Attorney Journals is a Southern California B2B trade publication for and about private practice attorneys. The magazine brings information and news to the legal community as well as providing a platform to spotlight the people, events and happenings of the industry. But that's not all. From marketing advice to business and personal development tips, we're the top resource you need to thrive in the ever-evolving and highly competitive legal industry.
The Latest Stories, Tips and Buzz!
Advertisement
Trial lawyers are master storytellers, and storytelling is a powerful art. It’s powerful because human beings communicate, plan, operate, and live every day in the context of stories—fantastic narratives in which we mutually agree to abide, and from which we understand the world around us. Because stories are such a critical part of the human experience, honing the art of narrative storytelling will make you a better trial lawyer, and a more effective advocate for your clients in mediation as well. A story, when carefully crafted, is like a Trojan horse—it’s a vehicle for infiltrating the minds and hearts of others with a message, and once safely secured behind the walls of our prejudices and preconceived notions, the story takes hold of our conscious mind and imposes its will. The Trojan horse was a military weapon of subterfuge used to conquer a great city, but stories don’t have to be used for nefarious purposes. They can also be used to provide information that empowers people to establish justice. What Are Stories and Why Are They so Important? Stories are the primary way that our species exchanges information. Wherever information is shared, critical messages are communicated via a story. The better the story, the better the communication. As a vehicle, a story can transport us through time and space, take us to places we’ve never been or that don’t exist, and trigger real, physiological responses—from joy to grief. Stories are important because they are powerful, uniquely human tools. Our species has been engaged in the practice of telling and believing stories ever since the first apes gazed at the stars and fashioned them into gods. Perhaps this ability to tell and believe a narrative is what separates us from the other animals. While I don’t know why we make up and believe stories, as a trial lawyer, I’m an expert storyteller and have seen, firsthand, the impact of stories, not only on juries, but also on people in general—and so have you. It’s just that the make-believe is so commonplace that we often fail to realize we are a part of the narrative. Whether it be the story behind a nation’s flag, which may instill the pride we have in our country; the stories we believe about money, which convert a mere paper object into currency; or the stories wielded by a trial lawyer spinning a yarn of evidence into a verdict of gold, we find ourselves yielding helplessly to the narrative. Not out of naiveté, but because stories are useful. They bind us to one another and allow people to cooperate in complex ways, which is why I am fond of telling plaintiff’s and defense lawyers alike that, “if you want a jury to connect and cooperate with you, then you must have them accept your invitation to become a part of a story.” The Mechanics of a Good Story So, let’s talk about the elements of a good story. Take a typical auto accident case. It’s easy to become a little lazy when it comes to the narrative. The police officer’s incident report tells us what happened, and the medical records provide evidence of damages, so our instinct is to frame the story around what the officer has described and what the doctor has diagnosed. But the officer has been trained to provide the most boring factually neutral story possible, and the doctor is a scientist, not a storyteller. On the other hand, trial lawyers are tethered only by evidence and procedure. Because the evidentiary elements of our cases are so critical, we can often be tempted to spend inordinate amounts of time developing our evidence at the expense of developing a compelling story—all while squandering the trial lawyer’s gift. Do not fall prey to the tide of form over substance. Resist by crafting your evidence into a gripping and persuasive story. A good story need not be complex, but it must be told well. Stories, at least those stories that tend to move people, generally follow a problem/solution pattern. There is a status quo that exists. A situational problem arises. Then a solution or victory is obtained, often by a person who is a hero. The knottier or thornier the problem, and the more creative the solution, the more that story resonates, and picks open locks in our minds. This