Monthly Archives: March 2011

The Joy in Domesday Thinking – Leading Change In Law Firms

I made the following comment on Julian Summerhayes ace blog but it got lost somewhere.  It draws upon my thoughts that I have been exercising here for whole freaking years now, thoughts which are now consolidated via Kotter’s Leading Change, my own change leadership work as an associate coach with the excellent Wilsher Group and a recent McKinsey article on wargaming.

In reponse to Why Lawyers Fear Change

Personally I think there is a need for some Domesday thinking.

Far too often I still hear “Oh, it won’t be all that different” or “We’ll get through it.”

This is likely to be well intentioned. Keep calm and carry on. Don’t panic. Don’t upset the ranks. Keep morale up.

But the results can be soporific.

By adopting a Domesday scenario I am not suggesting despair. Instead, I am advocating a form of make believe play, or Scenario Setting.

“What would we do if a competitor came in with a new form of legal service provision and attracted 30 – 40 – 50% of our client base? How would we respond in that situation?

The response is the critical bit.

What are our thoughts?

How would we implement plans?

Who would be responsible for what?

What resources would we need to access?

Who would we need to bring on board?

What would our practice look like, post-event?

How would we fit in to that?

How would it match our own personal goals and aspirations?

What, out of all of the things we have looked at today, might deliver benefits now?

Why shouldn’t we start implementing those aspects right away?

It is about walking up to the wall and meeting it, rather than hitting it 6, 12 or 24 months later.

Brilliant ideas can emerge out of well facilitated conversations and games such as these.

The question is, “Who wants to play?”

1 Comment

Filed under The Changing Legal Market

The Futile Fightback Against Spam Begins Here

Dear Sirs

Thank you for your email setting out, amongst other things, various articles about things that you have written about and which I had not expected.

Thank you for that.

Thank you that you have given me the opportunity to form a view and build a relationship with your company that has instructed, in turn, I must presume, a marketing company to send out your email setting out, amongst other things, various articles about things that you have written about and which I had not expected.  Or requested.

If I had not received your email then I would not have known about your company, not least because I am in Bath, over 200 miles away.

Still, your marketing people will know better about that and no doubt there are all kinds of reasons why it was a good idea to send me this email, and charge you for it, setting out, amongst other things, various articles about things that you have written about and which I had not expected.  Or requested.  Or desired.

Now that I come to read as far as the second paragraph I see that your newsletter has a typographical error within it.  We’ll let that go.

And I am left confused.

Why is it a good idea for your company to pay marketing agents to send out emails to people that have neither requested nor desired them living more than 200 miles away?

Of course, I am a solicitor and solicitors use your services.

I get that.

Divorce solicitors do not though.  What?  Your marketeers checked that out didn’t they?  I mean, they do target this stuff don’t they or do they just send it out in a scattergun fashion?  And if so, why would you pay someone to do that?

I’m wondering at the end of all of this, and I’m sorry if it has wasted your time, but was your email spam and how much do you pay your marketeers to send this stuff out in your company’s name to people who neither want it or could have any reasonable interest in it?

Furthermore, the email says that I signed up for this (and I find this really hard to believe) through one of your companies websites.

Go on I’ll bite.

Which one?

I wish you all the very best with your marketing activities but please make sure that I am not spammed in this way again.

With kind regards,

Neil

 

2 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

More Blasted Spam

I seem to be inundated with spam these days, and from people I know, am connected to, or share a group with on LinkedIn. It massively undermines your brand and trust in your LinkedIn efforts.
Inviting me to simply respond with “UNSUBSCRIBE” in the email subject bar does not cut it.
Why not put SPAM in your subject bar and then reconsider whether you want to send that out to clients you are trying to attract?

1 Comment

Filed under Law, Lawyers and Social Media