Law Firm 4.0 Blog

Branding and Website Case Study: Louisiana Litigation Boutique Keogh Cox

Investing in smart strategy isn't just a big firm luxury. Increasingly, aggressive, ambitious boutique firms with a good story are spending time and money to design plans to make smarter short- and long-term choices. Keogh Cox, with one office in Baton Rouge, LA, is one such firm.

With a 45-year history, Keogh Cox & Wilson, Ltd. had never engaged in strategic marketing planning. The firm had good lawyers, loyal clients, a nice reputation in the community and Louisiana and Baton Rouge bar associations.  So why shake things up?  Because firm leaders thought they could be better.

That's the key. The best lawyers always want to improve, work smarter and make a bigger difference in their clients' lives. This also means ensuring that you are attracting clients that are the best fit for your expertise and experience.

Using the firm's retreat with Altman Weil as its inspiration and launch point, partner Chris Jones reached out to Content Pilot in August 2014, initially to focus on improving this Keogh Cox website.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Content Pilot conducted a Ten Foundational  Best Practices audit of the site, which highlighted many areas of needed improvement. This motivated firm leaders to invest in and plan an overhaul of the site. At the same time, Content Pilot reviewed all firm marketing materials, advertising, budgets, website and SEO expenditures, and more - then conducted a positioning strategy meeting with firm leaders.  

Keogh Cox is a 21-lawyer litigation boutique, where lawyers of all ages and experience levels work closely together. They are aggressive advocates for local, regional and national clients who have difficult disputes in Louisiana.  It was clear in the positioning strategy session that lawyers have warm and important relationships with each other - there was lots of ribbing and laughing, but equal amounts of respect and reverence as they spoke about firm clients and partners' particular strengths and the high quality associates they were attracting.

Lawyers were unwavering in what they wanted to do and where they wanted to go. They have been known and want to continue to be known as a firm that successfully handles complex cases in Louisiana. Firm attorneys have many client successes to tell, and a feature of most of the new practice and industry descriptions is a series of short case studies.

The new brand strategy for Keogh Cox is: "The right ingredients for complex cases in Louisiana."  Capitalizing on how Louisiana is known for delicious food and spice, this "right ingredients" strategy is smart, especially as a reminder to out-of-state law firms who refer work to them, as well as clients in other parts of the U.S.

In addition, we recommended that the firm capitalize on its "street name," Keogh Cox, and get away from using the initials KCW.  You can see the former logo above on the website images - and here is our redesign - warm gray with a palette of curry and cayenne.

Speaking of spices, for years, Keogh Cox has private-labeled Leon's Original Cajun Seasoning, so the rebrand required a label redesign, as well.  Lawyers give the delicious spice concoction to clients, referral sources and friends.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The website launched in late July, and was a complete overhaul, including rewriting all lawyer bios and practice descriptions.  Content Pilot interviewed the lawyers to write unique bios that highlighted the energy, distinction and experience of each one.  Jenn Ocken Photography shot new lawyer photos that captured the personality of each lawyer.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Likewise, we interviewed lawyers for each practice area, focusing on overviews that (like the bios) are search engine friendly, and are filled with important keywords for the scanning reader.  As noted above, experience highlights/client stories are the centerpiece of most descriptions - here is one example from Business Law and Litigation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The firm owns its building on a prominent corner in downtown Baton Rouge.  Partner Chris Jones, who functioned as "project manager" for the brand roll-out and website planning, said, "We are getting a lot of recognition where people are noticing our sign and building.  Also for the website, new lawyer photos and advertising. We are committed to this campaign - and know we are building for the future."

During the website debrief, I asked Chris what advice he would have for other boutiques that are ready for change - he said, "Everyone is happy with the new brand and website, and we didn’t have an unrealistic expectation that we would see immediate results. We have to sustain this. We do expect a return on it, but it will take continuous thought and discipline to do the right things - make the right choices.  We know that it will take time."

Keogh Cox did it right. Leaders didn't put their toe in the water, they demonstrated courage and commitment from the first meeting that never wavered. It was an honor and pleasure for the entire Content Pilot team to work with them.

 

 

 

 

 

"Lean Data" makes more sense for law firms than big data.

Big Data is getting bigger.  According to research firm IDC, big data services and technologies will grow at a compounded rate of 27%, exceeding $32 billion by 2017.  The greatest challenge is knowing how to make it work for us in a law firm - how can we learn from it, affect change with it, make progress and grow revenue?

Data pours in from new sources and channels every day.  Sifting through all the signals and noise is an enormous daily undertaking, and extracting insights (the proverbial needle in a haystack) that drive smart business decisions is more difficult by the hour.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tom Fishburne's Marketoon shows how big data can "prove" almost any conclusion. Therein lies one of the greatest dangers: when the data set is so huge and your goals aren't clear, the data can tell you almost anything you want it to. 

I like "lean data" better. The Guardian says:

“The dirty secret of big data is that no algorithm can tell you what’s significant, or what it means. Data then becomes another problem for you to solve. A lean data approach suggests starting with questions relevant to your business and finding ways to answer them through data, rather than sifting through countless data sets."

Here are a few lean data opportunities for marketing and business development teams in law firms:

1. Google Analytics and other tracking of your website assets - what content drives longer visits to your site (e.g., video)
2. SEO statistics – how are you doing in your signature areas? How are you doing on trending topics?  Be specific in your improvement goals
3. Experience databases filled with intelligence about expertise, clients, qualifications
4. Litigation and corporate databases that reveal who else is representing your clients and for what (then do something about it)
5. Proposal win/loss analyses - why did you win? Lose? To whom and why?
6. Client loyalty interviews - use quantitative and qualitative questions
7. Financial data about your top 50 clients, then next 200 clients - what do the last 5 years tell you? Discover the stories in your numbers
8. Process improvement analysis – where can you streamline what you are doing, save time and get better results?
9. Track initiatives that are truly paying off and eliminate the ones that aren't

On the MediaPost Agency Daily (MAD) blog, Jason Harrison shares advice for marketers who want to be more effective in their data management in Making Sense of all that Data. Jason is the Founding CEO of Gain Theory.

1. Ask Answerable Questions - Don’t aim for something unattainable – start small and build small victories into something large. Don’t let the objective be “deal with Big Data” or something vague and unending.  
   