is why inside a good story, we’re more open-minded, and more persuadable. Coincidentally, the classic framework of a captivating story is the same framework encountered in many of our cases. A person is bumping along, living his or her life, and then—bang! Bad things happen; perhaps a contract is breached or someone becomes horribly injured. Now the person must fight through the problem. He may have lost a critical business opportunity, or she might have medical expenses, pain, suffering, loss of a job, or other troubles. As lawyers, we have the opportunity to fashion the evidence into a story that empowers a jury to accept the solution that our clients desire. If you have told the type of story that has brought the jury into the life of the character—your client—the jury will step into the story and take on the role that they’ve seen played out repeatedly in stories throughout their lives. They become the agent of change. The hero who dispenses justice and restores righteousness and order to the lives of the parties involved. Whether your client is the plaintiff or the defendant, when it comes to the jury, the best story (vehicle for transmitting your ideas) wins. To sum up, the facts of your case are the battleground, but the story is the fight. The main ingredients of a story are character, conflict, and resolution. Your story should include your client, how his or her life was disrupted, and then (hopefully) a verdict in his or her favor. You want the jury, your audience, to care about your client/character, and you want the relief to be an appropriate remedy. Using Stories at Mediation and Trial Remember this as you build your case. Look beyond the facts in a contract, police report, medical records, testimony, or other evidence, and ask yourself—what story does this tell? Because the story is what compels people. The story is what captures people’s most vulnerable human instincts, and the story is what wins. To build this kind of narrative as you prepare for trial: Identify your story early and keep an open mind because you may need to adapt it. Choose a main character—perhaps your client (or your client’s family), a business owner (or the business’s employees). And make your characters real-life, multi-dimensional people that the jury can grow to know and love. Establish trust. People will avoid talking about difficult circumstances unless there is trust, and it’s the difficult things that make a story rich and exciting. When clients/witnesses trust you, they provide deeper, more complex information for your story. Look for a theme that runs throughout your story. Is it about distracted driving? Profits over people? Safety? The theme is often connected to the essence of the conflict. For example, the conflict may look like, “the red car hit the blue car.” And that’s a story, but it isn’t a good story. A good story is that the person in the red car was distracted when she was supposed to be guarding the safety and well-being of her fellow motorists. Case facts don’t make themselves into a story on their own. They must be shaped. A jury is supposed to carefully evaluate each party’s facts and determine, by the evidence presented, what outcome should take place. But we’re human beings. We construct and believe in stories, and so the better-told story can often mean the difference between a win and a loss or a win and a big win. When you understand your story, you develop evidence that supports that story. Think of the “whys”. Why did the tragedy happen? Think of big-picture aspects that are bigger than the incident that caused the harm. What can the jury fix? How can the jury fix it? Stories are not only useful at trial. Your client’s story can also be an effective tool at mediation and can help the mediator understand not only the facts of the case but also how your client has been affected—and how a jury is likely to respond to your client. At mediation your goal isn’t to convince a jury; nevertheless, crafting a thoughtful, compelling story can help you better prepare for mediation and for trial, should mediation fail. Finally, practice your story. Share it with your significant other, your law partners, the Lyft driver. Tell it over and over again. You’ll find yourself tweaking it and perfecting it along the way. Tell it so often and so well that it ceases to be a mirage and becomes a manifested reality. Don’t worry about sounding contrived. You’re telling a story, and that’s what juries and people want. I say this—the good lawyers practice and practice until they get it right. The great ones practice and practice until they can’t get it wrong. *Originally published in the Daily Report and reprinted with permission.
