019. Then I bought out my business partner, which is whole other podcast if you want to talk about that. Then I wanted to start helping small and medium-sized B2B companies. That journey I had, that first 15, 16 years in the business, we went from small and medium-sized businesses to large companies. We worked in healthcare. We worked with a lot of large real estate developers. They got larger and larger. These are multinational companies, some of them, and it became a little bit—financially it was rewarding, but it didn’t feel like we were helping the little guy anymore. I wanted to get back to our roots, and I noticed that a lot of business-to-business folks aren’t supported by the marketing world. They don’t actually have the inclination to seek out marketing, and marketers don’t really want to work with B2B. They find it boring. It’s not Lululemon. It’s not the L.A. Rams. They want to work with those companies typically, so I noticed that B2B companies were underserved. If you look at the stats, B2B, small and medium-sized businesses are the backbone of the North American economy. They’re like 89% of the economy. So, I thought there was a good opportunity for us to support that, and we got into lead generation digital marketing for a lot of SMBs, a lot of B2B professional service companies, a lot of B2B distributors and manufacturers. They don’t really need all this huge marketing, branding, blah, blah, blah. They need business. They need sales. So, I was like, “What if I helped you get leads?” That really perked one of my clients’ ears, and he said, “You know, Ted, if you could get me leads, I’ll never leave you.” That was basically it. Again, I didn’t really know how to get there, but I had a vision where I thought if we could marry the data and the creative and focus on one goal, not vanity numbers, but really focus on actually getting people business, leads, solid, qualified leads, not garbage tire-kicker leads, there was a place in the marketplace for that. It’s been very rewarding over Covid. We actually started this division, I want to say, six or eight months before Covid, and not because I had a crystal ball thinking the world’s going to shut down with the global pandemic. It was simply me wanting to serve a particular community. I think Covid, as disastrous as it was for many people and as devastating as it was for many businesses, it was very helpful for us to be in a position to support these businesses. That division grew very rapidly over Covid because people were like, “Oh my goodness, we’re shutting our doors, but I got a little bit of government money. Can you help get me business and keep my doors open?” I was like, “O.K., no pressure.” We set goals. We created strategies and tactics around that and supported them in generating revenue, and it’s been very successful. Sharon: Did you think about jumping ship and going back to the film industry at some point? Ted: That’s a great question. I think the film industry, like of a lot of industries, is much more glamorous on the outside than it is on the inside. Like they say, this is how the sausage is made in the factory, whatever that saying is. I started noticing many of my friends who were in the film industry starting to get burnt out. They were working 12, 18-hour days, a lot of overtime, a lot of low pay, and it was a lot of grunt work. It took 10, 15 years to get into any kind of leadership role because there are union rules and whatnot, not to say there’s no place for the union. I just found that it was very tiring for a lot of these folks. A lot of them ended up having marital issues because of it, relationship issues, health issues, addiction issues, and I thought, “You know what? This is not really for me.” I was tied to the hip by a lovely girl back in my college days, and I wanted to make sure I was able to seal the deal, as it were. Funny enough, she is my wife of 17 years. We got married in 2006. We started dating in 1999, got married in 2006. It’s 17 years this year, and after I bought out my business partner a few years ago, I brought her in as a 50-50 partner. We’ve been partners in life and partners in crime for a number of years now. Sharon: Pretty good. It sounds very fulfilling. Ted: It is. Sharon: You do a lot of different things. How do you define digital marketing? You say you’re a digital marketing agency. That could mean a lot of things. Ted: Yeah, absolutely. Great question, Sharon. The first thing is that, for us, it is anything that is online for the most part. I think a lot of folks will do PR and outreach and influencer marketing, those kinds of things. Those are not our forte. Our forte is around helping folks on things for the digital funnel. If you don’t understand the funnel, it’s top of funnel, middle of funnel, bottom of funnel. The top of funnel is where you get the awareness. People who have never heard of your business before don’t know you from Tom, Dick or Harry. You’re just like every single person in your industry. Getting awareness is top of funnel, and activities like that that we support are things like digital ads, be it Google, LinkedIn, Facebook. We’ll even do Snapchat and Twitch and Pinterest. We’re exploring TikTok for some B2B companies. So, that’s getting the awareness out, but you also have things in top of funnel like SEO work. You have PPC, which is part of the Google landscape, blog writing to support the SEO efforts, video ads, YouTube ads. Whatever those things are just to get the word out. Then the middle of funnel is the consideration phase. People have heard of you. It usually takes about eight to 10 touches for them to even realize you exist. Once they actually convert and come to your website, that’s the consideration phase. We need to have really good, thoughtful content on a website. Gone are the days when if you look pretty and half-decent, they’re going to just call you. You need to actually provide value. So, we do a lot of work around supporting website content creation, creating marketing strategies and actually executing on them. Maybe we’ll have video content that is not a video ad, but it’s something that educates the end user, the client’s client or p /episode/index/show/lawfirmmarketingcatalyst/id/26616630

Episode 114: Forget Your Website Homepage—Google’s Search Results Page Is the New Face of Your Brand with Stephanie Manor Chew, Head of the Elite Sales Team at Digital Law Marketing 04/24/2023

Episode 114: Forget Your Website Homepage—Google’s Search Results Page Is the New Face of Your Brand with Stephanie Manor Chew, Head of the Elite Sales Team at Digital Law Marketing What you’ll learn in this episode: Why Google’s search results page is more important than your website homepage Why the most successful law firms are involved in their marketing, even when they hire an outside agency How a firm’s intake process can make or break their SEO efforts Why content marketing today is about quality, not quantity Why consistent Google reviews are the key to ranking higher About Stephanie Chew: Stephanie Manor Chew is award-winning law firm analyst andDirector of Sales and Head of the Elite Sales Team at Digital Law Marketing. For the last 16 years, she has been helping clients build credibility and increase their visibility online through the full lifecycle of digital initiatives. From custom search engine marketing and social media positioning, to targeted content and online reputation management, she makes sure that DLM clients get what they need, when they need it. Additional Resources: Transcript: Gone are the days when you could simply outsource everything to an SEO agency and expect results. To rank on Google today, law firms must take an active role in overseeing and executing their marketing plan. Stephanie Chew, Director of Sales at Digital Law Marketing, finds that the company’s most successful clients collaborate with them to achieve the best possible outcome. She joined the Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast to talk about why content is no longer king; why a firm’s intake process is the most important part of lead generation; and how consistent Google reviews can boost your SEO efforts. Read the episode transcript here. Sharon: Welcome to the Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast. Today, my guest is Stephanie Chew. She is the Director of Sales at Digital Law Marketing, and she’s speaking to us from Annapolis, Maryland. The company is headquartered in Nashville but is basically a virtual firm and works all over the country. Digital Law Marketing encompasses a wide range of digital aspects today, and no law firm can live without them. From SEO to PPC to social media, a law firm can make a case for each of them, especially when they work together. Today, Stephanie is going to educate us on what’s new in digital law marketing, where we should start and what we can’t live without. Stephanie, welcome to the program. Stephanie: Thank you so much for having me. I’m happy to be here. Sharon: Stephanie, tell us your background. How did you end up doing this? You didn’t tell your mother this is what you wanted to do where you were little, I don’t think. Stephanie: It’s funny; I always wanted to be in advertising in some respects. I was just telling my daughter this the other night when we were watching the Super Bowl. Watching the Super Bowl with my father, I was always so fascinated by the ads, and I always knew I wanted to do something around advertising and marketing. After college, I started with Trader Publishing Company, which is now Dominion Enterprises. It has changed hands a couple of times, but it’s basically selling advertising space to car dealers. Then it turned into apartment communities, like for-rent magazines, things of that nature, and then that led me over to the SEO world, the website world. Then I started working with law firms in 2009, and I’ve been here ever since. Sharon: That’s a long time with law firms. I can relate. I wonder what would have happened if I had been in advertising when SEO started. I’m involved in SEO, but I thought advertising was my dream job and quickly found it wasn’t. What would you say that lawyers have to do differently in digital marketing? Stephanie: They have to be a part of the partnership. In the first part of my career, we would come in and help firms and companies by putting ads in newspapers or books, and the firm or the business really didn’t have to do much. Now the most successful firms out there are involved with their marketing, maybe not as much as we are, but they’re a pretty big part of it. More than they ever have been. For instance, getting reviews is incredibly important now, so the firm has to work to get reviews. We can make a firm tell Google how amazing the firm is. We can create an amazing website with wonderful content, great SEO strategy, but if the firm isn’t getting reviews, they’re not going to get business. Now, more so than it’s ever been, the firm has to be behind the digital focus and be a part of what their partners are doing to help them become successful online. Sharon: That’s interesting, because when I read a review, the first thing I look at is, “Is this a legitimate review or is something the company wrote?” I hadn’t thought about how involved lawyers have to be, how involved everybody has to be. It’s not just something done in the back room. Stephanie: Right. The firms that are the most successful online, the lawyers are actually asking for those reviews directly themselves. We’ve seen firms where they’ve hired people to get reviews for them. They’re never as successful as the actual attorney asking for that review themselves. So, asking for those reviews is one thing we always push our firms to do because, like you said, you look at those reviews to see if they’re real or not. Most people look first at the newest reviews, the most recent review that was posted, and then they look at the lowest review. Those are the two categories that people care the most about. So, it’s important for the firm to be involved just as much as the marketing company to make sure your reputation is good too. Sharon: Do you explain that from the very beginning, that they have to be involved? Stephanie: Yes, and we will only work with firms that will be involved. We’re very lucky that we’re exclusive, so we only work with one firm per practice area per geographic location. If a firm isn’t a partner with us, there’s only so much we can do for them. But having that partnership, we are the best in what do. We like working with the best firms. It creates the best partnership for everybody’s success. But yes, it’s very important that they’re also a part of their own success up front. Sharon: When you say success, is that lead generation? Is it just what they’re doing? Stephanie: Yes, lead generation. Our goal is to help firms become visible online organically. Our main focus is search engine optimization, which is organic placement on search engines. We do paid ads, and we’re very good at doing paid ads as well, but it’s that organic placement that you get the most return from. The more rankings these firms have on the search engines, the more phone calls they’re going to get and then hopefully the more cases they get. It really does work that way. We can track a ranking on the search engines, and then we track their phone and work with them to hear how many cases they’re getting, and it really does work in that direction. Sharon: Social media and the paid stuff aside, do you encourage lawyers to write articles? Does this help? Stephanie: With our clients, we handle all of the writing because there are couple of different ways you have to write. Number one, you have to write to make sure you’re the voice of the firm and it makes sense. You’re writing about cases you’re looking to get, but you also have to make sure you’re writing so the search engines can recognize you. For instance, a very popular search phrase right now is “near me,” like “car accident attorney near me,” “car accident lawyer near me,” “dentist near me,” “best optometrist near me.” It’s making sure you get those “near me” keywords in your content, making sure your content includes questions and answers, because a lot of people are asking questions of the search engines. We do have firms that like to write themselves. Attorneys are wonderful writers, but if they’re not writing so the search engines can recognize what they’re saying, it’s not going to help them become more visible when it comes to these search phrases. It’s a balance. We do all the writing for our clients with their approval, but if somebody does want to write here and there, we encourage that. We would just help with massaging the SEO and the content. Sharon: Would you massage the SEO or the stuff that makes them go higher in the rankings? If they have a website already, would you say, “It’s wonderful, but we can go in and do some things”? What do you do? Stephanie: 99% of the time, we rebuild and redesign and develop the website first. The reason we do that is because a lot of how your website is built is how you’re going to perform on the search engines. For instance, if you have a very slow website, Google does not like that. Your site speed is a factor if you’re going to rank or not. So, we like to go in and clean up the website so we have a good product to work with to then help with SEO. From there, we write content, build out the content, create site maps, really get to know the firm, their voice, and figure out the types of cases they’re looking for. Then we write content around that to help them rank on the search engines. Sharon: Are you called in when they say, “We’re about to embark on a rebuild of our website”? It seems to me they already have one when they call you in. Stephanie: Sometimes that happens, where we start working with a firm and they just rebuilt their website, and we have to give them the bad news of “I’m really sorry, but this website isn’t going to perform.” We wouldn’t take on that client because we want to set up the proper expectations of success for our clients. If you have a marketing company tell you, “Oh no, that’s O.K. Your website’s slow, but we could still work with it,” that would be a red flag because it won’t work as well as it could if you redid the site. It happens sometimes. Sharon: Going back to the “near me,” I don’t even enter that, but that comes up as a choice to click on. Stephanie: Yeah, that’s usually right. Sharon: That’s interesting. What do you mean by content writing? Is that what you mean when you’re making sure the content— Stephanie: When it comes to content, you have the content pages on the website. Some of the most popular content pages on a law firm’s website would be their practice area pages. You might have a page on wrongful death. You might have a page on car accidents. You might have a page on personal injury. Then each one of those pages includes content. The type of content on that page could be question and answer, could be including those words “near me.” Google pulls from that content to determine how you’re going to rank based on the way the person is searching. You’ll see a lot of times where Google does an instant answer. If they’re asking a question, “what is the statute of limitations in the state of California for a wrongful death case,” a law firm’s content page could answer that question, so they’ll bring it up as the first result. There’s also blogging. You want to make sure you’re blogging on a regular basis. In the past, it was as much content as you could put on there. The phrase “content is king” is gone. That used to be the way we spoke when you would push content, push content, push content. Now, it’s more about the quality of content versus the quantity of content. It’s making sure it’s good content that’s enriched with the types of cases you’re looking for, and written well so the search engines recognize you as an expert on that topic with experience and expertise in the discussion. Google will see that and help you rank better based on the content and what you’re saying. Sharon: Is that per lawyer? Let’s say on the home page of the website you have banners or badges that say, “We’re the best.” Or is it in the bio? Stephanie: It would be in a practice area page. When somebody does a search for a car accident lawyer, let’s say, Google wants to provide them with the most specific information they’re looking for. So, they’ll more likely pull up a car accident page from your website and show that over your home page. Your home page should be a summary of everything you do, and then the content pages are more specific on each practice area. When somebody does find you, they’re going to find that practice page usually over your home page, but all of your content should include things that are easily identifiable for Google. Sharon: I always laugh when I see a bio that says they specialize in 20 different things, because how many can you specialize in? What would you do? Would you put everything the firm does? What would you do in order to come up? Stephanie: With a bio, you really want to focus on that attorney and what they’ve done and that’s it. When it comes to the actual practice area pages, that’s where you would focus on that practice area. Then maybe you could put in a little sentence or two about which attorney does that, if that makes sense. There are ways of doing it. It’s not necessarily a right answer or a wrong answer. It depends on the firm, the market, the practice area. But there are ways you can incorporate that being specific to the attorney and what their expertise is versus what the whole firm does on the bio page, if that makes sense. Sharon: It does make sense. Should you put successes like, “We won a case that was really hard to win for $10,000 and John Smith did it”? Stephanie: Oh yeah, verdicts and settlements pages and verdicts and settlements in general are some of the most visited areas on the websites. People want to see numbers. There are some markets where they might not be allowed to put verdict and settlement numbers on their website, or the firm doesn’t feel like it’s appropriate to do that. But by the way, law firms that put their numbers on their websites get more attraction than the ones that don’t. Sharon: The big question is do people choose a personal injury firm because they like the lawyer? It’s a nice, touchy-feely firm versus one that’s won all of these big numbers but they might not like as much. How do you choose? What’s more important? Stephanie: That’s a good question. Again, it comes back to the person choosing and what’s important to them on why they’re choosing, but if you don’t have the big numbers, you definitely want to talk about what you’ve done. A lot of people want to feel that they can relate to that attorney. I always say talk as much as you can about things you’ve done to help other people. If I had a case that was specific and I read that that attorney has helped other people with the same thing I have, I’m more likely to work with them regardless of what the numbers are because I feel like they could help me. If you don’t have those big numbers, you want to discuss what you’ve done because people will be able to relate to that. We’re also big believers in putting personal information into those bios. Talk about your hobbies, talk about your children, because people relate to things. There are so many situations where I’ve heard that this attorney got a case because somebody saw they had the same hobby, they went rafting or whatever it was, and their son had passed away, or that they were calling him because he had the same alma mater. Obviously that is a big one people gravitate toward. Outside of politics—I would stay away from writing anything related to politics—the more information you can humanize yourself with, it’s going to help people connect with you better and they’ll end up hiring you. Sharon: That’s interesting. I’ve heard that both ways. I tend to relate to people, so I would like to know more about them. That’s interesting that you should put it in your bio. Are you usually called in the beginning or are they already underway? Why are you called in? Tell us about your business. That’s several questions, sorry. Stephanie: That’s O.K. Usually we’re called in when a firm is looking to take their law firm to that next step and they’re looking for more cases. They’re not showing up online. They’re not getting phone calls. They’re not getting cases online. A lot of times, we’re called in to firms that have worked with referrals for pretty much their whole law career. They’re always getting referrals, and they’re tired of paying those referral fees to other attorneys. They’d like to generate cases themselves from the internet. Then we would be brought in to help them analyze what’s going on in their market and what their current web presence is. Then we can put together a plan to get them to where they need to be to generate more calls that generate the cases they’re looking for. It’s usually somebody that wants to make more money off the internet in some way, like they’re tired of paying referral fees and/or they’re looking for more visibility and better-quality cases. We hear that a lot; that we help firms create better-quality cases over anything else. Sharon: Better quality meaning larger cases, bigger numbers? Stephanie: It could be anything. It could be that it’s a firm that did a bunch of slip and fall cases and now they’re getting bigger and better quality personal injury cases. It’s medical malpractice firms that used to get a lot of junk calls and now they’re getting quality calls, things like that. We’re really good at SEO, and we’re really good at creating more rankings for somebody organically. Usually when somebody finds a firm organically, they tend to be better qualified, quality leads. Sharon: Do you keep your eye on the changes in the Google algorithm? Stephanie: Yeah, we have a SEO specialist that works with digital marketing. We’re all senior level, too. I always like to mention that because our SEO specialists are also very recognized in their SEO space. We have one Google Product Expert that works for us. She’s one of 50 in the world. She’s outstanding. We also have a Google Local Search expert who’s been nationally recognized. They’re the ones that keep up with the trends and how things are changing, and then we push that down to all of our firms. We’re constantly moving in different directions with content and with SEO strategies based on the changes in the Google algorithm and changes in how we as human beings search. It is ever-changing. If you looked back 10 years ago from today, it’s totally different to what we’re doing. Even a year ago, it’s a different strategy than what we were doing. Sharon: That sort of leads me to the next question. When I search, you have to skip like 10 sponsored ads. Is it possible to be high organically? Stephanie: Absolutely. It’s interesting because Google has... /episode/index/show/lawfirmmarketingcatalyst/id/26616483

Episode 113: Succession Planning Doesn’t Have to Be Scary—Here’s What You Need to Know with Roy S. Ginsburg, Attorney Coach and Law Firm Consultant 02/28/2023

Episode 113: Succession Planning Doesn’t Have to Be Scary—Here’s What You Need to Know with Roy S. Ginsburg, Attorney Coach and Law Firm Consultant What you’ll learn in this episode: How to determine what your succession planning goals are Why it’s so difficult to sell a law firm, and which types of practices may sell more easily than others When to start succession planning, and how long to expect a deal to take How buying a firm can be a strategic career move for young lawyers Why most lawyers need to challenge themselves to be better entrepreneurs and business developers About Roy Ginsburg Roy S. Ginsburg is an attorney coach and law firm consultant who has practiced law for more than 30 years. He works with individual lawyers and law firms nationwide in the areas of business development, practice management, career development, and strategic and succession planning. Roy is also a prolific speaker and blogger. He travels around the country speaking at CLEs sponsored by bar associations on topics such as selling law practices, succession planning and more. He’s a regular contributor at attorneyatwork.com. Additional Resources: Transcript: Succession planning is the most important topic law firm owners never want to talk about. But whether you want to sell your firm or pass it on to a top associate, deciding how you want to exit your career is better done sooner than later. As a legal coach, Roy Ginsburg helps attorneys prioritize their goals for succession planning and create a plan to achieve them. He joined the Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast to talk about which types of practices may be more appealing to buyers; how to help associates transition to owners; and what age attorneys should start thinking about succession. Read the episode transcript here. Sharon: Welcome to the Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast. Today, we are talking with Roy S. Ginsburg. Roy is a lawyer and strategic advisor to lawyers and law firms. He puts his 35 years of experience to work helping lawyers be more satisfied in their careers. He has several areas of expertise, but today, he’ll be talking about an area we don’t hear a lot about, and that is the obstacles lawyers face when they start the process of estate planning. That could be selling their firm to a different entity or turning their firm over to the next generation. Roy, welcome to the program. Roy: Thank you very much for inviting me, Sharon. It’s a pleasure to be here. Sharon: So glad to have you. You’re talking to us from Philadelphia? Roy: No. What I tell people is that I’m talking from a city that, until a few years ago, no one ever heard of, and that’s Minneapolis. They know about it now for all the wrong reasons, but, yeah, I’m talking to you from Minneapolis, Minnesota. Sharon: Tell us about your career. Roy: I got to the Midwest initially through law school. I attended the University of Wisconsin for law school. For a year after that, I clerked for a justice on the Wisconsin Supreme Court, and then I moved to Minneapolis after that to work for a large law firm here. I worked for a large firm for a few years, then I worked for a smaller law firm for a few years. I spent about a dozen years as an in-house lawyer. In all those times, in private practice and in-house, most of it was in the employment law area. That was the first 20. The last 20, I’ve pretty much been the consultant I am today. Sharon: How was it that you came to be a consultant and a strategic advisor? Roy: I wasn’t one of those lawyers who intensely disliked practicing law, though I’ve worked with plenty of those. I just thought it was O.K. and I was looking to do something different. In some ways, I surprised myself by having this entrepreneurial bug. The initial game plan was to be a CLE speaker primarily talking about business development and ethics. I figured lawyers would attend a CLE with ethics attached to it. They did, but it’s not so easy to get gigs if you want to do that on a national basis, which was the goal. I got them, but when you have three kids and hopefully all of them are attending college, it wasn’t enough. Then I realized that coaching was becoming popular, at least in corporate America. I knew that from being in-house and working for a few companies. I figured if I can tell a hundred people how to build a marketing plan, I can do it one-on-one. That was initially how I got into coaching/consulting. Over time, people said, “Roy, can you help me with this? Can you help me with that?” The recession was here. Could I help people find jobs? Back in 2008, a lot of small firm owners would call me looking for help with practice management issues. Most importantly for the purposes of this program today, I got lots of calls from senior lawyers, either solo or small firm owners, not knowing what to do. So, I saw business there. This was about 10, 15 years ago. I created my own website just for that particular business. Although I do all types of consulting and coaching today, I’d say about two-thirds of my time is helping solo and small firm owners with their succession planning, because they oftentimes just don’t know what to do. Sharon: You must have been very busy during Covid with succession planning. Roy: Yes and no. Much like a lot of America, for the first two months, in April and May, my phone didn’t ring. Everyone was trying to figure out how to live. Then June was business as usual. I’ve read and seen anecdotally that the pandemic was a mixed bag as far as retirement planning. It definitely incentivized some people to call and figure out what to do. On the other hand, it delayed some people because they thought, “What am I going to retire for? I can’t visit the kids,” or they realized during lockdown that they needed to have a busier practice and it was premature to retire. At least for the people that are calling me, it’s been a wash. I haven’t seen a tsunami of phone calls, but I also haven’t seen it drop off the cliff. It’s business as usual, and pretty steady at that. Sharon: I’m thinking about how many businesses and restaurants and all kinds of people decided to pack it in and said, “O.K., I’m going to try something different.” Rboy: Not so much. One of the things I pride myself on is I understand the DNA of lawyers. I’m a lawyer myself. They don’t like change. They don’t like to take a chance or a risk. I didn’t realize how unique I am by not only changing my life as a lawyer but being somewhat of an entrepreneur. I’ve learned from the coaching and consulting that’s not in the DNA of most lawyers, to think entrepreneurially. Like I said, they find themselves in the profession for no compelling reason, and they stay there because it's a half-decent living. Some love it; some hate it; most are in between. Sharon: Did you know you had this entrepreneurial gene before you started? Roy: Not really. It surprised me as much as it surprised family and friends, I think. Sharon: You say that practicing law was O.K., but it wasn’t because you had this craving, or you knew that wasn’t really what you were meant to do. Roy: Correct. I’m like most lawyers. There’s a joke in the Jewish community: nice Jewish boys who don’t like the sight of blood go to law school. My brother’s a doctor, so I’m the lawyer. Anecdotally, I can tell you I’ve coached or consulted with well over 200 lawyers over the last 20 years or so, and I always ask every one of them why they went to law school. You think you can guess the number one answer? There actually is no close second answer. Sharon: What else? What else was there to do? Roy: They couldn’t think of anything better to do. Very few lawyers have a compelling reason, and this is across the board, whether you went to a premier law school or one of the ones in the box. They just find themselves saying, “Eh, it’s a nice living, not too bad. I get a little prestige.” If you’re really entrepreneurial, you don’t go to law school; you go to business school or you start your own business. That’s one of the many reasons why I think most lawyers are horrific businesspeople in general. Most lack any sort of entrepreneurial DNA. Sharon: Did it take a while for this gene, this DNA, the entrepreneurial bug, to come out in you? Roy: I kind of enjoyed it. Needless to say, I’ve been doing it for 20 years at this point, but I think I have been good at it. Like most lawyers, I’m not terribly creative. But if I see something, I’ll act upon the trend. My consulting business is a perfect example. I had no big plan to help senior lawyers exit. I saw the demand and said, “Huh, I think there’s something here,” and then went with it. I’m good at spotting a trend and acting upon it, but big-picture-wise, I’m not so good. I wouldn’t have thought this would be a good way to make a living as a lawyer. It just turned out that way. Sharon: Why do you think prioritizing is so difficult for lawyers? Roy: Lawyers tend to be very reactive. When they call me, for some of them, it’s a big, big deal because they’re in denial, like a lot of people when it comes to what they do. Even though they realize they’ve got to do something, they haven’t taken a step back. Lawyers, again, are not very reflective. They’re not sure what they want to accomplish, so they try to make a lot of money on a deal, or they want to make sure their clients are going to be well-served, or they want to make sure staff is going to be maintained. I don’t want to say those are conflicting goals, but depending on the importance of a goal, they may do some things differently when they figure out what they want to do for succession planning. Sharon: Why is it harder for a law firm to do a succession plan? What are the obstacles they face versus another business? Roy: Probably the biggest obstacle is it’s a very immature, underdeveloped marketplace, unlike a lot of other professional services such as CPAs and dentists, for example. That’s a mature marketplace. People have been buying and selling CPA firms for years. Same thing with dentists or any other professional service. Law, as you may or may not know, was ethically prohibited for a while, although lawyers got around that, at least the clever ones. It’s still on the up-and-up. A lot of people don’t realize that there’s even that possibility. A lot of people don’t call me for help because they don’t even realize they can do anything. It’s more out of ignorance. Another fundamental difference between other professional services is each practice is pretty much unique. A million-dollar criminal defense law firm is completely different from a family law firm which is completely different from an immigration firm which is completely different from an estate planning firm. It may have similar revenues, but the only thing in common with those four practices is that they’re owned by a lawyer. They have a J.D. next to their name and they passed the bar, but it’s like comparing a grocery store to a gas station, and they happen to be owned by a lawyer. Even if you’re in a small town and there are 10 firms, oftentimes they don’t necessarily compete against each other. There may not be a natural buyer in the town or in the big locations. A lot of younger lawyers don’t even realize they can buy a firm and that’s a strategic way to build a practice. Part of my job is educating younger lawyers about how one way to jumpstart their practice is to buy. They just don’t think like businesspeople. If you’re a small business lawyer, you do deals all the time, but they can’t connect that dot to themselves. Sharon: Having a PR and marketing firm, I was told—I don’t think this is the case, but I was told from day one, “You’re not going to sell your firm. People don’t sell firms. They just can’t sell firms.” Are lawyers told the same thing? Roy: Pretty much. They’re not necessarily specifically told by someone, but when they ask about it, they’ll find it out. In fact, the way most people find me—I’m in Minneapolis. My clients are nationwide; five to 10% are from Minnesota, which I think is very typical. Someone, a small firm owner who’s about 65, 70, 75, goes to their buddy or a colleague and says, “Hey, what are you doing about the firm now that you’re getting older?” and they say, “I’m not really sure.” They say, “Is there anything I can do?” “I don’t know.” So, they ask around town and realize there’s no one in town who can help them. The good news for me is that 60- and 70-year-olds now know how to search the web. If you search “Can I sell my law firm?” or “How do I do this?” or “How do I do that?” I come up very high. Not that I want to pat myself on the back too much, but I don’t have much competition. So, it’s easy to come across me, and I say, “Hey, I can do something.” In other words, most people have no idea what can be done. All they do know is that sometimes they have internal people. I help those firms, but those who are solo or have no good candidates inside, like you said, they think there are no good options, but there are. Sharon: You do come up very high because of your website and your blog. You come up very high when it comes to succession planning. Let me ask you this: when you say they don’t have internal people, do you mean they don’t have somebody ready to move into their position? Roy: Yeah. Small firm owners have one, two, three, four, sometimes as many as five or six associates or people who’ve been there for a long time, and they’re thinking they want to sell it to the internal people and theoretically preserve the legacy. What they often call me for help with is how to price it and structure it. Is it realistic to get the money over this amount time? I also give them an idea of how much to ask for, because they’re often clueless about what their firm may be worth. Sharon: When you say theoretically they want to preserve their legacy, do you think that’s important? Do these people think it’s important? Roy: Again, that goes back to your question a few minutes ago: what are they prioritizing? To some, that’s a big deal. Others don’t care at all. Most are somewhere in between about preserving their legacy. Sharon: Do you find that most people have an unrealistic expectation as to what their firm is worth? Roy: Very much at times. Some firms aren’t worth much at all. Those are the ones who have goodwill, which is very personal. For example, if you’re a prominent criminal defense lawyer and you have a location in your city, your geographic area, your county, and you’re a solo, people call you because they want you; they don’t want anybody else. The best way I describe it to laypeople or even to lawyers about whether your practice has value, think about if it’s a Friday afternoon and you ride off into retirement sunset, and on Monday you sell the firm to me. If I answer the phone, will they work with me on Monday? Going back to the prominent criminal defense lawyer, for example, no way in hell are they going to work with me. They’ll just go to the next name on their list. They wanted to work with the guy or the woman who sold the firm on Friday. Other practice areas, it’s going to be a different answer. They may work with me. So, I always tell lawyers the two-word answer about whether they’ll work with you on Monday is, “It depends.” My job as a consultant to my clients is to figure out what it depends upon. For some lawyers, they have nothing to sell. The best example of a firm that has value, on paper at least, is estate planning. You know people are going to come back and revise the will. You know they are going to die and maybe need probate. It’s not so theoretical that the phone will ring. I think, given the nature of the relationship, a lot of people will assume the seller vetted the buyer. They’ll figure, “My former lawyer was pretty good at creating my estate plan, and I don’t know anybody I could call at this point without starting from scratch. So, yeah, I’ll work with them.” I’m sure you’re much like me. A lot of the people we’ve been working with, especially our doctors, they’ve all retired and we had to try someone new. Sometimes they sell the practice, and most people, especially with a dentist, they’re willing to try him once. The same thing with an accountant. It’s the same thing with a lawyer for certain areas. They’ll give him a shot. Others, there’s just no way they will give him a shot. It’s very, very dependent on the practice area. Sharon: That’s interesting. I never thought of it that way. How do you turn it over if it’s dependent on the practice area? How do you turn a criminal defense firm over to a senior person so the name of the firm carries on, let’s say, as opposed to the person? Roy: It’s going to depend. There are some criminal defense firms that are very prominent with advertising and people have no expectation they’re going to hire the person on TV. Personal injury is a good example. Those have value. In other words, the people calling up have no expectation they’re going to work with the person on the billboard or on TV. You can preserve the legacy. There’s a brand and there’s value there. In that respect, it helps. Let’s say you’re a small business attorney. Let’s say you have a dozen really good, consistent clients. You’re like a general counsel for half a dozen or a dozen smaller companies. There, it’s certainly possible to transition the relationship, but that’s going to take time and effort. You’ve got to make sure there’s company chemistry. That’s a deeper relationship. So, I tell people if you have 10 clients like that, it’s unrealistic to think all 10 are going to work with the successor. It’s also unrealistic to assume that no one’s going to work with the successor. It’s going to be somewhere in between. It’s going to be very dependent on how they hit it off, but certainly you get an advantage as a buyer to get that introduction. There’s no guarantee it’s going to work, but you’ve got to believe some of them will work. That’s why it’s very difficult to predict how successful a transition is going to be. Again, it’s very dependent on the practice area. Going back to estate planning, without that deep relationship, the odds improve significantly that when they call the former clients, they will work with the successor, as opposed to a small business attorney. Sharon: It seems like you need a longer timeline. What timeline do you recommend to think about this? Roy: I tell people that if all the stars are aligned, which they rarely are, nine to 12 months. If they’re not, 18 to 24. That’s just to make sure. It takes time to do a deal. The buyers want to do some due diligence. From the buyer’s perspective, it’s usually not the top thing on their radar to get done. They have client demands. It takes time, and sometimes when you get close to doing the deal, it falls apart. I’ve seen that happen. So, it gives you time for a do-over. Oftentimes you don’t know how long these things are going to take. The age range for me is 60 to 80. I’d say at this point, I think 70 is the new 65, but I have many lawyers calling me in the mid- to upper-70s which in my view is probably—that gives you no time for do-overs at all. I can’t make this stuff up. I’ve had people sign five-year leases when they’re 77. I won’t tell them to their faces, but I’m thinking, “What were they thinking doing that?” A lot of people are, quite frankly, in denial. They think that just because they feel good at 75, they’re going to feel the same way at 80, and chances are... /episode/index/show/lawfirmmarketingcatalyst/id/25922082