   With this approach, you’ll build capability, credibility and momentum, all while delivering better results. Then you will be better prepared to answer the big, ugly, complex questions your organization has been asking, like:  What is the long-term impact of our marketing on share price?
   
   
2. Free Your Data - Figure out where your key data lives and liberate it.  Take the opportunity to collaborate across the organization to unite seemingly disparate organizations and their data to see what connections can be made and what new questions can be asked and/or answered.  Build relationships with the stakeholders who control those data sets by creating a common set of goals right off the bat. In the end, you’ll need their partnership to build something meaningful and lasting.
   
   
3. Select Smart Partners - Work with a partner who will enable you to make progress quickly. Your partner should be your guide through the mountain, helping you navigate the data in jargon-free terms, simplifying the process while providing actionable options to deliver results quickly.  In delivering small, tangible results, you will be able to effectively manage internal stakeholder expectations.
   
   
4. Create SMART Data Goals - Just as you would set SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic and Timely) goals for your staff, set similar goals for your data. This approach helps you avoid becoming swamped by your data and instead tackle it in small chunks. This means setting extremely pointed, quantifiable goals for your team that are clear, concise and understood by all. Then continue to check in on how you’re doing against them along the way to ensure you’re on track and not veering from your intended outcomes.

Embrace lean.

 

What courage looks like in a law firm.

Jordan Furlong, legal industry consultant and popular blogger, and I have recently been emailing about "courage" and what it means to lawyers and their clients.  He just published a penetrating post called "What Leadership Really Means," that gets to the heart of courage and why it's so important for lawyers to understand it.  Fundamentally, because it's what clients want from you.

Here is an excerpt that shows where courage slips in:

...Either recommend something or recommend against it, strongly if you so choose; but you must take a stand with your advice and you must sign your name to it. Invariably, every new lawyer in the company, when first confronted with this memo, comes to John asking for the middle-way option, and he always refuses. The client, he tells them, is paying us to advise them. So: advise — and be ready to live with the results.

I found this a really interesting practice, because it forces the lawyer to shift from the easier role of “analyst” into the more perilous role of “advisor.” We’re quite comfortable, as lawyers, with analysis: it’s an intellectual exercise that allows us to occupy a safe, low-stakes position. The “reasonable person” that we fetishize in the law is an analytical construct, an imaginary neutral against whom we measure actual human behaviour for fun and profit.

Advice is a different beast. Clients act on advice, making decisions that carry consequences ient. You’re not just writing a memo anymore; this time, it counts.  It’s the difference between “What does the law say?” and “What should I do now?” There’s a good argument that advanced technology (e.g., expert applications, IBM’s Watson) could provide sound legal analysis; but nobody seriously argues that technology can render trusted counsel, or that any client would act on such counsel even were it offered. To my mind, a lawyer “grows up” the first time she gives actionable advice to a paying client. You’re not just writing a memo anymore; this time, it counts.

Most law firm partners with whom I work are extremely good at both analysis and advice. The older they are, the more that judgment and past experience inform their counsel - and the quicker the advice comes, even when confronted with an issue, challenge or opportunity they haven't seen before. When interviewing partners, few are wafflers when they describe the role they play with clients - they are clear-headed, sharp-witted and pragmatic in the advice they give.  No flip-floppers. And most of them love what they do.

Why then, when it comes to business development and marketing decisions that impact their firms are the lawyers immediately less comfortable, less courageous?  They fall victim to what Jordan describes above as occupying "a safe, low-stakes position."  The daring lawyer who is a zealous and outspoken advocate for his client's position becomes afraid to stand out or be memorable when it comes to positioning strategy, branding design, messaging, even a business development approach that could help him win a new client. 

Over a recent lunch I asked Jim Dolan, an executive coach and psychotherapist who works with a lot of lawyers, about this phenomenon - this courage double-standard.  Our conversation centered around this, and I invited Jim to dig deeper.  He said:

"Discussions of courage often begin with the literal meaning of the word. It's an old French word derived from the Latin 'cor' for heart.  Knights would pledge their hearts, i.e., their lives, to their lords in a solemn act of 'courage.'  The knight was literally giving his heart, and the meaning of giving one's heart is fidelity. Nowadays, we call this a fiduciary pledge.

"These archetypes lie not too far below the surface of the modern business agreements that bring lawyers and clients together. And not just lawyers, but professional advisors of all kinds. When I retain you for your advice - that is, ask you to go to battle for me, I am not asking that you hedge your answers, I am asking that you act on your fiduciary pledge and give me what lies in your heart. And what lies in your heart is all that you really have to pledge to the marketplace.

"Does this mean pretending to be a battlefield general in corny TV commercials?  Of course not. What it means is to know your own heart, and speak it loudly and clearly - in court, client meetings, and in marketing and business development.  This is what makes potential clients say to themselves, 'that's my lawyer.'"

Jim continued:

"I once undertook a major remodeling of my home, an effort that would involve the relocation of walls and an overall revamping of the floor plan. I had no idea how best to accomplish this, and really wanted someone WHO KNEW WHAT THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT to tell me what to do.

"I retained an architect and explained to him that I wanted to create a more open living space, but had no idea what the best configuration would be and I needed him to show me what would be best.  His response was to draw up plans on graph paper and mail them to me with 'what do you think?' scrawled across the bottom of the page.

"I did not know what to think; I was not, am not an architect. I had no idea what the final results would look like, which is why I hired an architect. We went around and around on this for a while, before I finally fired him and the contractor stepped forward and said, 'here is what I think would look best,' to which I said 'thank you' and the house is, to this day, as he recommended."

Some law firms employ a toe-in-the-water approach, believing that partial acceptance of a strategy works (i.e., provides a return on the investment). These lawyers think that if the initial little test didn't hurt too much, then they can try a little bit more the next time. It's like tasting Kale for the first time - no one starts with a heaping plateful. With positioning, business development and marketing strategy, however, watering it down or taking baby steps just puts you smack-dab in the middle of the noise - with the tens of thousands of other messages that we receive on any given day.  

Here are the cold, hard facts: We receive 30,000 messages each day (in 2002, it was 10,000).  The only way for us to deal with this blizzard of activity is to tune out those messages that don't make it into our short and long-term memory. We tune out consciously, sub-consciously and unconsciously. We all do it. Your clients are tuning you out right now and they aren't even aware they are doing it! 

