|
|
 |
Need-to-Know News - July 6th, 2004 |
|
|
 By Andy Havens, a Marketing Management Consultant and co-founder of Sanestorm Marketing (www.sanestorm.com). The article was originally published on LawFuel.com at www.lawfuel.com. Contact Andy at 1.877.SSTORM1 or andyhavens@sanestorm.com.
I heard a comment from a lawyer recently about branding. He said, "We tried that brand thing at our firm, gave it a good two years, and then scrapped it since it wasn't helping us at all." I must have made a sour face, as he asked, "What? What's wrong?"
"Any number of things. But let me first ask, what do you mean by 'trying that brand thing?'"
"You know. We paid some ad agency a bathtub full of money to come up with a new logo, color schemes, a tag line and some other stuff. Made our print ads look like the website. You know. Branding."
I nodded. "Right. Let me ask you a question. What do you wear to a black-tie affair?"
He knew this was a trick question. But he took the bait and answered, "A black bow tie."
"That's true," I replied. "But if you show up wearing just a black bow tie – no shirt, no pants, no underwear, nothing else – you'll be asked to leave. Unless it's a pretty kinky black-tie affair."
I got a slight chuckle out of him, and he asked, "So? What's your point?"
"The details you mentioned – logo, tagline, color scheme – are to a brand what a black-tie is to a black-tie affair. Yeah, they're among the most visible elements. But without the pants, you're in trouble."
That's the problem with many branding efforts I've witnessed over the last few years. Lots of law firms running around in shiny, new black bow-ties and no pants.
In fact, so many firms did such a poor job at understanding the requirements, processes and benefits of a full-on brand campaign, that there is now a backlash against branding in the legal community. Everyone is "jumping off the brandwagon," as some pundit said recently. Since I can't find the source anywhere on the Internet, it may in fact have been me.
Mistake #1: The black-tie-only, "costume" brand
 We've all heard it said. "Law firms can't be branded." That's crap. While it is possible to have a firm whose brand is confused and ineffective, you can't have no brand at all. It's like saying someone has no personality. We may use that as a shorthand way of implying that their personality is non-descript. But they still have a personality. It's just not memorable or interesting. Which is how your organization will be perceived without a coherent brand.
Logo, tagline, typeface, color-scheme and layout. The "black tie" of brand I mentioned above. Law firms seem to think that if they adopt or spruce up these graphic elements, they've got a brand. Nope. You've just got what the rest of the world calls "style guidelines." Are they part of a brand campaign? Sure. The most important part? Not by a long shot.
Your visual materials are, like a bow-tie, elements of a marketing "wardrobe." But your brand is your organization's personality and character. Indiana Jones is sometimes "Indy," sometimes "Dr. Jones," and sometimes "Junior." In many scenes he's dressed for a desert adventure. Once in awhile we see him in a tux or suit and tie. But he's always the same character. No matter how he's dressed or what he's called, he is not Dr. Frankenstein or Henry Higgins or Barbarella.
Here's a quick way to tell if your firm's brand campaign is serious, or just a bunch of graphics and text that you probably overpaid for. Ask yourself, would you ever take your brand into consideration when making a serious business decision? For example, would your brand ever keep you from taking on a piece of business? Or effect how you'd discipline an employee? Or influence your benefits programs?
If your brand isn't a serious part of your business, it's just a costume. You can take it off and put on another one and still be the same. If your branding campaign is just a bone you're throwing to your marketing committee, take this approach. But understand that you're wasting money and possibly confusing your market, clients, partners and employees. Because a costume brand can end up doing more harm than good.
How to avoid: Don't start a discussion about brand or spend a dime on new materials until you're ready to do so as part of a serious discussion of your business.
Mistake #2: Day-glo orange for its own sake
Here's how to tell a "Junior Birdman" marketing consultant from somebody who's actually done hard time in the real world. If, in a discussion about brand, the words "unique value proposition" pop out, you've got a lightweight. Just being "different" isn't the point of branding.