Episode 112: For Lawyers of Color, Mentorship Is the Glue that Leads to Career Growth with Tyrone Thomas, General Counsel at Doral Renewables 02/15/2023

Episode 112: For Lawyers of Color, Mentorship Is the Glue that Leads to Career Growth with Tyrone Thomas, General Counsel at Doral Renewables What you’ll learn in this episode: What companies should consider when planning their corporate giving initiatives, and why Tyrone is passionate about anti-hunger causes How mentorship creates strong connections that last for years, especially for lawyers of color Why law firms don’t necessarily need perfect diversity, but they do need to demonstrate a plan for growth and improvement What it’s like to work in-house in the renewable energy space Why the best leaders see their reports as individuals with goals that go beyond their workplace About Tyrone Thomas Tyrone Thomas is General Counsel at Doral Renewables. He has broad strategic and transactional experience within the renewable energy industry, having served as both Head of Legal at Plus Power, and Vice President and Deputy General Counsel at Invenergy. Throughout his career, Tyrone has led diverse teams of professionals in connection with the development, construction, financing and/or divestiture of dozens of utility-scale energy facilities with a total value of over $7 billion. Mr. Thomas earned a BS in Urban Studies from Hunter College and a JD from the University of Illinois College of Law. Additional Resources: Transcript: In the legal industry, every connection matters. This is especially true for lawyers of color and other underrepresented attorneys who know the feeling of being left out—and the feeling of finally being seen. Tyrone Thomas, General Counsel at Doral Renewables, credits his mentors with guiding him on his career path, and he does the same for young lawyers who reach out to him today. He joined the Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast to talk about what qualities he looks for in the firms and attorneys he works with; how firms can demonstrate their commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion; and what makes a good leader. Read the episode transcript here. Sharon: Welcome to the Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast. Today, my guest is Tyrone Thomas, General Counsel at Doral Energy. In addition, he’s the company’s anti-hunger advocate. He’s speaking to us from the Chicago suburbs. Tyrone has been on the podcast twice before, but he was with a different energy company. Today he’ll tell us all about his industry experience as well as his experience being a Black lawyer. Tyrone, welcome to the program. Tyrone: Thanks for having me, Sharon. Sharon: Glad that you’re here. Give us a synopsis of your career path. Tyrone: Sure. I’ll keep it post-law school. I worked in private practice for a few years. I was at DLA Piper in the Washington, D.C. office. I am still involved with DLA Piper from an alumni perspective, using them and adding advice when I can. I was with a firm called Hanson Bridgett, in San Francisco down in the financial district. Then I was with a small firm in the Chicagoland area called Gould & Ratner. In each of those spaces, my work primarily centered on development, whether commercial real estate development, development of GSA leasing properties primarily leased from the federal government, healthcare development, and everything in between. Then I moved over to a company called Invenergy that now is probably the number one, if the not the number two, private producer of renewable energy in North America. I moved over to them in 2014. Sharon: What is the name of the company? Tyrone: Invenergy. Sharon: Invenergy, all right. Tyrone: I spent about seven years there, eventually leaving as the number two on their legal team. I was the vice president and deputy counsel. I had a wealth of great experience there. I worked on a ton of really interesting projects that were cool from a practical perspective, but also great for the world in decarbonizing the environment. Tons of great employees. There were probably 400 people around the world when I started and almost 1,600 when I left. I went from having zero reports when I joined to about 27 when I left. I got to watch the company grow as I was growing in my career in that space. I then went to a really great standalone battery developer named Plus Power based out of San Francisco and Houston. It was a brief stint there because of Doral, where I currently am. It ultimately made sense to transition to Doral, where I’m general counsel and where I work with a number of folks who I worked with in prior years, including the CEO. We crossed paths in Invenergy for several years. It all just clicked, so that’s where I am currently. I was head of legal at Plus Power, and here I’m general counsel/corporate secretary. I’m taking on more and more of a compliance role as well. Sharon: What is anti-hunger? That was on LinkedIn. Tyrone: When I present on LinkedIn, I try to present not necessarily where I’m working, per se, but the entirety of what I’m doing in the professional space. Primarily what I’m doing is working in the legal compliance function. I’m doing a lot of work around governance. I sit on some boards, and I’m looking at some for-profit boards right now to figure out the best fit for me. Then, I consider myself an anti-hunger advocate. I spend most of my time that’s not on family or professional matters volunteering or donating to organizations that try to combat hunger and food insecurity. I have sat on associate boards and executive boards of various organizations. I’ve sat on the Executive Board of Directors of Beyond Hunger in the Oak Park/River Forest area here in Illinois, which honestly is probably one of the best-run and better-funded food pantries in the Midwest—I would say probably in the country. The funding is a testament to the community it’s in, but it also gives them the ability to serve a lot of constituents and continually chase new opportunities to serve more or in a different way, because obviously just giving someone food is not a holistic solution. This is one of the few food pantries I know of in the country that has two dieticians on staff, for example. There are nutrition programs and things like that. I also run a small nonprofit called Conversation for Six, which is intended to lower the informational bar to entry for people who want to get more involved in the hunger space. The idea was germinated off of feedback I got from individuals whom I was trying to nudge to give more money or to center some of their corporate giving campaigns on hunger. A lot of folks told me they didn’t understand it. They didn’t understand what these programs are, what some of these terms are. It’s not unique to the hunger space. A lot of nonprofits have to pick and choose who their audience is. They focus a lot on the audience that is preaching to the converted, because the converted are proven givers. They are going to give more and donate more. They’re going to evangelize, but what sometimes gets left out is the entry-level folks. I fund the charity myself. The goal of Conversation for Six is not to raise a bunch of money; the goal is to educate. I hired some freelance writers beginning in the pandemic, and they wrote a bunch of articles on foundational concepts. What is SNAP? What is WIC? What are the summer school lunch programs? What’s the idea of a food desert? Why is that term falling out of favor? It’s all these foundational things that will help someone then go on and engage with more involved food scholarship. We also point people to those organizations. So, if you need help or you want to help, we point to organizations. There’s a resource directory on the site that has organizations in all 50 states and some international organizations where people can either get help or give help, whether it be their time or their money. We’re a nexus to get people to direct-access organizations. I spend a lot of time thinking about this. I spend a lot of time doing it. I’m currently in conversations about whether it makes sense for me to join some local government boards that are focused on hunger, whether I can add something of value there. It’s a passion. It’s something I carry with me separate and apart from any legal or compliance or governance-related work I do for pay. Sharon: Let me ask you this. If you walked into an office and engaged a recruiter or a marketer and they said, “Hey, here’s a bunch of money. Go put it in hunger,” would that influence you? Tyrone: You mean if I was looking to take a job and they were also— Sharon: Or in marketing. Would it influence you in terms of having a better feeling— Tyrone: You mean in terms of whether their client would be influenced by this? I would say no, and I’ll tell you why. In our space, corporate giving is table stakes. Everybody has corporate giving. Let me start off by saying that feels too much like a bribe to me, so I want to stay out of the gray area. Everyone has corporate giving. When I made the comment earlier about influencing where they center their corporate giving, that’s a very real conversation. When I came out of law school, you still had to be in a suit every day, but you had a jeans Friday. They would pick a charity, and everybody would donate. Everyone would give $5 as their payment to wear their jeans, and it would go to a charity. A lot of the charities were not focused on what I considered some of the base problems that humans face. I wasn’t the only one there. I am certain other folks would try to push for certain charities, like “Can we give money to these anti-homelessness charities?” That was in D.C. and San Francisco, both of which have aggressive homelessness problems. “How about charities working on hunger? How about ones working on reintegrating people into the workforce or supporting unwed teen mothers? Can we put money there?” If we’re putting it somewhere anyway, and most of the people are giving the $5, $10, $15, that’s your table stakes. A lot of the people who made a lot more money would give $50, $100, but nobody cared where it went. They knew it was going to a good cause, and this is not directed money with conditions. I want to direct it towards these things at the very lowest level of a hierarchy of needs. Candidly, if someone tells me they want to put a bunch of money in the hunger space, I would tell them you should do that. You don’t need me to do that; you should do that, and I’ll talk to you about it. I’ll point you in the right direction. I’ll tell you about organizations that are doing great work and that are poised to be able to take that money and use it. There are some organizations that are struggling with certain types of resources, human capital resources, for example, and they can’t adequately use a large donation. An organization that had a budget of $100,000 or $10,000 last year would not be able to spend $1 million in one calendar year if you just dropped it in their lap. They would probably spend six months with consultants on a strategic plan, which they should. I can direct all those things. I can speak to those things. I can tell you what I would do with a big pot of money that needed to be given away. It could go to a lot of different organizations based upon who they serve and how it would be effective. It wouldn’t influence my decision to use a firm or not. It’s something I’m talking to everybody about. Sharon, when we turn off the recording, I’ll probably talk to you more about it later. I’m talking to everybody. With your corporate giving, you should fold in hunger because it’s such a basic need. Without it, you can’t really talk about these other types. Sharon: Should a marketer or a decision-maker try to match you with other people who are Black? Tyrone: It’s interesting because it’s not uncommon. The answer is no, but it’s not an uncommon question because you will interact with people. There’s a meme that goes around about President Barack Obama shaking people’s hands, and the handshakes are different based upon the cultural identity of the person he’s interacting with. He’s going down a receiving line and everybody’s getting a different handshake. I think sometimes what people see is there’s a very small number of African Americans in the legal field, and there’s a much smaller number of African Americans in the legal field in positions of power and leadership. Candidly, because there’s such a small percentage, a lot of folks know each other or know of each other. It’s not because the person is a statistic. We still see this, but we saw this 40, 50 years ago in terms of women in the workplace. The few people who were there made an effort to reach out to other women; they made an effort to reach out to other people of color and mentor them and ask, “How I can I help?” Back when I was coming out of law school and I had no business to steer anyone’s way, and I had no particular connection with a lot of the folks I was reaching out to for informational interviews, a lot of folks didn’t respond. I’m not going to knock them for that. But there were people who were doing very well and were very important, who were general counsel and CEO and managing partners, who were African American. They made a point to reach out to me, a 24-year-old, and say, “How can I help?” I’m not going to mention who, but I was at dinner with someone who has had a very prominent position and career, an African American probably in his 70s, a couple of weeks ago. It was a broader dinner, but he was there. We were at a table. We were talking, and he was a leader for someone who had been a mentor to me. I found out he had mentored that person 20 years before that person was a mentor to me. So, there is this small universe of folks who are trying to provide help that they themselves maybe didn’t get. There’s a high likelihood that if you put me in front of someone in the legal space, I might know them if they’re African American because there are so few. But if I didn’t, that wouldn’t influence me. When we’re talking about law firms, private legal providers, those of us who are interested in diversity and equity and inclusion—as I am—we’re beyond that surface-level engagement. It’s great if you have someone and they’re the right person to put in front of me. That is great because you are showing me something, but beyond that, who’s going to work on my matter? What are your broader numbers? Not just what are your numbers—I think, again, that’s surface level—but where are you going, where have you been? If you’re a firm of a thousand people and you have 12 African Americans, we want you to acknowledge that’s not a good number. Two, I’d love to know where you were last year, the year before and the year before. Did you go from zero to 12? Did you bring in one group? Was it a slow burn? What’s your plan going forward? How do you want to integrate folks into the business? What’s your plan? There’s recruiting, but what about advancement and retention? Who do you have in the partnership? Who do you have as income versus equity party? Who do you have on management committees? Who do you have leading offices? All of those questions are fundamental to understand what the firm does. I know firms that do a lot of great work in this space, but the people who do the work I need are all white men over 55. That’s fine because I know the firm itself is doing a bunch of work. The fact that the people in the room with me, who I’ve become great friends with, are not representative of the firm’s push for diversity isn’t an issue, because the firm can come with their receipts and say, “Here’s what I’m actually doing,” and it’s enough. Sharon: I can’t say I’ve been in this situation. It’s been a long time, but it used to be that there was tokenism. I remember being in meetings where everybody was, like you said, over 50, except for maybe a woman. Tyrone: And they didn’t get to participate in the meeting. Sharon: Right. No reason to be there, just to show their face. Let me ask you: did your ethnicity influence your decision to leave private practice and go behind the desk? Tyrone: A little. It wasn’t the only reason, but it influenced it a little bit. The work we do as lawyers is incredibly important work, but it is work that oftentimes is very difficult to blend with any creativity the lawyer has. As the managers of the guardrails, it’s not incentivized in our industry to take risk. We understand and we report on risk, but it’s always incentivized not to take risks. Let me be clear: there are tons of people who do take risks, including people who are taking their firms to the next level. But on the individual contributor level, it’s not incentivized. When I saw friends, colleagues, folks who were in the commercial space, they seemed to be able to incorporate their creativity in what they were doing. They seemed to enjoy what they were doing. I think the essence of what they’re doing comes through more because they work for a longer period. Sometimes on a transaction, when I bring in outside counsel for project financing, it’s 90 days from start to finish. I may have someone on my team working on that same project for three years. They know that project. It’s 200 landowners on a wind farm in the middle of some beautiful county in Nebraska. We know everything about those landowners that they’re willing to let you know. We remember the stories they told us about who owned the land before them and who owned the land before that person, typically in their family, and what their grandchildren are going off to college to do. You know them. You know this person doesn’t like that person, so if we do a dinner to celebrate all the people who are part of the project, don’t sit them next to each other. All those things add a little vibrancy, and they keep away the monotony with the work you’re doing. When I got into private practice in-house, I was chasing a little bit of that, “Let me find more entertainment in why we’re doing what we’re doing.” I found it in this space, and I never looked back. I’ve been incredibly excited. That’s not to say that’s something I don’t hear lawyers talking about in private practice, but it was something I saw less of in private practice. I saw so many people in the in-house world talking to me about the why. They really understand the business and the business concepts, which is also very attractive to me—and still is, being able to take the hat off sometimes. I joke about it. “I’m not here with the lawyer hat on. Nobody get freaked out. I’m just here." I was on a call this morning, “I’m just here to listen. I’m not here with the lawyer hat on. I’m going to be on mute. Don’t mind me.” I’m doing that from a quasi-commercial standpoint as well, because my involvement in the matter is going to inform strategy. It’s not about legal risk. It’s going to inform executive strategy going forward. That flexibility is really interesting to me. It keeps my days interesting. It keeps me from wanting to hang it all up and go do something else. Sharon: That was going to be my question. Does the excitement keep you attracted to the industry? There’s so much new stuff going on in energy today. Tyrone: It does. The excitement keeps me attracted. Candidly, it’s also the people. When you’re working on financing commercial office buildings, for example, there are a lot of interesting individuals. There’s a lot of interesting information you learn about the building, its tenants, its neighborhood, its owner, its prior owner. But there’s nothing like the partnerships—which is really what they are—we do with rural communities around the world in this industry. For my company, primarily in the U.S., there’s nothing like those partnerships. There’s nothing like truly doing what transactional law is supposed to be, which is where you’re finding a space where both of us want something and we can get it, and... /episode/index/show/lawfirmmarketingcatalyst/id/25921950

Episode 111: Don’t Wait for Career Opportunities to Come—Create Them Yourself with Executive Coach, Laura Terrell 01/30/2023

Episode 111: Don’t Wait for Career Opportunities to Come—Create Them Yourself with Executive Coach, Laura Terrell What you’ll learn in this episode: Why it’s important to look for career opportunities and not just wait for them to come to you How government attorneys can be strategic about advancing in their careers Why attorneys should periodically evaluate their practice areas and consider how their skills may translate as their clients’ needs change How learning to ask for and receive feedback can make or break your career What information you should gather before jumping into a career change About Laura Terrell: Laura Terrell is an executive coach with over 25 years of professional experience as a legal and business leader. In coaching, she partners with people to support them in reaching new levels of effectiveness and fulfillment in their professional lives. Her clients come from a wide variety of industries, including law, education, financial services, pharmaceutical, oil & gas, non-profit, health care, and technology. Some of them are senior corporate executives like CEOs and general counsels; others are entrepreneurs and small business owners, as well as professionals who may be returning to the workforce, making a pivot to a new career, or switching roles mid-career. She has worked extensively and in-person in many international markets and financial centers, including New York, Washington, Chicago, Silicon Valley, Canada, London, Europe, Africa, the Middle East, Singapore and China. Supporting start-up companies and their founders is also one of her interests, and she is an active private investor in early stage ventures. Additional Resources: Laura’s Blog: Laura’s LinkedIn: Laura’s Instagram: Transcript: Every lawyer must ask difficult questions at some point in their career. Should I go in-house? How do I become partner when I don’t feel confident? Can I use my skills in another practice area? As an executive coach to lawyers and a former attorney herself, Laura Terrell has helped numerous clients find the answers to these questions. She joined the Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast to talk about the value of feedback; what questions to ask before moving in-house or making a significant career change; and how to create career opportunities instead of waiting for them. Read the episode transcript here. Sharon: Welcome to the Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast. Today, my guest is Laura Terrell. Laura has been an equity partner at two Am Law 15 law firms, a senior-level appointee at the U.S. Department of Justice, the in-house counsel of a publicly traded company and Special Assistant to the President at the White House. Now she is an executive coach to lawyers. We’ll hear about that today. Laura, welcome to the program. Laura: Thank you, Sharon. It’s a pleasure to be with you. Sharon: I’m so glad to have you. Tell us about your career path. You’ve covered so much. Laura: I’ve been really fortunate. I’ve had the opportunity to work in public service in the federal government in a number of different capacities, including, as you mentioned, at the White House and the Department of Justice in legal roles. I’ve also worked in private practice at two very large Am Law 25 law firms. That provided me with a lot of knowledge of the business of law and much of what your interviewees talk about on this podcast, which is marketing, branding, running a business, all of those important things. I’ve had the chance to work in-house as in-house counsel for a publicly traded company. That also has been an incredible part of my journey. So, I feel really fortunate. I feel, as a lawyer, I’ve had a lot of variety in my experience. I’ve had a lot of different opportunities that have given me different breadth and different capabilities along with way. Sharon: Which is unusual, because I talk to people who have been lawyers for 20 years in private practice or in one area. There’s a lot to be said for that. You’ve really covered a lot of ground. When did you know you wanted to become a lawyer? Laura: I wanted to be a lawyer very shortly out of college. I was primarily interested in finding a career in law that would help me to mirror my interest in legal matters as well as government policy and government enforcement. I spent much of my career working in areas where I was either an attorney for the federal government or working in a capacity where I was defending clients and working with clients who were under federal investigation or dealing with lawsuits by agencies such as the Department of Justice or the Securities and Exchange Commission. What I didn’t expect was that I would develop a practice that was heavily based in financial and investigations issues. I didn’t have a financial background, but I learned very quickly about all kind of matters, including commodities markets, trading, options issues, a lot of the things lawyers don’t necessarily go to law school for. They were of interest to me because it taught me a lot about how money moves, about how businesses interact with capital markets and what’s important about that in terms of regulatory practice and regulatory enforcement. Sharon: So, you didn’t want to be a lawyer when you were 12 or 10. You sound to me like someone who got a degree and said, “O.K., now what do I do? I don’t know. Maybe something different.” Finance is definitely different. Laura: It is. I was an undergraduate major in government political science, and my interest was working in an area that involved federal government policy. I was tremendously interested in the executive branch and the regulatory enforcement agencies like the FTC and the SEC. I ultimately ended up working for the Commodity Futures Trading Commission as my first job outside of my clerkship and outside of law school. That was a surprise to me, but I always liked investigations work, putting puzzles together, working through facts, putting evidence in place, trying to figure out how it all connects. So, I did not grow up as a young child wanting to be a lawyer, but I saw very quickly in my college career that I was interested in finding a way to marry that policy side of my interest with an interest in legal enforcement and interaction with the court system. Sharon: You must have a lot of opportunity to put the puzzle pieces together in what you do. It seems there are a lot of pieces you put together. Laura: I have had a lot of opportunities. You mentioned a varied career. I think part of that is driven by looking for opportunities. That’s something I talk about a lot with clients. When I have lawyers that come to me, they’re often in a transition phase, maybe looking for a career pivot, maybe feeling stuck in a certain way. One of the things we talk about is that opportunities come to you, but you also have to look for opportunities. You have to find moments where there is something that makes you say, “This could help advance my career,” or “This could lead me to work in a different way.” I’ve had those chances. When I had the opportunity to work in the White House, for example, I didn’t know that was coming. That came up in a very unexpected way, but it gave me a real sense of working across agencies, managing the administrative and executive decision-making process. Those were all things that also prepare you well for the corporate world, being able to manage different interests, understanding who the different stakeholders are. Those were things that gave me different skills that I think I wouldn’t have had with just a law degree. My law degree is great; I’m proud of it, but I needed a lot of practical experience. Like a lot of people, I’ve found the things that interest me are beyond the bare bones of the law. My clients, for example, have legal issues, but they also need to be aware of where business intersects with those legal issues and what the practical business implications are for the questions that are coming up for them. I feel like a lot of experiences have given me that kind of understanding and ability. Sharon: Now your business is more about being an executive coach to lawyers. Is that correct? Laura: I’m an executive coach. I do work with lawyers. I do still practice sometimes in a pro bono capacity, but I primarily work with lawyers who are interested in working with a coach, maybe to reach a goal like making partner at a law firm. I’ve been there. I understand that, and I understand a lot of the challenges that come with that. Some of my clients are interested in just finding a better footing in their work. Maybe they need to shift how they’re working, or they need to change their practice area because everything is evolving. One of the reasons I decided to become a coach was because I really like talking with people about what inspires them in their legal life. I feel like I have a lot of background that can be helpful as a foundation for understanding that. For example, I work with a number of government attorneys who are looking to shift into a different role, maybe a management role. Working in the federal system in particular, it can be a little bit challenging to try to get those next positions, but I understand that. I understand the hiring process and the evaluation at many agencies. That’s something I also enjoy working on. Sharon: That sounds very difficult. I would think it takes a lot of patience in terms of a government attorney wanting to go into a more managerial role. Laura: For some attorneys, it may involve leaving one agency for another and leveraging skills in a highly regulated sector like energy or education and leveraging those into another area. One of the opportunities in government service, particularly federal government, is often once you’re inside the federal government, the ability to move to another agency can be a bit more eased by the fact that you have years of service, you understand some of the issues that come along with practicing in an agency as an attorney, including the budget you have to work towards, getting approvals, the kinds of authorizations you need to take investigative or enforcement action. Those are things that can pivot among different federal regulatory agencies and branches. That can be a chance for someone who may not have thought, “Well, if I can’t make this move at the Department of the Interior, for example, could I move to the Department of Energy or the EPA or another agency where I have a new opportunity, but my background is helpful?” Sharon: The background must be very helpful when it comes to branding or marketing a new practice area to be ahead of the curve. Laura: I think that’s right. I encourage all attorneys to think periodically throughout their careers, “What am I branding myself as? What is it that people think of me when they come to me and ask, ‘What’s your practice area?’ or ‘What’s your specialty?’ or ‘What do you work in?’” Sometimes, I think attorneys get trapped in thinking they’re doing one kind of practice, but it’s really not the bread and butter of what they do, or that practice may be waning or waxing depending on the market. It’s important to think about, “Oh, I’ve been focused on commercial litigation, but I’ve developed a different ability in restructuring work. Could I convert that into bankruptcy litigation? Could I bring that in as another aspect of my career?” I’ve met lots of people that have worked in different kinds of trial work, for example, that have also converted that into investigative skills. Sharon: You have to be thinking about your skills and what you’re really doing, but how do you transform that into staying ahead of the curve? You talk about the importance of being ahead of the curve and not letting it get behind you. How do you stay ahead? Is that one of the ways? Laura: That is one of the ways. You have to constantly evaluate, “What do I want to be doing? What is the market demand for what I’m doing?” Also, “How do people perceive me in that market?” Maybe you’re hiding your skills a bit. Maybe you’re coasting, or you’re assuming clients know what you do. There’s a certain amount of marketing that has to be done, as you know, Sharon, like going out and speaking at conferences, putting out emails regularly, doing a webinar, something for your clients that gets them engaged. I also encourage my clients to listen to their clients. If you’re an attorney in private practice, you should be listening to what your clients want. You may be selling them something that isn’t top of mind for them or is an area that is not mission critical for them. A great example is working with a pharmaceutical company that’s getting ready to spin off its oncology business but is really focused on its veterinary medicine practice. If that’s the case, you need to think about what their needs are going to be in that area and ask, “What is it that you’re looking for?” I think a lot of the rebranding and regeneration we need to do as attorneys is also based upon what you’re hearing from your clients. You need to have an ear to the ground, keep abreast of market trends, but also listen to what your clients are saying their priorities are, because clients’ priorities change too. Sharon: I think that’s really important. I know one of the first questions I asked—and this is like 25 years ago—to a bankruptcy attorney was, “What do you do when there’s no bankruptcy work?” I’ve seen it go up and down since then, but what do you do? You have to know. Laura: Absolutely. That’s a great example. I know several terrific bankruptcy attorneys who are quick on their feet in thinking through tough problems and getting to the heart of what is it we need to know. You know why? Bankruptcy litigation moves fast. Bankruptcy litigators don’t have the luxury of commercial litigation or civil litigation that can drag on for years. In a restructuring, you have clients that want to reconstitute their business as quickly as possible, address creditor issues, address debts, address pending litigation, so restructuring attorneys are really quick on their feet to think through that. They’ve got to be able to come up with ingenious solutions. They’ve got to persuade people. That makes them great attorneys when it comes to doing investigations that have a short timeline and require an adequate amount of evidence to be collected. They can actually come to a decision more quickly for a company, like, “How do you act on noncompliance without spending a long time doing something?” I find restructuring attorneys have a lot of great skills, even when the bankruptcy field is a bit less than active. Sharon: That’s interesting. You could really build that into something different when the market isn’t as strong in bankruptcy. You could build it into investigations or other things that are interesting and important. How did it come about? What was the catalyst for you becoming a coach? Laura: I had been practicing for a number of years. It coincided with a change in my personal life and a relocation for me and my family geographically, but also just an understanding of where I wanted to go as an attorney. I’d been an equity partner in two firms. I’d had an incredible practice. I enjoyed traveling. I had clients all over the world, but I also wanted to connect more one-to-one with my colleagues, with people I knew that would say, “Do you have five minutes to talk to me?” I realized that five minutes wasn’t enough to dig under the hood of what they were doing. I also enjoy working with more junior attorneys who are in earlier stages of their careers, where they’re asking, “How do I make partner at my law firm?” or “How do I advance in this corporation when there aren’t a lot of senior roles for me? Does that mean I need to take a leap and change to another organization?” I like working with people that are maybe not sure of where they want to go, but they know they want to make a change. I also like working with people that have a very definitive idea. For me, that’s really rewarding. I like the one-to-one. I also work with groups. I facilitate discussions and workshops with law firms and other organizations. I enjoy that as well, but the one-to-one is very personal. I just like helping people find the best path they want for themselves. Sharon: You must have a lot of people coming up to after you give a talk on what you do. Do people come up and say, “Who are you and what are you saying? You talk about branding. How do you brand yourself?” Laura: I tell people that I’m an attorney that likes to help other attorneys find ways to succeed on their own terms and based upon their own goals. I have a lot of diverse experience, so I can understand where they’re coming from. When someone says to me, for example, “I feel really alone. I feel like there’s no support for me in my law firm,” or “I’m not sure how I get that next promotion,” or “I don’t know whether there’s any path for me,” I’ve had some of those questions in my own career. I’ve helped other people work through those, so they’re familiar. I like to help people find the right resources, the right communication tools and the right ways to decide what they do next, how they leverage the things they know, how they find the knowledge they don’t currently have. I feel, as a practicing attorney, that I have a lot of depth and background that is relevant. People tend to trust me because they say, “Oh yes, you’ve been there. You understand this.” I think that does provide a foundation, if you will, for having the conversation. Sharon: I think it does, especially the fact that you have a broad background and you’re still practicing. That must differentiate you as a coach. There are a lot of attorneys who are now coaches, and I think that’s great, but the fact that you are still practicing and you have this broad background can differentiate you. Laura: I also spend a lot of time immersed in the legal industry. Many of my conversations and my meetings are with people who are not clients and are not going to be clients, but people that are friends or contacts within the industry. It’s important to ask them, “What’s on your mind these days?” or “How is your move working out at the new firm?” “What do you think is next on the horizon in terms of remote work for law firms?” or “What does this economy look like?” Those are things I get to ask other people about, and it’s as much a research mission for me as it is finding out what’s on their mind and what they’re talking about. It’s staying involved in the industry that I think gives a significance to what I do. I think it’s an extra incentive for people to find me as a coach that would be helpful for them. Sharon: Do you find that the advice or the counsel you give has changed when you’re talking about somebody who’s working remotely now, in terms of finding more clients or showing your immediate superior what you can do? Laura: I find that attorneys generally are people that have come out of very successful backgrounds. They’ve done really well in school. They have good grades. They have succeeded in law school. At times, that means that if they’re doing their work and all seems stable and they’re getting the work they enjoy, everything is O.K. I’d like to point out that it’s important to get outside of your work and your tasks to evaluate and consider what other people think of your work, what other people react to. If you don’t know how you’re doing at your firm, but you assume everything is O.K. because nobody’s ever tapped you on the shoulder and said, “We need to have a conversation. Maybe this isn’t the right place for you,” that can be a problem. A lot of times, law firms and even companies will not have a conversation and say, “Hey, this isn’t the... /episode/index/show/lawfirmmarketingcatalyst/id/25584135