A sad by-product of the recession is that law firm leaders lost courage - they lost their willingness to show their heart. In 2005-2007, positioning strategy for large U.S. law firms was evident and often distinguishing.  Clients knew what these firms stood for. Not so today. Budgets were slashed in 2008, but they have gradually been restored. Today's "strategy" is almost universally business development centered - win more work. I should say, profitable work.  That's good - but not to the exclusion of an over-arching strategy that differentiates you among your many fine competitors. 

Effective, resonating strategy, messaging and design can elevate you, make you memorable and enable you to own your prospect's mental real estate (your client or prospect's brain is the ultimate land-grab).  But lawyers have to be willing to share and show their heart to be memorable. To put that stake in the ground.  To want to be remembered.  (NOTE: If they don't remember you, they can't hire you.)  And even if they like you and the work you do, they still hire other firms.

So, lawyers, take a hard look in your marketing mirror and be critical. What is your strategy? What is your position, your brand?  For what are you known and remembered by the people who matter most to your career?  Where is your courage?

It takes courage to design a memorable strategy and brilliantly execute it. The other things it takes are commitment, consistency, cleverness and cost.  When it comes to winning at marketing and business development, 10% or 20% courage doesn't cut it. Be as committed, pragmatic and driven in your marketing choices as you are in representing your clients. I promise, it will be rewarded. 

Want lateral hiring success in your law firm? Focus more on fit.

The failure of laterals to integrate well into their new law firms continues in 2014 as it has in the many years preceding it.  For those firms that share the disappointing stories, the similarities are remarkable:

1. The lawyer came in expecting senior staff (especially marketing/BD and professional development) and lawyers to cater to their way of doing things.
2. The lawyer assumed firm partners would immediately introduce him/her to their clients.
3. The lawyer made excuses for not being more financially viable or productive in year one.  Or, the lawyer blamed others for his/her failure.
4. The lawyer was never a fit.

HBR Blog Network  published a new article called, "For Senior Leaders, Fit Matters More than Skill," that discusses research comparing executive hires coming from outside the organization v. executives being promoted from within.  The HBR research shows how dramatic the problem is:

"Outside hires take twice as long to ramp up as a leader promoted from within. Astoundingly, C-suite executives report that only one out of five executives hired from outside are viewed as high performers at the end of their first year in house. And ultimately, of the 40% of leaders who are hired from outside each year, nearly half fail within the first 18 months."

HBR notes that "the direct and indirect costs of the failures are staggering, far exceeding the cost of the search that found the executive."

Law firm leaders instinctively know this, whether they formally track the sunk cost of unsuccessful laterals.  Unfortunately, too many firms don't assign indirect - or even direct - cost to the resource-consuming unproductive lateral.  It's too painful, because it often takes so long to get them in the door. Once they are on the law firm's terra firma, leaders hope that marketers and partners will rally around them stirring up a flurry of activity that turns into new work and new clients.

HBR studied more than 320 leaders in 36 organizations and found an unexpected answer to the question, why do these executives coming in from outside fail so often?

The answer is: "External leaders fail because they just don’t work well with the people on their teams."

Blogger Jean Martin writes, "We’ve seen this problem before – a new executive arrives at the organization, and a mismatch between his work style and priorities and those of his new colleagues, together with his inability to tap into informal and formal sources of organizational power, prevents him from being as effective in his new role as he was in the last. Within months, he is excluded from key networks and loses valuable information and leverage, quickly reducing his chances of succeeding. Isolation starts the downward spiral of underperformance."

Martin notes that leading companies are changing their hiring criteria, adding "network fit" to skills and cultural fit.  Network fit means how well the new candidate will fit into the working style of his or her new colleagues. HBR research shows that "Hiring for this more colleague-centric type of fit can improve performance at the two-year mark by 30%. It has more than twice the impact of assessing only for general culture fit."

Ingersoll Rand has changed how it defines "executive fit."  Ingersoll Rand noted that while the candidates all scored high on leadership, but had struggled "to apply those skills within the specific dynamics of their new teams and peer groups."  So Ingersoll Rand changed how it was evaluating candidates  and created "four new 'fit categories' — knowledge, values, career experience, and leader behaviors — which in combination produced a more complete view of the executive’s style and how she is likely to approach work."

They have two types of fit -- "conformist," which is the same as the team, and "complementary," which "might be called for when the purpose of bringing in a new executive is to spark some productive disruption in the way the current team is working."

I think one of the most remarkable research findings came from Coca-Cola:  The recruiters are evaluated on and must take responsibility for network fit.  "The company requires them to report to management on not just how fast they are filling positions but also whether the external hire’s performance is up to expectations after they’ve been in role for one year. By reporting this 'quality of hire' performance metric the recruiting team ensures that, in all selection decisions, recruiters and managers ask not just 'Is the individual right for the job?' but also 'Can the individual perform on the job?'"

Companies like Coca-Cola have determined that the in-house recruiters have done a more effective job than the outside search firms - a challenge, indeed, to the external head-hunters.  The research found that companies are beefing up their internal recruiting departments and arming them with the right evaluation tools. This results in a substantial savings (a drop of 40%) in not relying as much on outside search firms.

Firm leaders might think this type of evaluation is overkill for the rank-and-file lateral. But for top rainmakers, practice or industry team leaders, consider broadening your evaluation criteria to focus on network fit.  

Simply, ask the question: Can this lawyer work well with others in my firm? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Results: 2013 AmLaw 100 Websites: Ten Foundational Best Practices Research - Part I

I just presented the Keynote address at the 2013 LMA Legal Tech Conference in San Francisco, previewing the results of the 2013 AmLaw 100 Websites research findings. Congratulations and thanks to Clare Ota and Adam Stock for organizing a sold-out, superior conference.

Sponsored by Content Pilot LLC and supported by RightHat, the Study analyzes the nation's largest websites based on Ten Foundational Best Practices, which include several attributes within each FBP. These attributes are foundational - the must-have features and functionality that visitors expect and require to ensure a good experience with your site.  These Foundational Best Practices are not just applicable to large law firms - they scale well and most also make sense for small and mid-sized professional services firms. 

I started conducting this research in 2005 because law firms were collectively spending millions and millions of dollars on their websites and they weren't making visitors any happier.  Five AmLaw 100 surveys later (2005, 2006, 2007, 2010, 2013), we continue to ask the question, "How are the world's largest law firms doing in this medium?"  

