Two weeks ago Lance Godard posed this question to me in Blawg Review #257:
You’re an active Web 2.0 participant. What specific impact on business, if any, have you seen from your online activities?
Since it’s a question I’ve heard a hundred times before it must be a reasonable one, and one worth discussing.
The answer, however, is impossible to quantify, and this is why: When potential clients I ask them how they got my name. I’m required to ask because, if I take a new matter, I must report that piece of information to the Office of Court Administration.
But what if the answer is, as often happens, an embarrassed “web” or “Internet” or “computer,” then what? It’s possible that they hit my website, a Google ad that I sometimes run, or that they stumbled on this blog. Or its possible that a friend or relative found me one of those ways and then passed the information on.
Which site they hit first is the type of question a marketer would want to have answered. And in theory a lawyer could try to find out which one by asking all manner of follow-up questions while the subject was fresh in the caller’s mind.
But I never ask. Because the answer is completely irrelevant to any issue that the caller has. They called because Mom’s cancer wasn’t diagnosed in time or little Johnny was hit by a car. They didn’t call to talk about marketing, web ads, blogs or any of that other stuff. They called because they have a problem. That which may be interesting to marketers isn’t interesting to the potential client.
And if it isn’t interesting to the client or relevant to any issue that they have, then it doesn’t matter to me. The moment when someone is distraught over a family member in the hospital is no time to satisfy an idle intellectual curiosity.
The reality is that, before I had this blog, I already had a number of people find me due to my website, which is pretty extensive. That wasn’t the primary way, of course, because I received referrals from former clients and lawyers that knew me.
The calls that come from “the web” tend to be cases I’m less likely to take. That’s because the calls haven’t been screened by someone else that knows me. Many of the web callers have previously been rejected by others, a conclusion that is generally pretty easy to divine within moments of the call starting.
There are, in other words, way too many variables for me to figure out what exact effect this blog has. The only time I know for sure is when attorneys that find this blog call me, as they will introduce themselves that way. Lawyers can be dispassionate about legal issues and chat for a moment or two before getting to the reason for the call. Potential clients, on the other hand, want to talk immediately about the incident.
So if it’s impossible to determine what effect a blog might have on marketing, why spend so much time on it? And the answer is easy; because I enjoy it. No one should blog if they don’t find the actual activity rewarding for itself, for it is immediately apparent from the writing if the person is doing it simply to game Google for clients, as opposed to writing for enjoyment.
When lawyers who enjoy the medium blog, you see personality. You see passion. You see opinions. You see people interviewing George Bush’s dog after he bit someone. You see stuff that they don’t teach in law school, and they don’t teach in marketing school.
Sis months ago Scott Greenfield wrote, regarding all the law bloggers coming to town:
Most new blogs are doomed to death from the outset, created for the wrong reason and certain to fail to achieve their creator’s purpose. Most offer neither insight nor viewpoint, as their creators are scared to death that taking a firm and clear position might offend a reader, a potential client. After all, the vast majority of blogs are born solely as a marketing vehicle, even if the creators follow the sound advice not to make them look too “markety.”
….The barrier to entry into the blawgosphere has increased dramatically. It’s not one of cost, or concept, as much as one of merit, focus and purpose. If you have the desire to write, the guts to write something worth reading and the stomach to deal with the constant onslaught of stupid and crazy readers, there’s a place for you in the blawgosphere. If you think it’s the path to success in your law practice, you will be sorry and your blog will fail.
…..
When I did a CLE with Kevin [O’Keefe], who was busily promoting blogging as the way to expose lawyer to the world, I responded to his enthusiasm with a caution: Anyone can have a blawg. Everyone cannot.
Thus comes Greenfield’s Law: Everyone can blog, but not everyone should. Because if you aren’t enjoying it, it will show.
So the answer to the question — What specific impact on business, if any, have you see from your online activities? — is this: I have no idea, though I know that there are many lawyers around the country that now know who I am, and that the fun I have in writing in this tiny corner of cyberspace has raised my general profile. That is a form of indirect marketing that I discussed last year, and can also result, for example, in a law blogger being quoted in the paper if they can talk authoritatively on a subject.
But that type of general profile-raising isn’t the kind of “specific impact” that can be quantified anymore than one can quantify the effect of writing an op-ed for the local paper or law magazine.
Although I suspect there is modest money to be made in dreck blogging if you can outsource the work and have people draft thousands upon thousands of dreck blog posts, for everyone else blogging cannot be done solely for business purposes or else the blog will suck and will make you miserable. You have to be the type of person who likes to write and feels compelled to write and who isn't satisfied unless they are producing quality content.