Episode 110: Always Be Prepared: How Preparation Leads to Success with Legendary California Trial Attorney, Daniel Callahan 01/16/2023

Episode 110: Always Be Prepared: How Preparation Leads to Success with Legendary California Trial Attorney, Daniel Callahan What you’ll learn in this episode: Why preparation is the key to a successful career in law How Daniel has won some of the largest verdicts in history, even in supposedly impossible cases How making room for creativity can lead to better case outcomes Why focusing on current clients can be more beneficial than focusing on getting new business How to maximize your networking and business development efforts About Daniel Callahan Daniel Callahan opened his own law office on St. Patrick’s Day in 1984. From there, he distinguished himself as one of the top trial attorneys in California and has repeatedly been recognized by his peers for his incredible accomplishments. Mr. Callahan was the winner of the prestigious OCTLA Trial Lawyer of the Year Award three times, in 2000, 2004, and 2012. Since founding Callahan & Blaine, Mr. Callahan has won many jury trials and obtained scores of seven and eight-figure settlements on behalf of his clients. Callahan Consulting: Instagram: Facebook: Transcript: Daniel Callahan is a legendary California lawyer who has achieved record-setting verdicts for clients. What was the secret to his success? Preparation. By not putting off what he could do now, Daniel had the mental space to think about his cases creatively—and that led to astounding verdicts in seemingly impossible cases. He joined the Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast to talk about his tips for building a network; why current clients are more valuable than new ones; and why client bills are an underused selling tool. Read the episode transcript here. Sharon: Welcome to the Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast. Today, my guest is Daniel Callahan. He is founder and head of one of California’s top litigation firms and has been a winner of the prestigious Orange Country Trial Lawyer of the Year three times. We’ll learn all about his career path and why he thinks his firm is successful. Daniel, welcome to the program. Daniel: Thank you very much, Sharon. It’s nice to be here. Sharon: So glad to have you. Tell us about your career path. Daniel: It’s an unusual path, Sharon. When I left high school, I did not go to college directly. I went to work in construction because I didn’t really apply myself much during school. I graduated fifth from the bottom in my class. So, I worked in construction. I was doing that. A buddy of mine got me a job, and I’m chopping trees down with my McCulloch chainsaw, and that turned me into a wood chopper. I’m thinking, “What am I doing here?” I saw my buddy. “I know why he’s here, because he's standing next to his dad who got him the job. My mother and father told me I’d be a good lawyer. Maybe I want to try going to college after all.” Then, when I went to college, I thought, “O.K., now I’m with all those smart kids, so I have to work really hard.” I put them on a pedestal and worked really hard, and as a result, I had straight As through college. When I went to law school, I thought, “O.K., you were pretty good at college, but now you’re really against all those smart guys.” Again, I put them on a pedestal, worked really hard and finished in the top 10 and editor of the law review. Then I went to law firms. I was recruited by several law firms. I went to Hawaii to practice initially with the oldest and largest firm in the state. I was there for two years. I learned a lot. I came back to California with another large law firm for another three years, and then I opened up my own shop. I was able to bring in more business than most people. I had enough to keep myself and two other associates busy, so I thought, “Maybe now is a good time to go out on my own.” I did that on St. Patrick’s Day of 1984. Sharon: Wow! Let me go back for a minute. Why did your parents think you’d be a good lawyer? Daniel: I think I was a bit argumentative. I could be kind of persuasive and argumentative at the same time. Sharon: Did you decide to go to Hawaii because that’s where you wanted to be? Daniel: No, not at all. I had never given a thought to Hawaii, but when they came to interview at the school, I accepted the interview and met with them. I got a call back. Two days later, they invited me to spend five days on the islands. They put me up at the Ilikai and gave me a car. In three days, you get to know the firm, and then you have two days to get used to Hawaii. It was so great! I took the job, but Hawaii wasn’t really for me. I preferred being back in California, where I went to law school at UC Davis. I didn’t go back to Davis, but I went to Newport Beach, California. Sharon: Was it more formal? Daniel: It was a very large firm, and I would not say they were formal. They worked really hard, but they also played pretty hard. I got a good grounding from them. Sharon: It sounds like you have that, between everything you did. Tell us how that led to a couple of your biggest wins, because they’re big. Daniel: One of the things I learned from my mentor at Allen Matkins was you cannot be faulted for working too hard. Remember, I always put the opposition on a pedestal anyway. I want to be really prepared. They taught me how to be prepared, how not to put things off until tomorrow if you can do it today, because you don’t know what’s coming tomorrow. You may have an ex parte hearing; you may have something coming up. If you planned on doing this but you put it off, now you’re crowded, and you can’t do your best job. That’s why I have been so successful. I almost over-prepare. When I go to trial, I prepare. First of all, someone else usually works up the depositions and the discovery and all that. They bring it to me and give me an idea which depos to read first. I read all the depos. I summarize the depos myself. I match them with all the exhibits that I read. Then I prepare the examinations of each witness, both our side and their side, linking them to the exhibits, and then I practice the exams. I work with the person who’s in charge of my AV. When I want to do an exam, I want this coming up, and he’s showing me how to put it up on the screen. When we go through these, after a while he knows everything I’m about to do, so you can almost think as I’m thinking. That’s because of preparation. I also prepare my own opening statements. I go through them two or three times the day before or two days before it’s scheduled. You don’t want to do it too much because it gets kind of old. It still has to have some life to it, but you want to do it a few times to get the bugs out. If I have a group of people sitting in a conference room listening to me, they’re instructed not to say a word during the opening, but after they can critique me. There is many a good idea I’ve gotten from those individuals. Some ideas I didn’t think much of, and I did not incorporate them. Many ideas I did incorporate. When I walk into trial, I feel like the 800-pound gorilla because I’m really prepared. I have all the exams for the entire case done. The only thing I don’t have done is a closing argument, and that’s going to depend on the testimony. The attorneys who are listening to this should order a transcript of the trial and have a daily transcript. By the way, you should have it certified. If you don’t have it certified, the judge may not allow you to use it. I believe in quoting the witnesses I cross-examine heavily. I believe in doing video depositions. You ask the same question three or four times. You get different responses. You pick out the response you like the best, and then you put a number of clips together and show that either during opening statement or right as you call that witness. Before you even ask him the question, you can play from his deposition. By that time, you’ve destroyed him in the eyes of the jury before he even gets to open his mouth. That is a helpful tip. I used that in one case called Beckman Coulter vs. Flextronics. That was a $2 million breach of contract case. We discovered a $300,000 fraud and we went to trial. Seven weeks into this trial, I amended the complaint to conform to proof that I had already elicited from the mouths of the defendants. I added two causes of action for economic duress, which is a subspecies of fraud. The jury came back and gave me $2 million on the first claim and $300,000 for fraud on the second, plus $1 million and a quarter of punitive. On the third cause, they gave me $180 million in punitive damages, and on the fourth $750 million in punitive damages, for a total of $934 million, which was and still remains the highest jury verdict in Orange County history. It was the highest in the United States up until about November of that year. How did that happen? Preparation, preparation, preparation. When you do that, when you are prepared, you can allow yourself to think, “What creative way can I go about doing this? How can I do something different?” By example, I had a smaller case called Radco v. Diamond Walnut. Radco was a producer of urethane foam, and they sent it to work sites in California in 55-gallon drums. They sold it to a subcontractor, but Radco wasn’t paid. So, Radco calls me and says, “Dan, how do I get a mechanic’s lien?” I said, “Well, in California, first you have to do a 20-day notice.” “A 20-day what?” “You have to give the owner notice ahead of time that you’re providing materials to the job site, so he knows to get you paid. Where are these 55-gallon drums?” He said, “They’re locked in a warehouse.” “Well, can you go get them, drive them around the block, release possession and then do a 20-day notice?” He has to do the notice within 20 days of releasing possession. “No, it’s locked in a warehouse.” I thought through my conversation with him. He said he had sold to Midstate, a subcontractor who could not pay their bills as due. Well, that’s the definition of insolvency. I remember from my days in law school studying the UCC that if you sold something to someone on credit while they’re insolvent, you can reclaim those goods and get constructive possession. So, that’s what we did. I got constructive possession back, even though the drums never left the warehouse. I then wrote a letter releasing that possession, served a 20-day notice and went for my mechanic’s lien. The in-house counsel of Diamond Walnut said, “That is ridiculous.” There was no precedent for it, but I argued it to the judge in Stockton, and he agreed with me. As a result, Diamond Walnut had to pay twice for those materials. That is being creative. Sharon, if you don’t mind, I think creativity is so important. You have to allow yourself enough time to be creative. Here’s an example. I had a client who’s an SBA lender. He lent money to this company in Orange County who had acquired all of this collateral, which the lender had a security interest in. The lender was not getting paid. He was afraid that if they did the normal due demand letter, filed a complaint, waited 30 days, all this collateral was going to wind up in Mexico. There are two ways to repossess collateral. There’s a self-help repossession under UCC 9-503. That’s what I did, but in order to make it look better, I put it on 14x11 paper, legal-size paper. I made it look like a form, although I filled it in with the correct statute, and then I had my signature notarized at the bottom, so now it really looks official. Then I went to the police department and said, “I need someone to come with me to make sure there’s no breach of the peace.” He said, “I’ll come with you to make sure you don’t breach the peace.” This was back in the early 80s, when not everybody had a cell phone with a video camera. So, I hired a guy from Los Angeles to come film, and the three of us approached the back of the warehouse. There was an officer from the Irvine Police Department, myself and the videographer. The warehouse doors were all open, and I said, “Get that guy.” When I approached, I said, “My name is Dan Callahan and I represent the SBA. We’re here to repossess a collateral of loans to the SBA. We’re going to take the CEO down. If you want to be named in the lawsuit, you can go down too, but if you help me, if you identify the collateral right now, then we will let you go.” He went around identifying all the collateral that belonged to the SBA. One of the pieces of collateral was a forklift truck. We had a flatbed and a forklift, and we’re loading all this stuff up on the flatbed. All of a sudden, our forklift ran out of gas. Fortunately, they had a forklift, so we picked up our forklift and everything else and left. We were out of there within about an hour. Whenever somebody came from the back room to look, we had the videographer shoot them, “I got you.” We went back to the office and had a beer with the client. I got a call from the lawyer representing the debtor, and he said, “Is it true all they had to do was say no?” I said, “Yeah, that’s true.” He said, “Oh, my god. Congratulations on your sting.” The reason I tell you that, Sharon, is because that shows some creativity. On the other one, I grafted the UCC onto the mechanic’s lien law. This one I went in on a self-help repossession, but I did a document. That is legal but somewhat deceiving. It looked like a court document almost. So, there are different things you can do creatively within the law that can get you results. Let me tell you one more story. There’s a case I had where other lawyers had turned the case down. It’s a personal injury lawsuit. There are these two women who were running in the bike lane, and they got hit by an uninsured drunk hit-and-run driver who abandoned his car. He was caught nine days later in a laundromat with beers in his pocket. He was sentenced to four years. The other lawyers who looked at this thought, “There’s no money. Who are we going to sue? An uninsured hit-and-run driver?” I went to the site itself and looked where it happened, and I noticed the bike lane. There are regulations for this in California. Usually, the bike lane is about four-and-a-half feet wide. This lane is 11 feet wide. Also in California, it has to be a properly marked bike lane, and this was not. Ordinarily the government would have immunity, but only if they follow the engineer’s advice. They had done it correctly many years before, but there had been a landslide covering the road. When they redid it and repaved it, they didn’t do the bike lane properly. They didn’t do it the way the engineer had told them many years before, so they did not have governmental immunity. So, I sued the City of Dana Point and demanded $50 million, which was the limit of their insurance. They offered me $30 million. I told everybody in my office, “We’re not even talking about settlement. There is no settlement. You’re not taking your foot off the gas.” For anybody who’s listening to this, once people start talking about a settlement, there may be an inclination to take your foot off the gas. Don’t do it. Just keep it there. On the Friday before the Monday trial, they said, “O.K., we’re in. $50 million.” I got a call from an organization that tracks this, and they said, “Dan, that $50 million settlement is the highest personal injury settlement in the history of the United States.” Sharon: Wow! Daniel: That’s what I said, wow! They also said, “Oh, by the way, you also have the third highest.” I had one for $28 million. As it turns out, $28 million was third. $29 million had been the highest and became second. My $50 million took over. I don’t know where that stands right now, but I’m sure it’s pretty high up there. Sharon: You can tell just by looking at your website and all the badges and awards. Let me ask you this because you alluded to it. You said you do consulting. Daniel: Yes. Sharon: Can you tell us a little about that? Daniel: Yeah, certainly. I was a founder and managing partner of Callahan and Blaine, 28 attorneys in Santa Ana that do business litigation and personal injury. Now, I’m the CEO of Callahan Consulting. I consult with partners and associates from Callahan and Blaine, but also with other attorneys throughout the nation, giving trial practice and strategy advice. Also, I will be contacted by clients that are looking for a particular type of lawyer in a given community. Just last week, somebody needed a bankruptcy lawyer in Michigan. I researched it, and I found two really good lawyers. I presented them to the client. I arranged for a conference call between the client and each of these lawyers so the client could make up their own mind as to who they wanted to retain. I do this all throughout the United States. Usually, I get about one case a day that I’m trying to help somebody with. So, it’s two things. I mentor attorneys, as I used to mentor the attorneys in my firm, and I also help clients find the attorney in the right specialty in their community that can help them. The way I’m compensated for this is normal. I get a referral fee when I set up a client with an attorney. I bill by the hour, and the hourly rate goes down. If you use more than five hours, then the hourly rate goes down. That’s just getting at the strategy, how to work creatively to get the best result. One of the things that’s helped me the most is looking outside the box. That’s because I give myself enough time to be able to have that luxury, and that’s because I don’t put off until tomorrow what I can do today. It’s the lessons you learn in your first few years. You get burned once and then you’ll know. I was in trial one time, and I asked an associated to do a request for experts or expert designation. I came back from trial and asked, “Did you do it?” He says, “No, I didn’t have time.” I go into the court to try to get relief the next day and he said, “No, it’s too late.” So, I went to trial. I still won. I had to take their expert and turn him into my expert. So, you don’t put things off. You get things done. Sharon: Would you say that’s something you practice in the rest of your life as well as in the law? Daniel: Yes, I would. I try to teach my children. I have my daughter, Caitlin, and my son, Michael, neither of whom are lawyers, but it’s been drilled into them about preparation and its success and results. I think I practice that in many areas of my life. Sharon: Do you think you need to have these big wins to be successful? Can you be a successful personal injury firm without huge or noticeable wins? Daniel: Oh yes, you can be successful without huge wins. Many attorneys spend a lot of time trying to bring in new clients, as well they should, but what you should also do is pay particular attention to the clients you have. Make sure you communicate often and clearly with your clients. Make sure they’re comfortable with you at all times so they know what’s coming and what to expect. When that happens, they’re out there in the community talking about you, and then you get referrals through them. You build your base by working with existing clients who then will be more than happy to refer your business. If they perceive you as someone who cares about them, then they care about you. That’s how I built my business. It was mostly from referrals from clients. Then it became referrals from other lawyers I knew, and then, because of the big victories, it became referrals from lawyers I never met but knew if they came to me, they were going to get a referral fee. It’s better to get a referral fee on a $10 million victory than a referral fee on a $1 victory. So, people come to me for that reason, and I try my very best to deliver. Sharon: On your website you have both videos and a blog. Is it necessary to have both? Daniel: 10 years ago, I... /episode/index/show/lawfirmmarketingcatalyst/id/25583379

Episode 109: How Executive Coaching Can Breathe New Life into Your Legal Career with Andrew Elowitt, Managing Director & Founder of New Actions LLC 12/07/2022

Episode 109: How Executive Coaching Can Breathe New Life into Your Legal Career with Andrew Elowitt, Managing Director & Founder of New Actions LLC What you’ll learn in this episode: Why a growth mindset is the key to making effective change Andrew’s tips for beating resistance and making changes stick Why lawyers need to adapt their professional approach to become effective coaches and mentors How to choose the right executive coach What lawyers of all levels can expect to gain from coaching About Andrew Elowitt: Andrew Elowitt JD MBA PCC worked for over twenty years both in law firms and as the head of a corporate legal department before becoming a practice management consultant and professional certified coach. He is the Managing Director of New Actions LLC, a firm that specializes in talent, strategy and leadership development for law firms, businesses, and government agencies. His work focuses on the people side of legal practice: how lawyers manage, lead, thrive, change, and find satisfaction. He is regarded as an expert on the use of coaching and emotional, social and conversational intelligences in leading and managing legal organizations of all sizes. Andrew is a Fellow in the College of Law Practice Management, an International Coach Federation Professional Certified Coach, Vice Chair of the ABA Law Practice Division Publications Board, and founding member of its Lawyer Leadership and Management Board. He is the author of numerous articles and is regularly invited to conduct workshops and retreats for his clients and to present programs to bar associations. Additional Resources: New Actions: Elowitt’s LinkedIn: Transcript: Coaching is a powerful tool that can help lawyers in all stages of their careers become more effective leaders, mentors, and professionals. The legal industry has embraced coaching over the last 10 years, thanks in no small part to the work of Andrew Elowitt, founder of coaching firm New Actions and author of books “The Lawyer's Guide to Professional Coaching: Leadership, Mentoring, and Effectiveness” and “Lawyers as Managers: How to Be a Champion for Your Firm and Employees.” He joined the Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast to talk about how lawyers can face and overcome their resistance to change; why a growth mindset is necessary for lasting transformation; and how lawyers should choose the right coach. Read the episode transcript here. Sharon: Welcome to the Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast. Today, my guest is Andrew Elowitt. Andrew is the managing director and founder of New Actions LLC. His firm provides high-level coaching, practice management consulting and retreat facilitation services to law firms and other professional service firms. He is a former lawyer and corporate executive. He’s also an in-demand speaker. He is a very accomplished author who has been on the podcast before with one of this coauthors, Marcia Wasserman. We’ll hear all about his journey today. Andrew, welcome to the program. Andrew: It’s great to be back, Sharon. Sharon: It’s great to have you. Thank you so much. Tell us about your journey. How did you get to where you are now? Andrew: I had been practicing law for 15 years, first in firms and then I went in-house. It wasn’t something that hit me suddenly at 15 years. I realized I was a good lawyer and I was well-compensated, but my passion for the law, for legal practice, was ebbing. I wanted to do something more. I wasn’t sure what it would be, but I definitely wanted to have a second act. So, I got to that point 15 years in, like I said, and it was a matter of some awfully good luck. My best friend’s weekend hiking buddy was a senior organizational development consultant who was putting on learning opportunities for an eclectic mix of people. I had known him socially, and I was introduced to him. I talked about what he was doing with the learning groups. He had a clinical psychologist, a college professor, an educational consultant, and a woman who did film editing and writing, so a lawyer in the mix made it all the more eclectic. Once I started that learning group, I was fascinated. It was like all the lights going on on the Christmas tree in Rockefeller Center. I went, “This is so interesting. I want to do this.” Then I started to train, and I probably read more in those first two or three years that I was training with my mentor than I had practicing law in the prior 10 years. Then I made the transition into doing organizational development consulting. We were working with a lot of tech companies in Silicon Valley. Over time, slowly, I started to pick up more professional services firm clients, lawyers, accountants. A lot of my friends from the legal world were now in managerial positions. We’d get together and they’d say, “Andrew, we’re having this problem,” and I’d give them advice. After about six months, they said, “You know what? We’ll pay to have you go into the firms and help us with these things.” I went, “Oh my gosh, there’s a niche here.” So, I started working with lawyers then. At that time, which was the early 2000s, coaching in the legal world was not well understood. People thought I was a life coach. They had all kinds of misgivings, and I had to overcome that initially in making the transition. At this point, coaching is very well known and respected and utilized, not fully utilized, but utilized in the legal profession. Sharon: Do you think that’s more in California? When I talk to people in other areas of the country, they don’t really know what coaching is. They’re going, “Coaching, what’s that?” Andrew: Yeah, occasionally I get that. I don’t think there’s a big geographic difference anymore. Maybe on the coasts there’s more understanding of coaching. The legal community has followed the business community. The business community was a much earlier adapter and user of coaching. You certainly saw that in the tech companies. One of the reasons why was because you had a lot of younger, relatively inexperienced managers coming in, and they needed help. Brilliant people, great subject matter experts, but they didn’t know how to manage, especially managing people. That’s one of the reasons why there was a lot of traction for coaching in tech centers, both on the west coast and the east coast. Law has followed that, and I think it’s a matter of what the business models are for businesses versus professional services firms. As you know, partners or senior attorneys have their producer/manager dilemma. They’re the ones that are on the factory floor grinding out the equipment or the product. At the same time, they need to manage, but do they have the time? There’s a built-in tension there. Do I step away from billable hours to do the work? Do I step away from client development to do the managerial piece? It’s a built-in dilemma. You don’t see that on the business side. On the business side, with the executives I work with, which is anywhere from 40% to 60% of my practice, they are managers. Their job is to manage the people that report to them and to collaborate with the people in their organizations. It’s different than in law firms. Sharon: Law firms are their own animal. One of the ways is exactly what you’re talking about. You have tension. What do you tell people who come and say, “I love the business side and I like client development, but I don’t like the law. I don’t like to write briefs. I don’t like to read them. What can I do?” Andrew: First of all, that resonates with me because that was my feeling about the law. I know I was a good technician, but I much rather would have been negotiating. I think that’s one of the reasons why I was happy going in-house. I got to be the client, and I was more involved in the business affairs of my organization. For those people, I think it’s great that they have wider interests. The people who like client development, they’re the future rainmakers in a firm. The people who like doing the managerial piece are really important. Now, there’s a problem because they may be very good at it, but firms are still slow in rewarding and incentivizing people to take on those managerial roles. One thing we’ve seen in big law, the largest law firms in North America and around the world, is the emergence of professional managers. People that may or may not be lawyers are now doing the administration and the leading of firms. There can be challenges to that. In a lot of jurisdictions, you can’t have nonlawyers, people that are not certified as lawyers, being equity holders in a law firm. That makes the compensation and incentivizing issue a lot more complicated, but I think we’ll see more of a continuation in that direction. It’s great to have people in firms that are interested, passionate, experienced and competent in management. It makes a big difference in the bottom line. Sharon: I had forgotten how it’s become so professionalized on the business side in many ways. I can’t remember; it’ll come to me later. I was trying to remember when I was at Arthur Andersen. There was such a big dichotomy between fee earners, non-revenue generators and revenue generators. I always felt like, “What are you talking about? We bring in this much.” Anyway, you said you were doing training in organizational development or coaching. Andrew: It started out with organizational development. That was the focus of our learning group. It was great for me. I was with people more senior than I in terms of work experience, not necessarily in terms of age. We started with a couple of learning groups in Los Angeles. Then my mentor, Don Rossmoore, got invited to Xerox’s Palo Alto Research Center, PARC, to lead learning groups there, so we had other professionals and executive coaches that were in-house for Xerox. We had people from Apple, Hewlett-Packard, Sun. It was the whole list of tech companies. This is back in the 1990s. It fast-tracked me to have all those people available to learn from. Our last learning groups morphed into a consulting group that was a bit informal. Very different from law firms, where everything is very structured. This was, “Do you have the availability? O.K., we’ll work together on this engagement.” I learned a tremendous amount there. We were usually dealing with larger issues throughout an organization. What I found in doing that was I loved the strategic part, the systems part of that, but it really comes down to implementation. When it comes down to implementing the changes we’re recommending, that goes back to the individual. Often the individual executives and managers were having difficulty implementing the changes they knew they needed to make, including changes in the organization, changes in the team they were leading, or changes in themselves. It's the individual. That’s where I really began the transition into coaching. I didn’t think I was very good at it initially. I still feel that way. I had to unlearn a lot of qualities and approaches that made me a good lawyer, but not necessarily a good coach. For example, as a lawyer, you need to be prescriptive and directed. You’re there to provide a solution. A client comes to you with a problem, then, “O.K., well, this is what you should do.” That doesn’t necessarily work well when you’re coaching. It’s better to work more collaboratively with your coach-ee to help them come to their ideas and figure out what they need to do. I had to stop myself. I had to restrain myself from jumping to solutions and saying “Here’s the roadmap. Here are steps one through five. Do them.” That was me at the beginning. I had to sit on my hands and zip my mouth and go, “I have some ideas about this, but I’d like to hear from you first. What do you think would be a good approach?” It’s bringing them more into the picture. That was one of the biggest and hardest changes for me, but I found I really liked working with executives. There’s something about working with people one-on-one I found very satisfying, far more satisfying than working with people one-on-one in the legal capacity. I went in that direction with executives and lawyers and a few other service professionals from time to time, but I wouldn’t identify myself in those positions. That’s pretty much the journey that I took. Sharon: Do you find that you have to put on a different hat when you’re working with a lawyer, and then another hat when you’re working with an executive? Andrew: That’s a great question. It depends on the lawyer and the executive. Sometimes I have to put on a different hat with the same person from one session to the next depending on where they’re at. With lawyers, Sharon, it’s usually a matter of the issues we’re dealing with. On the executive side, it’s pretty much pure management and leadership skills. Lately with the pandemic, resilience and finding a healthy work/life integration are huge, huge issues. For the last two or three years, that has been a theme in almost all of the coaching I’ve done. On the legal side, it’s different. It’s not pure management and leadership. At the younger levels of an attorney’s career, we’re more often focused on issues of productivity, time management, work-flow management. They are on the receiving end of delegation and feedback, so a lot of it is helping them learn how to receive delegation and feedback and how to help them make the people giving them the feedback and delegation even better. It’s a sweeping generalization, but I think it’s true that lawyers don’t have a lot of formal training in managerial skills. Some who came to the law after working in another area may have that. Some who took management classes in college or grad school, they may have some familiarity. But basically, when it comes to people management, lawyers don’t know a lot. They are replicating the ways they were managed, which means they may be using managerial and leadership approaches that are two generations old, which are not great with millennials and Gen Z. So, a lot of is helping people learn how to manage. Now, I said I started with people at the lower level. As you get higher, then it is learning those managerial skills, delegating, giving feedback. How do you hold the people that work with you accountable? How do you collaborate with other people? As you go further up, it becomes more client-facing, so it’s about developing those client relationships. Then we get into business development. I’m not a business development specialist, but I’m very good at helping attorneys that have support for client development within their firm and may even have dedicated client development people. They know what they should be doing, but they’re not doing it. It’s the classical example of the knowing-doing gap. This is something that’s not unique to lawyers. There’s something we know we should do, but do we get around to doing it? No. That can be the case with a lot of lawyers when it comes to business development. I’m very good at helping them understand what’s holding them back. Typically, it’s nothing external; it’s nothing in the firm or the environment. It’s something in them. We acknowledge what the inner obstacle is and we work past it and through it. I have a good record of getting them into gear and getting them developing clients. Finally, when we get to partner-level, practice area heads and executive committee members, then it’s a lot about leadership and management. That’s where there’s the most similarity to the business side or the executive side of my practice. Sharon: Do you work with people at all different levels, depending on where they are when they contact you or the firm brings you in? How does it work? Andrew: For firms, it’s virtually all levels. Large firms will bring me in. I’ll work with their professional development or talent development people. Most often, they have a high-potential associate and there may be a couple of things that they’re struggling with. As I think most of your listeners will know, it’s expensive to find new people and onboard and train them. You don’t want to lose that human capital. So, coaching can be very helpful and cost-effective in helping those people overcome the problems they may be having. It may be something like time management. You have an associate who’s starting to trend late on their deliverables. It’s the work they need to get to partners. It’s overly simple to say, “Oh, they need to work harder and faster,” or something like that. It may be an issue—it often is—where they’re not doing a good job of pushing back against the people giving them work. There are lot of people all over the world and there are a lot of associates. They’re hesitant to say no to a partner when a partner hands them a piece of work. What they end up doing is overloading themselves because they are overly optimistic about what they can achieve in a given amount of time. So, helping them learn how to push back is a way of dealing the time management issue. Sharon: I can see how it would be very hard to say, “I don’t have time,” or “No,” to a partner. That must be very, very hard. Andrew: There’s a skill and art to it, a lot of finesse. With some partners even more finesse. Sharon: Is there resistance? It seems like there would be. Maybe I have an old image of it, but it seems like there would be people who say, “I don’t need coaching,” or “I’ve failed if I have coaching. Andrew: Happily, there’s less and less of that. That sense of failure, I don’t run into that much anymore. Usually with younger associates, they may feel like, “I should know this. This is a flaw in me. I’m not doing a good job of this.” Often, they’re their most severe critics, so I make it very clear to people I coach that I’m not there to fix them. Seldom am I dealing with somebody who really has a risk of being fired from a firm. It’s usually developmental. Usually, they’re worth investing in, and the firm is spending money to help them become more productive and a tighter part of the firm. The one thing you did mention is that some people think, “I don’t need coaching.” I’ll initially talk to a prospective coach-ee—and this works on the executive side or the legal side. I qualify them, which sounds like turning them into objects, but it’s coach-speak for talking to them to see if they’re coachable. Not all people are. Most are very earnestly interested. They want the help. They’re stuck. They don’t know what to do, but they know they need to do something. Occasionally, you’ll find somebody who points the finger at everybody else. They say, “I’m not the problem. It’s their problem, if you could just help them.” That’s not going to be a good coach-ee. The other thing you look for is a growth mindset versus a fixed mindset. People with a fixed mindset think, “This is all the intelligence I have, all the social skills I have. What you see is what you get. I’m not going to change. There’s not a lot of room, if any room, for improvement.” Why spend time, energy, money on dealing with a person or trying to help a person who is saying, “This is where I am and I’m O.K. to be there”? There’s no upside potential. You want people with a growth mindset who are curious, who are saying, “I want to learn how to do this.” It’s a challenge. You want people who can say, “I’ve really messed up doing this. I can tell you about the last three failures I’ve had.” That level of self-awareness and candor makes for a great coach-ee. Sharon: I’m thinking there are some similarities. Sometimes a partner will say, “I know how to do it. I did it this way. They can learn how to do it this way.” Can that change? They may be... /episode/index/show/lawfirmmarketingcatalyst/id/25134159