Brand can be about differentiation, yes. But it's almost a side-effect. If you have a great brand, you will be perceptively different than other competitors in your sector. And once you have a strong brand, you'll want to protect others from copying it. But a brand can be very effective while not being particularly unique. Rather than asking if a brand is unique, ask if it is useful. And that will depend on what you want your brand to accomplish.
If your response to this is, "But we really are unique – we're the only firm in town that does XYZ law," then you've got a great positioning statement. Which is not a brand. Remember – brand is personality. If you're the tallest man on earth, you've got positioning. If you're the biggest firm in the world, that's a position. Not a brand.
How to avoid: Don't make uniqueness a driver of brand strategy. If your brand is strong and true, the distinctive elements will come naturally. If you force yourself to do something "different," you'll end up with a costume brand, at which point you're back to Mistake #1.
Mistake #3: One-size-fits-all
For a brand to really be useful, it must, to some degree, be exclusionary. Lawyers hate this. Especially lawyers at big, defense-side corporate firms. Why? Because it implies that they're not maniacally, fanatically interested in every single solitary piece of work that might possibly, ever come through the door.
Quick aside: This is also why you see so much watered-down, ridiculously inclusive text in law firm ads. "Serving individual clients as well as small businesses and Fortune 500 companies." Or, "Serving clients in [home city], [home state], around the country and around the world." That's not a brand. In lawyer-think, it's essentially an inverse-disclaimer. Disclaimers are meant to limit – "You must be 21 to participate," "Not valid in New Hampshire," "One rebate per customer." And you wouldn't ever, ever, ever want your marketing to prevent someone from traipsing in off the street looking for a lawyer to handle a $5 billion M&A deal.
Here's the reality: if your brand is poorly thought out, you're already turning away work. You're just doing it randomly. Which is exactly how many law firms decide on what practices, industries and clients to service. Whatever comes in the door. Whatever thrives. Whatever somebody takes an interest in. Which is how you end up with a brand that tries to be everything to everyone.
How to avoid: Take a stab at listing the types of matters you wouldn't take on a dare, the types of clients you'd never go after, they kind of lawyers you'd never hire and the industries that don't interest you at all. Then list your top 10 clients, their industries, the types of matters you do for them and the practice areas of your biggest fee earners. Your brand lives somewhere between those two lists.
 Mistake #4: Copycat style
Why do you want a brand? Because every other law firm is doing a bad job at it? Because you'd like a cute logo or a mascot, too? Because those other firm's website's are so tight and fresh? Those aren't good reasons. To paraphrase your mother: "Would you toss $200,000 into a hole in the ground just because some other firm did it first?"
You can't copy a brand. It's like trying to change your personality to be just like someone else. And as we all know from network television sit-coms, trying to be someone you're not lands you in a heap of trouble.
How to avoid: This one's easy. Don't look at other firms' materials when embarking on a brand campaign. Look towards your own strengths, goals and values.
Wherefore, then, brand?
So why go through the trouble of creating a good brand? Because strong branding provides value that isn't tied directly to economic or logistical calculations.
If your clients only hire you because you're the cheapest, you don't need brand. If they hire you because your office is closest to theirs, you don't need brand. If law students only want to join your firm because they know a partner there, you don't need brand.
If you'd like clients to remain loyal, even though their key attorney has left your firm, you need a brand. If you'd like clients to recommend you to colleagues in other states or countries, you need a brand. If you'd like young lawyers to ache with the desire to work at your firm, you need a brand.
So now you know how to avoid the four big mistakes of misguided law firm branding campaigns. How do you do it right? We'll get into that in a future column. Before taking on the task of serious brand development – which is a fairly sophisticated marketing process – you need to remove the impediments to marketing that you've so carefully created. |
 |
|
|
[back]
|
|
RSS FEED