Having participated in mediations as an advocate and as a mediator, I can say that the mediation process lends itself well to the resolution of all kinds of personal injury claims. From motor vehicle and premises liability cases to medical malpractice, products liability and labor law matters, a good mediator will give the parties the opportunity to manage risks and avoid the uncertainty of having the fates of the litigants decided by six people you have never met before. A mediation will often be the last best opportunity for the parties to discuss a resolution in earnest before they get into a courtroom and start trying the case. Of course, cases can settle during trial, but those settlement figures are often skewed by the courtroom events. If an important witness is obliterated on cross-examination (or does not even show up), the settlement numbers will go up or down accordingly. A mediation gives you the chance to discuss the case “as is,” without the unpredictability of a trial. Mediations are similar to trials in the sense that they work so much better when everyone is fully prepared. So, if you agree to mediate a case, take that opportunity seriously. A cursory review of your file the night before the mediation generally will not suffice. Indeed, when I look back at the cases that have not settled at mediation, the number one reason was that one or more of the parties did not properly prepare. What follows is a checklist of sorts, that will hopefully help attorneys and litigants on both sides get better results from the mediation process. Here are the ten things that you will need to get the case resolved: Bring your clients. This may seem painfully obvious, yet I hear so many attorneys say, “The claims examiner is on phone call alert” or “My client is waiting to hear from me.” As a general rule, the more involved the clients are in the mediation, the greater your chances of success are. Now, when I say that you should “bring” your clients to the mediation, I am using that word in a broad sense. For better or worse, the overwhelming majority of personal injury mediations are now done virtually. The plaintiff himself or herself does not necessarily need to be in front of a camera, listening to every word that is said. But having the plaintiff physically present in the attorney’s office shows a level of commitment to the process. It also makes the conversations about offers and demands much easier and helps to move the mediation forward. On the defendants’ side, having the claims professional on the Zoom call helps tremendously. The mediation process becomes disjointed and often loses steam when all developments have to be discussed in private phone calls between defense counsel and the insurance company representative. Listen. Nobody in the history of the world ever learned a thing just by talking. The single most important thing that the participants can do during the mediation itself is listen – not just to the mediator, but to all of the other participants. You need to listen to the other side explain precisely what the evidentiary basis is for their current demand or offer. Yes, there will surely be some posturing by the attorneys. A big part of the mediator’s job is to get the parties past the bravado and unhelpful rhetoric and move them toward a more reasonable and realistic place. Have pre-mediation discussions. I am always amazed when the parties tell me that they have not had any settlement discussions at all before the mediation session. Pick up the phone, people! As a general rule, the plaintiff should make a settlement demand well in advance of the mediation, as this allows the other side sufficient time to evaluate the settlement possibilities. Have pre-mediation discussions with your co-defendants. The proper evaluation of a personal injury case from a defendant’s perspective must include an opinion on the percentages of contribution needed from each defendant and third-party defendant. Yet we often see co-defendants taking diametrically opposed positions on percentages that have never been discussed before the mediation. If your evaluation relies on your co-defendant for a significant contribution towards the overall settlement, pick up the phone and discuss the case with the attorney and/or the claims professional in advance of the mediation. Alternatively, you can consider a defense-only mediation session, where contribution, indemnity, and coverage issues can be resolved, so that the focus can be solely on the value of the case when it is discussed at the next session with plaintiff’s counsel. Prepare BRIEF submissions. Take the time to prepare submissions for your mediator. They do not have to be voluminous; in fact, they should be quite succinct. Do not send your summary judgment motion with complete copies of all 47 exhibits. Brief statements on key liability and damages issues, with references to the specific supporting evidence, are most helpful. Please include the history of all prior settlement discussions, as well as insurance coverage information for the defendants. Meet with your clients. This is crucial, whether you are representing the plaintiff or a defendant. Decisions need to be made, in advance of the mediation, on where the settlement discussions will begin and end. (Of course, the end point may change at the mediation. See item 10.) Regardless of which side you are on, make sure that you have these conversations with the actual decision makers. A spouse or relative may have significant influence on the plaintiff’s decisions. If so, get them involved early on with the discussions. If the settlement money