Legal Tech Needs Better Content, Not More Content
So why are marketers doing the opposite? An inside look at new survey results on legal technology marketing.
February 15, 2018 at 08:00 AM
5 minute read
The results of the new Legal Technology Service Providers Use of Content and Social Media Marketing Survey are in, and they're disappointing. But perhaps they're not entirely surprising.
Like many of the law firms they serve, legal tech marketers are pumping out more and more content—but too many are doing it without a documented content strategy to guide their efforts. Whether you're a law firm trying to reach general counsel or a legal tech provider trying to get in front of law firm purchasers, producing content in this scattershot manner just won't cut it in an era of information overload.
We're not saying it's time to hang our heads. This is a moment that should be viewed as a tremendous opportunity. Put simply, organizations have an opportunity to build and strengthen relationships with key audiences by creating relevant, useful content that provides value to those audiences. But to break through all the noise, they'll need documented content strategies that keep their audiences top of mind and help their content find its way into those audiences' hands.
|Similar Trends
Greentarget conducted the survey of legal tech respondents in early 2018. The majority said winning new business was their top content-marketing goal, followed by building new website traffic and lead generation (both of which could be seen as avenues toward business development). And 94 percent of those respondents said they expect to produce more content this year than in 2017.
But just 50 percent of respondents said they had a documented content strategy, while 31 percent said they had one that wasn't documented and 13 percent said they planned to create one in the next 12 months. In other words, organizations know that content marketing can bring in new business, and they're increasing their efforts. But they aren't carefully planning its creation or distribution – meaning their hard work might not provide the returns they're hoping for.
This largely reflects what we found last year in Greentarget's State of Digital & Content Marketing Survey. Eighty-one percent of law firm marketers said they would create more content, but just 26 percent said they had documented content strategies to guide them. Meanwhile, 96 percent of in-house counsel—law firms' target audiences—told us that information overload was a problem.
Of course, it's almost certain that those holding the purse strings inside law firms feel just as bombarded by all the content flying at them each day.
|Budget Problems
Beyond the greater concerns about strategy, content marketing budgets simply aren't big enough among legal tech marketers, particularly when viewed against the nearly universal intention to churn out more content this year.
About two-thirds of the respondents to the legal tech survey said they spend no more than 20 percent of their marketing budgets on content. A recent Content Marketing Institute Study found that, on average, B2B marketers spend 29 percent of their budgets on content. And that's arguably a little low. In this day and age, about a third of B2B marketing budgets should be directed toward content.
Interestingly, legal tech marketers appear to be getting bigger content budget increases this year than B2B marketers generally. Our survey found that 59 percent of legal tech marketers got a budget bump, compared with 39 percent of CMI members.
|Effectively Delivering Content
Email and LinkedIn were the top distribution sources among legal tech marketers. Survey respondents were most likely to describe email as very valuable, but LinkedIn was most likely to be described as very valuable or somewhat valuable. Almost no respondents described LinkedIn as having no value—though 6 percent used that description for email, possibly because spam filters or concerns over timing create the risk that some emails will never be seen.
Traditional media, even in the era of so-called “fake news,” still has its fans among legal tech marketers, with 78 percent calling sources like The Wall Street Journal and The Economist as very or somewhat valuable (slightly ahead of blogs at 72 percent). This echoes other surveys and is perhaps a sign that key decision makers still value reputation and trustworthiness, despite the withering criticism directed at mainstream media in recent years.
Regardless of how content marketing finds its way to decision makers, no one seems to argue about its potential. One legal tech respondent shared an anecdote that encapsulates content's potential as a revenue driver:
“We had a partner at an Am Law firm call us and ask for a demo that led to the firm subscribing to our service,” the respondent said. “Previously, the CMO had not responded to our calls.”
Steve DiMattia is a Senior Vice President in the New York Office of Greentarget, a strategic public relations firm focused exclusively on business-to-business organizations. He works closely with clients in the legal, financial services and tech industries.
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 AllTrending Stories
- 1Lawyer’s Resolutions: Focusing on 2025
- 2Houston Judge Exonerated on Appeal, Public Reprimand Vacated
- 3Bar Report - Dec. 30
- 4Employment Law Developments to Expect From the Second Trump Administration
- 5How I Made Law Firm Leadership: 'It’s Imperative That You Never Stop Learning,' Says Ian Ribald of Ballard Spahr
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