And the question that law firms should be asking is -- Do you feel like you're getting your money's worth from your website investment?

For anyone doing a website redesign or refresh, this research will give you a framework for the conversations you need to have inside your firm.  It will make it easier to make visitors happier, for you not to mess up, for your project not to get derailed and for you to stay within budget.

This blog post will be the first in a series where I share the results of the 2013 analysis.  I have already written posts that are worth reading: The most startling finding from the 2012-2013 AmLaw 100 Websites research - a troubling deficiency and Website visitors don't read (and we've known this for a long time).  

For each of the Foundational Best Practices, I list the FBP, the attributes under it, the average score (on a 100-point scale) earned by the 99 AmLaw 100 firms (list taken from the 2012 American Lawyer top 100 firms, which is actually only 99 because of the failure of Dewey LeBoeuf), the pie chart of results for each FBP and note a few findings.  I'll also share the names of law firms that performed well in each category.

If you are interested in a Ten Foundational Best Practices audit of your website, contact me at [email protected] for more information.

The scoring grid for each attribute within each Foundational Best Practice:

• 86-100 = Excellent 
• 71-85 = Good 
• 51-70 = Fair 
• 26-50 = Poor 
• 25 and below = Unacceptable 

FBP#1 - Communicating your Message - 72.6

1. Clear and differentiating positioning strategy - 39.1
2. Practice and industry focus are apparent - 81.2
3. Geographic reach is apparent (1 office or 40) - 98.3
4. Contact information is clear and easy to find - 93
5. Site features or links to foreign language translations - 47.8

As I noted in the blog post linked above (The most startling finding . . . ), the average score for these big important firms for "Clear and differentiating positioning strategy" was 39.1, or "Poor" - a pretty dismal showing for strategy.  Firms have lost courage when it comes to showing differentiating strategy on their websites - it means the large firms are increasingly looking alike. The AmLaw 100 firms performed much better on strategy in 2007 than they do now.

42 AmLaw 100 firms have rotating carousels on their home pages, obviously a very popular and successful feature.  The carousel enables firms to showcase practices, industries and other commitments of the firm.  Because of its high adoption rate in the legal industry, it's important that firms focus on making it unique to their firm - a differentiating strategy is the best place to start.

All AmLaw 100 firms boast that they are global, but only 47.8 of the firms have non-English translations - marginally up from the 45 firms in the 2010 Study.

The total score for Communicating your Message was 72.6 - barely "Good." This is down almost 10 points from the 2010 Study.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Seven firms scored 100, including Wilson Sonsini.  Its positioning strategy is powerful - "Partnering with the world's most innovative companies for more than 50 years."  While other Silicon Valley law firms certainly serve leading innovators, Wilson Sonsini can put this stake in the ground as one of, if not the first. 

The others who scored 100 are:

• O'Melveny & Myers
• Jones Day
• Cozen O'Conner
• Patton Boggs
• Finnegan, Henderson
• Norton Rose Fulbright

FBP#2 - Graphics and Design - 77

1. Bold, branded layout style, grid and use of white space - 83
2. The site uses CSS@FONT-FACE web fonts to further branding design - 73
3. Strong imagery reinforces the brand and is fresh and unique. It effectively advances the story about what the firm does - 76
4. Site makes good use of HTML5 instead of FLASH - 73
5. Site is optimized for = or > 1024 pixel screen resolution - 80

This FBP is not about how attractive the sites are, although we certainly looked at that. We look at the objective things we can measure, not our subjective feelings and opinions about the designs.  Jeff Yerkey, Web/Interactive Director of RightHat, conducted the analysis of this FBP. We updated the attributes in this FBP from the 2010 Study, informed by broad web industry standards and best practices.  

All these average scores fall within a ranking of "Good," and the total score for this FBP is only 77. There is a lot of room for improvement here, especially on the lower end - 17% of the firms ranked Fair and Poor.  19% of the firms ranked excellent, with Goodwin Procter topping the list.  Others in the top ten are:

• Blank Rome
• Drinker Biddle
• Cozen O'Conner
• Foley & Lardner
• Milbank Tweed
• Dechert
• Wilson Elser
• Nixon Peabody (the former Nixon site)
• Bryan Cave

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'll soon post the results for FBPs 3 and 4, Navigation and Lawyer Biographies.

 

Charlatan SEO company gets sued by its unhappy law firm client

From the very first days of Google, Yahoo, MSN and other search engines, lawyers have wanted to appear at the top of search results - "above the fold."  That spawned a slew of hucksters forming companies that promised unwitting lawyers that they could get them to show up on top of their competitors in the hallowed number one or two spot on Google and other search engines.

Those of us who legitimately approach search engine optimization (SEO) and other website and online strategies shake our heads at the folly of lawyers who think they can buy their way to the top by gaming the system. 

Now, a Michigan litigation law firm, Seikaly and Stewart, has sued The Rainmaker Institute run by Stephen Fairley, for RICO - a frightening statute (promising treble damages if a claim is successful) that legal marketers desperately want to avoid - claiming:

“. . . the Victim Firms were duped into believing that the services to be provided by The Rainmaker Institute, a company owned and/or controlled by defendant Fairley, would be effective in making the web sites and related web pages of the Victim Firms appear high in the results of the most important internet search engines – most significantly Google – when key terms chosen by the Victim Firms to describe their practices and the services offered were entered in a search by potential clients. Plaintiff and others paid many thousands of dollars, individually and collectively to The Rainmaker Institute to obtain these services, only to find that they were, in most instances completely unsuccessful."

The law firm spent $49,000 with Fairley's company and in return, was promised top Google rankings. Many lawyers today understand that such a scheme is woefully flawed, but many others are intoxicated by the new business they think will instantly appear from better search results.