required on a case is above the authority limits of the claims professional to whom you have been reporting, have communications in advance with the supervisors who possess the requisite authority, as it may prove difficult to get their input during the mediation, especially if they have not reviewed the case previously. Don’t try your case at a mediation. The trial of a personal injury case is an exceptionally adversarial proceeding. Everybody wants to win and the trial attorneys will go to great lengths (within the bounds of fair play, of course) to get that victory. A mediation, on the other hand, is a more collaborative event. While the attorneys will surely advocate for their clients at a mediation, the result that they seek is a settlement to which everyone must agree. So, it is best to leave the “scorched earth” tactics and the “winner-take-all” trial mindset at your office when mediating a case. However… Bring your admissible evidence. While we are not trying the case at a mediation, we are evaluating the case based on the potentially admissible evidence. This is sometimes referred to as the “lens of admissibility.” Be prepared to highlight the admissible evidence that supports your position. Whether it is a photograph of a clearly defective condition, a series of questions and answers in a deposition transcript, or an emergency room record, the evidence itself should be brought to the attention of not just the mediator, but everyone in attendance. Always remember that it is the other side that you are trying to convince as to the value of the case, not just the mediator. Watch your language. Once the parties agree to a mediation, they all have the common goal of a settled case. All attendees at a mediation are well advised to ask themselves: Is what I am about to say going to be helpful in getting this case resolved? For example, we often hear settlement demands described as “outrageous.” According to Roget’s Thesaurus, synonyms for “outrageous” include: barbaric, disgraceful, heinous, inhuman, scandalous, and wanton. Is that the word you really want to use? Keep an open mind. The trial judge gives this admonition to the jury throughout the trial, so that jurors do not make up their mind too soon, thereby ignoring potentially game-changing evidence. Mediation participants must be prepared to adjust their positions, so that a settlement can be reached. It may seem counterintuitive to spend so much time and effort on evaluating the case before the mediation, only to revise your numbers during the mediation. But the evaluation of personal injury claims is enormously subjective, and reasonable minds will differ. So, the question is not just what YOU think the case is worth; it is also what range of numbers will achieve the desired goal of getting the case resolved. So that’s my list. If you think that I left something out, I would love to hear from you. I can’t promise you that your mediations will all be successful if you follow these ten steps. But I can pretty much guarantee that if you don’t do any of them, your case is going to trial.
How much a law firm should pay an associate attorney is an age-old question that many law firms consider. Many law firms debate this question, making it difficult for them to develop a workable formula that works within their budget. Law firms often gravitate to one of two extremes. One extreme is that law firms overpay associates to lure them to work for their firm. However, if a law firm overpays for talent, the law firm owner often makes no money themselves. It may also be challenging to meet other firm financial obligations if the payroll is too high. Law firms that pay associates too much money ultimately get overextended, have to let employees go, and implode. To a lesser extent, some law firms may not offer enough in salary. If that is the case, it is hard to attract top talent to the law firm. When that occurs, it is hard for a law firm to hire lawyers. Law firms do need to consider average salary data to determine a reasonable pay range. Yet, the salary data is not the be-all and end-all. The numbers still have to work financially, based on the law firm’s budget and forecasts. What Is a Reasonable Way to Pay Associate Attorneys? Every law firm is a little different. Depending on the practice area, how a law firm pays associates can change. However, many prognosticators argue that a law firm associate should receive about one-third of the revenue generated by them. Many would refer to this system as the “old rule of thirds” for paying lawyers. Under this system, one-third goes to the lawyer, one-third to overhead, and one-third to the law firm. Thus, if a lawyer brings in $300,000 in actual revenue, many would argue the lawyer should make a base salary of about $100,000 per year. Of course, the analysis gets complicated when the lawyer did not bring any of the business into the law firm, but instead, all their revenue comes from cases generated by the law firm’s marketing efforts, given that marketing is often expensive. With increasing overhead costs, including rising health care costs, the formula can also be more complex. Collection rates can muddy the water, too. If a lawyer bills $300,000 in billable hours per year but collects only $200,000 of that amount, the associate would not receive $100,000 under the rule of thirds. Instead, to the chagrin of many associate attorneys, they would receive a salary of $66,666.66. One lawyer argues today that the new norm for paying an associate is 20 percent of the revenue they generate for the law firm. The rationale for the 20 percent argument is challenging