Episode 108: The Lawyer as CEO: Why Law Firm Leaders Need Business Savvy with Attorney and Author, Reza Torkzadeh 11/29/2022

Episode 108: The Lawyer as CEO: Why Law Firm Leaders Need Business Savvy with Attorney and Author, Reza Torkzadeh What you’ll learn in this episode: Why law firm owners need to think of themselves as CEOs The two biggest mistakes law firm owners make that prevent their firms from growing Why law firms need to scale to stay competitive How Reza’s past mistakes helped him become a better leader Why knowing your firm’s vision and core values is the foundation of success About Reza Torkzadeh: Reza Torkzadeh is a nationally recognized plaintiff’s trial attorney who has dedicated his professional career to the pursuit of justice by exclusively representing victims in personal injury and wrongful death cases. Reza has handled numerous high-profile cases in both state and federal courts, and has served in leadership roles in litigation at the national level. He has been featured for legal commentary by the Wall Street Journal, Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles Daily News, Los Angeles Daily Journal, San Francisco Daily Journal, New York Daily News, Metro News, Christian Science Monitor, KUSI TV, and many other news outlets and publications. Through Reza’s leadership, vision and passion for representing the people, TorkLaw has established offices nationwide, in cities throughout California, Arizona, Georgia, Illinois, Nevada, Texas, Washington State, and Washington, D.C. Reza has successfully represented thousands of clients and after more than a decade of practicing law, “Representing the People” continues to be the core foundation and guiding principle of his practice and the firm. Reza is a frequently invited guest speaker and has lectured across the country on the practice of law and the civil justice system. He is a proud Honorary Board Member of the Los Angeles Trial Lawyers Charity, an active member of the Consumer Attorneys Association of Los Angeles, and President’s Club Member of the Consumer Attorneys of California. Additional Resources: Transcript: Whether it’s stigma or tradition, law firm owners typically don’t call themselves CEOs. But according to Reza Torkzadeh, founder and—you guessed it—CEO of TorkLaw, the most successful law firm owners are the ones that run their firms like any other Fortune 500 company. Reza joined the Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast to talk about the importance of creating a strong team and culture; why law firms are really in the business of customer service; and why any firm that wants to succeed the long term needs to scale. Read the episode transcript here. Sharon: Welcome to the Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast. Today, my guest is Reza Torkzadeh. Reza has a successful personal injury firm located in Orange County, California. He recently wrote a book, “The Lawyer as CEO,” which we will hear all about today. Reza, welcome to the program. Reza: Hi, Sharon. Thanks so much. I appreciate the opportunity and for having me on. Sharon: It’s great to have you. Can you tell us about your career path? How did you end up where you are right now? Reza: Oh boy! Well, throughout high school and growing up, I never thought of becoming a lawyer. It was never a career path I envisioned. I originally wanted to go to medical school and be a doctor. That was my study during undergraduate. I worked a summer as an EMT driving around in an ambulance downtown. I was doing all the things you would do if you are going to medical school and you are interested in that career. In my last year in college, I realized very quickly that the lifestyle of a doctor is one where you need to absolutely love what you’re doing. My grandfather is a doctor. My uncle is a doctor. We’ve got doctors in the family, and I didn’t feel like it was something I loved and was passionate enough about to put in those long hours and to be on call and to make those sacrifices. But I knew I loved people, and I knew I wanted to make a difference in people’s lives. That’s what was driving my initial desire to go to medical school. I wanted to meet patients; I wanted to help patients and treat them. So, that was still there. The next natural option for me was going to law school. I didn’t go to law school with the intention of practicing. I went to law school with the intention of using my law degree in some setting, in some business. During law school I tried a few different areas of the law. I worked at the district attorney’s office. I did transactional work. I did international business as a lawyer. After every position I knew what I didn’t want to do. It was right around my third year that I discovered plaintiff’s work, representing individuals on a contingency-fee basis, where if you don’t win, you don’t get paid. That was very attractive to me. How great to be able to provide legal representation to those who couldn’t afford a lawyer and to make a meaningful change in their lives? To cut it short for this interview and podcast, that’s how I ended up doing plaintiff’s work, and I never looked back. Sharon: That’s interesting. Most lawyers have wanted to be lawyers since kindergarten, so that’s interesting. Tell us about your practice today. Reza: We’re exclusively representing plaintiffs. We never represent the defense or insurance carriers, and it’s 100% personal injury. We handle a wide spectrum of PI cases. The majority of our cases now, 10 years into it, are catastrophic injury or wrongful death cases, and we handle them nationwide. We’ve got an office presence and staff in about nine states right now. Sharon: Wow! Had you been thinking about writing your book, “The Lawyer as CEO,” for a long time? Did it come to you because of your entrepreneurial background? What was it? Reza: A great question. I wrote it almost as a way for me to reflect on the last 10 years of the law firm. I had a lot of growing pains, a lot of learning the hard way and experiences where I almost walked away from the practice altogether. I thought to myself, “What would I have wanted if I was first starting out my practice?” I would want a book. I would want to know examples. Every industry has so much support for how to do things, and yet the legal industry doesn’t. They don’t teach you how to be a business owner in law school. They don’t teach you how important the business side is. We are a profession. We’re lawyers, so we have to act accordingly; however, every law firm is still a business. You’re not going to do anybody any good if you’re not running it like a business should be run. When I looked back on the last 10 years of starting and running TorkLaw, I thought about what I would have wanted on day one. It was really an exercise in vulnerability for me to write the book. I shared many things in there that I think are new to the legal world. We’re so used to hearing how wonderful all the lawyers are and their great results, and we’re not used to seeing the reality of what it takes to start a law firm. So, for me, it was an exercise in putting my thoughts and my journey down on paper. It was also a way where I felt I could make a meaningful difference in the lives of all lawyers, not just new and young lawyers. Not a day goes by, Sharon, that I don’t get a random email or message from a lawyer that says, “Wow! You really inspired me to take action.” That was the goal from the beginning: to put this out there and share my experiences, my ups and downs, my failures and my successes, and then ultimately my realization that in order to be an effective business owner, in order to be an effective CEO, you need to take a look at yourself. You need to look in the mirror and come to the conclusion that the buck stops with you as a business owner. Sharon: I guess that’s why the title of the book stopped me. As someone who spent their professional career marketing lawyers, it’s such a different thing than being an entrepreneur. How did the book change how you viewed marketing or client development? Reza: Great question. A question I asked myself before I wrote the book was if I were a CEO of a Fortune 500, publicly traded company, how long would I have lasted in that role? My response was, “Not very long.” I would have been kicked out very quickly. I think as business owners, that’s a great way to measure your performance and your accountabilities. When you’re at the top and you’re leading an organization of 50, 60 or 100 employees, whatever it might be—it might be five employees—it’s hard for those folks to be as transparent as you need them to be to hold you accountable. So, I often ask myself the question, “If I were a CEO of a Fortune 500 company, what would my board of directors say to me?” You’re absolutely right; I’ve been practicing for 15 years, and I’ve never heard a lawyer-business owner call themselves a CEO. Whether it’s stigma or tradition or whatever it might be, I think ultimately you have to decide whether you want to be the CEO of your company or not. Every organization, if it’s meant to thrive, if it’s meant to scale and grow and do meaningful work and make a change in the community, needs an effective CEO. Sharon: Maybe a lawyer wants to be successful but doesn’t want to be a CEO. They want to focus on developing clients and marketing, and they say, “I’ll leave the CEO to other people,” like you. What do you think about that? Reza: Absolutely. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with it. It’s every person’s own path. They get to choose for themselves. I chose this one because I am more drawn to the business side. I’m more drawn to marketing. I’m more drawn to scaling and the big picture. I’ve been fortunate enough to find people on my team who are much better lawyers than I am, much better at doing the tasks than I am. So, it works. I don’t think there’s a right or wrong answer for a lawyer who says, “Look, I just love lawyering, and that’s what I want to do for the rest of my life.” I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that. Sharon: Very early in my own career working with lawyers—I can’t even remember who it was—I heard a managing partner or a lawyer say they thought scaling a law firm wasn’t feasible. What are your thoughts about that? Reza: I disagree. At our firm, we say we’re a customer service business that happens to practice law. We’re in competition for the consumer. The consumer is used to a certain level of customer service and experience that you get at Apple or Amazon or Walmart or Starbucks or FedEx and these national brands we all recognize. I think where lawyers and law firms have fallen behind is this element of customer service and customer experience. I think you can absolutely scale. It’s no different than providing a product. You’re providing a service, and if you’re providing a good enough experience for your clients, there’s no reason why you can’t replicate that in other markets, in other practice areas. You have to have the right people. You have to have the right tools, the right infrastructure, of course, but if you’ve discovered a formula that’s successful in your own law firm, the only thing that’s stopping you from scaling is yourself. I think any CEO or business owner will tell you that if you’re not growing, you’re going in the wrong direction. When I started practicing law 15 years ago, it was competitive. The personal injury industry has always been competitive, but not as fierce as it is today. There wasn’t the amount of dollars being spent on marketing as there is today. Now, you’ve got hedge funds and banks and venture capital firms that are dumping money into law firm marketing. In order to survive the next 10, 15, 20, 25 years, and in order to be competitive with these behemoths that are spending hundreds of millions of dollars a year on marketing, in a way you have to scale. You have to grow to stay competitive. Sharon: Did the book change how you look at clients, how you market or how you develop your people? Reza: Absolutely. The exercise of the book was itself a reflection. Our lives are so crazy. Oftentimes I describe it as being inside of a tornado. Writing the book allowed me to quiet everything down and put on paper what’s in my mind. It made me focus on the things we were doing. If I’m talking about customer service in the book, it made me focus on, “O.K., what are we doing step by step, A through Z, for customer service?” It's the same thing for marketing. One of the biggest realizations for me—and I included this in the book—was ego-play marketing, which is seeing your face on a billboard or on TV or hearing it on the radio. Just because you see it doesn’t necessarily mean it’s effective and that there’s a positive ROI on it. It made me self-reflect, to go back and dig deeper. Look, I don’t have all the answers and I continue to make mistakes, but an important takeaway is that you can always improve. You can always do better; you can always change. We’re not the same law firm we were five years ago, and I can promise you something: we’re not going to be the same law firm five years from now, either. We’re always retooling; we’re always changing. We don’t have all the answers, but I think there’s always a better way to do things. Sharon: Do you think there will be a sequel, a third edition? Reza: I don’t know. Not now. This one took me about 18 months to do. It was a massive labor of love. I wanted to create a book that was super easy to read. You could read it in one day. So, I spent a majority of that 18 months cutting back what was in the book and making it as short as possible. I wanted as many people as possible to pick it up and finish it and read it more than once. As of right now, no sequel. This is it. The response has been incredible, and this is not a money maker for me. 100% of the proceeds are donated to charity. Sharon: Writing the book probably brought to the fore a lot of things that lawyers don’t do or mistakes they make. What are the top two things that lawyers should do differently or the mistakes they’re making? What do you think? Reza: For law firm owners, I will tell you the two biggest mistakes I see—which I made also—is, number one, not focusing on culture, vision and values. That’s the first one. Had we not had those things in place, in writing, engrained in everything we do, we would not have been able to scale effectively. Number two is not having a process or procedure for recruitment and retention of teammates. Both mistakes we made and paid for dearly. I think the most common way we hire is that you put up a job post, you get back hundreds of résumés and you can’t tell the difference between one or the other, and then you just pick one that might have some experience or might have worked for a competitor. You bring them in for an interview. You interview them, everyone interviews great, and then you hire them. Six months in, you realize this is the wrong person. This person sucks. I think doing that type of blind hiring is a mistake. I think desperation hiring is a mistake, and not having the culture be part of it and not having the right people is a guaranteed recipe for disaster. Sharon: Do you think if somebody had said that to you when you were just opening your doors, you would have been able to say, “Oh yeah, I didn’t do it that way the first time,” or “I don’t know what my culture is”? Reza: Yeah, I’ll tell you. This was my experience. It was my own ego for the longest time. I thought we had the best culture. I thought this was the best place to work. That was in my head; it wasn’t reality. I was dealing with office drama and turmoil. It was a toxic environment, and I kept telling myself, “This is the greatest place to work.” It really wasn’t. If someone early on, in year one, told me to focus on culture and a method to distinguish the players you’re bringing onto your team, I don’t know if I would have taken that advice. I learned it the hard way. Sharon: I’m not thinking about it as advice. I’m thinking back on when I didn’t have business experience, and professors were asking me, “What about this, that and the other thing,” in a business environment. How would people know what their culture is? You could ask. You could say, “My culture is to have the best place to work.” Who knocked you on the side of the head to say it isn’t the best place? I’m asking two questions. Reza: It was a one-day event that occurred, but it was an accumulation of the stress I was feeling working in the office. I was doing anything and everything not to go into the office. That’s how bad it got. This is a company that was my first baby, that I put my blood, sweat and tears and everything into. Now I was at a point, five years in, where I didn’t even like going into the office. I think that was a reality check. Then losing half of my staff in one day was a reality check. It was an indication of my failures as a leader than it was anything else. All the things I was complaining about, all the things I was struggling with, really started from me. I was not being accountable. I was not the leader I should have been, and for the longest time I assumed I was. When you get to the point when you can take accountability for those things we’re all complaining about and see how it was my responsibility to correct them and make different decisions, I looked back and said, “Wow! I was a pretty crappy leader.” I was not making the decisions I should have been making to set an example for the rest of my team. I should have been making those decisions so the people on my team could be proud of who they’re working with and for. It took a good five or six years of pain to figure that out. Sharon: My last question is—I have a lot of questions. I’m thinking about all the newbie lawyers, because I hear about them and see them all the time, who say, “I can’t work for anybody else. I’m going to hang my own shingle.” If they had read your book, would it have helped them develop the business into a client-focused business? How would it have helped them? Reza: I hope so, Sharon. I think there are some fundamental things in there that every business organization can benefit from, but it’s like everything else: what you put in is what you get out. I meet with young lawyers all over the country all the time. I’m telling them what to do, and the majority of them won’t do it and don’t do it. They continue going along just how they were. I think for those folks, the book could be the spark. I don’t think the book is a blueprint on exactly how to start your practice and scale and be efficient, but I do think it’s a way to get some inspiration and a spark that will lead you down your own path. Our core values are going to be different than everybody else’s. My vision is going to be different than everybody else’s, and the things that are important to me may not be important to everybody else. You’ve got to figure out your own path, but I think there are foundational things, like having your core values, having your vision very clear, making sure everybody understands what they are. You need to know every single person you bring onto your team, or at least make a best effort to go beyond just posting a job, pulling a résumé and hiring somebody. I say don’t make desperate hires and wait for the right person. It may take a while, but you’re better off waiting for the right person than bringing the wrong person into your organization. Sharon: It’s hard to let go of the wrong person, yes. Reza, thank you so much for being with us today. Reza: Thank you, Sharon. I appreciate it. Sharon: I greatly appreciate it. /episode/index/show/lawfirmmarketingcatalyst/id/25108014

Episode 107: How Creative Advertising Campaigns Set Professional Services Firms Apart with Larry Cohen and Brad Wilder 11/22/2022

Episode 107: How Creative Advertising Campaigns Set Professional Services Firms Apart with Larry Cohen and Brad Wilder What you’ll learn in this episode: Why advertising for professional services is unique compared to other industries How to make the subjective creative process more objective The process behind some of Brad and Larry’s most well-known campaigns Why law firms need to be responsive to the changes in the marketplace, and why advertising is no longer optional Why a good website is a nonnegotiable, especially when it comes to hiring and retention About Larry Cohen: Larry Cohen is the president and co-founder of advertising agency Glyphix. His vision of a small agency of talented, skilled professionals doing great work for great clients is what drives the group. He’s a writer. Copy. Scripts. Children’s books. In addition to his work with clients, he understands the financial side of their investment in Glyphix…and keeps Glyphix financially strong and stable. About Brad Wilder: Brad Wilder is creative director and co-founder of Glyphix. Art direction and design are his thing. The national and international awards he’s won prove the point. Awards for almost everything… corporate identity, advertising, packaging, in-store merchandising, display and trade show booth design, interfaces, for clients like Nestlé, Mercedes-Benz, Baskin-Robbins, Xircom and Disney. He’s also a tech geek. Transcript: In the legal industry, advertising has done a 180. What was once considered tacky is now a requirement. And according to Larry Cohen and Brad Wilder, co-founders of advertising agency Glyphix, if you’re going to advertise, you better make it count. They joined the Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast to talk about how to make the creative process run smoothly; why a strong website is a critical part of attracting top talent; and why even the best brands need a refresh from time to time. Read the episode transcript here. Sharon: Welcome to the Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast. Today, my guests are Larry Cohen and Brad Wilder, who are some of the professional forces behind Glyphix. Glyphix is an advertising agency which works across all genres but has particular expertise in the professional services space. They’re specialists in all kinds of advertising, websites, print, etc. I say specialists because they’re specialists in having their work stand out from the crowd. We will learn more about Glyphix today. Larry and Brad, welcome to the program. Larry: Thank you very much for having us Brad: We’re glad to be here. Sharon: We’re so glad to have you. Each of you, give us your career paths just briefly. Larry: Interesting question, because our career paths are almost exactly the same in the sense that— Sharon: Larry, that’s you speaking? Larry: Yeah, this is Larry. Brad and I met in high school at Hamilton High School in Los Angeles. I was a writer for the school paper. Brad was the photographer and designer, and that’s where we met. After college, we got together and began working for an advertising agency called Mendelson Design. Back in 1986, when the Mac came out and gave us the tools to do a lot of great creative work for a very affordable price, we decided, “Hey, let’s start our own new agency.” We’ve been together since 1986. So, it’s been a very similar career path. Sharon: So, you’ve known each other a long time. Brad: Longer than we’ve known our wives, yeah. Sharon: Can you tell us what Glyphix does in general? Larry: In general, we do professional services-focused, full-service advertising, some marketing, no PR. We try and delineate those two things, but it’s soup-to-nuts advertising from brand building to SEO and social. Brad: The bottom line for us is really helping our clients position themselves in the marketplace against the competition and keeping them ever-present in the minds of their potential customers and clients. That can start with the strategy, and then from there move right through to naming their websites, logos, branding, TV advertising, print. All those are different tools we have at our disposal to keep our clients front and center in front of their clients. Sharon: How do you describe each of your roles at Glyphix? Are they the same? Larry: No, our roles are very, very different. I came out of university with a business degree. So, for me, it’s the business, dealing with clients, doing some copywriting. Brad is our creative director, so he runs the creative. Whether we’re designing websites, shooting TV commercials, doing print ads, Brad’s the guy that runs the creative here. I think it’s one of the reasons we’ve survived together, as we have a good delineation between who does what with respect to each other’s talents. Sharon: That is a good delineation. You’re not crossing over on each other. Brad, the first time I ever saw the agency was when you did something—I can’t remember which company it was for—it was advertising an x-ray. It was for a healthcare law firm. Brad: It was for Fenton Nelson which is now Nelson Hardiman, health-care attorneys. What was the question? That was a great piece. It was so radically different at the time. No one had ever done it before. Sharon: It was radically different. It was for healthcare marketing attorneys, as you say, and it really stood out. Brad: To give some background on that, Fenton Nelson is a healthcare law firm specializing in all things healthcare. They wanted direct mail, not digital, but they wanted it to completely stand out. We actually shot x-ray film with a design that became a direct mail line. It was a full x-ray in an x-ray envelope. It was sent to all the healthcare agencies on their call list. It was 10, 15 years ago, and people are still talking about it. Sharon: So, it was a real x-ray? Brad: Yes. Larry: We actually had to source x-ray film. Sharon: How did you come up with that? Larry: That’s a great question. We came up with it because Brad and I always try to look for what makes a client unique, what makes them special. In this case, we interviewed Harry Nelson and his staff and they said, “We could go to any healthcare facility. We can walk through the facility and see what their issues are and where they’re going to get in trouble. We see things that other people don’t.” That gave us the idea that an x-ray allows you to see things other people don’t. That gave us a positioning line for the firm, and it was, “We see things other firms don’t.” It was a positioning that said, “We’re unique because our experience and expertise allow us to help our clients.” In that case, it was to help healthcare clients, hospitals, and facilities stay out of trouble. It really came out of the client organically, and that’s what Brad and I tried to do. I think we’re good at helping clients find a position for themselves, find the thing that makes them unique. Are you the most expensive? Are you the most experienced? What is it that you’re the best at, and how do we translate that into a creative message? Then, how do we get that in front of our potential clients? Sharon: Do you tell the client that even if they don’t ask for it? Do you tell them what you’re working from? Larry: Yes, absolutely, because we want to educate the client. I think clients find it exciting. People love hearing stories, and every firm, every client has a story to tell. The trick is to find that story. I have to uncover that and deliver that story. It’s compelling. You think about great brands. Most of them have a story behind it: why the company was started, what problem you are solving for your customers. That’s what customers and clients care about. Nobody cares about what you do. They care about what you can do for them, how you make them successful. Our job is to translate what you do into why somebody should care. Sharon: Is that how you got the name Glyphix? Is there something with Glyphix that tells clients that? Larry: It was painful naming. We’re a creative firm, so we have to have a creative name; we have to do things differently. We went through hundreds of names. We kept focusing on the name “glyph” as in a hieroglyph. It’s using a picture or several pictures in a row to tell a story. At the time, everything that ended in X was much cooler, and we just stuck with Glyphix. Even our logo is a little “GX” man—it's on Glyphix.com; check it out—that tells a story through pictures and simple storytelling. Sharon: I was thinking this while I was looking at the website. You have these very simple line drawings that tell what you do. Was it you who came up with that, Brad? Larry: Are you talking about the video? Sharon: Yeah, the video. Larry: We typically come up with work as a team. At Glyphix, we have a great bunch of people who work together as a team. At the time, we had a gentleman, David Allman, working with us. I think David and Brad came up with that idea. Then we had it animated, and we had a wonderful gentleman who did the voiceover. We wanted a very simple way to explain what we do to people. Sharon: As I was looking at it, I thought it was great, but it’s like, “How do they come up with it?” I don’t know if I could have. Larry: We’re very glad that other people can’t do it; otherwise, we’d be out of work. Sharon: If somebody says to you, “What does the firm specialize in?” do you have an area you specialize in? Larry: I’m not sure about the word specialize. We do a lot of work with professional services firms. We understand how they function and how they work. We work with dozens and dozens of law firms and accounting firms, helping them craft their position, understand the brand and keep it in front of clients. Ballard Rosenberg is a firm out here in the Valley. We keep them in front of their clients by keeping them in the business journals every month. For other firms, we’ll get them on television. For others, we’ll put them on KCRW radio. For us, it’s helping our clients manage their brand. For others, it’s evolved into websites and doing some social media for them. I think nowadays people are so busy, it’s difficult to keep up with everybody. The key is keeping our clients front and center in the minds of their clients so when a need comes up, they remember them. Brad: And I should say we don’t do only professional services. We just happen to be very good at it. Professional services, especially with law firms, they bring their own special challenges, and we’ve learned to work around those things. You often hear that working with law firms is like herding cats. We’ve gotten pretty good at herding cats, but we handle many other firms. Our newest onboard is an AI and machine learning company. It couldn’t be any more different than law firms, and the approach is very different from law firms, but again, we’re looking for that story, that one thing they do best. Sharon: How would you say that working with professional services firms is different than working with a products firm, let’s say? Brad: It’s super different, because with professional services firms—I don’t mean this in a negative way, but there’s a lot of ego involved because it’s personal. You’re talking about selling the people. With a product, you can get some distance in between them. I can go to a CEO or marketing group in a firm and say, “Hey, your product is this and that. Here’s the audience. Here’s how they’re going to respond.” There’s some objectivity you can bring to that. With professional services firms, it’s very, very personal, especially when you get in a room with three, four, five partners of a law firm. They all have opinions. They’re all valid, but they’re all personal. Imagine taking five lawyers at a law firm out to purchase one car. You’d come back with a motorcycle. They have very strong opinions. They’re always very articulate. They’re very bright folks, so they all have valid opinions. Trying to get to a consensus is oftentimes difficult, as opposed to a product that stands on its own. Instead of telling a story about the product, you’re telling a story about the people at the firm, and you have to get them over that hurdle. The firm itself has a brand and that brand stands for something. If you can get to that point, they can put their own personal biases aside and do what’s best for the firm, but that’s a challenge sometimes. Sharon: I’m sure that’s a challenge if you’re dealing with ego. How do you overcome that? If you have a managing partner who feels one way and a senior associate feels differently, or if you’re talking to an equity firm and the driver feels they’re going one way and the other people are going another, how do you overcome that? Larry: It’s a great question. It’s challenging. You can start by listening. Hopefully, we can spend the first meeting or two really listening and coming back to them with a creative brief that says, “Based on all the input we’ve received, this is what we’re hearing. This is the direction to go in. Do we all agree on this?” We’ll never start a design, whether it’s a logo or a website or an ad campaign, until we understand who we’re talking to, what we’re trying to say, what our goals are. We try to get them all on the same page. That’s the first hurdle. The second hurdle is when you show creative. Creative is subjective in nature. People like blue, but they hate green, and they like flowers, but they don’t like butterflies. Who knows? With that subjectivity, we try to bring objectivity to this process by saying, “Based on what we heard, this works well for you. Here’s why these colors work well. Here’s why these graphics work well. Here’s why this typestyle works well.” We bring objectivity and some rationale behind the design, but again, you can look at a painting and you can love it or hate it. It may be a Rembrandt, but you may still hate it. It’s hard, and you just take time. Sometimes these projects will go on for months and months because they’re debating in-house or they’re busy. We do our best to keep moving things along and trying to get to a final answer. Brad: In addition to that, I think it’s partly common ground. If you have a lot of partners and they all have strong opinions, it’s sitting down long before any creative and discussing likes and dislikes, because personal likes and dislikes are every bit as valid as any other design criteria. In talking with you as long as possible, we try and pick out the common ground they all agree on to start with and then build outward from there. We build on the common ground and the trust that’s been created in the initial discussions. Then that’s where, as Larry was saying, we try and make it as objective as possible in a very subjective industry. That’s one of the biggest challenges about being in advertising. Sharon: I bet it’s a challenge with a lot of professional service industries. Are you ever the order takers, as we sometimes get accused of being? Do people call you and say, “We need a new website,” and you go in thinking, “O.K., let’s look at the website. We may not need everything new.” Larry: I would say definitely not. In fact, we’ve lost business in the past by saying, “This is not what you need.” I feel like our responsibility is to talk to the client and say, “Based on your goals, here’s what we suggest.” Now, if you want to ignore that, O.K., we can do what you’re asking us to do. But I’ll always give a client our best advice right up front, because otherwise I don’t think we’ll be successful in the long term, and they won’t be successful. That doesn’t work for us. Most of our clients we’ve had now for, some of them, five, 10, 15 years. I think they know we will make the hard call and give them good advice. We may not be so popular, but I think in the long run, it serves them well. We try very hard to avoid being order takers. We always say, “If you ask for this, we’ll give you that, but here’s what we think you should do as well. Here are both options for you.” I always want to feel good that we gave the client the best thinking we could, even if they want to make a bad decision. That’s up to them, but I want to give them an option and say, “Here’s another way of going. What do you think? Brad: We will never do only what the client asks for. I don’t want that to be taken wrong, but if they ask for something very specific, if they’ve got something in their mind they want to get out and see how it looks, we’re happy to help them with that process. But we’re always going to give another opinion or two about a possible better way to get them thinking in larger spheres or in different directions. Sharon: Do you think it’s possible to rebrand? If everybody has a brand in their mind, is it possible to change that? Brad: Oh, absolutely. Brands evolve constantly. If you look at the big brands, the Apples and Cokes of the world, they’re constantly evolving and changing and staying current. We do that very often. We just finished a project for Enenstein Pham & Glass, a great law firm over the hill in Century City. They wanted to tighten the name up to EPG. We had a great project we did with them. We redid the logo and updated collateral materials. I think firms constantly need to be responsive to the changes in the marketplace. They need to stay fresh. Law firms oftentimes say to us, “We don’t need a website because nobody checks our website.” Well, the truth is when you’re hiring, that’s the first place they go. We’ve been working with a lot of our law firm clients and accounting clients so their site is designed in part to attract young talent, to bring people on board. Your website is your calling card. It’s your office. Everybody goes there and checks it out just to validate who you are. Oftentimes, you have to understand who is going there. If you are looking to hire, which every accounting firm we know of right now is looking desperately to hire talent, that’s where talent goes. They check out your site and get a sense of who you are. Larry: And to see if it’s some place they want to join. The better the candidate, the better the website should be to impress in both directions. Most people think of a website as outbound. I don’t get new business from my website, especially in professional services. It’s usually word of mouth. But they’re always going to validate, and that validation has to be up to date. It has to be modern. It has to be credible for every law firm, and everybody knows this. For 20 years, the professional services industry has been going through upheaval after upheaval because it came from a time when law firms, if they advertised, they were shysters. Now more than ever for law firms, you have to think about marketing and social and putting your best face forward. That’s a huge turn of events, and I think some law firms are still having trouble getting used to that idea. Sharon: Do you think that in any professional service there’s room for traditional advertising, for print, for newspaper ads or magazine ads? Is there room for that? Larry: Oh, sure. I think they all complement each other. As I said, for Ballard Rosenberg, we keep them current. They represent companies in employment law cases. So, for that firm, we keep them in front of the L.A. Business Journal, the San Fernando Valley Business Journal and some other publications where... /episode/index/show/lawfirmmarketingcatalyst/id/25093809

