Two simple words – top right – Boston, Massachusetts. It sounds so trite, yet is so important. Even in 2004, there are so many law firm web sites that fail to clue you in as to where they are located. To assume that everyone knows is wrong. Even after years of studying large law firms, I still scratch my head trying to remember what part of the world they live in. The PD presence is yet another example of building a decent mousetrap, thus it should give you a lengthy lifespan. If you do, keeping current is all that is needed. And, once again, the site has been well-maintained. The db searching in a variety of areas is still first-rate.
Now in year two, this edition of Proskauer.com is chock full of useful areas that promote the firm, offices and practices. Ironically, the weakness is probably still the layout and look of the home page—too dark and graphics focused. The concept of time and dates still stands out, in updating and search results. You can see that updating is constant by the recent dates that accompany so many items. I like having the choice of brochures to print out in PDF, besides the web stuff. The “recent news” listings of Proskauer-quoted lawyers is always impressive. The office pages could use a little more helpful guidance besides description and a generic map. Get me there from the plane, train and subway. My guess is few firm clients are bussing in at the Port Authority. The practice pages do not have the strongest related-content, but the good searching helps offset that. One of the first big NYC firms to realize that the site could be much more than a recruiting tool (which it still does, and does well).
Even though this version of the site was here last year, I still can remember the older ropesgray.com versions from days gone by…that were so lame. However, that is ancient history. The firm home page does a good job highlighting news, combined with those Hubbard “case studies” that seem to be part of the company’s design formula (I could blink and be on Ballard Spahr…same looks). Good navigation and searching. Just keep it up to date and this site should last you for a long time.
I still like the firm’s twist on things, avoiding the drab repetitiveness of so many firms and so many sites. Something, though, seemed stale this time around. It is time to shake things up. In the northwest, Miller Nash and others have raised the stakes on being cool and different, helped by developer Saturno in the web department. IMA has always been a big Stoel Rives fan. If the IMA reviews return in ’06, I expect big things.
The TRP site continues to move in a positive direction. It is constantly updated and timely. There is a focus on the “newsworthy”. It might not be the most eye-catching site, but it does provide excellent organization and has sections that now relate well to one another. The site has been made much more user-friendly, eliminating scrolling and excessive clicking.
The growing bi-coastal firm continues to grow online as well. The site manages to combine the best traditional marketing elements with good online tools to serve many audiences well. Among the highlights is one of the best “press” sections (which is key when you are finding yourselves in the news a lot), and a primer for many firms on how to “update”. The home page is a little blah. The ancillary business sites continue to add value to the overall firm brand.
I got to wonderin’, are the “Fish” in & Richardson and & Neave related? Two big IP firms run by Fish. “Irregardless” as they say on SNL, the new FN site is greatly improved, replacing bells and whistles with information and usefulness. I especially liked the secondary left-hand navigation as a tool to drill deeper, not to mention get the specific data I sought. Two little fixes – have the most recent items first, in reverse chronological order. And, two, why are you paying others to put on seminars? You’ve got the credentials to have people pay you for the privilege of speaking. I’ve often wondered how law firm marketers explain that to partners that they need to pay others to get them a speaking slot? Just curious.
Like any smart firm, the folks at FCHS made sure to let IMA know that the new and improved online presence was up and running—and just in time for this year’s review. A significant upgrade, indeed. Like employment law, the expectation for IP firms is high. After all, so many of the web-based issues belong in the hands of the IP boutiques. The home page gets the message across without being too crowded. The content is organized appropriately, with a few of those little touches (printer-friendly, e-mail this page) that lend to its usability.
Lucky for HL that IMA is behind in getting these reviews completed. The new web site launched about a month ago (at review time). It was in desperate need of an overhaul and they went with the “Hubbard large law firm route” – not a bad thing – with client success stories, some good forms, solid searching, and most important, content in the right places. They still have some nice touches, such as “client comments” in a rather deep “client service” section. Clients can fill out the online survey. Come to think of it, enemies of the firm can fill it out as well, and just say mean things. Such is life in our profession of being adversarial. Nobody would really do that, would they?
While rare, there is such a thing as being too text-heavy. The home page is good, but needs to be streamlined a little. Get rid of the frames. Keep a brief description and some updated highlights. Some practice groups do a great job populating the categories for showing their credentials; others are bare-bones. In the world o’ web that means the populated sections are the more active and credentialed, in case you were wondering. Overall, a stalwart effort, with nice little user-friendly touches to bring people back.
