Most firms have client maintenance, client service, and client development programs for their major and most important clients. Most firms understand that the 80/20 Rule applies to them (80% of the revenue comes from 20% of the clients) although I am not sure how many firms understand the more critical 225/20 Rule (225% of the profit comes from 20% of the clients).
But what does it mean to be a major or first class client of a law firm? Or are all clients of your firm first class clients? I suspect not as the reality is all clients are not created equal and some clients are much more valuable to you than others so to treat them all as equals is not good for your business.
If you agree that all clients are not borne equal and that all clients value different things differently a good place to start might be to actually ask your first class clients what is important to them and how they would like to be treated and served.
What could I expect to receive from my law firm if I was really a first class client (apart from larger invoices) that second or third class clients might not receive (does my law firm tell their other clients they are in fact second or third class clients?).
Assuming a law firm ever thought I was a first class client (unlikely) and asked me those questions I might respond along the lines that I would expect:
- everyone in the firm from the Receptionist downwards would know just how important I am;
- that whoever I am dealing with knows my business and that I am not wasting time ( or worse money) over and over again explaining things yet again to another lawyer I am expected to deal with. I would expect my law firm to transfer its tacit knowledge freely around the firm;
- I would have access to be best and brightest the firm has to offer;
- I would have preferential treatment such that other clients might be “bumped” for me as I am given priority;
- to be kept up to date with what is happening in the legal and business world that could affect me and my business;
- some commercial introductions perhaps and invitations to key events;
- the firm might ask my opinion and input on things that affect the firm;
- no surprises-in service, timelines or price;
- to pay first class prices for first class service and advice;
10. real coffee
It goes without saying that any client-whether first class or third class- is entitled to assume a minimum level of service and technically correct legal advice but if you have clients paying first class prices and your law firm can’t service their expectations and what they value, I am pretty sure these days they can find another firm that can.
John
- johnc's blog
- Login or register to post comments
First Class
John,
In my view, all customers of any firm should expect your items 1,2,3,5,8,9 and 10 as a minimum - irrespective of their "level" within the customer hierarchy.
We have found that offering customers (as opposed to clients) a range of options for their particular needs works really well - in this way, we can have the conversation with them about what they are ideally wanting and them give them a range of choices as to how THEY would like us to approach the situation.
In my experience of legal firms, they tend to focus more on the transaction rather than the customer. This can result in the customer feeling that they are "just a chequebook" and the firm "knows better" than they do. The proactive, relationship focussed legal businesses look to the relationship first and the transaction second.
Unfortunately, in my experience (15+ years), these businesses are the exception rather than the rule!
So my view (for what it's worth) is that the customer defines the level of service they require, of which first class is simply one of the choices. WE don't wish to assume their needs or desires - that smacks of arrogance.
The better choices the customer has from your business, the fewer choices they will make with regard to the provider of their legal advice....
Cheers,
Matthew
Really?
Not sure what sort of business Matthew is in, but those assertions are both archaic and counterproductive. We have more than 2000 clients on our database, do you honestly believe that our receptionist should know them all?
The days of lawyers pandering to their clients like lapdogs are a thing of the past... unless the client is willing to pay for it.
What we, as law firms, need to find is a way of splitting up our service offering so that it has meaning to each client. We have some clients who would rather be service Nescafe and have their work done when we can get to it, just to save some money. We have other who expect an all nighter to be pulled to get their work done, but they are willing to pay for it.
The question is, do we have out Gold and Platinum cards to people and let them know where they rank? Do we ask them in blunt terms where they want to be?
If every client was given 1,2,3 and 5 we'd go out of business just trying to service that promise. Just because legal services can be expensive doesn't mean clients need to be overserviced, there are better solutions.
A
Yes, Really
Customers should be given an explicit choice of where to sit in a firm's metaphorical airplane. Why not? Firms already discriminate against customers based on service now, so why not be ethical and let the customer know, exactly, what to expect from each class of service? This is what all excellent service companies do now.
As for having 2,000 customers, why not have separate phone lines so you can identify them when they call in? Again, all great service companies do this.
In any event, the point is that customers these days demand to be treated individually, not equally. Some will pay a premium for higher service, some won't. There's no mystery in this, it's human nature.
If firms truly want to differentiate themselves, offering various levels of service, turnaround time, and access are a good place to start. A world of no options is obsolete, and boring.
Regards,
Ron Baker, Founder
VeraSage Institute