A. The Pluses & Minuses of Name Recognition:

Although name recognition is important, this awareness alone will not guarantee the continued success of the Firm. Just ask companies such as Montgomery Ward, Braniff Airlines, and Atari to name a few. They were all obliterated by their then lesser known competitors through better products or services and more aggressive marketing strategies.

For fast moving industries such as Business and High Tech, these potent strategies make the difference between first place (survival) and obsolescence. It is not even a guarantee that the companies offering the best product or service (or the perceived best) will win out over those that aren’t as good (can we all say "Betamax”?)

It’s a given that the 250 largest law firms in the country already have a long history and strong name recognition. Brand name firms are called to the table more often based on their recognition and presumption of quality—but that doesn’t mean the work they eventually get will remain with them.

The challenge facing larger firms is competing with firms younger, more aggressive, and less expensive than they are. These firms may initially lack some of the name recognition and reputation on a Firm level, but are generally perceived as more responsive and in touch with the times.

Law firms relying primarily on a long history to maintain their competitiveness will eventually be perceived as being “out of touch” by a marketplace which is dominated by younger and more aggressive decision makers.

To summarize, the main disadvantages of name recognition are that larger, older, more known firms are often perceived as too expensive, less aggressive, and not in tune with today’s rapidly changing environment.

B. Brobeck: A Case Study

David Geyer, Director of Marketing of Brobeck, Phleger & Harrison LLP was one of the panelists that spoke at the LMA Bay Area Program held at the Practicing Law Institute in San Francisco on June 25, 2001. He referred to the recently released BTI Consulting Group report (www.bticonsulting.com) which reveals that less than 25% of Fortune 1000 companies are satisfied with their outside legal counsel.

They analyzed the strategic market performance of more than 100 law firms over a three-year period. The mid-size firms were doing extraordinarily well and taking away billing and revenue from the very large firms. What’s more, 42% of Fortune 1000 clients saw smaller and medium sized firms with a quantifiable client service advantage. Large firms will be at a disadvantage until they adopt and embrace client-focused strategies.

Geyer reminded the audience that now is the time to reposition and promote the firm along its strengths, and to become students of their clients’ businesses. “Build deeper relationships, offer just-in-time service, and build tour knowledge base. The first ones to do this win,” he reminded. Please consider the following case study for Brobeck, a law firm that has made marketing a top priority.

•	Firm revenues increased from $250 million in 1998 to $476 million in 2000.
•	Profits per partner increased 44% in 1999 were up another 56% in 2000, to $1.2 million in profits per partner.
•	The firm grew from 550 to 950 lawyers in two years.
•	An American Lawyer survey among the nation’s top 50 technology companies ranked Brobeck #1. This is exactly what the firm was aiming at.
•	Fortune rated Brobeck one of the top 100 companies to work for.
•	The firm began running a $3.5 million TV ad campaign on CNN in January 2001 (that’s $2.2 million on network time, $1.3 producing the ad).
•	The marketing budget is 1.5% of revenues (including salaries and marketing activities). The budget will grow to 1.7% of revenues in 2001 because of the advertising campaign.
•	The firm changed its name from “Brobeck Phleger & Harrison” to just “Brobeck.”
•	Brobeck adopted a tagline or “signature statement”: “Brobeck. When your future is at stake.”
•	David Geyer has a marketing staff of 25 people.
•	The marketing department doesn’t have to fuss with dispensing tickets for client entertainment or filling tables at charity events.

C. Advertising Impact on the Legal Industry

The following statistics are taken from a survey conducted in the year 2000 of the top 1000 largest law firms in the US (“G-B 2000 Law Firm Advertising”).

•	The typical marketing budget of a law firm has increased sevenfold since 1991.
•	There are three times as many lawyers today as there were in 1970.
•	75% of all law firms surveyed said they planned on substantially increasing advertising expenditures over last year’s.
•	More than 80% of these firms consistently have used display advertising in the past two years.
•	Nearly 40% of these firms sponsor local or regional TV and/or radio programs.
•	72% of these law firms frequently sponsor events, seminars, and community activities as a means to market their firm.
•	Nearly three times as many firms engage in advertising as ten years ago.
•	68% of the ads run focus on image as their primary marketing vehicle.

How Much They Are Spending

At the June 14, 2001 LMA Chapter meeting, panel of publications and agency experts made the following observations:

•	Know what’s reasonable—most firms allocate 2-3% of gross revenue for all marketing activities. A reasonable percentage of the total should go to advertising.
•	Advertising is rated as one of the top four marketing activities that provide the greatest return on investment to law firms.
•	Repetition remains one of the keys to a successful ad campaign.
•	Break the budget gown by goals, not by publications. Look, for example, at practice groups by geographic market, or by industry segment.