Episode 106: Organic Vs. Paid Google Campaigns: Each Has Its Place with Eric Bersano, Vice President of Business Development for Market My Market 10/20/2022

Episode 106: Organic Vs. Paid Google Campaigns: Each Has Its Place with Eric Bersano, Vice President of Business Development for Market My Market What you’ll learn in this episode: The difference between search engine marketing (SEM) and search engine optimization (SEO), and why SEO is a worthwhile investment even if it takes time to see results Why Google’s Local Services Ads give you the most bang for your buck if you’re investing in SEM Why quality, original content and a great user experience are the keys to ranking on the first page of Google When it makes sense to pay for pay-per-click and social media ads How your firm’s intake process and in-person service affect online rankings About Eric Bersano Eric Bersano has been deeply involved in online legal marketing since 2006. He is the VP of Business Development at Market My Market, a digital marketing agency that helps businesses generate new clients by implementing the right systems and strategies. Depending on a law firm’s goals, Eric ensures the best marketing channel and modalities are implemented, including search engine optimization, pay-per-click advertising, and TV and radio. His focus on the legal space gives Eric the network to utilize the most talented designers, programmers, and marketers in the country. His clients maintain very high rankings for competitive online searches at the city, state, and national levels. Transcript: The online marketing landscape is so competitive that it almost seems pointless to put much effort into SEO. Why try to compete with the firms that rank highest on Google? But according to Eric Bersano, Vice President of Business Development for Market My Market, that belief is misguided. Not only can the top law firms on Google get knocked off their number one spots, it happens quite often. Eric joined the Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast to talk about the paid and organic campaign options available through Google; why you should think of your website like a book in a library; and when paid search and social media ads can pay off for your firm. Read the episode transcript here. Sharon: Welcome to the Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast. Today, my guest is Eric Bersano, Vice President of Business Development for Market My Market. Eric has been in the legal marketing space since 2006 and has seen a lot of changes. Today, we’ll hear all about the evolution of legal marketing and its importance to the legal marketing community, as well as why law firms need a guide to navigate the proliferation of marketing venues. Eric, welcome to the program. Eric: Thanks for having me, Sharon. Sharon: So glad to have you. Tell us about your career path. I’m sure you weren’t saying this is what you wanted to do when you were in kindergarten. Eric: That’s a very good point. I actually made a shift in 2006. I was working with orthopedic surgeons. I had a friend who was working at a company called FindLaw, which really put search engine optimization and digital marketing on the map for lawyers. My mom didn’t raise a doctor or a lawyer, but I’ve worked with both. To be honest, I prefer the law field. Sharon: We’ll talk more about it, but how did you get into this space, the online legal space? Eric: So, a quick background. Coming over from the medical side, one thing I always tell people is I was never going to be as knowledgeable as a surgeon. I was selling orthopedic implants, and there was no way I would ever know more than they did. My nail for the femur was very similar to somebody else’s nail for the femur. When I came over to attorney marketing, I realized very quickly that this was a new animal. A lot of attorneys weren’t doing marketing or weren’t putting it into focus. To a lot of the old-school attorneys, marketing was hurtful, because they weren’t even legally allowed to market until, I think, the late 70s. Most attorneys that had a thriving practice were using either Yellow Pages or just referral sources, and they were doing extraordinarily well. Once the internet started to become a place for people to find attorneys, it was this brand-new open ground that was really fertile. The thing I loved about it was that I could go into a law firm in January and six months later, they wanted to buy me lunch or dinner because they doubled in size or their profits had doubled. In the early days, search engine optimization was fairly easily, especially working for a big company, because it didn’t take much. But as you said, over the past 16, 17 years, there has been a ton of changes. I like to keep up with all those changes to make sure my clients are profiting from those. Sharon: You’re bringing back so many memories of firms saying, “Oh, I don’t need any online stuff. We take care of it with referrals only. We don’t market. We just do referrals,” which to me is marketing, but O.K. Eric: Right. Sharon: What does Market My Market do, and what does that mean? Eric: Good question. We get asked that a lot. When you’re choosing the name for a company, you throw a bunch of things against the wall, and you’re hoping for something that really defines what you do. We didn’t want to pigeonhole ourselves into just legal marketing. There are a lot of companies that do that, but we do work with other professionals. That would be doctors and some accountants, and then lawyers are probably our biggest market. Market My Market is us marketing you in your market. Everybody’s got a geography they cover, and our true focus is to make sure they’re being as competitive as they possibly can when it comes to online. The one big differentiator we bring is that one of the co-founders, Ryan Klein, worked in-house at two extremely competitive law firms in south Florida. One was a personal injury law firm and the other one was a criminal defense firm. Both were in south Florida, which is the home of John Morgan when it comes to personal injury plus a host of other really competitive law firms. One of the things he did was bring over his philosophy from working in-house, working side by side with attorneys and knowing exactly what they wanted to see. When some people get lost in the weeds as marketers, they say, “Hey, look, your traffic is up,” or “Look how many intakes or phone calls you got,” which are great indicators, but what a lawyer really wants is signed cases. They want more high-quality, signed cases. We want to work backwards into that with our approach to make sure we’re getting an increase in signed cases, not just pointing to some of the key indicators. Sharon: I’m going to stop to ask you, is John Morgan a personal injury law firm or an attorney? I’ve never heard that before. Eric: John Morgan of Morgan and Morgan has built kind of the Death Star of websites. He started out in south Florida as a big TV advertiser. You can’t drive more than 10 feet without seeing one of his billboards. Probably five, eight years ago, he started really branching out. He’s got practices in Boston and Arizona and Las Vegas. So, his one website they’ve grown is really competitive in a lot of markets. If you talk to any personal injury attorney in Florida they’ll know John Morgan, but more and more, they’re starting to know him in other parts of the country because he’s starting to encroach in everybody’s backyard. Sharon: That’s interesting. When you said Morgan and Morgan, I’ve seen that, but I didn’t realize it was John Morgan. This question comes up a lot: what’s the difference between SEM, search engine marketing, and SEO, which is search engine optimization? What’s the difference? Eric: It’s a good question. SEM would be the umbrella term. Search engine marketing is all the different types of marketing you can do online with search engines. We always refer to Google because that’s the 800-pound gorilla, but there’s also Bing and Yahoo and some other ancillary search engines. Search engine marketing encompasses search engine optimization, but it also includes paid search. Those would be things like Google ads, or one thing that’s become very popular over the last two years is LSAs, or Local Services Ads. Anybody listening to this who’s done a search for a car accident lawyer in “insert city here,” you’ll see three ads at the very top with a profile photo. Those are Local Services Ads. The key to those is you don’t pay when somebody clicks; you only pay when you get a lead. If somebody clicks on your ads, reads all your information, but doesn’t contact you, you’re never charged. But if they fill out a contact form or call that tracking number, it’s taken into account on your Google dashboard. You can even reject leads for a refund if they don’t qualify. For example, if you’re a criminal defense attorney and you get a family law lead, you can dispute that, and they’ll take it off your bill. So, search engine marketing is everything you can do with search engine advertising. Search engine optimization is really the key we focus on for one main reason. Nobody goes to Google or any search engine because they have the best ads. They go to that search engine because they trust that the results that show up on the first page are the best information and resource for that subject matter. If I type in “DUI attorney Fresno,” the average person assumes that the law firm that shows up number one is the best DUI attorney in Fresno. It’s not always the case, but the big advantage to the optimization piece is people will trust you more when you show up on that first page. The marketing costs are also generally fixed. What I mean by that is if I do a PPC ad and I’ve got a $10,000 a month budget— Sharon: PPC is? Eric: Pay-per-click. When I do a pay-per-click ad, I’m going to be charged every time someone clicks on my ad, whether they call me or not. Now, if I’m spending $10,000 in January and I spend none in February, that’s a sunk cost. I’ll never get that $10,000 back. But with search engine optimization, you’re paying for links, you’re paying for new website pages, blog articles. All of that stuff accumulates over time. The biggest thing I hear with search engine optimization from attorneys is, “Oh, we tried it. It doesn’t work,” or “It doesn’t work for anybody.” I would challenge you to do a search for your most important keyword in your city and look at the firm who’s showing up number one. That person is fighting tooth and nail to stay there. The bigger the city, the harder they’re fighting, because if you’re showing up number one for “car accident lawyer Houston,” your business is exploding. You can guarantee that the people who are there want to stay there, and they’ll do anything they can to keep their number one spot. Sharon: Does anybody still say, “Oh, we tried that and it doesn’t work,” when it comes to SEO? Eric: Yeah, they do. To be honest, SEO is constantly changing. Companies like us, we don’t claim that we know exactly what Google wants. Google gives you best practices, but they don’t want to say, “Do, A, B, C and D and you’ll rank number one,” because not everybody can rank number one. The one thing they’ve always stayed true to is that they want original, relevant content and a great user experience. That’s what we’ve built our company principles on. The people who say it doesn’t work have been burned, because no matter how great of an SEO company you are, it takes time to see results. Let’s say we’re talking about a competitive market like Chicago. That could take six months to a year. If you give an SEO company a year and you get nothing in that year, it’s going to be hard for you to invest in somebody else and give them a full year. What happens all the time is they don’t get somebody who focuses on legal. They don’t know which directories to go to. They don’t understand the practice areas, the keyword terms to optimize for. They might be a really good SEO company, but without understanding that legal niche, they might not be performing well enough to get them rankings. I talk to attorneys every day who are like, “Nope, I tried SEO before. It doesn’t work.” It’s just because it didn’t work for them with the particular program they had. Sharon: When you say LSA, Local Services Ads, do you set up a separate phone number for that? Eric: The Local Services Ads are through Google, and Google has its own tracking numbers for you because they want to be able to tell you exactly what somebody searched for and clicked on to serve that ad. That’s how they charge you. One of the things we do is manage those Local Services Ad campaigns, so that tracking number gets imported into our dashboard. We can actually say, “Hey, you got 10 Local Services Ad calls. You got 15 intakes. You got 20 calls from organic, and you got 15 calls from Google My Business.” We want to know which piece of the online marketing is working. There are four places for you to get business on Google’s homepage: LSAs, PPC, Google Maps, and then there’s organic. We really like to focus on organic because that’s typically 60% or more of clicks. Not that LSAs and PPC aren’t a good substitute, but anybody who’s relying solely on PPC is really putting their client flow in jeopardy. It doesn’t take many bad months with PPC for you to spend your marketing dollars with no return. Sharon: It used to be many, many years ago that you could say to somebody, “O.K., you don’t have the budget. I understand. Here are some things you can do.” It seems like today there’s not much you can do. With PPC, it seems like that’s the one thing you can still do and say, “O.K., you could just start with PPC. Put all your money into PPC and start that tomorrow,” but you’re saying they’re missing a lot still. Eric: That’s a really good point. If I’m working with somebody in a really competitive market, let’s say New York City, and they have almost no web presence at all, that’s going to be a really tough pill for them to swallow, for them to hear, “I need you to pay me X dollars a month for a year before you can expect anything.” But that’s realistic if they don’t have any SEO working at all. That’s the case where I’d say, “All right, let’s put together a very competitive, focused, pay-per-click campaign to start getting some clients in the door,” because the big advantage with PPC is it’s instantaneous. You do the keyword research. You set up your landing pages, and you can start receiving phone calls and emails right away. Now, the downside of PPC is it’s become extremely competitive. If you’ve ever done a search, the most expensive pay-per-click keywords, there’s a list of about 180 of them that are legal keywords, things like, “I’m a car accident lawyer.” Those could go anywhere from $50 to $150 per click with no guarantee that the person’s even going to reach out to you. So, I think PPC can be used sparingly to make up for that valley of death before you start to get organic results or to hyper-target something that’s very timely. For example, if there’s a bridge collapse or food poisoning, sometimes there’s going to be a bunch of people that are injured in a very short window. Those types of cases come out all the time. You’re not going to have a “food poisoning for Tyson Chicken” campaign ready to go with SEO, so in those cases it would make sense. But the most efficient, lowest cost would be LSAs. Again, you’re only paying for leads. The big issue right now with LSAs is they’ve been around so long that if you’re in a major market, there are probably at least 50 people in those LSAs already, and there are only three spots that will show up on the homepage. Sharon: And Google decides who those are. Eric: Yes, Google decides. There’s some thought that having more reviews, getting consistent reviews, is going to help you show up there. You don’t want to get 10 reviews in a month and no more for six months. But the number one factor for showing up in those LSAs is how responsive you are to the leads that come in. Google will know if those go to voicemail. Google will know if you’re not interacting with their dashboard to say, “We have this lead” and move that through their funnel. They want to make sure that if you’re getting the leads, you’re treating their clients well. Remember, they’re Google’s client first. They went to Google for a search. If you mistreat them and don’t provide them a good service, Google’s not going to reward you with those rankings. Sharon: Wow! With LSAs, it seems that they would go to voicemail sometimes, because nobody’s manning those phones all the time. Eric: That’s another good point. The more sophisticated people become, the more efficient their front and back office are, the more profitable they’ll be. In the old days, let’s say 20 years ago, I don’t think the average person expected someone to pick up the phone at 7:00. But if you’re having a legal issue, you may not want to talk about that in the workplace. You may call on your way home or after you get home. So, if you don’t have 24/7 answering, you could be missing out, and this is actual data we have with our clients. We use call tracking for every single one of our clients. Just under 30% of contacts came in either before 9:00 or after 5:00. If 30% of your contacts are coming in during off hours and you’re not immediately responding, you are definitely losing out on clients. Sharon: Wow! That’s a lot of person power, I should say. Eric: Exactly. If you get a hundred leads in a month and 30 of those are going to voicemail, that’s not a good client experience. Sharon: Is it still possible to become number one in Chicago or Los Angeles or New York, no matter how much money you’re putting out? Are those spots just long gone? Could somebody overtake somebody? Eric: Yes, it happens all the time. There are two things that will typically happen. You’ll have somebody who gets really aggressive with an organic campaign. There are a lot of myths about organic. A lot of people will say they’ve got proprietary software; they’ve got a proprietary secret sauce or amazing links that nobody else knows about. The truth is search engine optimization comes down to doing a lot of things really well. It’s very detailed. I’s need to be dotted; T’s need to be crossed. It’s keeping up with trends like user experience. One quick example would be on a mobile phone, you want the contact us and phone buttons to be towards the bottom of the page because that’s where people’s thumbs are at, whereas on a desktop, people are used to seeing them at the top. Extrapolate that times a thousand little, tiny things, they all add up to the people who show up in those top three to five spots, which is where you need to be to get any clicks. The second thing that can jostle things up would be a Google algorithm change. Google admits that they change and update their algorithm hundreds of times a year, but each year there are usually two or three major ones, and you’ll see a big shakeup. Someone who has been in the number one spot for months and months and months all of a sudden drops down to the bottom of page one or even page two. Those are opportunities, because Google is testing out some of their new changes, and they want to see if that user experience is still good. What that means is, let’s say you and I are both competing for the same keyword. Somebody goes to your website and the average time on your website is 90 seconds, and the average time on my website is 20 seconds. Well, Google knows that, and they’re just going to assume that your website is better; it’s more engaging; it has more relevant content. When the algorithm shakes up, that one factor could cause somebody to stay higher than the person who was previously number one. I’ll just end by saying this. There’s no one factor or silver bullet that’s going to get you to number one.... /episode/index/show/lawfirmmarketingcatalyst/id/24742857

Episode 105: How Your Firm’s Address Affects Your Online Rankings with Chris Dreyer CEO and Founder of Rankings.io 09/19/2022

Episode 105: How Your Firm’s Address Affects Your Online Rankings with Chris Dreyer CEO and Founder of Rankings.io What you’ll learn in this episode: How your location affects SEO, and why firms in major metros need to market differently than rural or suburban firms How traditional advertising and brand building can complement SEO What end-to-end SEO is, and why Chris’ company does nothing but SEO How long you can expect to work with an SEO firm before seeing results Why it’s better to not do SEO at all than do it halfheartedly About Chris Dreyer Chris Dreyer is the CEO and Founder of Rankings.io, an SEO agency that helps elite personal injury law firms land serious injury and auto accident cases through Google’s organic search results. His company has the distinction of making the Inc. 5000 list four years in a row. Chris’s journey in legal marketing has been a saga, to say the least. A world-ranked collectible card game player in his youth, Chris began his “grown up” career with a History Education degree and landed a job out of college as a detention room supervisor. The surplus of free time in that job allowed him to develop a side hustle in affiliate marketing, where (at his apex) he managed over 100 affiliate sites simultaneously, allowing him to turn his side gig into a full-time one. When his time in affiliate marketing came to an end, he segued into SEO for attorneys, while also having time to become a top-ranked online poker player. Today, Chris is the CEO and founder of Rankings.io, an SEO agency specializing in elite personal injury law firms and 4x consecutive member of the Inc. 5000. In addition to owning and operating Rankings, Chris is a real estate investor and podcast host, as well as a member of the Forbes Agency Council, the Rolling Stone Culture Council, Business Journals Leadership Trust, Fast Company Executive Board, and Newsweek Expert Forum. Chris’s first book, Niching Up: The Narrower the Market, the Bigger the Prize, is slated for release in late 2022. Additional Resources Transcript: SEO is a complicated beast. If you want to conquer it, you have to go in ready to swing, according to Chris Dreyer. As CEO of Rankings.io, Chris specializes in working with personal injury lawyers and law firms to get them on the first page of Google in competitive markets. He joined the Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast to talk about how the “proximity factor” affects Google rankings; why your content is the first area to target if you want to improve your rankings; and how SEO, digital marketing and traditional advertising all work together to build your brand. Read the episode transcript here. Sharon: Welcome to The Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast. Today, my guest is Chris Dreyer, CEO of Rankings.io. His firm specializes in working with elite personal injury firms, helping them to generate auto accident and other cases involving serious personal injury. He does this through Google’s organic keyword search rankings which, to me, is quite a challenge. This is a very competitive market, and it’s one that requires a very healthy budget if you’re going to be successful. Today, Chris is going to tell us about his journey and some of what he’s learned along the way. Chris, welcome to the program. Chris: Sharon, thanks so much for having me. Sharon: Great to have you. Tell us about your career path. You weren’t five years old saying this is what you wanted to do. Chris: I’ve always been an entrepreneur. I saw my uncle. My uncle’s a very successful business CEO for many organizations. He’s had a really interesting career path. I told my parents before I went to college that no matter what I got a degree in, I was going to start and own my business at one point, and they were on the same page. I ended up getting a history education degree. I was a teacher, and I was working in a detention room when I typed in “how to make money online,” probably the worst query you could possibly type in. But I found a basic course that taught me the fundamentals of digital marketing and I pursued that. By the end of my second year teaching, I was making about four times the amount from that than I got from teaching. So, I went all in and did some affiliate marketing. I had some ups and downs with that. Then I went and worked for another agency and rose to their lead consultant. Then I had an epiphany and thought, “I think I can do this myself. I think I can do it better,” and that’s what I did. That’s when I started. At the time, it was attorney rankings. Sharon: Wow! Had you played around with attorney rankings before, when you were a teacher and just typing away? Chris: When I worked for this digital agency that’s no longer in business, they were a generalist agency, but they worked with many law firms and attorneys. I was their lead account manager. I just enjoyed working with them. I enjoyed the competition and the satisfaction I would get from ranking a site in a more competitive vertical. That’s how I chose legal. I wanted to look for something that had a longstanding business. I didn’t want to jump into something fast or tech-related that could be changing all the time; I wanted something with a little bit more longevity. Sharon: Did you ever want to be a lawyer yourself? Chris: I ask that to myself all the time. I think about it now, mainly because of all the relationships I have, how easy it could be for a referral practice. We have our own agency and I know how to generate leads now. So, I ask myself that a lot. That’s a 2½ to 3-year commitment. You never know; I may end up getting my degree. Sharon: There are a lot of history majors who went into law and then probably decided they wanted to do something else, so that’s a great combination you have. It’s Rankings.io. What’s the .io? Chris: There are these new top-level domain extensions. There are .org, .net, .com. Now you see stuff like .lawyer or .red. There are all kinds of different categories of those domains. Tech companies frequently use .io, standing for “input” and “output.” How I look at it, or how I make the justification for it, is that if you invest in us, you get cases—input/output. Sharon: Can you make up your own top level or is there a list somewhere? Chris: There’s a big list. GoDaddy and NameSheet.com have many of them. In legal specifically, there’s .law, there’s . attorney, there’s .lawyer, I believe even .legal. Most industries have their own top-level domain extension now. Sharon: I’ve seen .io, but I never knew what it stood for. You don’t see it that often. I happened to be Googling somebody in Ireland the other day. Most of the places were using .com, but this was using .ie, and I thought, “What is .ie?” but it turns out it was Ireland. Tell us a little about your business. What kinds of clients do you have? Is there seasonality? Chris: We help personal injury attorneys. We primarily work with personal injury law firms that are midsize to large. Typically not solo practitioners and new firms, but more established firms trying to break into major markets in metropolitan areas, your Chicagos, your Philadelphias, your bigger cities that have a lot of competition. We’ve been around since 2013. We don’t work with a high volume of clients because our investments are higher, because to rank in these big cities takes a lot of quantitative actions, a lot of production. We currently work with around 45 to 50 firms, and that’s what we do. We do search engine optimization for personal injury law firms. Sharon: Search engine optimization for personal injury law firms. To me, that seems like a lot. It’s great. Are these typically smaller firms that are in—I don’t know—Podunk, Iowa, and they say, “I want to go to the big city”? Is that what happens? Chris: Typically, it’s one of two things. It’s either a TV, radio, traditional advertiser that wants to focus more on digital that has a larger investment. They have more capital to invest. Or, it’s someone that wants to get creative and focus on digital to try to take market share away from the big TV advertisers. Most of the time it’s individuals in big cities because there are tons of personal injury attorneys. Right now, I’m in Marion, Illinois. There’s a handful of attorneys. Most of them aren’t focused on marketing. Just by the nature of having a practice, they typically show up in the Map Pack. That’s not the case in Chicago. You actually have to aggressively market to show up on the first page of Google. Sharon: If somebody’s already spending a lot of money on TV or radio or billboards in Chicago, are your clients people who have turned around and said, “I can do better if I put this money all into digital and rankings.” Does that happen? Chris: I personally am not an “or.” I’m an “and.” You did TV? Well, let’s also do SEO. Let’s also do pay-per-click. I like the omnichannel approach. I think there are two types of marketing. There is lead generation and direct response. That’s your pay-per-click, your SEO, things like that. Then there’s demand generation and brand building. The thing about demand generation and brand building is they actually complement direct response, and you can get lower cost per acquisition. To give you an example, if you’re a big TV advertiser and have an established brand, and someone types something into Google, you may capture that click because they recognize your company as opposed to someone that isn’t as known. I think they all work together. Of course, we’re always playing the attention arbitrage game. We want to go to the locations where our money can carry the most weight to get us the most attention. For example, right now, individuals are going to TikTok and Instagram Reels and YouTube Shorts because there isn’t the same amount of competition there. That’s where a lot of tension and competition are occurring. It’s a constant game, and it’s something to be apprised of and aware of what’s going on. Sharon: Is that something you also do in terms of rankings? Do you do TikTok or Instagram or anything like that, or Google My Business? Is it all of those? Chris: We use that ourselves to market our business because we’re omnichannel, but for our clients, we focus solely on design and SEO. That’s simply because we have intense focus and expertise in those areas. We want to be the best in the world and really dialed in to all the fundamental changes that occur. But knowing that limitation, knowing that there is more effort and sacrifice if someone wants to come to us because we don’t do everything, we like to be aware of who is providing services in those other areas. Who’s the best at pay-per-click, who’s the best at social media. We try to make it as easy as possible to get our clients help in those areas too. Sharon: How do you keep up with everything? There are so many different things. Chris: Obsession. I think of it as a game. I always tell people that running a digital agency is like a game that pays me. I truly believe that, because I enjoy what I do. I don’t love the quote that if you love what you do, you never work a day in your life. I don’t believe that’s completely true, but I don’t have the same stressors and I enjoy what I do. So, that’s an obsession. Sharon: So that’s dinner-table talk. Chris: Oh, yeah. Sharon: What keeps you attracted to attorneys? A lot of people say, “O.K., I’ve had it.” What keeps you attracted? Chris: I think they’re providing a good service to the common individual and fighting against big insurance companies. Generally, they get a bad rap, particularly personal injury attorneys. They’re referred to as ambulance chasers. Sometimes individuals get creative, and they refer to me and our agency as an ambulance-chaser chaser. But in general, they’re the plaintiffs; they’re trying to help individuals that have been injured. I think where they get a bad rap is sometimes people are banging down their doors and soliciting them right after they’re injured or in the hospital bed. Other times, you’ll see these big billboards where it’s like, “How could you possibly put that up on a billboard?” There’s a complete lack of EQ or empathy. It’s like, “Congratulations. You just lost a leg. Contact us,” or “Congratulations. Someone’s seriously hurt.” It’s just the wrong messaging. That’s where they get a bad rap, but the overwhelming majority are truly trying to provide value and help these injured victims. Sharon: Do you ever work with defense firms or law firms that aren’t personal injury? Chris: That’s a good question. Our focus and expertise is personal injury, and what I tell other businesses and my peers is that it gives us optionality. If I think we can help a law firm and we can serve them and continue to provide extreme value, we will selectively take those opportunities. Right now we have about 45 clients, and I think three of them aren’t personal injury law firms. It just happened to be the perfect prospect for us. They were in competitive markets. They had these clearly defined goals and brands, and we wanted to help them. Sharon: How about other legal services, like—I forget; I think it’s Legal Voice or something like that. If it’s a graphics firm that does graphics for trials, do you work with that kind of firm? Chris: We’ve worked with some. I can’t think of any specifically. I would say our business is more focused on the front end, the marketing and awareness side, and less on the sales intake or operations side. Operations would be your trials and customer service and things like that. At this point in time, we’re focused solely on lead generation, and that’s an issue upon itself. Our job is to overwhelm the sales department. Intake is a whole different ballgame. Sometimes intake has to be addressed, but it’s not us. We have referrals that we give for that. Sharon: Do you work with only lawyers, or do you work with marketing directors at these firms? Who are you typically working with? Chris: Most of the time it’s the lead attorney. There are some firms that have a CMO or a marketing manager, but I would say that’s the minority. When they get a CMO, typically it’s at your higher eight-figure or nine-figure firms, and they will start to bring these services in-house. So, most of the time it’s still the lead attorney. Sharon: You used a term I hadn’t heard before, end-to-end SEO. What does that mean? Chris: It’s a great question. A lot of digital agencies that are full-service, they’ll offer design and social and PPC. They have a very narrow span of control, meaning you get assigned a SEO specialist, and that SEO specialist is supposed to be able to write content, optimize your site, do your local SEO, do your link building. Look, I don’t believe in unicorns. I don’t think people have the skillset to do all of those. So, when I say end-to-end, we have a dedicated content department with writers; we have a dedicated, on-site SEO and technical department to optimize your site; we have a dedicated local department that only works with local maps and helps you on the Map Pack; we have a dedicated link-building department. It’s the full spectrum of SEO as opposed to getting these generalists, where maybe they’re good at one thing and not good at the other things. Sharon: Do you think your market understands the term end-to-end SEO? Chris: Probably not. I probably should work on the copyrighting a little bit, but I do like to make that distinction. Even though we’re specialists and do only SEO, you can take it a step farther. If you look at how we staff, everybody’s a SEO specialist, as opposed to it being an add-on or backend service. Sharon: The Map Pack, is that where you have the top three local firms on a map near you, when you search “Starbucks near me” or “Personal injury firm near me”? I say Starbucks because we did that last weekend. I know things are always changing, but if it’s a one- or two-person personal injury firm and they don’t have the budget you’re talking about, can they do anything themselves? What do you recommend? Chris: That’s a good question. If you don’t have a budget, try to scrape your budget together and get a website made the easiest way you can, whether it’s a WordPress site or a template. That’s your main conversion point. Try to get your practice area pages and your sales pages created as an outlet for conversions. If you don’t have a big budget and you’re in a metropolitan area, I would encourage you to look at other opportunities to generate business, potentially on-the-ground, grassroots business development practices where you’re making relationships with other attorneys. That can carry a lot of weight and get you started. SEO is a zero-sum game. Either you rank in the top positions or you don’t, and if you don’t, you’re not going to get the clicks. If you’re on the second page of Google, you might as well be on the 90th page. No one goes to page two. So, if you’re going to do SEO, you can’t just dip your toe into it. You’ve got to go in ready to swing and ready to do the quantitative actions to get results. Otherwise, you might as well not do it at all. You might as well choose a different channel. Sharon: That’s interesting. So, if you Google your firm and find you’re on the second page, should you just give it up and say, “O.K., I’m not going to do anything in this area”? Chris: If you’re working with an SEO agency and you’re on the second page of Google, I would tell you to—well, first of all, depending upon the length of time you’ve been with them, if you’ve given them sufficient time, then I would say you probably need a different SEO agency. If you are on the second page of Google and you’re not doing SEO, that’s O.K. You could still rank for your brand, your firm name, particularly some of the attorney names, the name of their company. There are probably not going to be many of those. You’re probably going to rank for that. I would find a different way to generate leads. It may even mean working for someone else to generate revenue before you go in and start your own practice. Sharon: So, being a lawyer in a law firm first and getting your feet wet that way. You mentioned something about the length of time. How long should you give a firm before you say, “O.K., thanks”? Chris: I’m going to give the lawyer answer here. It depends. If you’ve been doing SEO for a long time and you have a tremendous amount of links and content, it could be a technical SEO coding issue, maybe a site architecture issue. Maybe you need as little as 90 days to truly make a huge impact. We just took on a client in Florida that had a tremendous amount of links, a tremendous amount of content. We literally just unclogged the sink, so to speak, and they’re skyrocketing in a short amount of time. If you’re in a major market and you just got your website built and you don’t have links, it’s going to take some time. All of these SEO specialists will say it takes six months. That’s completely untrue. It’s based upon the gap. What are you benchmarking against? What does the data show? It could be nine months; it could be 14 months based upon the quantitative actions you’re taking. If you don’t take the correct quantitative actions, you could be treading water, too. So, it really depends. You can see results quickly. It just depends on where you’re at in your state for your firm. Sharon: Since you work with attorneys, I’m sure more than once you’ve heard, “Chris, I’ve waited three months. What’s going on? How long do I have to wait? We’re pouring money into this.” What’s your response? Chris: That’s a great question. We try to set those expectations on the front end before we even sign them as a client, but occasionally those situations will slip... /episode/index/show/lawfirmmarketingcatalyst/id/24402789

