Apathy is the Enemy
The state of hiring in legal marketing and business development
October 09, 2018 at 09:01 AM
4 minute read
A wave of apathy has hit the legal marketing/business development profession just when new talent is sorely needed to inject energy and specialized expertise into firms to ensure they survive and thrive amid unprecedented industry pressures.
A great demand… and a collective “yawn” from candidates. In this time of change, a tremendous need has arisen for skilled legal marketers. Today's market is very similar to that of the early 2000s when legal marketing really took off in earnest to try and catch up with accounting and consulting firms, with the supply of talent available coming nowhere near to meeting the demand.
Now firms are facing competition from non-traditional providers of legal services as well as increasing client demands to provide greater value. Further, many firms are looking for talent with very similar skill sets.
Every day, legal marketers tell us that they are being bombarded by recruiters. But because all of the positions appear the same on the surface, many candidates don't take notice even with a plethora of seemingly interesting opportunities available.
Step up on the basics! Just when their firms are called upon to showcase differentiation, in-house recruiting and HR teams must rise to the occasion to attract suitable talent. Resting on cut-and-paste job board posts, does not inspire great candidates to beat down your door.
Those that do show interest often grouse that HR professionals don't understand what they do. Here's what they tell us:
- Initial missteps—first interviews with HR reveal a lack of knowledge of the position, the responsibilities or how to answer related questions
- A glacial pace—either putting candidates “on hold” (which translates into “we think we found someone better but, if not, we will settle for you”) or never getting back to the candidate at all
- Unprepared interviewers—a candidates time is precious too. Ensure your firm's representatives are well-prepared and thus make a good impression.
Be ready to clearly articulate what your firm has to offer. Notwithstanding rampant misconceptions, today's marketing and business development professionals are inextricably tied to revenue generation. They work closely with lawyers to help them understand their prospects, their clients, their industry and work with them to develop plans to gain more business. They watch the competition. They know which marketing efforts can return the most results.
They are probably the savviest of candidates because they commonly work at the heart of the firm's business and, as such, are keenly attuned to gauging if the culture the firm expresses during the recruiting process is authentic.
To attract inspired marketing professionals, take time to prepare your firm's story and present it in a compelling and transparent manner.
Educate your lawyers on market challenges. The success rate of wooing someone from a peer firm who they can 'plug and play' are increasingly rare. Smart firms think outside law and remain open to accepting candidates from other professional services firms.
Encourage lawyers to consider hiring professionals who are knowledgeable in their client's industries and businesses. Growing numbers of professionals from energy, health care, financial services, insurance and consulting firms are well-prepared to lend insights that the “usual suspects” and other outsiders cannot.
Firms who succeed in the future must intentionally fine-tune their efforts. With the right care and attention on the talent acquisition side, candidates will interview with you and simultaneously appreciate that you understand their potential value, and how they can realize their own ambitions.
Jennifer Scalzi is the CEO of Calibrate Legal who works with its law firm clients to help them achieve optimal performance from their business services teams to drive top and bottom line impact. She can be reached at [email protected]
More information on the ALM Intelligence Fellows Program can be found here.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllThe Path in the Multiverse: Rethinking Client Engagement Through Gamification
6 minute readThe Power of Your Inner Circle: Turning Friends and Social Contacts Into Business Allies
As Tech-Focused Roles in C-Suite Expand, Newcomers Embrace Big Law Opportunities
Latham, Kirkland Alums Land the Top GC Posts—Here's What It Means for Business Generation
10 minute readTrending Stories
- 1How I Made Partner: 'Develop a Practice Area You Really Care About ,' Says Jennifer Gniady of Stradley Ronon
- 2Indian Billionaire Gautam Adani Indicted in Brooklyn for Alleged Orchestration of $250 Million Bribery Plot
- 3Eagle Pharma Founder Sues Company to Recoup Cost of SEC Investigation
- 4GC Conference Takeaways: Picking AI Vendors 'a Bit of a Crap Shoot,' Beware of Internal Investigation 'Scope Creep'
- 5Legal Events for Georgia Lawyers
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250