To me, one of the best parts of blogging is how I am invited to write articles or guest posts or do interviews. Last fall I debated Emergency Physician Monthly's blogger on the subject of tort reform. It was great! I doubt I convinced a single one of his readers, and I doubt they're going to start referring their patients to me, but the experience was professionally and personally satisfying. I've also been invited to do some radio and TV interviews on other subjects, not one of which produced a single call (to my knowledge), but all of which were a fun experience and a chance to boil down a controversial issue into an accessible form for non-lawyers. I like that. It's fun.
That is to say, if you're going to do a legal blog, it has to also be a personal hobby or you're just going to make yourself miserable with little to show for it.
One final point: it seems people can't stop asking questions about the return on investment of blogging. Yet, few people ever question the return on investment of going to a Bar Association mixer or speaking at some lightly-attended public event or going on the TV or the radio or whatnot. I don't see how any of those are substantially different from blogging; they're all different ways in which to reach peers and the public.
Although I suspect there is modest money to be made in dreck blogging if you can outsource the work and have people draft thousands upon thousands of dreck blog posts…
Actually, it could well have the reverse effect. Imagine a juror Googling the lawyer during trial and finding the stuff? What, exactly, will the juror think of lawyer and client?
I really like what you've said above, Eric. "So if it's impossible to determine what effect a blog might have on marketing, why spend so much time on it? And the answer is easy; because I enjoy it." I just started writing for the blog of a personal injury law firm in California. We like to maintain a solid website and blog frequently not because it will bring clients (although thats possible), but because it's important to avoid being sucked into a vortex where you can't see outside what your firm is doing. I like seeing what other lawyers across the country are thinking about and what issues are bouncing around the blogosphere, and I hope others in the legal community are interested in what we're discussing at ourblog.
I think this ties in perfectly to what Max said above: "One final point: it seems people can't stop asking questions about the return on investment of blogging. Yet, few people ever question the return on investment of going to a Bar Association mixer or speaking at some lightly-attended public event or going on the TV or the radio or whatnot." Blogging doesn't necessarily change the way lawyers operate. It just lets them interact and share ideas more often. So whether blogging brings business is almost beside the point.
Thanks for the post!
GJEL blogger
http://www.gjel.com/blog
Actually, it could well have the reverse effect. Imagine a juror Googling the lawyer during trial and finding the stuff? What, exactly, will the juror think of lawyer and client?
Oh good heavens no trial lawyer should ever be near a dreck blog! Your reputation will of course be as someone who produces dreck for money.
But it might work, like ads on public transit or tv, to get enough calls that the dreck blogger can make money referring cases to actual trial lawyers.
I'm not condoning this practice. I'm just saying that I can see it plausibly returning a profit. I know, and I'm sure you do too, a number of "lawyers" who do a really crappy job on an extremely high volume of cases and thereby turn a profit both through their cases and the handful of good cases unfortunate enough to get into their hands yet fortunate enough to be referred out.
Max, I didn't know who you were before your guest blog at EP Monthly, and I enjoyed your writing enormously. So you picked up at least one new fan there! (I can't say that you convinced me, because I was on your side to start with.)
"I'm required to ask because, if I take a new matter, I must report that piece of information to the Office of Court Administration."
Really? Could you expand on this? We don't have that requirement where I practice and I'm curious about the requirements.
"I'm required to ask because, if I take a new matter, I must report that piece of information to the Office of Court Administration."
Really? Could you expand on this? We don't have that requirement where I practice and I'm curious about the requirements.
The rules can be found at this link:
http://www.nycourts.gov/RULES/JOINTAPPELLATE/603_7.shtml
If you got to Rule 603.7(a)(7) you will find that this information is required to be filed as part of the statement for all personal injury actions that are taken on contingency:
Name, address, occupation and relationship of person referring the client
Good post Eric. I am not sure why so many people get fixated on the ROI of a blog. What's the ROI of a cell phone? What's the ROI of a car? What's the ROI of speaking to reporters who call you as a lawyer? All are worthwhile in the pursuit of clients and doing good legal work that begets more clients. It's the same for blogs.
In your case, you enjoy doing what you are doing. You are increasing the size of your network. You are learning by exchanging ideas with people. I'll hazzard a guess that by enjoying this blogging that you are becoming a more well rounded and perhaps better lawyer. Potential clients and referral sources can learn a little about you before contacting you or referring someone to you. That's better than a poke in the eye with sharp stick.
Lawyers have called me some sort of huckster for 'selling lawyers on blogging' and questioned a blog's business development poetential. Those same lawyers are the ones I would refer cases to in NYC, Houston, and Miami if someone I knew asked for a lawyer in those states on a criminal or personal injury matter. I got to know those lawyers through their blogs.
Kevin makes a good point. I think blogging does help you improve your skills as a lawyer. For example, if I read a case, I get x out of it. But when I summarize a case, I really do have to read the case far more closely than I do if I'm just trying to find out what the opinion is. This gives you far greater understanding of the legal issues at hand than just x. So you gain more knowledge, you impart useful knowledge, it is all good. If you want to look at real ROI, you have to factor this kinda stuff in.