Episode 104: Why Google My Business Is a Gamechanger for Law Firm SEO with CEO of NoBull Marketing, Ronnie Deaver 08/01/2022

Episode 104: Why Google My Business Is a Gamechanger for Law Firm SEO with CEO of NoBull Marketing, Ronnie Deaver What you’ll learn in this episode: Why all successful business owners use a combination of thought and action The difference between Google Ads, Google My Business, and organic SEO Why all roads lead to Google My Business, and why law firms should be investing in it How SEO has changed over the last decade, and how it will likely change over the next five years Why online reviews are crucial for ranking on Google, and how to get more of them About Ronnie Deaver Ronnie Deaver is the founder of NoBull Marketing, a lead generation firm for lawyers. Specializing in Google Ads and Google My Business, NoBull is know for its “No B.S. Guarantee” and fluff-free services. Before founding NoBull, Ronnie was Director of Operations and Director of Web Development & SEO at SMB Team, a legal marketing and coaching firm. Additional Resources Transcript: SEO has changed dramatically over the last five years, but one thing remains the same: keep Google happy, and Google will reward your firm with higher rankings. Ronnie Deaver, CEO of NoBull Marketing, has figured out exactly how to do that for his legal clients. He joined the Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast to talk about why Google My Business is so important for law firms; how to get more valuable online reviews; and why your website still matters—but not for the reasons you might think. Read the episode transcript here. Sharon: Welcome to the Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast. Today my guest is Ronnie Deaver, who is CEO of NoBull Marketing. NoBull Marketing is a lawyer-exclusive marketing firm. In this session, we’re going to be touching on three areas: search engine optimization or SEO, Google My Business and Google Ads. They all play a role in generating leads for your firm. They can also make your head spin, as they have mine, but Ronnie’s going to lay it out for us clearly. Ronnie, welcome to the program. Ronnie: Thank you. I’m so excited to be here. Sharon: So glad to have you. First of all, tell us about your career path, how you got here. Ronnie: My career path probably started around 10 years ago, and it was a very unexpected way to get into marketing as a whole. I moved to Boston, and for anyone who wonders why, it’s a very stereotypical story: I chased a woman. The woman did not work out, but the city did. While I was there, I was very broke. I went on Craigslist—this is one of my favorite stories—and found a guy who was like, “Hey, I need help with my website.” I met with him at a McDonald’s, and the first thing he said to me was, “Hey man, I want a website, but what I really want is to show up number one on Google.” In my head, I was like, “I don’t know how to make that happen, but if you pay me this much per month, I’ll make it happen for you.” So, I got my first recurring client. Fortunately I succeeded, and the rest is history from there. As it relates to lawyers, I got involved with lawyers three or so years ago. From then on, I’ve been sold that they’re the people I want to work with. As far as I’m concerned, it’s almost like a spiritual calling. I have so much respect for lawyers because they literally raise their hands and say, “Yes, I’m willing to get involved with people at the worst times of their lives.” They’re crazy. That’s insane to be like, “People going through the most emotional problems of their lives, when they’re at their worst and their lowest, I’m going to help those people.” I’m like, “Wow! I want to help those people help other people.” I’ve been working with lawyers ever since. Sharon: Why are they at the lowest? Because they’re lawyers, because they went to law school? Ronnie: No, they’re helping people who are at their lowest. Sharon: I see. I get it. Ronnie: If you’re getting a divorce, you’re pretty emotionally stressed. If you’re going through a criminal case, you’re usually not your happiest person at that time. What I respect about lawyers is they put a lot of training and time and willingness into helping people who are not coming to them when they’re super chippy and cheery and excited. They’re usually unhappy; they’re usually trying to solve a big problem; they need help; they can be emotionally touchy. It's not easy to be a lawyer. You’re dealing with people at the worst, but these lawyers are volunteering to do that. It’s a cool career. While I couldn’t be a lawyer—I wasn’t destined for that—I want to help those lawyers build better lives and build better businesses for themselves so they can help more people. Sharon: That must keep you very busy. You answered my question. I was going to ask if you had thought about law school yourself. Ronnie: I did, but I’m one of those guys that’s more of intense action than intense thought. I thought about it, and I was like, “Man, this is not my destination.” I’m a very clearcut, no B.S. guy, and the law is a little—there’s a lot of negotiation. There’s no clearcut “This is right. This is wrong.” It’s not that simple, and I’m a simple guy in that sense. I’m like, “This is how we do it. This is what’s going to work. I’ve tested it and I’ll evolve that over time.” I’m not destined for that high level of nuance and thought that lawyers need. I thought about it, but it’s not me as a person. Sharon: That’s interesting. I’ll have to think about it. I like the idea about intense action. You’re a person of intense action and not intense thought, and lawyers are so thoughtful and think everything through. What keeps you attracted, then? Why, after years now, have you continued to work with lawyers? Ronnie: The biggest thing is because they’re so intensely thoughtful, they’re also willing to recognize that intense thought doesn’t make a business. That’s the cool thing about business; it inherently is this weird balance of both. You have to have to incredibly good thinking. You have to think and know what you’re doing and why you’re doing it, but you can’t think your way to success. You also have to take a lot of action, action that you don’t know if it’s going to be profitable; action you don’t know if it’s going to work; action even when it’s hard; action when you’re having a bad day. It’s a combination of both. What I love about lawyers is that oftentimes they’re very driven people if they went through law school. They’re like, “Hey, I know I have this weakness. I know I can think well, but I don’t know what I need to do to act.” They’re very willing, if given appropriate guidance and coaching, to take real, major action and have success. When I work with a lawyer, I’m usually quite confident. In almost every circumstance, I can work with that lawyer and they’re like, “Yes, I want to make this business work,” and I’m like, “Great. Do this, this and that. This is what we found works. If we follow these steps, we’re going to make you money.” They’re like, “Great, I will follow the steps,” and they do it and they execute. If I work with a restaurant and I work with somebody who’s not quite as driven as a lawyer, you can end up with a lot less successful story. The success stories I get with lawyers are incredible. I’ve got one woman right now, and when I met her, she was basically facing bankruptcy. Now she’s growing so fast and hiring because she can barely keep up with the caseload. They’re struggling to follow up with their leads. That delta, that change, is so common in the lawyer space because once given direction, they run with it because they’re so driven. I love it, and I have so much energy for it. Sharon: That’s great. I’d like to know some of the lawyers you know. Don’t you find resistance sometimes? Resistance like, “I know. You don’t know. I’m a lawyer. I know how to do that.” Not to knock anybody, but it’s like, “I know how to do whatever needs to be done, whether it’s marketing or whatever.” Do you find that? Ronnie: I think that’s broadly true for most marketers in working with lawyers. I have a unique experience with lawyers as an individual because of the way I come off and the way I speak to people. The way I think and talk and approach people is very forward. It’s no B.S. It’s like, “Hey, this is what I think. This is why. This is going to be the outcome if you do this and the outcome if you don’t.” I’m very honest and transparent. Maybe you have seen my guarantee—I won’t go into it right now—but if I don’t think I can make you money, I’m not going to charge you, basically. If I don’t think I can succeed for you, I’m going to tell you I can’t, and I won’t take you on as a client. I make it very clear to people that I’m not trying to sell you anything. Either you want the thing I do and I can make you money, or you don’t want the thing I can do or I can’t make you money, and we shouldn’t work together. When I come to people with that approach and I’m that transparent, that no-B.S., and I have that wiliness to not take your money, and I’m not trying to scam you or sell to you regardless of your benefit, people will come to trust me a lot quicker. They’re going to say, “This guy actually has integrity.” Character and integrity building is something I care a lot about. Because I approach my business and every person I speak with like that, I usually get very little resistance, because at that point, they’re like, “Hey, I actually trust this guy.” That resistance is usually coming from fundamentally they don’t trust the person they’re talking to. That’s not usually an experience I have, because I will willingly stop working with somebody when I’m like, “I think you should focus on a different investment, because I don’t think you’re getting the ROI from me for whatever circumstances. I think you should go to do this.” I do that even to my own detriment, because my fundamental goal is that I want lawyers to build better businesses. Sometimes that includes me and sometimes that doesn’t. I’m willing to say that regardless. Sharon: I can see how that can engender trust and less resistance. You’re in area we’ve worked in, but not so much as a hands-on area. It’s something that really needs to be straightened out. SEO has come a long way since the first websites and I could tell people, “Do it yourself.” That can’t be done anymore. What’s the difference between SEO, search engine optimization, Google My Business and Google Ads? Can you explain that all? Ronnie: I find the easiest way to explain it is to envision an actual search. Any lawyer listening, do a search for “divorce lawyer New York City.” I chose New York City because it’s going to have tons of searches and a lot of competition. If you do that search, what you’ll see immediately at the top is Google Ads. You’re going to see the new local service ads. I should say newer; it’s been out for years now. That’s where you see maybe an image of a lawyer and their reviews. Under that, you’ll see text ads. Those are ads that literally just have text on them. Both of these, though, are a form of Google Ads. Google Ads, they’re great. A lot of people have had mixed experiences, but the great thing about Google Ads is you can pay to play, and it works if it’s done right, if you’re doing it with a professional who knows how to fight Google. Here’s the thing: Google Ads is designed to spend your money, not make you money. Think about who’s running it. Google wants to make money. They don’t really care that much about you. They just want to make money. But when you work with a professional whose goal is to make you money, like me, my goal is to say, “Hey, Google, I don’t want you to take my money. I want to make sure we’re making money.” Anyway, Google Ads can be really profitable if you spend this much to get that much. So, that’s Google Ads, and basically it’s pay to play. You pay to advertise. You get clicks. Those clicks turn into calls. Those calls turn into cases. You run the numbers. You try to make it profitable. That’s Google Ads you see at the very top. Interestingly enough, as you mentioned, a lot has changed over the last 10, 15 years in the SEO/Google world. What’s right below Google Ads now—and this didn’t used to be true—is Google My Business, otherwise known as the Map Pack or the Three Pack. There are a lot of different names for it. That’s the next thing, where you see names and reviews and a literal map. Back about 10, 15 years ago, you saw organic results first. You would see ads, of course, but then you would see organic results, your typical text search results, and then you would see a map under that. This was a major shift that happened roughly five years ago, where Google My Business was completely allotted to being above organic results. Nowadays, what I talk to lawyers most about is that Google My Business shows up above all of your organic results. This is where I think you should put your effort into on the organic side. Google My Business is its own standalone profile. It has a lot of ranking factors that are a little bit different than SEO. It’s going to have ranking factors based on reviews, how active you are on the profile. Are you making posts? Are you uploading photos? Have you added your services? Have you added your products? Are you doing Q&As? Are you responding to your reviews? There’s a lot of grunt work, which we’ll talk about later, that goes into Google My Business as a platform for ranking on there. Quick caveat there: one of the big differences from traditional SEO—when people say, “I want to be ranked one”—is on Google My Business, you can get to rank one, two or three, but you’re never going to own that spot 100% of the time. It doesn’t happen. Google My Business is always switching them out. There’s no owning rank one 100% of the time in your market, especially in a bigger market. So, the name of the game with Google My Business, because it’s so dynamic, is not just to rank one. It’s the percentage of time that you own rank one, otherwise known as your market share or your share of local voice, which are just different ways of saying how often you show up in the top three. So, just remember that, people. The big thing that’s changed from SEO to focusing on Google My Business is instead of owning that rank one spot and owning it permanently for years, you’re talking about a percentage of time, literally, in a given day. If a thousand searches are made in one day, you’re trying to have maybe 20% of that, not 100% like you would in the old days, which is traditional SEO. Beneath is, of course—if you search “divorce lawyer New York City,” we saw the ads; we saw Google My Business. Right beneath that is your traditional SEO. I personally don’t promote a lot of traditional SEO anymore. The big reason for that is that nowadays there are all these aggregators: Super Lawyers, Lawyers.com, Justia, FindLaw. These guys are spending millions and millions of dollars a year to own these. I’ve found that even if you could rank here—and you can with sufficient effort, but the value you get out of it, plus the chances of your ranking are so low that it’s not worth the ROI. I did the tracking once. The average website tracker converts 3%. You’re going to put all this effort in, and you get 300 extra people on your website. That’s like 10 calls. 300 people, that could be a big number for a lot of business owners, especially for the level of SEO they can commit to, but it’s only 10 calls. Making that profitable is very hard. Regardless, that’s your three fundamental separations between Google Ads that show up at the top, pay to play. Google My Business, which is where I now recommend people put the majority of effort because it’s at the top. More importantly, you’re not competing with Findlaw, Super Lawyers, Avvo, any of those guys on Google My Business. You’re just competing with the local people in your market. It’s a much less competitive market while still having all the volume of everyone in your area searching for it. Below that are organic SEO results. That covers the three. Sharon: Let’s say I’m a family lawyer and I’ve never done any of this. I come to you and say, “I have money to put behind it. Can you get me to the top or near the top?” Is that possible today? Do I have to redo my website with content? Ronnie: Yes, it’s absolutely possible. Here’s the thing. SEO and Google My Business, they still have a relationship together. Do you have to do everything as crazy and intense as you used to have to do with SEO? People used to think with SEO, “We have to redo the website, and we’ve got to make millions of pages of content. We’ve got to do that,” and it’s this whole giant affair. You don’t have to do that anymore. However, your website still does affect your Google My Business because it scans your website and uses that for context of what services you offer. If you say you’re an estate planning lawyer, for example, Google wants to see that you have pages for probate, pages for estate planning, pages for wills, pages for trusts, because it’s going to scan your website and use that as context. But here’s the thing. This is the big changing in mindset. It’s not about those pages’ rankings. Those pages are never going to rank. I don’t give a crud if anyone ever Googles and finds that page. That’s not the goal when you’re focusing on Google My Business, at least. The goal is that Google scans them to help it understand what your business does, and then it’s more likely to rank your Google My Business profile higher on that Map Pack rather than your actual page. Here’s the other reason I love Google My Business. Google My Business only shows up on the searches where people have literally raised their hands and said, “I need a lawyer right now.” It doesn’t show up when they’re saying, “Should I get a lawyer?” or “Can I avoid getting a lawyer?” or any of these other research terms. It literally only shows up when people say, “Hey, I want to hire a lawyer right now.” So, the leads you get from it, the people who call you, they’re usually very close to making a decision. You’re putting effort into showing up in front of people right when they need a lawyer, which is why it can have a high conversion rate and why it can be so profitable. But yes, you can absolutely start ranking. A lot of my clients rank within as little as 90 days. That’s possible. The reason it’s possible is because if you put the sufficient grunt work into the profile—grunt work being the posts, photos, Q&As, getting reviews—reviews alone are like 35% of the factor. Put that grunt work in, and even a small boost in your ranking on Google My Business can easily turn into an extra 10, 15, 20 calls a month. 10, 15, 20 calls, maybe that’s three, four or five consultations. If you close one of those with an average case value of $3,000 to $5,000, you’re already starting to get profitable from what you’re spending on somebody like me. The ROI to time factor with Google My Business is so much better and so much faster than whatever SEO that was in the past, where it’s 12 months or 24 months to float an expense, and maybe $30, 40 grand a year for years. Google My Business doesn’t have that factor. You can go a lot faster. Sharon: You still have to do a lot of SEO behind the scenes. It shows up in a different... /episode/index/show/lawfirmmarketingcatalyst/id/23896389

Episode 103: Why the Best Communicators Don’t Just Speak—They Persuade with Deborah Shames, Co-Founder of Eloqui 07/11/2022

Episode 103: Why the Best Communicators Don’t Just Speak—They Persuade with Deborah Shames, Co-Founder of Eloqui What you’ll learn in this episode: Why lawyers should aim to persuade, not educate, when they’re communicating Deborah’s top three tips to become a better presenter Why professional women often hesitate to speak up, and how they can overcome this block Why understanding your intention is the first thing you should do before communicating How to create a newsletter that both you and your readers will stick with About Deborah Shames Deborah is passionate about speaking and training. That’s why she wrote or co-wrote four books on communication and public speaking, including the business best-seller “Own the Room.” And because Deborah ran a successful film company in Sausalito, CA. for fourteen years, she knows how difficult it is for women to stand out and succeed. Her latest book is “Out Front: How Women Can Become Engaging, Memorable and Fearless Speakers.” She walks the talk by speaking regularly across the country to motivate and inspire professional women. Deborah has coached and trained thousands of professionals from all industries to communicate more effectively. Her work has supported A-list performers in television and film, CEO’s of major corporations, gold-medal Olympians, and political candidates. Her clients also include professionals in finance, law and insurance. Deborah ran the successful Calabasas group of a national business organization and was awarded “Consultant of the Year” by the Los Angeles Business Journal. Deborah uses her experience directing over sixty award-winning films to make her business clients more genuine, effective, and successful. It doesn’t matter whether they are delivering a keynote address, speaking to a Board of Directors, or pitching for new business. Deborah donates her time training MBA candidates in presentation skills at UCLA, Pepperdine, USC and Cal Lutheran. Her personal goal is to prepare women, from Millennials to seasoned veterans, with the skills they need to be out front. Additional Resources Transcript: Although communication is a daily part of the job, lawyers aren’t immune to the fear of public speaking. With practice and intention, however, it’s possible to evolve from an anxious speaker to a confident, fearless one. Deborah Shames is proof: she has helped thousands of professionals become strong communicators through her speaking and training company, Eloqui, and she has overcome a fear of public speaking herself. She joined the Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast to talk about her top tips to become a skilled speaker; how to identify your intention when communicating; and why persuasion is more effective than education. Read the episode transcript here. Sharon: Welcome to The Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast. Today, my guest is Deborah Shames, one of the founders of the speaking and training company Eloqui. She is author or coauthor of four books on presentation training. Her latest book is “Out Front: How Women Can Become Engaging, Memorable and Fearless Speakers.” The company’s training has made a difference in the careers of thousands of professionals across the country. Today, Deborah will tell us about her career path and how we can become better presenters. Deborah, welcome to the program. Deborah: Thank you. Sharon: So glad to have you. I love the word fearless in your title. How did you get where you are? Tell us about your career path. Deborah: I was a film and television producer and director for many years. I found that the qualities and traits I used with actors could be used with business professionals. When I met David, my partner, who was in front of the camera as a presenter, we combined forces and translated performance techniques for the business professional. Sharon: Did you find that actors were listening to you when you were talking? Deborah: I produced and directed over 60 films and videos. Actors have all of these issues—not the best ones. Not the good ones like Danny Glover, Angela Lansbury and Rita Moreno, who I loved directing. But so many other actors were insecure and constantly needed reinforcement and feedback, and what I found when we switched to business professionals is they have the same issues. They had anxiety; they needed to know how to engage an audience. For me, it was so much easier because they didn’t have to memorize lines. So we translated the techniques from the entertainment world for business professionals, and I was thrilled never having to work with actors again. Sharon: Did you decide after film and television producing you were going to teach people how to do this? How did you get to this stage? Deborah: My partner, David, had an executive at a tech company. She needed to do media, and her handler said, “We need a woman to work with her.” David said, “I can be a lot of things, but I can’t be a woman,” so he asked me if I wanted to do it. When I went in and trained this woman on how to get her message across, how to engage, how to put herself in her answers rather than doing canned, generic ones, I asked David, “You get paid for this?” From then on we started to develop our business, first with workshops, then training, then one-on-ones. Sharon: How did you name your business Eloqui? Deborah: Eloqui is the Latin to speak out. It’s also a form of the word eloquence, and we wished we could bring back eloquence to the way people communicate today. Sharon: It’s a form of the word eloquence? Deborah: Yes, and the Latin version, eloqui. Sharon: That’s a great name. Tell us about your business. I know you’re always very busy with your training. You do one-on-ones and groups? Deborah: Eloqui primarily does training for teams, no more than 12 people, ideally six to eight. We also give keynotes. We give public workshops that everyone from your company has gone to that are half-days, and we do one-on-one. During the pandemic, all the one-on-ones were done virtually, but we’re thrilled that starting last fall, companies were saying, “Come back in and do in-person trainings. We’re sick and tired of Zoom and Teams meetings,” and we said, “So are we." Sharon: Did you find it was harder to teach people via Zoom, to teach them how to speak? Deborah: We found that one-on-one works great virtually. It’s almost impossible to do group trainings virtually because of the distraction factor. People are looking and listening to everything else. It’s very hard to get them to be interactive. We’ve done some, and it was the most exhausting experience I’ve had. Keynotes and webinars are O.K., but again, people don’t pay attention the way they do if you do them in person. Sharon: I’m sure that’s true. I think I would have a very hard time listening when the dog comes in or whatever. Deborah: When people are on a virtual session, they check web browsers; they check email; they tell you they’re listening, but their eyes are darting back and forth and you know they’re not. I don’t blame them. Now, one-on-one, like we’re doing right now, that’s fine, but the others are tough. When people tell me they’re exhausted after a virtual session, I say, “Of course you are. You’re on camera and right up close, and that can be exhausting.” Sharon: Do you still do Zooms? Deborah: I do, but I really limit them to one-on-one sessions like I have later this afternoon. Sharon: And you teach all over the country, right? Deborah: Yes. We just got back from New Jersey with a new client where we taught IT managers. In two days, we fly back to Costa Mesa near L.A. to do a group of immigration attorneys. In late July we return to Glidewell Dental to train female dentists who come in from all over the country. I love the variety of clients we have. It makes it fun for me. Sharon: It sounds like a variety. When you talk to certain groups—let’s say attorneys—do you find them more resistant than CPAs or dentists? That’s a leading question. Deborah: I don’t find lawyers more resistant, but there’s a huge difference between practicing law, no matter what your practice area is, and being a networker or bringing in business. That’s what lawyers have the biggest difficulty with. They will tell us, “We didn’t go to law school to do sales, but you have to do sales if you want to be made partner.” One of the most difficult things when we train attorneys is to move them away from the belief that they’re supposed to educate people about what they do. They need to persuade someone or a firm that it’s valuable to partner with them because the attorney has their best interests at heart. Moving attorneys from being educational and informative to persuasive is the biggest difficulty we have. Sharon: That would be very hard. Part of me wants to say, “Are they still thinking they didn’t go to law school to be a salesperson?” because that is what you hear all the time. They didn’t go to law school to be a salesperson, and nobody taught them how to do that. Deborah: One of the things we teach attorneys is an exercise called active queuing and listening, how to delve for specifics, how to feedback what they’re hearing so that, instead of promoting themselves and their firm, they’re answering the questions people have and they’re gaining trust. For attorneys, gaining trust is everything. We’re not buying the name of their firm; we’re buying that particular attorney because we need his or her influence. We need their ability to solve our problems. That’s what we do when we train attorneys, but it’s the same in the medical community; it’s the same in IT and with engineers. It’s moving people away from showing you how the sausage is made to showing you how much they enjoy and care about what they do and that they will tailor it to your needs. Sharon: That would be very difficult, but I understand. It seems so important for a professional to be able to gain that trust, like you’re buying me as opposed to—I don’t know; I’ve never worked with IT people—as opposed to an IT person who has to explain something. To me, it seems a little bit different. Am I wrong? Deborah: I don’t agree. Chris Brew is our IT person. I don’t need know how he fixes my computer, like today when my Google changed the password and I couldn’t send out invoices. I want to know that he’s available to me, that he is nonjudgmental and not going to make me feel foolish because I couldn’t solve it myself, that whenever I need him he and I can communicate, and then I turn it over to him. It’s the same with attorneys. You asked for three tips for attorneys to become better presenters. Here’s what I thought about. Whenever attorneys speak, let’s say at a conference or a TED talk or they’re pitching for business, they need to always tailor their content to the audience. It sounds simple. It isn’t. Two, they need to learn how to tell stories, case studies, because they could tell me all day long what their services are; it’s not the same as telling me how they solved the problem for another client. Lastly, they need to put in more “I” statements. Even though they’re part of a team, when we hear why a project, a case, a transaction was important to them, we start to think about how we could partner together and they would do the same for us. Those “I” statements are really important, and it’s not the same as being self-aggrandizing and taking credit. It’s saying what they enjoy or what they enjoy doing. Sharon: How do they figure out, or what are the questions to ask before they give a presentation to know who the audience is? Deborah: Great question. When lawyers give either a pitch or a presentation, there’s always a contact person. I know when we have a new client, we’ll say, “What’s your goal for this training? What do you want to achieve? What are the challenges your people face? If you’ve hired—and this is for attorneys—a lawyer or lawyers before, what did they not do, or what did they do, that has encouraged you to find someone else?” Lawyers need to be better questioners and better listeners. Too many times lawyers will tell you the history of their firm, why they’re the best and all these things that do not make us decide in their favor. Sharon: You wrote the book about how women can overcome obstacles. What obstacles are you thinking of, and how do they become engaging and memorable and fearless? Deborah: It took me nine years to write the book “Out Front.” Not only were we busy, but I wanted to share my own personal journey as a woman professional, as a woman executive, and it was hard to put that down on paper. The reason I was motivated to write the book is I have trained, coached, and spoken to hundreds, maybe now thousands of women, who are afraid to speak up, who believe that if they’re not an expert, they don’t deserve to speak on a topic, who will put themselves last and are afraid to do things like tell a good story or tell why they enjoyed a project. They believe if they’re not an expert or perfect or if they haven’t been doing the job long enough, they don’t deserve to speak. That’s simply not true. I help give women the confidence to find their own voice and to speak up before everyone else has spoken, because when a woman waits to speak last, she often will not be heard. I also encourage women to have mentors and other people who say, “Excuse me, I’d really like to hear what Sharon has to say now,” and to build that team and have women mentoring other women. I see women finally breaking the glass ceiling, but it still is not common and it’s not easy for women. Sharon: I’m just thinking. It seems that it will be very hard to be the first person to speak out. Deborah: One of the first. You don’t have to be first. Sharon: O.K., I’m one of the first. Deborah: Yes, one of the first. What I do with women is identify your intention. What do you want to come from this meeting? Is it to get a second meeting? Is it to qualify to see if it fits right if you’re interviewing for a job? If it’s to achieve buy-in? Keep focused on your intention no matter how much pushback you get. When you show up, when you are confident, that confidence is more important than your content, interestingly enough. The way we deliver material is worth two to three times our content, so women have to show up and be excited about what they have to say. Now, on the flip side, Sharon, women can sometimes affect negatively how they’re coming across, meaning they speak in long, run-on sentences; they have an uptick at the end of a sentence like, “I believe in this,” as opposed to I believe in this.” If they’re not specific about a point they want to make, people tune out; they don’t listen to them. All of that is in addition to a woman being brave enough to speak up when she has something important to say. Sharon: Deborah—I’m thinking of what you used to do in terms of producing—do you think you were doing the same thing you’re talking about and you got past that? I presume now you see it with other women, but did you face the same things, do you think? Deborah: That’s so fascinating. As a director—well, first I started out with actors and then I directed corporate professionals. I had to read who my subject was and give them the advice that would move them past the block with the obstacle they had. I’m still doing the same thing. I’m still directing. You’re absolutely right, and one size does not fit all. That’s why we keep our groups small when we do a training, so that everyone is up on their feet. Nobody learns from being lectured at. You have to do an exercise, get feedback and then, if possible, do a take two in order to change behavior. I’m really happy that we have a business model that works with small groups, sales teams, executive teams, engineers that now have to do sales. These groups, these teams we work with, sometimes we’ll say, “We’ve eloquied you. We’ve become a verb, and now you can coach each other; you can rehearse with each other.” Sharon: Do you think they do that? Deborah: I do. I think they absolutely practice these new skills. As soon as it gets stressful or a lot’s riding on it, you will go back to the way you always did it, the way you always spoke. The most talented women I see have impostor syndrome. They have anxiety. They don’t sleep the night before a presentation. They believe they’re going to be outed somehow. So my job and our job—because we have other trainers as well—is to give women the confidence and the tools and the safety net, so when they forget where they are, they know how to recover. When someone interrupts them, they can get back to achieving their intention. When they have a success, we tell them focus on it; don’t focus on the one thing you left out or what you consider a failure, which it wasn’t. Focus on how well you did, and it will be easier the next time. Sharon: I’m thinking about board meetings, meetings with the managing partner and five other attorneys or something like that. Same principles? Deborah: Yes, you can call it communication or presentation. Whether you communicate to a board or to your team, or you want to get a promotion or interview for a job, first, that’s your intention. Then have no more than three talking points. If you want to convince or persuade someone with a talking point, give an example. If you say, “Our team is very collaborative,” that’s a generality. There’s no evidence until you tell us when you were collaborative, when your team achieved something by counting on each other. With these kinds of tools, any woman can be successful. Sharon: I can see how giving the examples would make a big difference, as opposed to saying, “We’re collaborative,” because everybody’s collaborative, right? In addition, I wanted to ask you: You firm has a newsletter which I think you write, and it has come out weekly for, what, 12 years or longer? Deborah: Our newsletter, the Eloqui Tip of the Week, started 18 and a half years ago. It was because Jim Freedman from—it was then Barrington; it’s now Intrepid—said, “You give so many great speaker tips. Why don’t you put them out to your clients and colleagues on a regular basis?” We said, “Why not?” Sharon, we now have 5,000 readers. We have an average 27% open rate. Every Sunday morning, it comes out at 7:30 Pacific Time. It is a great marketing tool for us. I can’t tell you how many people have written with a tip embedded in the bottom and have said, “It’s time for me to come in and do another training,” or “I’ve moved to a new firm, and I want to bring Eloqui in.” We have missed—because consistency is everything—one Sunday in 18 years because the donkey died. This is my favorite story. We were on our honeymoon on the island of Lesbos. It was pretty constant contact. We had a thousand names. We went to the one internet café on the island, and we said, “We need to use your computer. Deborah’s going to enter the names and send it out.” He said, “Internet closed. The donkey died.” We said, “What?” He said, “I put a harness on the donkey. It runs around in a circle. It generates electricity. That’s how I have the internet working, the computers working. Donkey died. Internet closed.” I looked at David and he goes, “Don’t even think about it.” So, we missed one Sunday. Sharon: I’m thinking how I would be, because you do it every weekend. I always imagine that Friday or Saturday night, you’re going, “Oh, my god! I’ve got to go write the newsletter.” Deborah: No, my personality is such that if I waited till Friday or Saturday, it would drive me crazy. Starting after the last tip on Sunday, our ears are tuned to everything going on with our clients, with news in the world, with what we’ve seen or done... /episode/index/show/lawfirmmarketingcatalyst/id/23691458