The Simple Justice Criminal Defense Law Blog excoriates the legal marketing profession in its post about this lawsuit. It also shreds the plaintiff law firm/lawyers for being lazy, naive and stupid.  Here are a few sweepingly general disparagements Simple Justice's author, Scott Greenfield, writes about legal marketers:

• Fairley beat them at the game, deceiving them to the tune of $49 grand, with promises of vast internet wealth and prestige, by doing what every marketeer does, promise the world and deliver, well, nothing.
• Don’t blame Fairley for being a particularly successful member of a particularly disgraceful industry. He sold you a bill of goods. That’s what marketeers do. Didn’t you realize that when you put your reputation, your ethics, your livelihood and your cash into the hands of schemers, you’re going to get burned? What’s next, suing Nigeria for its prince welching on your inheritance?
• Did Fairley lie to Seikaly & Stewart? How would anyone know, since the entirety of internet marketing schemes are based on deception and manipulation? And were Seikaly & Stewart victimized by Fairley’s unkept promises? It’s beyond ironic that a firm seeking to buy its way to prominence from a marketeer complains that it was out-deceived.

I want to caution Greenfield not to throw all marketers under the bus because of one (or a few) bad actors.

Kevin O'Keefe also wrote about this on his blog, Real Lawyers have Blogs. 

Lawyers, don't waste your money on empty promises about SEO and other marketing greatness. Instead, invest your thought, time, attention and dollars on marketing and business development initiatives that will pay off. Notice that I carefully chose the word "invest" as opposed to "spend" - like your 401(k), all marketing/business development programs are investment strategies that require brain power, patience, commitment and consistency. 

If it sounds too good to be true . . .

Managing Partners Share Forecasts and Insights – LMA Texas – Dallas City Group

Guest post by Lisa Whitley Coleman

Four Texas Managing Partners recently discussed industry trends, marketing and business development roles and necessary changes to fundamental law firm business models at an April Legal Marketing Association Dallas City Group panel luncheon hosted by Haynes and Boone LLP.  The room was filled with attorneys, senior and junior marketers, and COOs who said they appreciated
the opportunity to hear how top law firm leaders answered the provocative questions.

The panelists were Terry Conner, Firm Managing Partner at Haynes and Boone LLP; Robert Jewell, Managing Partner at Andrews Kurth LLP; Emily Parker, Managing Partner at Thompson & Knight LLP; and Kevin Sullivan, Chairman and CEO at Winstead PC.  The discussion was moderated by Deborah McMurray, CEO and Strategy Architect at Content Pilot LLC.

The panelists and moderator are all in agreement that the boom times of demand for legal services from pre-2008 will never return.  According to McMurray, the positioning challenges for
today’s firms include:

1. Lawyers' competition is now global rather than local. 
2. Clients want to reduce risk and cost by litigating less.
3. Demand for legal services is on the decline. And,
4. The number of lawyers is increasing faster than demand – there were 46,000 new lawyers in 2012 alone. (And over this decade, there will only be a need for 75,000 new lawyers.)

McMurray began the discussion by sharing several book titles she found on Amazon while searching for the most recent book by Richard Susskind, "Tomorrow's Lawyers." She read aloud the 2012-2013 book titles that signal a rather grim oulook for the legal industry.  Here are a few:

• Growth is Dead - Now What? Law Firms on the Brink - by Bruce McEwan
• The Lawyer Bubble - A Profession in Crisis - by Stephen J. Harper
• Avoiding Extinction - Reimagining Legal Services for the 21st Century - by Mitchell Kowalski
• Declining Prospects - How Extraordinary Competition and Compensation are Changing America's Major Law Firms - by Michael H. Trotter
• Don't Go to Law School (Unless) - by Paul Campos

A more positive title was used to segue into the panel discussion:

• Profit and the Practice of Law - by Michael H. Trotter

 

Facilitator Deborah McMurray addresses the panel

The panel addresses the packed luncheon

 

 

Panelists were asked to start with the shift in demand for legal services and what they see in their crystal balls for 2020 - only seven years from now.  “People tend to overreact to dire situations and have exaggerated perspectives when times are good or bad,” Winstead’s Sullivan said.  He predicts that we will continue to see fracturing among different-sized firms but says that we won’t see changes to the fundamental structure of law firms - law firms will still basically be law firms.

While the heyday is not returning, Haynes and Boone’s Conner believes demand will rebound, pointing out Texas’ growing population and resulting job growth.  “We will also see a growth in demand for legal services outside the U.S. and have opportunities for cross-border work,” he said.  "The challenge will be to capture that business.”

Andrews Kurth’s Jewell pointed out that books like the ones mentioned above will drive people away from pursuing law school degrees, which will correct the overabundance in the supply of legal service providers. He added that it’s cyclical – this will result in a shortage of lawyers in key areas in a few years.

Thompson & Knight’s Parker reminded the audience that that the criticism of lawyers that we are hearing today has always existed going back to Charles Dickens classic tale “Bleak House.”  Dickens' story reveals an arcane legal system badly in need of reform, where an estate case spans years without resolution and racks up an exorbitant amount of legal fees.

For the second question, McMurray reminded the panelists and audience that we have heard a lot of discussion over the last 20 years about how the pyramid-shaped structure of law firms is changing but, in reality it has only grown taller and narrower (with the number of equity partners decreasing).  “Given the change in service demand, do you see the law firm business model fundamentally changing over the next decade?” she asked.

“Clients are loud and clear in their desire for us to be more accountable, and they want to know who is working on their accounts,” Jewell said.  There is no longer any tolerance for huge teams to be assigned to client projects.  “Our challenge is to demonstrate to clients how young attorneys can add value to their matters,” he said.  In response to this challenge, Andrews Kurth provided a young class of associates with The Fullbridge Program training, a business boot camp to help junior associates understand the business framework underlying their legal work.  Jewell views the training as a success, concluding that this particular group of associates is noticeably busier than their untrained counterparts.

Sullivan believes we will continue to see incremental changes. He believes it’s imperative for each firm to study business models practice group by practice group.  “Every practice cannot be leveraged.” he said.  One change that has been clear, Sullivan said, is the rise of attorneys as employees.  Firms are seeing an increasing number of non-partner-track staff attorneys and counsel positions, which is a good move for clients, creating customized, economical service solutions, he said.

Conner commented on the need to become more efficient, the decline of billable hours and the importance of determining the profitability of projects. “I think legal marketers will be involved in these determinations,” he said.

“Given the Amazon book titles and what is published in major and social media about how law schools are even slower to adapt to shifting market conditions/demands than law firms, there is a resulting crisis in law schools and legal education, McMurray said.  “What does that mean for building and shaping the legal careers of young lawyers?”

