I’ve said before that I’m a 2.0 kinda gal. Let some tech geek with no life be the guinea pig and work the kinks out of whatever new product. I can wait.

Should have waited for the 3.0 iPhone.

I have to admit that since I was FINALLY activated on Saturday, in an experience brought to you by the folks at AT&T who didn’t upload my NEW SIM card number into the system, I’ve been having fun (this was after waiting in line on Friday, only to be told the system was crashed and I would have to activate my phone at home later that afternoon, but couldn’t get it done until Saturday morning). All my e-mail accounts are there. Love the Internet capabilities. Traffic reports. I miss having my Outlook Tasks sync, but I can figure that one out.

Checked my e-mail this morning on my fully-charged phone; and it’s just another day in paradise. Took a shower and came back to a dead phone and this lovely picture:


After 3 calls to Apple and a very nice chat with Chad in Texas, it appears that I have one of those bad batteries my husband has been e-mailing me about.

And while statistics are based on over all populations, not individuals, I can tell you that my experience with my iPhone has sucked 100% (except when it’s working and I love it).

This afternoon I get to hang out at the Apple Store in Century City hoping someone is a no show for their scheduled appointment so I can get a replacement phone/new battery. Oh, joy. And it’s only day 6 (day 5 if you discount the day my phone didn’t work at all because of the SIM card fiasco).

So glad I’m not an attorney at a big firm who has been issued an iPhone in lieu of a pink slip. I can see it now: Sitting in the lobby of opposing counsel’s office wondering where everyone is for the big depo. Tapping on my newly charged iPhone not really knowing what that black & red warning light means. Hell, I just charged the damn phone so my battery really can’t be dead. Missing the e-mail from the senior partner that the depo location has changed. Pissing off the client, leading the firm to be fired and my ass thrown out on the street. All because of a bad battery.

Okay, that’s a bit dramatic, and I know I’m just venting my frustrations right now. But before law firms roll out iPhones to their attorneys, they’d better make sure the kinks are out of the system first. No use losing your IT credibility over a battery.

Having put in my dues at big law, I have to say I prefer the culture and work at small or mid-sized firms. With the rumors swirling about possible mega-firm mergers (Heller & Baker, Pillsbury & Nixon Peabody), I have to wonder what mergers like these are trying accomplish? Are they looking to save their firms, á la the Heller rumors? Or expand into new markets, as was leaked to Above the Law in regards to Nixon?

[A] few weeks ago there was a firm-wide videoconference with the new [Nixon Peabody] managing partner Dick Langan. He said the goal was to double the size of the firm within five years; we all left saying the only possible way to go from 700 attorneys to 1500 in that short amount of time was a merger. He talked a lot about increasing our international presence, and specifically mentioned Paris and also South America.

As any firm begins their strategic planning process, bigger (footprint, headcount, revenue, PPEP) is always on the table. Seth Godin’s blog post this morning, “Should small businesses whine?” got me thinking if smaller can be the better approach. He believes that “Small is a weapon, not an excuse.”

If your small company can’t deliver a better experience (in areas people care about) than a big one, why on Earth should someone do business with you? I’m not saying you must have faster service, a bigger website, lower prices and twenty-four hour a day phone support. I’m saying that for some of your customers, you have to be monstrously, demonstrably, better.

The web is a great equalizer. A tiny business can have a better website than a huge one. A tiny business can do better customer support than a big one. A tiny business can write a better newsletter than a big one. Maybe not for everyone, but everyone is for the big companies. The passionate minority is happy to embrace the small company. As long as they focus and don’t whine about it.

Getting back to mega-firm mergers:

Does bigger translate into better customer service? Usually not. In fact, chaos usually ensues for months after a merger. Accounting systems don’t mix. End-users have a difficult time adapting to the new systems. Lots of turnover of staff and attorneys as everyone tries to figure out their new place in the pecking order, if they have one. Moaning and groaning that “that’s not they way we always did it.” Clients are always well aware of the chaos, leaving them vulnerable to your competition.

Will a 1700 attorney law firm better serve their clients than a 700 attorney law firm? Not necessarily. One merger motivator is the allure of adding new practice experiences or greater depth to your current portfolio. My experience is that after a merger, and without intervention by the business development department, most attorneys continue to just work with the same attorneys with whom they always worked. There might be some cross-over, mavericks who get it, but it is a slow process to change habits and culture. Once the allure of the merger wears off, everyone reverts back to their status quo. This is true with lateral hires as well, whether individuals or groups.

Can an 80 attorney firm, or a virtual law firm, provide a better client experience? Absolutely. There is a rise of smaller firms offering better service, responding to client requests for “alternative billing arrangements,” all the while attracting great talent and maintaining a healthy profit. It might not be the $2 million we see at some mega firms, but the attorneys are still living the good life. In addition, there are new firms springing up every day, such as Virtual Law Firm, brought to us by Craig Johnson of Venture Law Group fame, that are thinking outside the lawyer box. These new firms are more in tune with current technology and trends, looking for ways to motivate the Gen-X partners and Gen-Y associates.