economic conditions and rising benefit costs, including health care costs. Such a position also makes sense when considering inflationary factors, including the cost of advertising to bring in potential clients when an associate does not have their own book of business. While many law firm associates may not like hearing that their base salary should be somewhere between 20 and 33 percent of the revenue they can reasonably be expected to earn, the reality is that law firm owners would be wise to heed this guidance. If they pay more than this amount to attract or retain talent, they will likely put themselves and their firm in financial trouble. Many law firms specifically get themselves into trouble by offering a base salary that is not within the 20 to 33 percent range of the revenue the lawyer can reasonably generate. Instead, many law firms set salary ranges solely on online salary data or what it takes to hire lawyers away from their competitors. When that happens, many law firm owners become frustrated when their lawyers do not meet their billable-hour or revenue requirements. They also suffer financially, and the firm’s viability can be jeopardized. Thus, law firm owners need to follow the metrics of their lawyers and law firm to ensure that the salaries they are paying make financial sense. What About Incentives on Top of Base Salary? Many law firm owners also wonder whether incentives, in addition to the base salary, will motivate lawyers to meet their productivity metrics. Paying lawyers incentives probably makes sense for many law firms. By doing so, lawyers have an incentive to exceed their goals because they will make extra money. Law firms can set up incentives in many different ways. A law firm may: Pay a set discretionary bonus to an associate lawyer who met the billable hour and accounts receivable goals; Pay lawyers a discretionary bonus if they bring in a case outside of the law firm’s marketing efforts; and/or Come up with a formula-driven bonus system that pays associates a portion of any profit they make for the firm, although complicated formulas can lead to computation disputes with associates. Truth be told, many associate attorneys are not impressed by incentive-based pay. Most are merely looking for guaranteed money—and they will jump ship if a competitor offers more. In their defense, the desire to make the highest guaranteed salary possible makes sense when you consider that many lawyers are coming out of law school with significant student loan debt. It is also challenging to buy a home and have a family in this day and age with rising prices. Yet what many associate attorneys fail to realize is that, if they ever become partners, there is no guaranteed salary. If the firm is not making money, they do not get paid. In the end, law firms that want to be fiscally responsible need to follow the guidance above. Suppose an associate intends to depart for a higher guaranteed salary. If they are asking for more than 20-33% of the revenue they actually generate, most law firms should let them go. While it is often sad when an associate departs, the law firm is usually better off not to over-extend to keep them. If they do it often, the firm can struggle to succeed. The law firm should instead hire another lawyer with a reasonable salary expectation and move forward.
A firm’s client base should be a crystal-clear reflection of its strategy. Here’s how leadership can help ensure that business development professionals bring that part of law firm strategy to life. Setting the Stage: Strategy and the Client Base of the Future In a previous post, we explored how even the busiest firm leaders can personally contribute to sales success. This follow-on focuses on one small but powerful—and too often overlooked—step in the strategic planning process: targeting. When a firm plans for its next three to five years, it envisions its future market positioning, geographic footprint, brand, buyer awareness, services, people, and other key factors. Even if only implicitly, the strategy also illuminates the client base of the future. Most new law firm strategies define an ideal client profile. That’s a start, but as Tony Robbins said, “You can’t hit a target if you don’t know what it is.” A profile alone is too abstract to drive consistent action. What’s needed is a specific, strategy-driven target list—by name—of clients to retain and nurture, and prospects to pursue. The questions, then, are: Which current clients deserve continued investment, and which have run their course? Which prospective clients align with the firm’s future direction and need to experience direct and energetic sales efforts? The Leadership Imperative Today’s client development teams, now equipped with sophisticated tools, including generative AI, can generate remarkably precise target lists. But without visible and ongoing leadership sponsorship, those lists rarely take hold. Leaders are well-advised to make clear that targeting is a strategic, sanctioned, monitored, and rewarded activity. Otherwise, even the best-intentioned efforts will fade into “business as usual,” and strategic plans will gather dust on a metaphorical shelf. Two contrasting examples illustrate the points made in this blog post: The cautionary tale. A mid-sized firm we advised generated a strategy to become a leading advisor to middle-market businesses across all the firm’s limited geographies. With this guidance, the client development team built a list of 3,000 companies, identified key buyers, mapped relationships, and generated preliminary action plans. It was a promising approach, but leadership