A Law Firm Rebrand: Understanding Where You Are—and Where You Need to Go
Whether due to expansion of services or for a more modern look, it is often in an evolving firm's best interest to rebrand. A rebrand is not only the renaissance of the external messaging, but also an opportunity to look internally at the vision, beliefs and culture.
June 10, 2020 at 11:01 AM
5 minute read
A law firm's brand is more than just marketing—it is the embodiment of the firm's identity, what it stands for, and where it is going. A firm's brand is the ongoing story and visuals that are elicited in a client when they hear your firm name. Whether due to expansion of services or for a more modern look, it is often in an evolving firm's best interest to rebrand. A rebrand is not only the renaissance of the external messaging, but also an opportunity to look internally at the vision, beliefs and culture.
|Identify Rebrand Triggers
The goal of a rebranding strategy is to develop instant recognition, inciting a subconscious favorable reaction and instinctive preference to the firm. To start, a rebranding strategy should begin with the business reasons behind the rebrand. Does the firm need to accelerate growth in a new market? Is it driven by the need to compete with larger or more established competitors? Was there a change in ownership or stakeholders? Or is the current brand simply no longer accurate? Often it is a combination of motivations behind a rebrand but, whatever the reasons, it is important to fully identify the "why," making it front and center as the rebranding process begins. With clear objectives, it is much easier to avoid potential gaps and ensure the achievement of the desired business goals of rebranding.
|Self-Awareness is the Key to Success
After identifying the business drivers behind the rebranding, a firm must look inward to capture its unique spirit. Just as lawyers cannot take a blanket approach for all clients, a firm's brand should be a bespoke identity that is rooted in its character, culture and vision. It is not simply defining services but, instead, needs to start by assessing the firm's unique value proposition (UVP) and building the rebrand around this. A firm's UVP is a clear statement describing its benefits, how it meets clients' needs, and what distinguishes it from competitors. Often, the defining differences between law firms may be more nuanced, as opposed to major deviations. Simply put, define what separates you from similarly-situated firms, answering the question "why are you the best choice?" Decide what makes your firm unique, and refine that identity to a few keywords and selling points that will encompass the overall theme of the rebrand.
|Assess the Current Brand Experience Through the Clients' Lens
Virtually all law firms have blind spots, with a distorted view of their image in the marketplace. Similarly, clients frequently have a myopic view of a firm's services. Understanding not only your prospective audience but your existing clients is key while re-envisioning the brand. Conduct external research on your firm and clients with the goal of obtaining an objective understanding of your current brand perception and competencies. Absent external and objective market research, you run the risk of rebranding on false assumptions. Ensure you understand your brand, clients, and market better than anyone else, then rebuild your brand based on this research.
|Rebrand With Tomorrow in Mind
As a law firm's business plans take into account industry forecasts, trends and future predictions, so too must its brand. It is vital to plan for growth. A successful rebrand will find a balance between the past, present, and future, honoring a firm's heritage, as well as its growth trajectory. It must also emphasize its relevance in the present market, and where it is going, to ensure that the brand has longevity. To do this, a visual identity that is scalable, robust, and accessible must be designed with a firm's acknowledged UVPs and identity in mind. It is essential that the rebrand focuses on every touchpoint for the firm, not the least of which is the website.
Rebranding expressions (e.g., logo, colors, typography, tonality) necessitates an updated website, arguably the most important outward-facing brand piece for a law firm, and the epicenter of firm marketing plans. Each element of the website should reinforce the rebrand, from the visual design elements to the messaging and content itself. The website, together with the remaining elements of the firm's online presence and tangible marketing collateral – brochures, business cards, signage, etc—are the tools used to connect, promote and establish the new brand. Once these steps are completed, unveil the rebrand to your employees, clients, and prospective clients with a marketing campaign for maximum influence.
Like anything successful, rebrands require a thoughtful approach and take time. Time to understand. Time to develop and cultivate. And time to impact. With a holistic strategy to intentionally and deliberately crafting a rebrand, firms can be sure all audiences appreciate its unique strengths and offerings.
At the end of the day, a well-executed rebrand will illustrate to existing and potential clients the value of your firm, even before they learn the value of your services.
Shanon Lazarus is an attorney and the director of marketing and business development at Bressler, Amery & Ross in Fort Lauderdale. Contact her at [email protected].
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 AllNavigating Claims Under the Florida Telephone Solicitation Act and Florida Telemarketing Act
4 minute readSecond Circuit Ruling Expands VPPA Scope: What Organizations Need to Know
6 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Elon Musk Names Microsoft, Calif. AG to Amended OpenAI Suit
- 2Trump’s Plan to Purge Democracy
- 3Baltimore City Govt., After Winning Opioid Jury Trial, Preparing to Demand an Additional $11B for Abatement Costs
- 4X Joins Legal Attack on California's New Deepfakes Law
- 5Monsanto Wins Latest Philadelphia Roundup Trial
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