It costs a lot of money to go to law school, Parker said.  “Prior to about 1992, only about 50% of people attending law school did not end up practicing in private law firms.  After about 1992 and through 2008, the percentage going into private law practice increased to about 75%.  Since the 'great recession,’ the percentage going into private practice has dropped back to about 50%,” she said.

Sullivan agrees that it is better now than it was two years ago.  “I don’t see anything drastic changing,” he said.  “Competition remains strong for top graduates from law schools. We do need to really pay attention to the new lawyer experience,” he emphasized.  Focusing on creating top-notch training and experience will help keep these tops grads interested in practicing law, he explained.

EFFICIENCY

McMurray’s next question explored areas within law firms with the greatest need for innovation and re-engineering within law firms. Marketers like to see themselves as change agents, Jewell
said.  “Together, we need to explore new structures and answer the question -   Are there faster, better, smarter methods for delivering services?”

Parker agreed that answers are needed.  “I’m not sure that the way we are compensated encourages efficiency,” she said.  “In fact, the hourly billing rate method discourages efficiencies.  There is a need to set up systems that reward efficiency.”

Jewell says he sees the communication trends of younger professionals as being more instantaneous and efficient, but sees a flaw in the continued preference of the exclusive use of electronic contact.  Having analyzed Andrews Kurth’s pitches and proposals by practice group for 2012, the firm’s business development professionals found that meeting face to face resulted in a better than 50%chance of winning new business.

Conner sees a need for better project management, project management training and improved budgeting.

WE NEED YOU GUYS

On the topic of the role of legal marketers and expected changes in the next five to 10 years, all the panelists agreed that the services provided by legal marketers play an essential role in the strategic development of law firms. That is not expected to change.

Sullivan confirmed that attorneys are very slow to change, a poorly-kept secret any marketer who has suggested something new can easily affirm.  He joked that the standard response to innovation is to ask who else is doing that, which drew a big laugh from attendees.

‘We need you guys,” Sullivan said. “Marketers are at the other end of the spectrum as far as change goes. Attorneys in their 40s are much more comfortable with the role that marketing and business development team members can play – what they can add.”

Communication within the marketing department is critically important, Jewell said. “Thinking creatively is key,” he said.  Marketers need to use modular materials that can be customized within standards, and create high service standards that are communicated across the board, he said.

Parker sees an increasing reliance on chief marketing officers in law firms.

"What are the highest value marketing and business development initiatives to the law firm?  What can marketing professionals do to add value and increase their indispensability in the future?" - McMurray asked for the last question of the day.

The emphasis is on sophistication, performance and results, Conner said.  “Marketing professionals have to be more strategic.”  Marketing has a good seat at the table now and that’s important, he said. “Understanding pricing and profitability is very important.  We like data, especially competitive intelligence. Marketers need to have a really deep understanding of what the law firms do, what their clients need and want.”

Conner would like to see marketing completely focusing on core groups of clients in order to achieve a deep understanding of their needs. “I see having more business develop managers embedded in our practices,” he said.

“Helping lateral hires to integrate would be a great initiative, Sullivan said.  “They bring new clients and new opportunities.  We need to ramp them up quickly,” he concluded.

Jewell would like to see marketing better assist with communicating what their attorneys do and how they do it.  He also mentioned that attorneys have personal relationships that are not being captured and explored, which creates opportunities for marketers.

“The marketing team can provide lawyers with good information about the legal market and legal services pricing and budgeting so lawyers can make compelling, relevant presentations to potential clients,” Parker said.  Marketers can help shape these important conversations - showing firm experience, determining the best pricing arrangement and the timeframe for getting the work done, she said.

One thing was clear from this discussion: branding is no longer top of mind.  These managing partners value strategy,technology, research, analytical skills and competitive intelligence.  This isn’t to say that branding isn’t important today; it simply didn’t come up in the discussion.

Audience members questioned panelists about the use of sales professionals on client development teams. The general consensus was that it isn’t being ruled out, but is not currently under consideration.

Another question raised the issue of a moving to flat-rate billing.  Panelists agree that many
clients support this change and also agree that there are no clear answers. 

“Clients know what’s reasonable,” Sullivan said.  “We need pricing incentives that line up with our clients’ interests. But it’s tricky.”

PANELIST PROFILES

Terry Conner

Terry is in his sixth year as Managing Partner at Haynes and Boone and he started his career at his firm in 1975.  He was the only corporate associate for Haynes and Boone and he says his office was right in between Mike Boone and Richard Haynes so they could keep an eye on him.

Q. At what point in your career did you set your sights on leading a law firm?

I got involved in practice management 25 years ago and in firm leadership 15 years ago.  I
didn’t set my sights on the MP job, but understood that’s where I was headed a few years before becoming the MP.

Terry describes his leadership style, with regard to decision-making, as fact-based and as analytical as possible.  He seeks input from all relevant sources – and he has the right folks at the table. 
Internally, his emphasis is on communication, consensus-building and letting personnel know that firm leadership’s job is to help provide tools for their success.

Q. What is the best business development advice you received as a young lawyer? 

Become a true expert in an area (or two) that you really know, like and can promote internally and externally.

Q. Over the next few years, what is your greatest concern about the practice of law? 

Running the practice of law as a business will do fine financially. The concern is maintaining the dignity and integrity of law as a noble profession – a profession that has the highest ethics, client-first mentality and interested in improving our profession and society.  And related to that, heightened business pressures that affect law firm culture.

Bob Jewell

Bob is completing his sixth year as the MP of Andrews Kurth.  He started his career at the firm in 1978.

Q. At what point in your career did you set your sights on leading a law firm? 

I’m not sure I ever set my sights on leading a law firm.  Your credibility with your partners as a potential leader is somewhat dependent on first having demonstrated success with your clients.

Bob’s leadership style is all about listening, but being decisive.  He’s open to constructive criticism and believes that empathy salves many wounds.

Q. What is the best business development advice you received as a young lawyer? 

Whatever you’re involved in, do the very best you can.  Of course this means client matters, but also
includes involvement with non-profits and charities – even coaching little league.

Q. Over the next few years, what is you greatest concern about the practice of law? 

Bob’s greatest concern about the practice of law is that he wants it to continue to
be an attractive profession for talented younger generations.

Emily Parker

Emily became managing partner on Feb. 15, 2012 and began her career at Thompson & Knight.