Episode 102: Hiring During the “Great Resignation”: How to Find Talent When the Market Is Tough with Diane Bravermann, Owner & Founder of YourHRedge 06/13/2022

Episode 102: Hiring During the “Great Resignation”: How to Find Talent When the Market Is Tough with Diane Bravermann, Owner & Founder of YourHRedge What you’ll learn in this episode: Why offering a flexible work environment is the best thing a company can do to entice talent Why the “Great Resignation” isn’t necessarily due to younger workers quitting What interview questions to ask to see behind a candidate’s rehearsed answers When employers should look past red flags to hire a candidate with potential Why references are not as valuable as they once were About Diane Braverman Diane has more than 20 years of corporate human resources experience assisting businesses with varying human resource needs. She is the founder of YourHRedge, a human resources consulting company with expertise in developing robust infrastructures, crafting comprehensive policies and procedures, employee handbook and spearheading special projects to secure continuous improvement. Diane’s professional experience spans a broad range of industries – automotive parts and products, venture capital, hospital, marketing and public relations, architectural, real estate and more. Her professional experience is complemented by her undergraduate in business, certifications in human resources management and strengthened by specialty training in emotional intelligence and targeted selection (behavioral based interviewing). Prior to founding YourHRedge, Diane was appointed as an operations manager for a start-up nonprofit organization to establish infrastructures achieving the goal of becoming fully operational. Additional projects included writing company policies, creating job descriptions, designing a performance management process (performance review, performance development and performance improvement). Diane has also served for six years as a hands-on board member for a non-profit organization. As a board member, Diane played a key role in the successful merger of two local non-profit organizations with similar program and services. Succeeded in establishing a new functional organizational structure with enhanced and expanded programs, identified staffing deficiencies and opportunities, developed job descriptions, implemented pay increases for equity and consistency, and crafted a series of communications to help acclimate employees to their new work environment. Additional Resources Transcript: Like many other industries, professional services firms are struggling to find and retain qualified candidates in the wake of the “Great Resignation.” It’s a challenging hiring market, but that doesn’t mean employers are totally out of luck. Recruiter Diane Braverman has helped numerous professional services firms find the right talent, even when it seemed like a qualified candidate would never appear. She joined the Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast to talk about what employers need to change to attract and keep top talent; why a flexible work environment became job seekers’ number one request; and why sometimes companies should take a chance on an imperfect candidate. Read the episode transcript here. Sharon: Welcome to the Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast. Today I am pleased to welcome Diane Braverman. Diane is a recruiter who’s successful not only because of her personality, which facilitates understanding people, but also because she puts the experience and knowledge she gained in the corporate world to work, which enables her to see her clients’ perspectives from both sides of the desk. As we know, recruiting employees is one of the biggest challenges employers face, and recruiting candidates who have the characteristics for their positions is even more of a challenge. Today, Diane is going to tell us about her journey and give us tips about what we need to know about recruiting. Diane, welcome to the program. Diane: Hello, Sharon. Thank you. It’s nice to be here. Sharon: So glad to have you. Tell us about your background and how you got into recruiting. Diane: Certainly. I have been in the human resources space for over 20 years in large corporations, and my expertise ranges primarily in employee relations. I did performance management, performance improvement, HR processes and talent acquisition. Over the past four years, recruitment has been the most requested service. Sharon: We’ll talk more about that. It’s been such a challenge for everyone, for all employers. Tell us about what you do as a recruiter. Do you get calls from people? How does that work? Diane: Basically, what I do is speak to the management of the firm—if it’s a law firm, I’ll speak to the managing partner—and I try to get an understanding of not only the position they’re looking for, but I also want to know about the culture of the company. I need to understand all the details of the job, if in fact the responsibilities are exactly what they want. I talk about qualifications, education and the culture, which is really their shared set of values, their goals, their attitudes, their practices. That gives me a better understanding of finding that organizational fit. Sharon: When you ask about culture, what kinds of things do they say? I wouldn’t even know how to answer that. Diane: For some culture, I would talk about management style. Are they a hands-on employer, meaning they need direct oversight? Do they let their staff function autonomously? Do they come to them when they really need assistance? Is it a collaborative environment, so working in teams versus working in silos? Things like that can determine what kind of culture it is and if it’s a high-stress type of job, too. Sharon: When I think of culture, I also think of whether it’s collaborative, like you mentioned. Do they go on picnics together? Do they have Christmas dinners or holiday dinners, or is it “That’s it; you come to work”? Diane: Unfortunately, in most cases it’s work, but I would say individual departments may do a lunch together for a camaraderie event. Sometimes doing it corporate-wide is more difficult. For managers of their particular group or department, it’s a little easier to get together and do those kinds of events. Basically, it’s team building. It’s getting to talk to each other, interact with each other separate from business, and that really goes a long way. Sharon: I bet it does; it’s just hard to do those kinds of things when you’re meeting with the big poobah. They may say one thing, but the people working for them may say it’s something totally different. Diane: Yeah, and if you have all the top executives attend, staff employees may feel a little intimidated. There’s that. You want them to feel relaxed and be able to freely engage. I know sometimes executives can pose a different dynamic when they’re with the group. So, I think it’s nice to do it with small departments. Sharon: It must be very different today after Covid. Talking about professional service firms, law firms, CPA firms, even marketing firms, what do they have to offer today in order to entice people? Diane: What I’ve noticed lately—this is post-Covid—it’s a very different talent pool right now. It’s a very different attitude. I think the number one commodity an employer needs to address is a flexible work environment. Too many people have gotten accustomed to working at home and they like it. It’s cost-effective for them; they get more work done. So, I think that is a consideration. While I understand there are some positions you just can’t work remotely, if that’s the case, maybe try to create a hybrid. You’re in the office three days; you can go home for two days. That’s one thing I’ve noticed. I’ve even talked to candidates who will say, “No, I want completely remote.” If the employer cannot accommodate, then you move on to somebody who can. Sharon: What really surprised me, and what shows how the world has changed, is when I’ve been looking at law firm marketing positions with large firms, five years ago, before Covid, they never would have entertained a remote person. Now the position describes, “This is a hybrid position for two days” or whenever. It’s like, “Wow, that’s fabulous!” Diane: It’s a great opportunity to have that. I interviewed a couple of attorneys for a client, and they did ask if there is any flexibility. One of them mentioned it to me, and I thought her explanation was very good. She said, “It’s about being efficient. I could spend an hour in the car driving to work, or I can time my commute, work early in the morning, make my preparations for trial or whatever I have going on, and then when the traffic slows down, I can commute and get there more reasonably.” So, it may not be totally working from home but adjusting their hours. I think employers have to be flexible. That’s number one. Number two, I think a lot of companies need to recognize that they need to treat all their employees with respect and consideration in giving them feedback and treating them like you’re glad they’re working for you. That’s a big thing, too, that I hear. Sharon: Do you find resistance among management or partners, or people who will just say no? In terms of culture, do they say, “No, I need my people at their desks. I need to see them.” Is there some resistance? Diane: Yes. There’s a lot to be said for being at your workstation and doing your work. Attorneys are very busy, and it’s not that they don’t want to take the time. It’s just that a lot of time, they don’t have the time. Let’s talk about recruitment and time. When I talk to potential employers, especially a law firm, I say, “You’ve got to be engaged in this recruitment process, because if I send you a candidate I think is a good fit and you’re too busy, that candidate is gone.” I have a current client that lost a couple of really great candidates. They just couldn’t give the attention. That’s something I try to talk about on the front end, their commitment to following up with candidates, because they have multiple offers on the table, which is indicative of what’s going on today. Sharon: I read in the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal another article about the “Great Resignation.” Diane: It’s interesting; you would think the “Great Resignation” would be that people are resigning. Not necessarily. I think a lot of people are staying put because they’re insecure about moving on, but we also have the baby boomer generation leaving their positions. They’re retiring, and it’s hard to replace those positions so there’s that big gap. Replacing them requires having the years of knowledge that this generation acquired working in these organization. Sharon: The history, yes, you can’t replace that. I’m thinking about the fact that we often said to departing employees, “We will be calling you because you know what we did last year for this,” and you lose all of that. There are things that just can’t be replaced with a new person. As good as a new employee is, you can’t replace that stuff. Diane: It’s not good or bad; it’s just different. Employers need to be really nimble at making those adjustments. It’s a whole new generation of workforce coming in. They’re highly technical. They like their technology, and employers need to make sure they have technology in their organization for a workgroup to function well and be successful. Sharon: It seems there would be younger managers now coming on who are not so—maybe baby boomers have retired, and the new managers get it in the sense that they understand they need the latest version of Microsoft. Diane: The generations that are in the workforce now, they want the latest technology because they’ve been working with it. It would slow them down to have anything less than that. Technology is getting stronger and stronger, and staying current is a challenge. Sharon: It is for anybody. It is amazing in terms of how fast it changes. Everybody puts their best foot forward when you go for an interview. How do you get behind that façade? I always feel like it’s a façade. How do you get behind it? How do you see the other side? Do you ask questions? Diane: You’re saying what do candidates need to do to prove themselves? Sharon: No, what do recruiters need to do? If I’m going for an interview, I’m going to show you my best side and say, “Yeah, I can do this job, no problem.” How do you get behind that? How do you penetrate that, I guess is the word? Diane: You’re saying that candidates are very good at interviewing and they’re well-rehearsed. Sharon: Yes. Diane: There are a couple of ways you can try to challenge that. When you have interviews, you need one person to look at their résumé and challenge them on their work experience, why they left, what they did, their skillset, all the information that’s on their résumé. Then, there should be another group of people—maybe one or two, not a lot—who talk about something different, because if you keep asking the same questions from one person, you’re going to get the same answer. It would be important to determine what competencies would be best suited for a particular position. Is it decision-making? Is it leadership? Is it adaptability? Ask questions around those competencies so they don’t get so well-rehearsed around their résumés. In this way, you can really hone in on who they are. Sharon: That’s a good idea, the unusual question. What’s your role in terms of what I call “playing the numbers”? You’re going to LinkedIn, and you have people saying, “Call me.” Besides saying, “Are you interested? Can I talk to you? Do you have any interest in hearing about this?” what are the other things you ask before you turn somebody over? Diane: At the first initial screening, I look for deal breakers. In a phone interview you can only garner so much information. So, I listen to how they communicate, number one. I do challenge them on their résumé. If there are inconsistencies and they can’t discuss what’s on their résumé, that’s a red flag for me. If they talk too much and can’t really answer the question, and you ask a follow-up question and they still can’t, that’s another red flag. One of the big things I notice, I ask them, “Did you research the company? Do you know the company you’re applying for?” If they say no, it puts them at a disadvantage, because they’ve already shown me they’re not interested enough to prepare for an interview. Sharon: Do you make a note on the résumé you’re going to pass on—I’m thinking of paper, but let’s say it’s an email—do you say, “This seemed like a good candidate who has the qualifications, but here are my red flags”? Diane: Well, if there are too many red flags, I don’t even push them forward. I take notes during the interview, and usually the interview is 20 minutes; it could be half an hour long. If there are some flags, I will note them. For example, there was this one attorney I interviewed. I thought this candidate was fabulous, great skills, great communication skills. We were almost done, and she said, “I just need to disclose this.” About six years before, she was going through a divorce. She got caught in a DUI and they suspended her license for a month, but she’s back practicing. She explained, “That was a different part of my life. I’m in a much better place, and I just want you to know that.” I sent her forward to the second interview, and the law firm still wanted to meet with her. In that case, you give people the consideration that, yes, we all make mistakes. She had a good response on where she was at, and it was the fact that she was honest. Sharon: I was going ask you, did she win brownie points because she told you that right up front? Diane: No, it was at the end of the interview. Sharon: But before you passed her? Diane: No, we would have found out anyways. When you do a background check, if you don’t disclose it on the front end, own it and talk through it versus getting to the second interview, they make you a job offer, then they find this. That doesn’t look good, and that would tend to make an employer say, “You know what? She had the opportunity to talk about this and she didn’t disclose it.” Sharon: Yeah, those surprises are not what you want, but it seems that something like that would be—if it was six years ago, it could be different. Diane: Today, Sharon, running a criminal record is not allowed, at least in California. A lot of states are subscribing to that. It’s a double-edged sword. The fact that they disclose it voluntarily, I have respect for that. Then I let the employer decide from that point on where they want to go. If somebody was embezzling, I wouldn’t hire them in the finance department. Sharon: If I’m considering a potential employee, what should I ask, or what do I want to know before I get into something? Diane: First, talk about the culture and see if it’s a consistent message. I’m sure this candidate is going to talk to more than one person, so make sure the people that are interviewing this person have a consistent communication about the culture. I would ask how performance is evaluated. How will my performance be evaluated? What are opportunities for growth? Is there growth in this position for me, and if there is, what are the steps? You and I know about career ladders and how important they are. To have a formal career ladder, I think, sends the message to an employee that this is a place they can grow. One of the biggest reasons why people leave employers that I have heard lately—mind you, there’s a whole list of reasons why people leave—but one of them is lack of opportunity. So, asking those questions about opportunity is very helpful to retain a candidate. Sharon: Lack of opportunity, I can see that being a big one. Or saying there is opportunity, but when you get into the position, you find out that the last person spent 20 years here before they died, and then there was opening. Diane: That’s right. That’s why as a recruiter, you need to be honest. You want not only the company to find the right candidate, but you want the candidate to find the right company. Being honest, placing a body just to get somebody is not doing your job. As much as you want to place somebody at the company, you want to place the right person, because recruitment is very costly. Sharon: Yes. Diane: It’s become more costly. Then there’s a whole other set of things companies can do to retain them. Getting them in the door is one thing. When I talk about new hires, I always try to encourage employees to have a solid onboarding program, which can be 30 to 90 days. Actually, onboarding starts with recruitment. You really need to court these candidates because they have many people seeking them. So, you court them. You have effective onboarding. There should be a mentorship program. Once an employee comes on board, there should be somebody assigned to them to help them navigate through the internal processes, what’s required to make them feel comfortable. It really gets them to be acclimated quicker. Then there’s compensation and those other incentives, but that’s more of a recruitment tool than anything else. Sharon: Do you think employers are paying more attention now post-Covid or because employees are so hard to find? Diane: They’re very hard to find. I am seeing that when I post positions on a variety of sites, I used to get inundated with résumés. Literally hundreds would come in, and a lot of them were qualified. Now, less than a third of the résumés are coming in. A lot of them, I don’t even know if they read the job description; they’re just applying randomly and they’re not qualified. When I finally get a good... /episode/index/show/lawfirmmarketingcatalyst/id/23406842

Episode 101: “Ready-Made Marketing” Takes the Headache Out of Small Business Marketing 05/09/2022

Episode 101: “Ready-Made Marketing” Takes the Headache Out of Small Business Marketing What you’ll learn in this episode: Why the pandemic inspired Evon and Lori to write their book, “Ready-Made Marketing” Why it’s a misconception that marketing has to be expensive and time-consuming How Evon and Lori vetted the technology resources recommended in the book Why so many small businesses struggle with marketing How to access automation tools to make marketing easier About Evon Rosen Evon is a strategic and creative marketing professional specializing in financial and legal services, healthcare, and real estate. Her highly-creative and fresh ideas help develop brands, increase market share, facilitate client retention, and improve processes. Evon has held executive marketing positions at both public and privately held companies that include City National Bank, First Federal Bank of California, Celtic Capital Corporation and the Peak Corporate Network. Evon is the first two-time recipient of the Commercial Finance Association’s Essay Award and has had numerous articles and white papers published. She was a featured speaker at L.A. Direct Marketing Day, and received the U.S. Festival Association Award for Creative Excellence. She received both her undergraduate degree and California Teaching Credential from the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA). About Lori Berson For over 20 years Lori has developed break-through strategies effectively integrating marketing automation, demand generation, sales enablement, branding, interactive media, advertising, email, social media, print, outdoor, video, events, and promotions, for many of the country’s leading marketers, including Anthem, Charles Schwab, Disney, Dole, Lexus, Seinfeld, and Coldwell Banker. Her remarkable business acumen, creative talents, and knowledge of emerging technologies have contributed to the success of these organizations and more. Lori began her career at a variety of advertising agencies, including Diener, Hauser, Bates, Needham, Harper and Steers, and Asher/Gould. She established the in-house creative department (servicing the automotive industry) at the Los Angeles Herald Examiner. Lori then went on to create advertising for the major studios (Paramount, Disney, Fox, and Warner Brothers), entertainment public relations firms, and celebrity management companies, at The Hollywood Reporter, and designed for Seinfeld, Lilo and Stitch, Oprah, The Wheel of Fortune, Entertainment Tonight, The Disney Channel, Cheers, Family Ties, Fantasy Island, Beethoven, Charlton Heston, Shirley Jones, and Martin Sheen. As a member of the faculty at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) and Art Center College of Design (her alma maters), Lori teaches Advertising Concepts, Design, Email Marketing, Social Media Marketing, Video Marketing, Landing Page Design, and How to Manage a Photo Shoot. Photos: Additional Resources: Lori Berson LinkedIn: BersonDeanStevens LinkedIn: Evon Rosen LinkedIn: Transcript: The pandemic may have left many small businesses with limited marketing support and budgets, but that doesn't mean marketing is out of reach. That’s what marketing experts Evon Rosen and Lori Berson wanted to prove with their new book, “Ready-Made Marketing For Business Owners, Business Professionals and Independent Contractors.” The book features hundreds of templates and technology recommendations that professionals with little time and budget can easily leverage for immediate results. Evon and Lori joined the Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast to talk about their motivations to write “Ready-Made Marketing”; how to use the book effectively; and why even professionals with no marketing experience should learn how to market their businesses. Read the episode transcript here. Sharon: Welcome to the Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast. Today, we’re talking with Evon Rosen and Lori Berson, coauthors of the recent book, “Ready-Made Marketing For Business Owners, Business Professionals and Independent Contractors.” They are marketing experts and have worked with businesses in a range of industries, including law, and have helped their clients grow their brands, increase market share, facilitate client retention and, most importantly, increase profits. Today, we’re going to hear more about their book and how it can help all of us be better marketers. Evon and Lori, welcome to the program. Evon: Thank you, Sharon. It’s so nice to be here. Sharon: So glad to have both of you. First of all, I want to know how you ended up where you are. Evon, why don’t you go first? What was your career path? How did you end up working in marketing for a variety of different industries and professions? Evon: My career in marketing has been focused on business development. I’ve been helping companies and business professionals in financial and legal services, as you said, as well as healthcare and real estate to develop and enhance their brands, grow market share and increase profits. I started in marketing research, and I moved into product management along the way. Then for 20 years, I helped senior and executive-level positions in both public and private firms. One of my longest stints was with City National Bank, where I created the brand positioning “The Way Up.” The bank is still using that today, I’m happy to say. Sharon: Did you develop that? Evon: Yes. Sharon: Oh, wow! Evon: It started off with a blue ladder. It’s now a white ladder, but it’s “The Way Up” campaign they’ve been using for many, many years. Sharon: Yes, for a long time. I forgot that’s where we first met. I totally forgot about that. Evon: Yeah, that is where we first met. I think you introduced me to Lori at that time. That’s how Lori and I met. Sharon: I first want to ask you, Evon, what did you study? What would you recommend that people study? Lori, the same question when we get to your background. What would you recommend people study for marketing? Evon: It’s interesting; I studied sociology and I got a teaching credential, both from UCLA. I think what was so great about both of those areas in terms of marketing is that sociology is all about people and all about behavior, and that’s basically what marketing is about too. Teaching helped me focus on being up in front of a group, being able to write business plans and marketing plans and things like that. It all works to help in marketing. Sharon: Lori, what was your path? Lori: I actually started my marketing career over 23 years ago. I’ve been creating revenue-generating strategies in branding, demand generation, advertising, interactive media, email, social media, print, outdoor—a myriad of things, including sales and marketing automation, for many of the country’s industry leaders in consumer package goods, financial and professional services. Some of those companies include Anthem, Charles Schwab, Dole Food Company, Fisher Investments. That was in addition to working for entertainment clients like Seinfeld. I did it for many, many years. Actually, I started in entertainment. I’ve also had the pleasure of teaching advertising and marketing at UCLA, and email marketing and video marketing at Art Center College of Design, which are my two alma maters. To answer your question about what I studied, I started studying in the design area, graphic design. From there, it morphed into more of the marketing side. A lot of it comes from not only from the college education, but from when I was very young and did internships, and from taking online courses throughout the years and then teaching. Like Evon said, that teaches you a lot as well. I’d also say what’s really important these days is to continue learning and to stay up to date, especially with the rapid change of what’s going on with new technologies. Now it’s NFTs and crypto and Web 3. There are so many exciting things happening that it’s important to stay up to date continually and to keep learning. Sharon: I didn’t know there was a Web 3. Lori: We’re in Web 2 now, but Web 3 is the metaverse. Sharon: Oh, O.K. Lori, you have your own company; it’s Berson Dean Stevens, correct? Lori: Correct. Sharon: Evon, you’re independent, and you also work with Lori a lot. You both started in traditional marketing. How did you segue into marketing automation and video? How does one do that? Lori: That is a great question, Sharon. I remember about seven or eight years ago—I always like to keep up with technology. That’s part of what we offer in the book, a lot of technology resources, which we’ll get into. But as I was looking at things, I thought, “O.K., what seems to be the trend? What is important to learn going forward?” So, I dove in around 2013, 2014 and started learning. I got together with one of the first animation software companies and learned as I did it and got clients involved. It was all very new, and we all jumped in and learned as we did it. Sharon: There’s so much to learn. Evon, you were going to add? Evon: It’s kind of the same for me. When I was with many companies in a senior position, I had a staff. I had a lot of people working for me that had a lot of the tools and knowledge that I didn’t, so we would all jump in and do things together. As Lori said, marketing evolved, and we had to evolve with it. Sharon: There’s so much to learn when you say to keep up with what’s going on. Lori: It’s overwhelming. Sharon: Yeah, it is overwhelming. That’s a word for it. Evon, you and Lori wrote the book. What was your impetus? To me, there are a million and one books on marketing and how to market, and there are a million and one podcasts. What was your impetus for writing the book? Evon: The original idea came out of Covid, because during the worst of the pandemic, as you know, firms were forced into doing new ways of business. Everybody started working remotely. In-person meetings were no longer an option. It was unfamiliar territory for everyone, and a primary concern for both firms and their clients was financial. Cost-cutting led to layoffs and people quitting, which left many professional firms and professionals with no internal marketing support and no budget to hire external expertise. Lori and I had seen so many people struggling with how to reenergize their businesses and jumpstart sales, so we wanted to make marketing accessible and help people bounce back from Covid setbacks. You’re right, Sharon, there are a million and one marketing books out there. Most of them deal with developing business or marketing plans, or they’re specific to using social media as a marketing tool, or they speak to building brands. They’re planning oriented. We wanted to write something that was action oriented, which is exactly what “Ready-Made Marketing” is. It provides the words and the tools to enable business professionals to start marketing themselves immediately. It addresses an unmet need that the business community has, and I’m happy to say it’s resonating. Sharon: It’s quite a successful book, and it’s a very hands-on book. Evon: Mm-hm. Sharon: Lori, tell us how the book was constructed. How did you write this book? What was in mind when you wrote it? Lori: “Ready-Made Marketing” was constructed in two sections. The first part includes over 70 customizable email and video templates and scripts that can be used in a variety of business situations. It also includes step-by-step instructions and screenshots for using proven and effective marketing tactics like LinkedIn, podcasts, webinars, video and text messaging, just to name a few. The second section of the book is where we’ve included over 400 technology resources that are free or affordably priced. This was key because we wanted it to be not only simple, but cost-effective for people to be able to use. All of the technology resources have been vetted, and we have the top two in each category, which are our recommended options. The bottom line is that we wrote the book to be handy and easy to use, with everything laid out so you could quickly get to what you need, when you need it. It starts with a chart that is entitled “How to Use this Book.” If you want to write a sales email, you go to the customizable templates. If you want to host a webinar, there are ideas to develop content and step-by-step instructions for production. Basically, the book takes the guesswork out of marketing. Sharon: It’s a very up-to-date book. Lori: Yes. Sharon: It sounds very different from so many marketing books with everything you’re talking about, the video and podcasting and all of that. You don’t find that in many traditional marketing books. When you say you’ve vetted the resources, how did you vet them? Evon: I’ve researched and used all of the resources with clients. Both Evon and I have used all of the resources, whether it’s both of us or one of us separately, with clients. Sharon: So, they’re tried and true. Evon: Exactly. Sharon: That’s great. Evon, it seems that the teacher always learns something from the student. Tell me what you learned from writing this book about marketing, things you didn’t think of before. Evon: It’s interesting because I was thinking about that, and I think the difference is no other books are like “Ready-Made Marketing.” You can hit the ground running with this book, and that was our goal: to use marketing to help people generate sales as fast as possible. That can be done. Marketing doesn’t have to be expensive. It doesn’t have to be a time suck. It can be done relatively easily. Not everything, but there are things you can do to jumpstart your business, and that was great for people to see. What I learned is not so much about the book or marketing itself, but the impact the book has had. When I hear from business professionals and read the amazing reviews on Amazon, it’s heartwarming to see how appreciative people are. They have something that’s really made a difference in bouncing back from the pandemic and beyond. Even if a business didn’t take a big hit, they love the fact that they can do so much marketing themselves without spending a lot of money. In fact, the book has a testimonial from an attorney who says it’s a game changer. That’s amazing to hear. Sharon: It sounds very gratifying. Do you think the book would have had the same impact if we weren’t coming out of the pandemic? Evon: I’m not sure the book would have been written had there not been a pandemic. Sharon: O.K., that’s a good point. Evon: We’re hired for our marketing expertise. Marketing is a lot more than what’s in the book, but the book is a wonderful place for people who need to do some marketing who don’t have a budget, who don’t have a lot of time, but still need to get sales and have their brands out there. That’s what this book does. We were happy to make it something that people can use themselves. Sharon: Lori, what do you think you learned from writing the book? Lori: I learned that I didn’t realize the need out there. From talking to other business owners and even from some of the testimonials and reviews that Evon mentioned, a lot of people don’t know where to go to find information on how to market themselves. They don’t have the time. It feels very onerous to a lot of businesspeople and professionals. They’re focusing on their business, so they don’t have time to get into the growth of it as much as they should. They’re going along with a certain amount of clientele, but we all need to grow business to stay alive. I was quite amazed at the response to the book and to the tools that we presented, how people have said it’s made their lives so much easier. We knew there was need, but we never realized how much of a need and how broad-based it is. Sharon: It seems there’d be such a demand for something like this. This is for both Evon and Lori. Do you think people were skeptical when you said this book is going to be a hands-on, how-to book? Do you think people said, “Yeah, tell me about it”? Lori: I’ll take that to start. I think people were confused a little bit, because typically what they see is the strategy and planning, which doesn’t get to what they need as quickly as possible. Granted, strategy and planning are important. But I think it’s so new and so different from what they’ve seen from other books that it was a little bit confusing. Then, once they got into it, they thought, “My god, this is so easy. It’s super simple.” Evon: I didn’t think that people were particularly skeptical. I think what’s interesting is that many people don’t really understand what marketing is or what they can do themselves. I think when they started looking at the book and saw what was in there, it was more of a revelation, like, “Oh, my gosh, I can do this, and it’s right there. This is what marketing is. That’s great.” Sharon: Looking through reviews on Amazon—it is on Amazon, and the reviews are glowing. Something interesting to me is that it’s on Kindle also. There’s a Kindle version, which I was surprised to see. Is that something you thought about or planned for when you were writing this? Evon: We did. We wanted to do the different versions, the Kindle version, the hardcover, the paperback. We wanted to make it accessible to anybody’s needs. However they access it, we want them to have it. Sharon: It’s widely available, it seems. Lori, who was your target market for the book as you were writing it? Lori: The target market is business professionals and their firms, other small businesses, independent contractors, people with limited or no marketing expertise and those with no marketing staff or, as Evon mentioned earlier, those with limited or no marketing budget, which we find is a majority of the small businesses out there. Also, we found out that people who have some marketing experience are especially appreciative because of the distillation of those 400 technology resources in the book. Working with other marketing professionals, I found that they may know a couple of the really well-known technology resources, but many times those can be super expensive. One of our primary focuses was to get stuff as much for free as possible in addition to really inexpensive technology resources, something like $5 a month and at most $15 a month, to give them some of those automation capabilities to help them save time and focus more on their business. Basically, “Ready-Made Marketing” is perfect for anyone looking to start or enhance their marketing, whether they have no experience or they do have some but need extra resources. Sharon: I was thinking about the fact that in marketing today, even more than 20 years ago, you have to be an expert in a certain area. What you wrote is more broad-based as opposed to, “I’m a web developer” or “I’m an SEO expert” or “I do videos.” Do you think people embrace that, or did they say, “I got to find somebody else,” meaning, “I’ve got to find an SEO person for my SEO”? Lori: I think it’s a little bit of both. In this particular case, because we’re focusing on people that don’t have expertise, we wanted to give them tools to be able to do some of the basic stuff themselves. There’s always going to be a need to hire because you’re right; everything is very specialized. There are agencies that just work on each of those sections. They’re going to want to eventually hire those people once they... /episode/index/show/lawfirmmarketingcatalyst/id/23034440

