After floating the idea last year, the Law Firm Media Professionals Group has assembled a committee of law firm media relations executives to determine a collective response to the flood of surveys that has washed across the legal market in recent years.
As I blogged about at the time, I tend to shudder when I hear the word, committee.
An “approved response” conjures up images of the Chinese Politburo or one of those interminable bar association talking shops.
On the other hand, there’s some smart people on the committee – some are friends and clients – and I’m sure they will help out fellow marketers creaking under the weight of this stuff.
Prior to freelancing, I worked in-house at two large law firms, and I have immense sympathy for overworked marketers and PR folk who have to triage the daily deluge of requests from a myriad of organizations seeking to have law firms firm engage with their survey, ranking, supplement, or article.
Some marketers figure out for themselves what is worth pursuing, and what isn’t, but I guess for firms with s smaller staff, or the more generalist marketer who isn’t as close to the minutiae of the legal media, I can see the value in heading over to the LFMP for their view on whether a particular survey or organization is credible.
In the old days, law firm marketers used to head to the LMA listserv groups, and some of the same conversation now takes place at the excellent Legal Marketers Extraordinaires group on Facebook.
With the LFMP in the mix, there’s more information to help people out, and that’s no bad thing.
The ABA Journal recently ran a piece with more on the LFMP survey committee.
The full members of the LFMP Survey Committee:
Michael Bond, Blattel Communications
Kimberly Brooks, Baker Botts
John Castro, Weil Gotshal
Josh Epstein, DLA Piper
Abigail Fairman, Richards Kibbe & Orbe
Thomas Freeman, Cooley
Arielle Lapiano, Paul Hastings
Lawrence Martinez, Manatt Phelps
Richard Pinto, Shearman & Sterling
Christopher Rieck, McDermott Will & Emery