Q. At what point in your career did you set your sights on leading a law firm?

My sights were always set on being an outstanding practicing lawyer.  I first seriously considered becoming MP shortly after Jeff Zlotky (the then MP) indicated that he wanted to return to the fulltime practice of law.

She describes her leadership style as “a servant leader.”  She likes to lead by example, being transparent and accessible.

Q. What is the best business development advice you received as a young lawyer?

Never lose touch with anyone you know either personally or professionally.

Q. Over the next few years, what is your greatest concern about the practice of law? 

The projected flat demand for legal services over the next few years creates pressures on lawyers and firms regarding how to develop and promote less experienced lawyers.  At the same time, clients want to reduce the cost of legal services.  Giving the next generations of lawyers and law firm leaders the opportunities we received is both an obligation and a challenge in today’s ‘what have you done for me lately’ legal world.

Kevin Sullivan

Kevin has been Chairman and CEO of Winstead for two and a half years, where he started his career.

Q. At what point in your career did you set your sights on leading a law firm?

Exactly 2 ½ years ago.

Kevin describes his leadership style as supportive.

Q. What is the best business development advice you received as a young lawyer? 

First become good at what you do.  Then you will have a better product to sell.

Q. Over the next fewyears, what is your greatest concern about the practice of law? 

My concern is that the quest for ever-increasing profitability will make it less fun.

_____________________________

Lisa Whitley Coleman serves on the LMATX Board and is the 2013 Leader of the LMA Dallas City Group.  She is the CEO of CM² Marketing where she provides outsourced creative and customized marketing and business development solutions for her law firm clients.  She is an award winning marketer and writer, and previously worked as a journalist at Texas Lawyer and the Dallas Business Journal. She can be reached at [email protected]

Experience management/databases - best practices in content gathering

Gathering and managing content that is relevant to a firm's buyers of legal services is the bane of every marketer's existence.  I've seen this one activity paralyze entire departments.  The team is flummoxed by finding the most efficient way to engage lawyers so they provide the information that marketers need for pitches, proposals, Chambers, Thomson League Tables and other rankings/listings.

In my last post about experience management, I wrote about focusing on your top three use cases and on the people who will use this information.  Your clients are the ultimate consumers of experience data - how are they evaluating you?  What do they need to know about you to make the decision to hire you?

Effectively managing content requires the perfect marriage of people, process and technology.  But, as I noted in my last post, don't start with the technology tool.  Answer these questions about content contribution:

1. What processes do you currently have in place?  How are they working?
2. Who inputs new matters into your experience database?
3. How many fields per matter are too many (a barrier to entry)?
4. Post-launch, how much lawyer time is required for each new matter?
5. Who is the ultimate owner of the experience database, and who ensures the efficacy of the data?

In the Lex Mundi Americas experience management survey of CMOs that I conducted before a November presentation, the vast majority (nearly 80%) of respondents said the marketing/business development team own the process and database.  Lawyers own this process in several firms, as well as paralegals in others. 

Lawyers must "own" this data or they won't use it, but we still recommend that the marketing/BD team is the ultimate facilitator and controller of the technology and process. 

In the CMO survey, I asked the question: How many people on your team are directly involved in managing experience and keeping it current?  58% of the respondents said 1-2 people, but 32% said 3-5 people.  The right number depends on firm size, but we believe that larger firms should have several content contributors and managers.  Effectively gathering the right information is a sleuthing exercise and it's time-consuming.  Having more people dedicated to this mission-critical task is better - especially on the front end of a project implementation.

Lisa Simon, CMO of Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck and former international LMA President, is a long-time advocate for effective experience management. We worked together to implement an experience database at her firm and she says the firm has seen the enormous benefits.  Lisa has this advice for managing the content:

1. Less is more - having some data on a lot of matters is better than having lots of data on only a handful.
2. Stakeholders are not always partners - Paralegals and secretaries/admin assistants are as important to the process as the attorneys - their buy-in is key.
3. Look beyond the obvious sources - Utilize resources outside your own systems to begin generating content.  Sometimes you get more info from your clients' press releases than your own lawyers.

Interestingly, according to the CMO survey, some firms have a database, but they don't give lawyers access to it. I believe it's a best practice to let lawyers be hands-on - to pull data, sort and parse it.  Once again, if they see its utility, they'll engage with it, and be invested in its success and health.

I asked the CMOs whether they give lawyers access to the database to enter new matters. More respondents did not have lawyers enter content.  At Brownstein, we created a web form for the corporate/securities group - they were clamoring for it, wanting to populate the database themselves. They use the form several times a day and now other groups want forms for their practices.  Brownstein will launch these forms for its five main practice teams.

In other posts, I've written that lawyers don't trust the efficacy of the data if they don't own it. Brownstein has figured this out - the lawyers enter the data, and the marketing team reviews it before it goes live (on the website or for pitches/proposals). Lawyers trust it, so they'll use it, and they'll keep contributing to the Deals and Cases Tool.

In the CMO survey, I asked whether firms were adding the matters of lateral hires.  As I noted in my last experience management post, effective lateral integration remains one of the greatest challenges firm leaders have today. While it is challenging, I believe it's a best practice to merge laterals' experience with yours as quickly as possible.  There are easy ways to tag their experience, so if they leave, you can easily sweep it from your system.  Half of the Lex Mundi survey respondents merge laterals' data into their tools and half do not.

Finally, it is early January 2013 and you might be in a position to make the business case for an experience database. Whether a new one or continued investment in an existing database, the arguments for it are compelling:

1. It is guaranteed to increase revenue and make cross-selling/relationship expansion more effective.
2. It creates practice and lawyer stickiness to your firm.
3. As the owner of the experience database, marketing has more power than ever (knowledge really is power) - it leads to respect.
4. No more emails! (Does anyone know anyone who  knows anyone who does XYZ?) For 25 years or more, lawyers have been sending these dreaded emails.

Experience management and databases - The results of a survey of CMOs

Experience management and how to get one's arms around it surfaces in every conversation that I have with firm leaders and senior marketers.  As I noted in a February 2012 blog post "Experience Management - it's been elevated to mission-critical," cross-selling and revenue growth are the two top concerns of firm leaders as they see a future of shrinking demand for legal services and higher expenses.  These issues remain at the top as we approach 2013 - but firm leaders are no closer to having a handle on how to cross-sell more effectively and otherwise drive new revenue.

