Why Even Small Complaints Can Tank a Lawyer's Online Reputation
In the legal world, first impressions have been replaced by online reviews. Today's attorneys need to understand how to delicately nurture their virtual brands in a realm where they may have little to no control over what's said about them.
March 04, 2019 at 01:24 PM
3 minute read
There may be no such thing as bad press, but there's definitely such a thing as one out of five stars on Yelp. According to the “Reputation Management in the Digital Age” panel held at last week's ABA Tech Show, the majority of would-be clients out there are researching prospective attorneys online, and reviews are among the first things that catch their attention.
Jordan Schuetzle, director of proposition strategy and market development lead at Thomson Reuters, compared an attorney's online presence to a first impression, only without the element of control. It used to be if you wanted to build a good reputation, you'd dress well and practice good manners. Now most of those initial vibes—good or not—are being delivered secondhand.
“It's a scary prospect. People out there are talking about you and you may have no control. You may not even know there conversations are happening,” Schuetzle said.
Even if prospective clients aren't taking the time to read each and every review posted on a site like Yelp, most platforms compile that feedback into some kind of an overall ranking or score that is easy to throw off balance.
During the panel, Schuetzle showed examples of firms with otherwise decent ratings that had been toppled by relatively minuscule complaints. One client was angry that nobody had bothered to return his phone call, while the local pizza delivery guy resented not being given a bigger tip. “So you have to care about those people too,” Schuetzle said.
Fortunately, there are ways that lawyers can take some control over how their brand is perceived online. Instead of being passive and waiting for commentary to start popping up online, attorneys can work on finding the opportune moments in a case to ask clients for feedback.
Solo practitioner Megan Zavieh recommended making it as easy as possible for clients to supply commentary by sending them a link via text or email. Her practice, ZaviehLaw, focuses exclusively on attorney ethics, which means that her clients are sometimes reluctant to make their association with her public knowledge. The key take away there? Ask for permission before using client feedback in marketing, even if the applicable comments go unattributed.
It's also important to ask for feedback while the case is still unfolding. Zavieh said clients are no longer invested once their matter has been brought to a close. Plus if the commentary is negative, there's still time to turn things around and potentially salvage a positive experience.
“If you know they're not happy, then try to fix it and make them happy,” Zavieh said.
Unfortunately that's not always possible and the occasional bad review might still find its way onto the internet—but there's still room to recover. Ignoring critical feedback won't make it go away and besides, Schuetzle said the majority of customers look favorably on businesses that take the time to craft a thoughtful response.
Zavieh pointed out that you're not really responding to the client who authored the complaint. At this stage it's about engaging the next client, which is why it's important to keep emotion out of the equation.
She suggested having a friend or someone with a little distance from the situation help with drafting the response. It's also critical that the message feel personalized and authentic.
“[Clients] don't want to hear back from the business manager or director of marketing,” Zavieh said.
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 AllTrending Stories
- 1GOP Now Holds FTC Gavel, but Dems Signal They'll Be a Rowdy Minority
- 2Houston-Based Law Firm Overcomes Defamation Suit for Website Warning
- 3The Time Is Now for Employers to Assess Risk of Employees’ Use of DeepSeek
- 4Big Law Partner Co-Launches Startup Aiming to Transform Fund Formation Process
- 5How the Court of Public Opinion Should Factor Into Litigation Strategy
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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