Growing and maintaining relationships: Aligning business understanding with client expectations
Business retention and growth strategy differentiation in an industry with many competitors can be a real challenge. Yet, there are some basic, service-oriented strategies that clearly distinguish one firm from another.
February 23, 2014 at 07:00 PM
7 minute read
Business retention and growth strategy differentiation in an industry with many competitors can be a real challenge. Yet, there are some basic, service-oriented strategies that clearly distinguish one firm from another. The key to creating an effective differentiation strategy is to begin by asking clients for their opinions about how they differentiate one firm from another. We decided to ask that question and learned that one of the best ways for a firm to differentiate itself is to develop a strong business understanding.
Since we believe it's always important to add the “voice of the client” to any business strategy, we asked some clients what “understand my business” means to them and how firms may better align themselves with client expectations. Here are some of their comments.
Senior IP litigation counsel of a financial services company:
“Understanding the realities of the products we sell and knowing that there is a distinction between the realities of the products we sell and the business climate and business needs that come along with the products we sell.”
“With outside firms, oftentimes it's the younger lawyers who never really worked a real job—they went to school, went to law school and very few worked in industry or business—or learned how to sell, making accommodations for bigger deals and vendors. These are typically the guys who want you to fight to the death. So on one level, generally speaking, they need to be able to understand what our industry is and what our products are.”
GC of a technology company:
“It means not only the specific industry, but also the needs of what I'm asking for as it relates to my specific circumstances. If I talk about this pressing issue, what do I need to have happen and why? If you don't understand our legal needs in the context of our business and our industry, you will never have as much value to me as someone who does understand.”
And last, the senior litigation counsel for a global corporation:
“Our company has peculiar procedures; I want them followed and respected if not at least tolerated. Some firms think we are putting them through hoops, and we can tell they are not very receptive to it… Our arrangement in the U.S. is different than our American competitors. There is a lot of that information on the Internet. It would be nice for firms to do a bit of homework on their own about our company, so they have a good basis for spotting issues that they otherwise might not. Know our business, spot issues, think about how they impact us and pick up the phone… If they don't understand our business, they won't be able to add much value.”
In response, our outside counsel view from a managing partner of a 750-lawyer firm has this philosophy at his firm:
“A strong business understanding is essential to maintaining and growing client relationships, especially for succession planning. It takes years, 10 or so, to prepare for the next generation to take over a client. This is true primarily because knowing the client's business, their appetite for risk, how an issue is going to impact their business, etc., is critical to building loyal relationships. Otherwise, we're viewed as every other law firm. This is tough to achieve, but critical to the long-term stability of our key business relationships.”
Aligning inside and outside counsel's expectations of one another is more easily achieved when outside counsel know the business and anticipate legal needs and inside counsel communicate what about their business and industry is important for their outside counsel to understand.
Business retention and growth strategy differentiation in an industry with many competitors can be a real challenge. Yet, there are some basic, service-oriented strategies that clearly distinguish one firm from another. The key to creating an effective differentiation strategy is to begin by asking clients for their opinions about how they differentiate one firm from another. We decided to ask that question and learned that one of the best ways for a firm to differentiate itself is to develop a strong business understanding.
Since we believe it's always important to add the “voice of the client” to any business strategy, we asked some clients what “understand my business” means to them and how firms may better align themselves with client expectations. Here are some of their comments.
Senior IP litigation counsel of a financial services company:
“Understanding the realities of the products we sell and knowing that there is a distinction between the realities of the products we sell and the business climate and business needs that come along with the products we sell.”
“With outside firms, oftentimes it's the younger lawyers who never really worked a real job—they went to school, went to law school and very few worked in industry or business—or learned how to sell, making accommodations for bigger deals and vendors. These are typically the guys who want you to fight to the death. So on one level, generally speaking, they need to be able to understand what our industry is and what our products are.”
GC of a technology company:
“It means not only the specific industry, but also the needs of what I'm asking for as it relates to my specific circumstances. If I talk about this pressing issue, what do I need to have happen and why? If you don't understand our legal needs in the context of our business and our industry, you will never have as much value to me as someone who does understand.”
And last, the senior litigation counsel for a global corporation:
“Our company has peculiar procedures; I want them followed and respected if not at least tolerated. Some firms think we are putting them through hoops, and we can tell they are not very receptive to it… Our arrangement in the U.S. is different than our American competitors. There is a lot of that information on the Internet. It would be nice for firms to do a bit of homework on their own about our company, so they have a good basis for spotting issues that they otherwise might not. Know our business, spot issues, think about how they impact us and pick up the phone… If they don't understand our business, they won't be able to add much value.”
In response, our outside counsel view from a managing partner of a 750-lawyer firm has this philosophy at his firm:
“A strong business understanding is essential to maintaining and growing client relationships, especially for succession planning. It takes years, 10 or so, to prepare for the next generation to take over a client. This is true primarily because knowing the client's business, their appetite for risk, how an issue is going to impact their business, etc., is critical to building loyal relationships. Otherwise, we're viewed as every other law firm. This is tough to achieve, but critical to the long-term stability of our key business relationships.”
Aligning inside and outside counsel's expectations of one another is more easily achieved when outside counsel know the business and anticipate legal needs and inside counsel communicate what about their business and industry is important for their outside counsel to understand.
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
© 2025 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 AllClass Certification, Cash-Sweep Cases Among Securities Litigation Trends to Watch in 2025
6 minute readNLRB Blisters Skilled Care Home Chain That Terminated Nursing Assistant Who Complained About Wages
6 minute readJetBlue Airways Will Pay $2M to Settle DOT Charges of Chronically Delayed Flights
Trending Stories
- 1TikTok Law and TikTok Politics
- 2California Supreme Court Vacates Murder Conviction in Infant Abuse Case
- 3New York’s Proposed Legislation Restraining Transfer of Real Property
- 4Withers Hires Lawyers, Staff From LA Trusts and Estates Boutique
- 5To Speed Criminal Discovery, NY Bill Proposes Police-to-Prosecutor Pipeline For Records
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