Ed Poll had an interesting post this week on his LawBiz Blog on the topic of testimonials. He calls it a 'contrarian view.' Mr. Poll notes that, "If we can't get business without revealing a name, then we have not yet proven our credibility." I agree that the name-dropping, by itself, shouldn't be what brings you business, and relying on testimonials alone, or putting too much emphasis on testimonials, is ill-advised. But I think it can have its place in marketing your practice.
As lawyers, one of our main obligations to our clients is confidentiality. One of the theories behind privileges, including the attorney-client privilege, is that the client will receive better representation, and the lawyer can provide the client with better service, if there is confidentiality. Under those circumstances, the client will reveal information that the client might consider embarrassing or detrimental to his position, but which is vital to the lawyer's representation.
Mr. Poll is right when he says that often it is not only the details of the representation, but also the the mere fact of the representation, that the client does not want publicized. Although the fact of representation may not technically be privileged, many clients do not want to broadcast the fact that they consulted a lawyer.
As Mr. Poll also references in his post, many lawyers are reluctant to admit that they need 'help,' either - and often don't want to advertise the fact that they sought 'help' from consultants or from lawyers themselves. Even where the relationship is not technically privileged, revealing the identity of a client or the fact of representation should not be done without the client's consent. It's just good business.
Not only should a client's request not to publicize their name be honored, but when requesting testimonials, you should be very clear that providing you with that kind of help is entirely optional, and that under no circumstances should a client provide a testimonial if they have reservations about doing so.
Although I agree that a client's request to keep their identity confidential should be honored, it doesn't necessarily follow that obtaining testimonials from clients who are willing to reveal their identity will 'turn off' potential clients who are more reticent. Most educated consumers today, whether they are consumers of legal services, computers, or consulting services, will want to know something about the company or individual prior to making a purchase, and testimonials are one way of accomplishing that.
But testimonials aren't the only way of helping a potential client feel at ease in hiring you - experience, referrals, case studies and references are all ways in which a potential client can get to a comfort level that leads to hiring you. If a client is uncomfortable with giving a testimonial, it might be turned into a case study without revealing the client's identity.
Mr. Poll's post specifically makes note that providing references is a different issue. But, after all, giving someone a reference is providing a name, even if it isn't in the form of a testimonial on your website or marketing materials. In my opinion, providing a combination of testimonials and case studies and stressing that the client's wish to keep the representation confidential is unlikely to 'turn off' a potential client.
The bottom line, for me, is: be respectful of your client's wishes, be clear that giving a testimonial is optional, use testimonials with care, and use them as only one element of marketing your practice.
Comments