Episode 100: Why Now Is the Perfect Time to Refresh Your Law Firm Policies with Marcia Watson Wasserman, Founder and President of Comprehensive Management Solutions 04/26/2022

Episode 100: Why Now Is the Perfect Time to Refresh Your Law Firm Policies with Marcia Watson Wasserman, Founder and President of Comprehensive Management Solutions What you’ll learn in this episode: What law firm culture is, and why it affects clients as much as it affects staff Why law firms should look at their policies with fresh eyes post-pandemic How firms can use technology to enhance communication When it makes sense for firms to use a hybrid work model, offer hoteling, or open smaller satellite offices How to maintain firm culture when staff is remote About Marcia Watson Wasserman Marcia Watson Wasserman is a published author and co-author of the books: , and . She is a Fellow in the College of Law Practice Management, one of an elite number of consultants who have earned this honor. Marcia serves as Columns Editor on Law Practice magazine’s editorial board and is a member of the Publishing Board of the ABA’s Law Practice Division. Additionally, Marcia frequently presents law practice management topics for legal and business conferences while also contributing articles on law practice management to leading legal publications. Prior to founding Comprehensive Management Solutions, Inc. in Los Angeles, Marcia served for over 15 years as Chief Operating Officer and Executive Director for several national and local law firms, including an AmLaw 200 firm. Earlier in her career, she served as Director of Law Firm Services and Director of Client Advisory Services for two, mid-sized CPA firms in Southern California. Additional Resources: LinkedIn: Website: Transcript: After decades of incremental change, the pandemic forced many law firms to embrace technology, rethink work traditions, and evaluate their culture almost overnight. According to law practice management consultant Marcia Watson Wasserman, these changes have been a net positive, even though they’ve raised new questions about how to manage a law firm in the post-pandemic landscape. She joined the Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast to talk about how firm culture trickles down to clients; what technology firms should be investing in; and how firms can embrace remote work. Read the episode transcript here. After decades of incremental change, the pandemic forced many law firms to embrace technology, rethink work traditions, and evaluate their culture almost overnight. According to law practice management consultant Marcia Watson Wasserman, these changes have been a net positive, even though they’ve raised new questions about how to manage a law firm in the post-pandemic landscape. She joined the Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast to talk about how firm culture trickles down to clients; what technology firms should be investing in; and how firms can embrace remote work. Read the episode transcript here. Sharon: Welcome to the Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast. Today, my guest is Marcia Watson Wasserman, Founder and President of Comprehensive Management Solutions. Her company provides COOs with to-go law practice management consulting and coaching services to boutique and midsize law firms and their managing partners. Marcia is also coauthor of several books on the subject of law firm management. Her most recent book, coauthored with consultant Cynthia Thomas, is the seventh edition of “Law Office Policy, Procedures, and Operations Manual,” published by the American Bar Association. Today, we’ll look at how efficient law office management facilitates good marketing. Marcia, welcome to the program. Marcia: Thanks for having me, Sharon, Sharon: So glad to have you. As I was saying, it’s such an accomplishment to have not only coauthored this book, but to have a list of books you’ve coauthored. Tell us about your career. You have an impressive track record in the area of law office management. Tell us about your career track. Marcia: It all started accidentally when I was an undergrad at UCLA. When I was a sophomore, I saw a job on the job board. It was a part-time job working for an attorney. I took that job and learned how to be a legal secretary and a paralegal. I was the backup bookkeeper and office manager and eventually became Executive Director of several law firms back in the 1990s. I was also COO of an AmLaw 200 firm. I decided I wanted to be an entrepreneur and that consulting was far better suited to me, so that’s what I started doing, consulting to law firms. For the last 20 years, I’ve led a managing partners roundtable of boutique and midsize law firms and enjoy doing that, too. Sharon: I remember when you started it. That’s how long we’ve known each other. Even before that, but I do remember when you were starting that. Tell me about law firm culture. How does that affect employee satisfaction, and how does employee satisfaction affect or facilitate good marketing? Marcia: I want to quote a law firm futurist, Jordan Furlong, because he says it so well. Culture is what people at the firm actually do every day. In harsher terms, it’s what people get away with. Culture is what actually happens. So, what type of culture you have has an impact on who you hire, whether people are happy, whether they stay with you and how you communicate with clients. If you don’t have motivated employees, your clients are not going to be happy with you. If you have people phoning it in and not really dedicated to serving clients, it’s going to have a huge impact on your clients. If you have a great positive culture, then you not only have good employees, but you have clients who are drawn to you as well. You become known for your brand and people seek you out because it’s an important part of your own attempts at business development and marketing. If you have a good culture, it gets known. Suddenly, you’re on the best law firm list for employees and your client base expands. Sharon: Is that the way law firms should review and assess their current policies? Especially post-pandemic, when everybody’s ramping up again, how should law firms assess their policies and procedures? Marcia: They need to look at them with fresh eyes. You may have done something for many years because it made sense, but after the pandemic, when law firms discovered we could work virtually—least most positions could—you need to look at every single thing you do with fresh eyes. There were certain things that were temporary, governmental regulations that you had to put in place because of the pandemic, like mask wearing and cleaning and not allowing clients to come to our offices. Now a hybrid workplace is the new normal. We’ll see how that plays out over time, but people reevaluated what they wanted, which has an impact on culture and has an impact on clients. It isn’t just the firm that has that in mind; it’s the clients as well. Clients don’t necessarily want to get in the car for an hour and drive to you. I heard family lawyers and estate planning lawyers say, “Oh no, it will never work. They’re used to coming in. It’s a very close relationship, and they want to come to the office. We have to have these really nice, big offices for them.” The reality is that’s not what the clients necessarily want. The clients can do a Zoom or a Facetime or whatever works for them, and they’re very happy to have a relationship with you that way. There may be a time and place where they do want to meet with you in person, but not necessarily as much as lawyers would have assumed they would. So, you have to have policies in place that take all of those things into account. Demand has changed as to what clients’ expectations are. Some of it has to do with the age of your clients. A lot of this is generationally driven, namely the younger lawyers and staff and clients who are Gen Z or Millennials, who have a very unique spin on what work and work/life balance means. If they’re a client, they want to work with a law firm that understands that, so you’d better be marketing appropriately to your clients, know who your clients are and have the right people there. A Gen Z client or even a Millennial will not necessarily want a near-retirement Baby Boomer as their attorney, so you’ve got to pay attention to relationships. There are certain policies you have to have that are formal, like leaves of absence and antidiscrimination, but if you’re looking forward, what do you want your firm to look like? Make those policies to take into account a hybrid workplace. Be culturally and otherwise diverse and have fun things in your policies, too. Have a fun committee, whether it’s virtual fun or nonvirtual fun. It makes a difference. Sharon: I know a lot of companies learned how to use technology because they were forced to learn how to use technology, whether it’s a law firm or a different kind of business. They said, “This will never work with virtual or a hybrid law firm.” What kind of technology have firms been implementing? How are they going to be doing this differently? What have they learned during the pandemic, and how are they going to be operating differently in terms of technology? Marcia: There’s so much available with technology. Even the Zoom we’re doing today, if the pandemic had happened 10 years ago, we wouldn’t have had a good medium like this to communicate. Communication is so important, and technology is right there with us, leapfrogging ahead of what the law firms were expecting. I know of immigration law firms and certain plaintiffs’ firms that are using chat boxes and fillable forms. That’s how they do their prescreening; they’ve designed their software to prescreen potential new clients. It makes it a little more seamless for the client. They can go on to somebody’s website and fill out a form, so they don’t waste time waiting for somebody to call them back. They’re able to immediately get that information to the firm. Somebody reviews it and gets back to them much more rapidly at the intake stage. There are document management systems that some firms were lazy about; they didn’t want to make the investment. If you have those systems in place, you can share documents with clients much more easily. When you’re setting up workflow and processes, usually firms look at it totally from an internal viewpoint of what’s easy for them. They need to be outward-facing and think, “How will this work for our clients? How can we be more efficient so that our fees are fair, we can get things done faster for our clients and we can share documents with our clients?” Even if you’ve got a brainstorming session with a client on Zoom, you can use a whiteboard on Zoom or whatever other software you’re using. You’re able to communicate that way and use technology to enhance communication that you wouldn’t otherwise have. Sharon: That’s an interesting point about the fact that if the pandemic had happened pre-Zoom, I wonder if it would have lasted as long. Everybody would have pushed to be able to get back into the office. It’s an interesting question. I saw some ads recently for law firm marketers. They talked about the fact that it was a hybrid environment and I thought, “If you had suggested that 10 years ago, five years ago, the employers would have said, ‘Forget it! We’re not going to do it that way.’” Marcia: There are still employers who are behaving that way. I know of law firms that said, “We’re important because we’re employment lawyers and our clients really need us; hence, everyone needs to come back to the office one month into the pandemic. We’ll spread people out and do our best to do what we can do, but everybody needs to be back in the office. My legal secretary has to be outside my door to do the things I need. It can’t be done remotely.” The firms that took that position lost a lot of their lawyers and staff who said, “No, it’s not safe, and that’s not what I want to do.” Sharon: In terms of lawyers working remotely or in hybrid environments, is that going to remain, especially with younger lawyers? Have they seen the way it might be and said, “I’m not going back to what it was”? What do you think? Marcia: Some of it depends on where you live. In a congested area like Los Angeles, where both of us live, yes, hybrid will happen because people realize, “Wow, I don’t have to be in a car two or three hours a day commuting. I’m so much more productive. I can get more work done. I can be with my kids. I can have more of a balanced life.” The younger lawyers are driving that and demanding it and saying, “As long as I’m getting the work done, what does it matter?” Now, when hybrid comes in, there’s a time and place where getting together makes sense. If you’re onboarding new people, you can do it virtually; there are best practices for doing it, but there’s a lot to be said for a brand-new person to come in and actually meet people and get walked through things. There’s a time and a place for a team meeting. If there’s a group of people that work together on a particular client and an important event is coming up, a trial or whatever, it makes sense for them to be in the office the same day. Even though a lot of clients say, “We don’t need to come in,” there may be a client that wants to come into the office, and that’s also the time the team should be there. But I’m seeing a lot more willingness to let people adjust their schedules, and everybody’s a lot happier. It depends. Your older lawyers who are accustomed to coming to the office all the time swear they can’t work at home; they just can’t do it, so they’ve been going into the office throughout the pandemic. There are younger lawyers, too, who say, “I have roommates; I have a one-bedroom; I can’t work and live in the same place. I don’t have enough space. I can concentrate better in the office,” and they’ve been going to the office the entire time. The great majority of them say, “Hey, I want some balance in my life. This is really working, and as long as I get the work done, give me the autonomy and the authority to get it done my way, as long as I’m meeting deadlines.” A lot of that has to do with how well your communication systems are in place. I do hear that people are worried about losing their culture because everybody’s operating more in a silo. So, you have to work at that. Sharon: How do firms have to operate differently? You mentioned communication. How about telecommunication? Do law firms have to strengthen or change their management policies around that communication? You have to work harder, I presume, to keep a culture. Marcia: You do, and that’s why firms are having things like happiness committees where they come up with events, virtual or otherwise. There are firms I know that have done walks on the beach during the pandemic just to keep people engaged, or they had everyone met at a park and bring their own lunch and stay socially distanced just to see one another. I know a few firms that had retreats at remote locations during the pandemic. They had everyone take Covid tests and made sure they were O.K., and nobody got sick because they were very careful about what they were doing. A lot of it depends on what your culture was to begin with and how friendly an environment you were. Are you a new firm? Are you a firm that’s been institutionalized for 40, 60 years and you’re used to doing things one way and you don’t like change? Lawyers don’t like change anyway, so you need to manage a little bit differently, and communication is an important part of that. Everyone likes to be communicated with in a different way. Some people are happy to text one another and use Slack, and other people want to use video more. Every circumstance requires a different situation for communicating, both as to what the individuals’ preferences are and the circumstances of what you’re communicating about. People shouldn’t just endlessly do Zooms. Everybody is burned out on Zoom. Meetings should be intentional. They should have agendas. There’s a time and place for people to meet in person, and a time and place to have a group Zoom meeting or a one-on-one. Sharon: I like the idea of the fun committees and walks on the beach. Those are great ideas in terms of keeping something cohesive during the time when you’re supposed to be spread apart. I’ve read about law firms opening more branch offices, little satellite offices of one or two people. Is that happening, or is that an exception? What’s the scoop on that? Marcia: I’d say, again, it depends where you live. If you’re in a small town where everything is close by in Middle America, you don’t need it. But in suburban areas that are spread out, yes, I’m definitely seeing it for a variety of reasons. One is to serve clients. It’s to open an office closer to where your major clients live so they don’t have a big commute to come see you. That’s one reason. One firm I know, the senior partners live in the suburbs and they don’t want to drive to the home office all the time, so they opened a branch near where they live to make it convenient. Now they don’t have to come to the main office all the time. Another firm I’m aware of—and this happened a lot—when people were working virtually, many of the employees, staff and the lawyers decided they were going to move because they wanted more space. They moved farther away, in some cases another county away. We have L.A. lawyers who’ve moved to Orange County and San Diego County. We have lawyers from the west side who had a small apartment and said, “No, I want something bigger for my family.” They bought a house out in the suburbs, an hour and a half drive from their office. Suddenly the firms are finding out about it later, after the fact, and saying, “O.K., what can we do to keep these people?” One firm I know has downsized their main office in L.A. and built a big branch because so many of their people moved into the area where they’ve opened the branch. The branch office is probably as large as the main office now. They did it to accommodate people’s lifestyle and commute and to make sure their employees were happy. Sharon: Are you seeing established law firm offices in Century City or downtown shrinking their spaces? Marcia: Absolutely. They’re doing more hoteling. It depends where they are in their lease. If their lease came up during the pandemic, almost universally they’ve reduced their space. If they still had time to go, they put up with it or renegotiated with their landlords to extend the term and make it less expensive, or they gave up some of their space. A lot of people are subleasing space. I have a client that is looking to move into subleased space because their lease is up. Just in their own building, they’ve had offers from several different law firms to move into subleased space. These other law firms—that are well-established law firms—have too much space. They’re doing a lot more hoteling for lawyers, just like CPA firms have done for a long time and commercial real estate brokers started doing a number of years ago. It was always, “Oh no, lawyers can’t do that.” Well, lawyers can do that. If you want to work at home three days a week and be in the office two days a week, if you don’t need your own dedicated office with your plaques on the wall, you can have an office or a conference room. There’s scheduling software that firms are buying that accommodates this. The receptionist has scheduling software so that when people come, it arranges an office for them, and they know where to go. That’s another place where technology is helping, so you don’t have... /episode/index/show/lawfirmmarketingcatalyst/id/22909340

Episode 99: Become a Stronger Writer with Tips from an Expert Writing Coach, Elizabeth Danziger 04/13/2022

Episode 99: Become a Stronger Writer with Tips from an Expert Writing Coach, Elizabeth Danziger What you’ll learn in this episode: Why getting your message across is the most important goal of writing How strong writing skills help people move up in their careers How to remove filler words from your writing Why proofreading is necessary, even if it’s not important to you personally Elizabeth’s top three tips for clearer writing About Elizabeth Danziger Elizabeth Danziger, the founder of Worktalk Communications Consulting, is a seasoned written communications expert with over 30 years of experience. She has a longstanding reputation for training people to become compelling, confident writers. Danziger is the author of four books published by major publishers, including Get to the Point!, a text on business writing initially published by Random House. Her work has also appeared in many magazines, including Personnel Journal, Journal of Accountancy, and other national publications. She enables people to wield the power of words to enhance their credibility and catapult ahead in their careers. Additional resources: Facebook is LinkedIn: Twitter: Love it or hate it, writing is a daily part of our lives. And according to author, writing consultant and communications expert Elizabeth Danziger, people who write well are more likely to advance in their careers. That’s why she founded Worktalk Communications Consulting, a firm that trains professionals to write clearly and confidently. She joined the Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast to talk about the importance of rereading; the power of language; and her tips for stronger writing. Read the episode transcript here. Sharon: Welcome to The Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast. Today, my guest is Elizabeth Danziger, head of Worktalk Communications. Worktalk prepares teams to write clearly and confidently so they can strengthen their credibility, increase their influence and generate new possibilities. Liz is also the author of the book “Get to the Point! Painless Advice for Writing Memos, Letters and Emails Your Colleagues and Clients Will Understand.” Worktalk also has a very interesting newsletter called “Writamins,” and it’s chock full of interesting information you’ll want to know. Make sure to sign up for it. We’ll have a link at the end of the program. Today, Liz will be talking about how we can make the best use of language. Liz, welcome to the program. Elizabeth: Thank you. It’s a pleasure to be here. Sharon: So glad to have you. Every time I read what you’ve written, I go, “Oh my god, it’s so useful.” I have to say, I took a course from Liz years ago and the one thing I always do—Liz, I don’t know if you still have my emails, but you did get me to reread my emails before I sent them. Elizabeth: Great! Sharon: I still do that. I always remember that, because you’re right. You catch things you didn’t realize were there. Elizabeth: Oh, that’s wonderful. Sharon: Tell us about your career path. Were you always into words and grammar? Was that always of interest to you? Elizabeth: When I was a child, I wanted to be a doctor, actually. I wanted to be a physician, but I also always loved to read. I remember my mother yelling at me, like, “Why don’t you go out to play?” and I’d be like, “No, I want to read.” I’ve always been a great reader. Then, when I got to college and hit organic chemistry and calculus, I thought, “Well, maybe my skills are better suited elsewhere,” and I became a writer. My first book was published when I was 25, and it did well domestically and internationally. Then I wrote two more books, including “Winning by Letting Go,” published by Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. I wrote for all the women’s magazines, and then I decided I wanted to work with people who were doing real things in the real world and making life happen, and not necessarily the editors of Cosmo. I also realized there’s a huge need. People suffer over their writing. They suffer personally and internally, and they suffer bad consequences from lost business, lost relationships, lost possibilities. So, I founded Worktalk to support people in making themselves understood. Sharon: How do you do this? We took a class with you, but do you work with people individually? Is it sessions? How do you do that? Elizabeth: I work with people however they want to be worked with. Notice that I ended a sentence with a preposition, which is totally O.K. Most of our work takes the form of webinars and training sessions. We customize every one of our webinars to our clients. We get writing samples. It’s like sending a blood test to the doctor. You send me your writing sample and I see what’s going on. So, it’s mostly trainings and webinars. We also do writing labs, which are much smaller. Each person brings one writing sample and we workshop each other’s work in the lab. Of course, I do one-on-one coaching, but mostly it’s trainings and webinars. Ultimately, we work with people in whatever way they need. Sharon: I think there are a lot of people who have a love of reading, but how did your love of reading translate into understanding grammar? It seems like that’s a different thing in a sense. Elizabeth: Truthfully, people think of me as a person associated with grammar. I didn’t really study grammar until I started teaching writing. I was a writer, and I was edited by book publishers, by Hartcourt Brace Jovanovich and Random House and by the editors of Cosmo and the editors of Glamour and the editors of all these magazines. They edited me. When I decided to start doing writing training, I think a lot of it came to me intuitively. Then, when I started teaching it, I realized I had to get the rules down. That’s why I tell people grammar is extremely important, of course, but getting your message across is the most important thing. Sharon: I’m not trying to put words in your mouth, but when we work with lawyers, they go to school to learn how to write in a certain way. Is there resistance, or is it more difficult to untrain them to write for the normal person? Elizabeth: It is a little more difficult. With respect, lawyers really think they know a lot about a lot, and they’re trained to argue; they’re trained to think you’re wrong. So, there is a little more resistance, but at the same time, I’ve worked with law firms. I’ve worked with associates who are getting dinged for the writing. Their writing’s not clear; their writing’s not to the point; their writing doesn’t catch the issue. When I work with associates, they end up getting that taken off their performance review and they turn into good writers. I’ve also worked with legal firms on other things, but I love working with lawyers because they’re smart. Not that people who aren’t smart shouldn’t call me—not that anyone would identify themselves at not smart. It’s fun to work with people who learn quickly. It’s fun. Sharon: That’s interesting, because it seems like if you’re working with associates, there are people higher up, perhaps partners, who aren’t—and once again, as you say, with respect—aren’t as good a writer or as to-the-point, and they’re evaluating somebody else. Elizabeth: I’m not sure about that. My experience in all fields, in accounting, business, finance and law, is that the people at the top, they’re almost always good writers, I would say. Good writing and good thinking go hand in hand, and you cannot rise to the top if you’re not a really good thinker, hopefully. People who write well tend to get promoted in professional service firms. Very often, the managing partner is an exceptional writer, but the managing partner, believe it or not, has other things to do than to edit the crappy writing of the people who work for them. They need to be managing the firm. That’s why they outsource to me if their associates are not up to snuff, but the top people are often good writers. Sharon: That makes a lot of sense. They have to be persuasive, and they have to get their clients’ attention, which means being to the point. Elizabeth: Right. Sharon: How is what you do changing today? When people are texting and abbreviating every other word—Liz is rolling her eyes here. I find myself doing that, or I’ll make a mistake and think, “Well, nobody’s going to notice that or know that’s a mistake,” and then I say, “Sharon, you can’t do that. It’s not right.” How do you deal with that? Elizabeth: That’s an excellent question, and I can look at it in a couple of ways. One is that I am fighting the good fight. Like Winston Churchill said, “Fight the good fight.” Although there is a lot of texting, Slack, Whatsapp, whatever, the thing is that—and this is getting a little philosophical—if we think about it, what is the function of language? I’m sure we all love dolphins and pot-bellied pigs and whales, but they’re not building legal systems; they’re not building cultures; they’re not doing what humans are doing. We are doing it because we have language, really sophisticated, nuanced language that can create a future and a past. It’s powerful. Language conveys meaning, but why bother to get something from my head into your head? How do we get this from my head into your head? Because we have a set of agreements. We agree. The sounds I’m making mean something. The scribbles on the page mean something, and you can make a certain number of errors in those agreements. Grammar is just a set of things we agree on. When I say, “I was,” it means it happened already. We agree on that. But if you break too many of those agreements of grammar, it creates friction in the system, and your meaning starts to fall apart. You literally lose meaning, and that’s why I know the work I do is evergreen. In every class, I ask people, “Have you ever gotten an email from someone that had so many grammar and punctuation errors that you literally didn’t know what the person was talking about?” and everybody says, “Yes.” It’s true that people are more casual about it, and the winners, the people who end up on top, are going to be the people who communicate with a nuance and a correctness and a sophistication. Sharon: Do you find yourself texting and abbreviating things? Elizabeth: No, I never do. I dictate my texts, and I usually proofread them. I just don’t do that. Maybe it’s because I’m a boomer. I also tell people not to do it, so I don’t do it. Sharon: It’s interesting to me how the world has changed. I do have to throw this out: I’m flabbergasted that they’re not teaching cursive writing in some areas. Elizabeth: I know. What’s sad is that there’s a lot of research on the whole process of writing by hand, the neurology and neuroscience, and there is an additional layer of writing in cursive. When you take notes by hand or when you write in cursive, different things are happening inside your brain that are enabling you to process that information at a deeper level. On a simple level, I wonder how those people are going to sign their names when they grow up. If you’ve never learned cursive, what is your signature going to look like? I don’t know. But you’re right. Of course, I have to deal with people texting and Slacking and this and that, but in the end, the bottom line of language is the same: get your message across. That’s what we aim for. Sharon: When you’re teaching a class of law firm associates or younger people, let’s say, do you hear more, “Oh, Liz, that’s not important”? Elizabeth: I do. What’s interesting is in my section on proofreading, I always ask people, “When you receive a document that’s not carefully proofread, how does it affect your opinion of the person who sent it? Positively, negatively or no impact?” I talk to people all over the country, and in most cases, the majority of people say it has a negative impact on their opinion of the person who sent it. Yet there are certain cultures and certain groups and subgroups where a lot of people will say it makes no impact on them. They don’t care if somebody doesn’t proofread. What I tell those people is, “O.K., so the person on your team, that person may not care at all if you proofread. Knock yourself out. But I promise you, if you write to a CEO or the government or the executive vice president or the division manager, that person will care.” Many people still do care, and we have to take care of that. We have to write for the top, not to the least common denominator. Sharon: That’s a good way to put it. I think certain professions care more. We were the recipient of this, because a firm that became our client, they switched firms because they said their other firm wasn’t proofreading. Elizabeth: Oh my gosh! I saw this in a client, a regional accounting firm that had been approached by the client of another regional accounting firm. The other firm was a very reputable firm, a good firm, and I asked my client, “Did you ask them why they are talking to you? This is like somebody who already has a girlfriend going on a date. Why are they talking to you if they already have an accounting firm?” He asked them, and what they told him was that their firm consistently misspelled their name. Sharon: That would be a zinger, let’s say. Elizabeth: Yeah. Sharon: Tell us some of your top secrets or your words of advice for us to keep in mind. Elizabeth: There are three things I would suggest. The first is that you think about your reader before you write. It sounds very simple, but it astounds me sometimes how rarely people do that. They sit down and think, “Tap, tap, tap,” and they’re not visualizing the living, breathing human being who’s on the receiving end of that. What do they care about? What are their hot buttons? What are they wondering? What are their questions? Write for the reader. That’s the first thing. Second, write shorter sentences. Your average sentence range should be around 20 words. That doesn’t mean every one should be boom, boom, boom, 20, 20, 20. Maybe some 15, maybe some 25, maybe some 30, but if you have a 30 or 35-word sentence, I want you to put two 10-word sentences around it. Microsoft Word’s check readability statistics function will calculate your average sentence. That’s the second thing, to write shorter sentences, and a whole cascade of good things will happen. The third, as you remember from when we talked years ago, Sharon, is to always, always reread. You’ve got to reread what you wrote and make sure you didn’t write something incredibly dumb, especially for attorneys. Attorneys are held to a higher standard. The scary thing about not proofreading is that people generalize. They think if you’re careless at this, you’re careless at that. If there’s a typo in the cover letter you send to your client, “Here’s the contract you asked me to draw up,” and you write “contact” instead of “contract,” and it goes straight through spell check because contact is also a word, I promise you they are going to have less confidence in the validity of the contract because there was a typo in the cover letter. That’s just how we roll. It’s crucial to reread and proofread everything no matter how hurried you are. The time it takes to backtrack and grovel and apologize and try and make it right is so time-consuming that it makes the time that we spend proofreading seem very, very short. Sharon: That’s a good point, what you say about lawyers being held to a higher standard. If I got a cover letter or a document from a lawyer where there was a typo, I would think, “Oh, my god, what kind of work am I going to get from this person, exactly?” Elizabeth: It’s terrifying Sharon: Yes, it is. Elizabeth: It’s truly terrifying. Sharon: That’s true. If I got a typo in a cover letter, it would reflect poorly on the person, but if it came from the guy who’s going to paint my house, I don’t think I’d be thinking in the same way. Elizabeth: Exactly, that’s a great point. We have different expectations from different people. People have the highest expectations of lawyers because they associate them with precision and language, and because they rely on them to use language to plead their case. Sharon: That’s true. Rely—that word really hit me. They’re advocates. Elizabeth: Exactly, good point. Sharon: I want to ask you two things. Are you going to be writing another follow-up to the second edition of your book “Get to the Point”? Elizabeth: I’ve already done a second edition. I thought about doing a third edition, but I’m very busy with work right now, and it’s a huge time commitment. I think I keep people posted by keeping up the Writamins. If you subscribe to Writamins, you’ll get all the latest. Sharon: Yes, and we’ll have the link in the podcast description when we post it. One of the latest versions was talking about filler words. As I was writing something the other day, I thought, “Wait, that’s a filler word,” and I took it out. Elizabeth: Great! It really affects you. I’m so gratified. Sharon: I never thought about it, but it’s something I use all the time. Give us examples on how we get rid of them. Elizabeth: A lot of it is just thought and self-discipline. I wish I could say, “Give me $29.95 and I’ll slice and dice and microwave and cut and reduce filler words.” That would be really nice. I would be a millionaire, a multimillionaire, if I could do that. A lot of it goes back to rereading. We also need to be aware of words like “just.” I’m sorry to say this happens more often with women than with men. Men and women both do it, but women are particularly prey to “just” or “sorry.” I would like to bury these words. In other words, if I say to you, “I’m very, very sorry,” do I sound sorrier than if I said, “I’m sorry?” Sharon: That’s a good point, yeah. Elizabeth: To my ears, the person who says, “I’m very, very sorry,” I would not necessarily say that person is twice as sorry as the person who says, “I’m sorry.” I wrote a Writamin about this. You probably remember. I was about “I would like to,” and “I wanted to.” Oh my gosh! Please read the Writamin, everyone. It’s on the website. It’s at Worktalk.com. Sharon: Great information. It’s so much to remember. Liz, thank you very much. Whether it’s a certain rule or whether it’s knowing that we need to get to the point faster, that’s the most important thing you’re talking about. Thank you so much for talking with us today. It’s really been great. I don’t know how many filler words I’m using there. Elizabeth: No, you’re doing great. Sharon: Really, really great. Elizabeth: Really, really, really, really, so, so, so great. Sharon: Thank you so much for being with us. Elizabeth: You’re very, very welcome. Thank you for letting me be on this show. I appreciate it. Sharon: It’s great to talk with you. /episode/index/show/lawfirmmarketingcatalyst/id/22778006