In the day-to-day life of a legal marketer there always seems to be a battle to fight. Some are worthy of our blood, sweat and frustrations, while others are not. At the end of the day whether or not we go with Pantone 419u or 425u; engrave or off-set print; serve chicken or fish; include a client extranet button or not on the home page won’t make a difference in expanding the firm’s business.

However, fighting battles that don’t need to be fought can and will weaken my credibility (trust) with my lawyers. It’s simple client relations, yet time and again I see legal marketers duking it out over trivial matters: serif or san serif, is it period space, or period space space? (AP Style says one, but was happy to let that one go … for now).
I listen to my clients, guide them, and recommend actions that they can take. I listen some more, make alterations to my plan, and then move the ball forward a few yards. The more my clients trust and respect me, the more likely they are to accept my recommendations. It’s that simple.
That’s when the fun starts. We get to introduce client service interviews, client teams, strategic planning, CRM, SEO, blogs, and maybe some re-branding and a new website.
I have found that respect needs to be earned, and then earned again, and once again after that. I get to build on my successes. There is rarely a second chance to rebuild credibility, especially in a law firm. Once it is lost, it is gone.

For the past few days there has been some gossip swirling in my circles about Pillsbury, where I served as a Marketing Director in the LA office for several years. ATL is reporting that 15 attorneys have been laid off. I cannot confirm any of this. I can say that, if true, 15 attorneys, and what about the staff that supports them, have have lost their jobs in a tough economy.

Pillsbury isn’t the first firm in today’s economy, nor will they be the last, to right size, clean house, lay off, whatever you want to call it. However, behind the gossip are some shocked people wondering what they’re going to do.

It can happen to any of us.

As I said in my post Are You Redundant: what are you doing today to increase your value and strengthen your positions within your firms? What are you going to do today to avoid being seen as redundant?

I’m coming to see all of the surveys and rankings as just notches on the bed post. Look closely at the methodology, the actual numbers, what they choose to use and not use, and you have to wonder: WHY, OH WHY? I’m sure it has nothing to do with advertising.

American Lawyer Magazine, after the AmLaw 100 and AmLaw 200 issues, just released their “A-List” issue. Not to take anything away from the firms on the list, but what does this really mean? Are A-List firms better places to work? Are the clients more satisfied or loyal? Are the associates producing better work product? Oh, and lets not forget about the “staff.” Did they get raises this year?

On the surface, the A-List should be great places to work (Associate Satisfaction Ranks – check); better corporate citizens (Pro Bono Ranks – check); promoting diversity (Diversity Ranks – check); and making the partners rich (Revenue Per Lawyer Ranks – check).

While I am no Mark Greene or Ann Lee Gibson, taking a peek behind the methodology just raises more questions for me.

To come up with the A-List score, we double the points for both revenue per lawyer and pro bono and add them to the scores from the associate satisfaction and diversity surveys. Then we rank the firms by their total scores. The top 20 form the A-List.

I’m not sure why, but for the A-List the revenue and pro bono ranks are twice as valuable as associate satisfaction and diversity? Why is that? And what about all the incomplete surveys? And, are 10 responses enough to reach a valid conclusion on anything?

“Last year 164 firms had at least ten responses, which qualified those firms for a national ranking. The top-ranked firm gets a score of 200, and the bottom-ranked gets a score of 37 when we calculated the numbers,” p. 99, American Lawyer Magazine, July 2008.

As for revenue per lawyer, is this an indication of a more profitable or better run firm? Not according to Ann Lee Gibson’s article “Revenue Per Equity Partner— a Useful Metric of Law Firm Financial Performance”:

This article posits that the two revenue metrics used most often to describe law firms’ financial performance— gross revenue and revenue per lawyer—are not the only and perhaps not even the best revenue metrics to describe law firms’ operational and financial performance.

(skip)

The metric “revenue per equity partner” offers more useful and predictive information about a firm’s ability to produce revenue that actually winds up on the bottom line in partner profits.

I’m no math wizard, but the stats just aren’t adding up for me.

I’d call you to brag about my new iPhone, but it isn’t activated. Probably won’t be until later this afternoon. It looks cool, though.

So here’s the marketing angle. Why is Apple, the brand of brands, having such difficulty in launching a new product … again? Did you not learn anything the last time around? Did you not have the “what went right, what went wrong, what will we do different next time” meeting after last year’s bang-up launch?

I understand you tried to lock the phone down so it won’t work on other carriers, and that has lead to many of today’s problems. Tell me, how’s that working out for you? Challenge a nerd that you can’t break their system and you know they will. Call it the Gary Hart Syndrome. It seems the only thing you got for forcing immediate activation is lots of bad press.

