Instead of shouting about the large settlements and verdicts in their cases, plaintiffs’ firms can craft thought leadership regarding those results to build referral relationships, get more cases, and recruit top talent.
There’s an incredible thought leadership opportunity staring top plaintiffs’ firms in the face, but so many of them ignore it.
What’s that opportunity?
Going behind the scenes of big settlement and verdict numbers they tout on their websites and in their marketing and advertising generally and explaining HOW they were able to secure those results.
How they persevered despite a heavily disputed liability claim.
How they successfully argued a novel damages theory.
How they boxed in a strong opposing expert witness and made them ineffective.
How they persuaded a pro-defense jury.
Generally speaking, how they were able to overcome hurdles in cases that allowed them to secure the gaudy results they trumpet.
Take a look at the legal thought leadership you consume. Few plaintiffs’ firms do this, which means there’s a massive opportunity for those that want to position themselves as leaders in securing top results for clients in particular kinds of cases.
Here are five reasons why this kind of behind the scenes thought leadership for plaintiffs’ firms is so impactful—and why more firms should consider producing it.
It demonstrates genuine expertise and strategic thinking
When plaintiffs’ attorneys discuss how they worked up a case, how they dealt with problems in the case, and how they increased the value in the case, they’re showing past, current, and potential clients, but more importantly, past, current, and potential referral sources, why those attorneys should be the ones the clients and referral sources come to with their cases.
They’re showing clients and referral sources that they won’t be discouraged or stymied by a heavily disputed liability claim, the need to rely on a novel damages theory, a strong opposing expert witness, or a pro-defense jury.
Instead, they’ll roll up their sleeves, dive in head-first, and secure a great result for a client that other law firms probably wouldn’t have been able to secure. They’re showing that they have knowledge and wisdom to put to good use to help clients resolve their cases as favorably as possible.
It invites incoming conversations that can lead to referral relationships
When plaintiffs’ firms plaster their large settlements and verdicts on their websites, on their billboards, and in their social media feeds, it’s a one-way communication: “Look at our numbers.”
But when they publish thought leadership about how they secured those settlements and verdicts, they’re inviting conversations—conversations from other attorneys who might be dealing with similar issues in their cases, or who have a case that they want to refer out that’s similar to the one that was the subject of a piece of thought leadership.
Firms are inviting those attorneys to reach out to their attorneys and talk to them about the cases or challenges discussed in their thought leadership so that they can decide whether they would rather go it alone or refer the case to one of the attorneys who published the thought leadership.
(Even if a would-be referring attorney decides to go it alone, the publisher is creating goodwill through having that conversation, which could lead to good things in the future.)
This thought leadership also invites conversations with non-attorney referral sources, such as physicians and therapists.
Thought leadership about how people with particular injuries were able to have a successful resolution to their case will signal to these referral sources that when they have patients/clients with similar injuries they should consider referring them to the publishers of that thought leadership because they’ve shown they have a favorable track record when representing clients with those kinds of injuries.
This thought leadership could be particularly effective when discussing cases where clients had injuries that medical professionals had assumed were not the kinds of injuries that could have led to such a high verdict or settlement.
It’s a tool for proactively opening the door to new referral relationships
In addition to thought leadership inviting others to reach out to the creators of that thought leadership, the attorneys producing it can use it to proactively approach potential new referral partners, whether they’re attorneys or non-attorneys.
The attorneys can send the article, video, podcast episode, etc., to referral partners to either introduce themselves or to stay top of mind. The article provides an opening for a conversation about the kinds of cases the attorney handles, what makes them different from other attorneys doing the same kind of work, and the kinds of cases the potential referral sources handle or see through their patients/clients.
The attorneys publishing this kind of thought leadership can also educate referral sources on the kinds of cases the attorneys would like to handle by virtue of the kinds of cases, with the kinds of facts, they’re covering in their thought leadership.
It differentiates law firms from their peer firms in the eyes of referral sources
When attorneys produce this kind of thought leadership, they’re showing referral sources, the legal community, and the public that they know how to navigate hurdles and complex issues in cases. They know how to extract value from cases where other attorneys don’t. And, they know how to stay focused on getting results for clients even when the hurdles and complex issues they face would have likely tripped up other attorneys and firms.
Because so few firms produce this thought leadership, the ones that do produce it will stand out from their peer firms and position themselves as leading firms—even if the firms that stay silent are capable of overcoming similar hurdles and complex issues, or previously have.
Unfortunately for those firms, they aren’t telling the world that they are or that they have.
It positions the attorneys producing this thought leadership as a thought leader in the eyes of the media and conference organizers
When attorneys publish thought leadership about how they were able to secure great results for clients in tough cases, media outlets and conference organizers notice. They will turn to those attorneys in the future when they want the attorneys to speak about various aspects of their cases that are relevant to the outlets or organizers at that time.
It piques the interest of lateral attorneys and staff, and newly admitted attorneys, looking to join a top-tier plaintiffs’ firm
This kind of thought leadership could also give the law firms producing it a recruiting advantage.
It shows lateral attorneys and new attorneys out of law school, as well as lateral staff, that those firms can handle tough cases, those firms do interesting work, and that if they want to work for a plaintiffs’ firm that is able to get good results for clients by rolling up their sleeves and working hard to overcome obstacles, then the firm producing the thought leadership is the right place for them.
Three concerns plaintiffs’ firms should keep in mind when producing this thought leadership
It’s not all sunshine and rainbows with this kind of thought leadership. When plaintiffs’ firms produce it, they need to be mindful of three concerns.
First, confidentiality. Obviously, they’re not going to want to violate any ethics rules or ethical duties concerning client confidences. That’s an easy enough concern to handle because attorneys can structure their thought leadership so they’re talking about public information, like what’s on the court’s docket or what was discussed in open court.
Confidentiality could also be an issue when it comes to settlements. If plaintiffs’ attorneys have settled a case that they want to talk about, they’ll need to be sure there’s nothing in the settlement agreement prohibiting them from talking about the case publicly and/or talking about the case in a marketing or advertising context.
The second concern is divulging the ingredients of a firm’s “secret sauce.” Some firms worry that when their attorneys discuss how they resolved a case, they’ll divulge some kind of proprietary information about how they go about litigating, settling, and trying cases.
Most of the time, this “secret sauce” concern is overblown. Few litigation techniques are new these days. Success is driven by how plaintiffs’ attorneys used a combination of techniques to get a great result for a client, and how they used those techniques to overcome obstacles that many other attorneys might not have thought to use.
The third and final concern is the temptation to be too salesy. There are plenty of law firms that would want to turn thought leadership about successful results into glorified press releases that explicitly say, “Hire us today!” or “Refer us your cases today.” Avoid that temptation.
Plaintiffs’ firms’ should not be overtly salesy in their thought leadership. There’ll be plenty of opportunities for them to be salesy in other marketing channels. In their thought leadership, they should let their knowledge, wisdom, and insights that they’re pouring into it speak for itself and persuade referral sources.
An opportunity ripe for the picking
So few plaintiffs’ firms today are using thought leadership as a way to show referral sources how they secured the great results they got for their clients that they’re touting in their marketing and advertising.
That’s a missed opportunity. By producing thought leadership that goes behind the scenes, peels back the curtain, and shows how they’re getting results for clients, plaintiffs’ firms can position themselves favorably to referral sources, the media, lateral attorneys, the legal community, and the general public.
Thinking about bringing on an outside writer to help your law firm strategize and create compelling thought-leadership marketing and business development content? Click here to schedule a 30-minute Content Strategy Audit to learn if collaborating with an outside writer is the right move for you and your firm.