Marketing cuts: good or bad?

December 3, 2008
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
How essential are law firm marketing departments? I guess it depends who you ask.

That department is taking a hit because of the economy, according to a recent article in The National Law Journal. Law firms that are struggling to stay afloat or maintain their practices see the marketing department as more expendable than a practice group or handful of attorneys. Other firms, however, believe now is the right time to step up marking efforts.

In a tough economy, which is the better business strategy for a firm: cut or increase your marketing?

If a firm has little to no marketing, then it will have less exposure to potential clients. Less exposure brings fewer clients, and fewer clients mean the practice will continue to struggle and could face cutting another department or more attorneys. The vicious cycle could continue until the economy picks up.

Cutting back on marketing would be more harmful to smaller firms, newer firms, or firms that haven’t already done a good job getting their name out to the general public. The bigger firms may not take as big of a hit if they cut marketing because they may already have brand-name recognition.

Attorneys and partners at a firm are often responsible for keeping clients or bringing in new ones, but can they do it without a marketing department?
ADVERTISEMENT
  • Look at tough times as chock full of opportunity, rather than barren, and your prospects are much brighter.

    When there\'s a dearth of clients, you need to make an extra effort, not a lesser one, to gather them.
  • Marketing for every business is so key right now. My company, Squish Designs, an Indianapolis based web development and social media consulting company would love to help out those lawyers looking for marketing assistance. We offer websites which we can integrate various forms of social media into, including blogs.

    My contact info:
    Nicki Laycoax
    nicki@squishdesigns.com
    www.squishdesigns.com
    www.twitter.com/nickilaycoax

    I am happy to help.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. Just an aside, but regardless of the outcome, I 'm proud of Judge William Hughes. He was the original magistrate on the Home place issue. He ruled for Home Place, and was primaried by Brainard for it. Their tool Poindexter failed to unseat Hughes, who won support for his honesty and courage throughout the county, and he was reelected Judge of Hamilton County's Superior Court. You can still stand for something and survive. Thanks, Judge Hughes!

  2. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  3. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  4. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  5. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

ADVERTISEMENT