The systems are crashing left and right, and the 1.0 users can’t upgrade. Now I’m hearing it’s a software bug that is keeping the phones from being activated. Ugh. I think you need to hire some of those guys from Gizmodo to help you out.

Some Casual Observations from the Front Lines
There were long lines of people camping out in front of the stores (I got there at 6:30 and was 33rd in line) for no reason, really. Why not allow people to pre-purchase or reserve? That would pace customers coming into the store over a couple days, and alleviate some of the back-up on the systems.

Where were all the “chiefs” who could do the problem solving this morning? While everyone in my store was really nice, poor Dave was just being run ragged: “Dave, I need a 16 white.” “Dave, I’ve never seen this on the screen before.” “Dave, I need a jawbone.” Dave had to problem solve and was one of only two people allowed in the stock room to get the phones.

This one’s for the guy I met at 6:30 this morning: Thanks for all the free water while we waited in line. Now, how about access to your bathrooms?

And finally, why all the upgrading hassles? Stop changing the rules mid-stream. I’ve been an AT&T customer since three or four phone companies ago. I’m on a family plan with three phones, two of which are eligible for upgrade. Yesterday I was told no problem using any of the upgrades for the iPhone for my number. Today there was a problem and I had to shell out an extra $200 for a phone that isn’t activated yet.

But it looks really good sitting on my desk.

In an eat-what-you-kill law firm culture, associates are the appetizer. They might keep us from starving, but when’s the last time you made a decision where to eat based on the appetizer?

Most associates are viewed as disposable by the big firms and are churned in and out. The leveraging required to make the numbers work will prevent most associates from joining the partnership track. The high cost and salaries of the associates requires that they be seen as valuable from day one; they’re just too expensive to “wait and see” if they’ll develop from students to lawyers. I remember a time when associates were given a couple tries at passing the bar. Not anymore. You’d better pass it the first time, or you’re out.

Yet, time and again we read in surveys how associates want “work-life balance,” interesting work, mentors, a pathway to partnership, etc. However, when there are good alternatives presented, associates are still lured away by the prospects of the $165k firm.

The National Law Journal has an article on local Southern California IP firm Knobbe Marten and their business model. Buried towards the end of the story is the impact the system has on the firm culture and associates:

[Washington, DC managing partner William] Zimmerman, who joined the firm out of law school in 1998, said its short partnership track has the added benefit of giving more responsibility to younger lawyers, such as taking depositions and participating in trials.

Most of the firm’s hires are first-year associates who stand a good chance of making partner within five years, [managing partner Steven] Nataupsky said.

Knobbe Martens has hired more than two dozen associates in the past year.

The firm boasts a more relaxed culture; most attorneys work, on average, seven hours a day and bill about 1,640 hours a year.

The catch: associate salaries of $150,000, which are below market rates. Some former associates, speaking on condition of anonymity, said pay was a factor in their decision to leave.

Granted, if I was 25-years old and $100,000 in debt I’d care what the other firm pays, but a few thousand here or there will not impact your life 10-15 years from now as much as your firm culture. And while Knobbe’s PPEP at $475,000 doesn’t begin to rival the AmLaw 25, you have to admit it’s not a bad living for a 35-hour work week.

Seth Godin in his blog post today questions why, if George Costanza of Seinfeld fame has a Wikipedia page, shouldn’t your brand receive entries? My first reaction: sounds like a good idea to me. After all, I’m a legal marketer, not a lawyer.

I know that several law firms already have Wiki pages, including Latham, Skadden and Pillsbury. Several more have set up LinkedIn pages, including Skadden, Weil Gotshal and Dewey Ballantine. And while I am always eager to jump out in front of a new trend, lawyers are by nature cautious, weary of change, and definitely don’t want to go first.

As we coax our law firms and lawyer into the new frontier of Web 2.0 I sometimes wonder if “not right now” is the best answer as WE discuss: Should I promote the firm on Wikipedia? Does the firm need a LinkedIn profile? Do we need to open a branch in Second Life?

I’m not advocating a return to the era and comfort of ecru stationary, nor do I advocate waiting to see what O’Melveny does prior to making a decision (ask me about the light up pen story another time).

I have found, after spending 10 years as a legal marketer, I need to edit my enthusiasm for anything new around my partners. While they are willing to take a leap of faith with me, they would just rather wait until a few other firms have taken that one giant step first.

I just heard the wonderful news that Martindale-Hubbell & LinkedIn have hooked up. Not that kind of hooked up, the good kind that makes legal marketers like me scramble an e-mail out to all of her attorneys gushing about their products.

If you haven’t heard the good news, Martindale.com is now featuring LinkedIn social networking functionality.

Kevin O’Keefe broke the news here. And while Doug Cornelius finds it clunky, I just have to say Mazel Tov to the new couple.