According to Altman Weil's MergerLine(tm), through the 3rd quarter there have been 68 law firm mergers completed.  In Q4, there are several high profile and notable ones in the works - Fulbright's merger with Norton Rose and SNR Denton's three-way merger with Fraser Milner and Salans are two that will create literally thousands of laterals.  Lateral integration is also at the top of firm leaders' list of concerns - how do they quickly embed and inculcate a few laterals into the fabric (and client base) of the firm, let alone many hundreds? 

The simplest answer is effective experience management.  Sure, but how?  It's not easy, but it's not nearly as paralyzing as you think.  Reframe your thinking about how to go about it - don't start with the lawyers and their many and assorted lists of deals and cases; start with the clients - the buyers of legal services.  What do they want and need to make buying decisions in your various practice and industry areas?  When your planning starts with the end in mind, it ensures that your focus, and consequently, your action is relevant.

To prepare for a recent experience management presentation to a Lex Mundi Americas group of senior marketing and business development professionals, I surveyed the group about their hottest button issues and concerns, wanting to understand where they were in the experience management life cycle.  Most of the 19 respondents were in mid-sized to large law firms.

Here were their burning questions:

1. What is the limit of experience information that can be published that doesn’t affect the confidential client information?
2. How can we motivate the lawyers to keep the experience database updated?  How do we keep it current?
3. How do we handle it when there are several practice areas working in one transaction? Is it better to consolidate as one big transaction, a transaction with different points of advice or several different matter entries?
4. Is it common to ask the client if the experience information can be published?
5. What is the best way to demonstrate the benefits of such a system to the attorneys, especially as an offset to its costs?
6. How are people doing this effectively? How do people connect to time and billing, follow-up, self-service, website, proposals, etc. What accountability share is there - lawyers vs. admins vs. BD/marketing staff?
7. Best practices, what systems are out there in the market, usability of system (lawyers, BD staff)?
8. How can we do this cheaply, but effectively?

I asked the senior marketers what their greatest challenge is regarding experience management:

1. Keeping the information updated
2. Leveraging data from other systems via integration
3. Getting the lawyers to cooperate
4. Which matters to highlight and capture
5. Convincing firm of the need for such a database
6. Resources to plan and implement it
7. Managing all the reports, rankings, pitches, web, etc. that need this data – and getting the right data to them all
8. Getting lawyers to think beyond the work they do (cross-sell)
9. The ability to capture specialized/unique skills
10. Disorganized process and incomplete data

Nearly 60% of the respondents do not have an experience database.  These firms are struggling with multiple data sources - Microsoft Word documents, mini-databases, Excel spreadsheets - and many of these documents are closely-held by the partners.  The ones that responded that they do have one are mostly "thinking about it" or are in the earliest planning stages.

Because the process of gathering thousands of matters into a single, flexible location is so debilitating, I thought it would be helpful to share best practices that we have developed for the launch of  a successful experience database.

Start Here.

1.    I previewed the secret above:  Start with your ultimate end users (your clients) and work backwards >> your lawyers >> marketing/BD team >> IT.

2.    Identify your top three use cases for your experience database (a few examples below).  Choose only three to start - you can always expand it post-launch.  Building a tool that satisfies the needs of all your use cases will take years - and the goal here is to get a workable tool launched in a matter of months - six months is average, depending on the quality of the data.

• Client pitches, proposals, RFPs
• Client expansion conversations – cross-selling
• Website – bios, practices, industries, more
• Surveys – Thomson League Tables,  Chambers, other
• Lawyers – KM
• Lateral integration

3.    Lawyers must use it or they won't keep it current.  They won't care about it if, in some way, they don't own it.  Build it to be used by everyone in the firm - not just the marketing department.

4.    Successful experience management is the perfect blend of people, process and technology.  Don't start with the technology tool. 

People.  Who needs this information? Who must be involved?

1. Clients – ultimate users of the information
2. Lawyers – practice group leaders, users of the information
3. Practice group marketers – consultants to the project for their practice/industry teams
4. Marketing/BD managers - users of the information for pitches, proposals, reports, surveys, rankings
5. Project manager in your firm – day-to-day oversight and accountability
6. Vendor partner – strategy, best practices, day-to-day project management, guidance, training, launch and post-launch.

Process.

1. Gather all the experience lists you have – scour pitches, proposals, website, personal matter lists – don't get bogged down in the formatting; different formats are OK
2. Analyze the efficacy of this data – do lawyers trust it?  (if they don't,  you can't move on to any of the next steps.  They have to trust the data first.) 
3. Create consistent presentation styles for matter and narrative format for your proposals, web, reports, case studies, surveys, etc. for the experience you have
4. Develop your strategy: Who will use it, for what will they use it?
5. Meet with your vendor/IT partner to review all of the above and plan your tech strategy/approach.

Technology and Integration.

1. Build v. Buy - 58% of the marketers said they are or are planning to build it in-house compared to 25% buying a third party tool.  In an ILTA survey we did in February 2012 of IT professionals, the results were the opposite - the majority planned to buy it.
2. What third party vendor to choose?  Choose a vendor partner who intimately understands what lawyers do, law firm project strategy, and the process and the people aspects of such an endeavor in a law firm.  This will make a huge difference in how smoothly the project goes and how much consulting value they can bring to the table.
3. Functional requirements - Your vendor partner will create these for you, and will design them based on your use cases and conversations with your IT team.
4. Integration – where does important data live?  It’s all about leveraging trusted data that lives elsewhere - time/billing, CRM, document management system, conflicts, website, HR database, etc.
5. Mobility – experience on-the-go - The most effective cross-selling takes place spontaneously, when lawyers and clients are on the move.  These opportunities are lost 80%+ of the time, because experience data lives somewhere back in the office.  Lawyers need it at their fingertips when standing in a movie line, riding in a cab with a client, and having lunch or a drink.  Velocity(tm) is the answer to this - it puts this trusted data into your lawyers' hands via their smart phones or tablets.

The next critical piece is content - who contributes to it, who owns it.  That will be my next post.

Love your law firm marketing job more - Part 2

I intended to share the skeletal Smart-Work Matrix worksheet that Allen Fuqua uses in my last post.  Here it is.  This is an example of how Allen and his marketing team plot their tasks and projects at Winstead.