did little more than acknowledge the existence of a list. Without leaders reviewing, refining, endorsing, and enforcing accountability, enthusiasm waned. Within two years, the middle-market strategy had been replaced by the de facto goal of opportunistic expansion, including “growing globally.” The success story. A then-Big Six accounting firm embraced a strategy “to serve global companies globally” (my words). Leadership made it clear: “Your job is to serve or pursue Global 1000 clients. Other work is your choice, but we will not invest in it, and it will not drive recognition or compensation.” Within two years, the firm’s annual growth rate rose from single digits to 16%+, it expanded into previously unserved markets where its clients and targets operated, and its workforce expanded by an estimated 20%. What Firm Leaders Should Consider Doing Client development teams can deftly perform most of the back-office work required to develop great, strategically guided target lists. But to ensure that names on target lists become names on client lists, leadership might take some or all of the following actions: Publicly charter the effort. Empower client development leaders to craft and maintain target lists that reflect firm strategy. Know the lists. Be conversant with their composition and alignment with firm priorities. Communicate relentlessly. Reinforce who the firm serves now, who we will serve next, and how each lawyer’s work contributes. Monitor the pipeline. Track traction against target lists and step in when progress stalls. Provide resources and alignment. Support the effort through budget, technology, incentives, and lateral hiring. Recognize performance. Celebrate wins that reflect strategy and quietly correct those who are off course. Help lawyers and staff learn to say “no” to proposed off-strategy actions and investments. The Payoff When leadership and client development teams align around specific targets, the results are transformative. Accountability. Progress can be tracked, and success measured, against named targets. Clarity. Everyone knows the firm’s priorities and what’s expected of them. Focus. Effort and investment concentrate where they yield the highest return. Collaboration. Lawyers coordinate around shared priorities, enhancing the client experience. Efficiency. Time, attention, and resources flow toward what matters most. Cultural alignment. The firm speaks with one voice about growth and purpose. Why This Matters A firm’s client base should be a direct function of its strategy. When leadership sets clear boundaries and expectations, client development becomes not just a clerical exercise but a manifestation of strategic intent. Turning a strategy into a defined client base requires more than capable business developers; it requires leadership resolve. Ask yourself: Does everyone in your firm know exactly which clients define your future? If not, now is a propitious time to make that clear.
There’s a moment every ambitious founder eventually faces—one that separates the leaders who rise from seven figures into eight … and those who stall out despite their brilliance. I see it every week with the managing partners, founders, and high-achieving lawyers I coach. But the clearest example came recently, during a conversation I had in Berlin with a managing partner who runs a highly successful seven-figure firm. He’s sharp. Strategic. Respected. The exact profile of someone you expect to see at an international legal conference. Over lunch, he shared his plan to scale to eight figures—a smart move in his market. So, I asked him the most natural question in the world: “Who’s your coach?” He paused. Smiled. And said, confidently: “I don’t need a coach.” And in that instant, he revealed the most dangerous blind spot every high performer has—the myth of more. The Myth of More: When What Got You Here Stops Working High performers tend to trust the formula that rewarded them in the past: More effort More hours More control More personal execution More of you holding everything together This founder had built a seven-figure firm by being a world-class problem solver. That strength had served him extraordinarily well. But it had also quietly become a ceiling. Many founders mistakenly believe that the path to eight figures is simply a continuation of the path that got them to seven. They assume linear effort will keep creating exponential results. It won’t. At a certain point—often right around the seven-figure mark—the model collapses under its own weight. More hours begin to burn out the leader and the leadership team. More control creates bottlenecks instead of momentum. More involvement forces everything to route through a single person. The strengths that once produced success become liabilities. Eight Figures Is Not an Operational Challenge—It’s an Identity Shift Scaling to eight figures isn’t about optimizing your schedule or hiring more support staff. It requires something far more uncomfortable: It requires you to change. Not as a technician. Not as a lawyer. Not even as a CEO. You must evolve into something that many high-performing attorneys have never been taught to be: A leader of leaders. This requires a complete internal shift—from elite doer to builder of other elite doers. A doer controls and executes. A leader delegates and inspires. A doer solves problems. A leader asks better questions. The founder in Berlin had elevated himself into the CEO seat, but he was still operating like the most elite technician on the team. He was leading with the same instincts that once earned him success in the courtroom. And that’s why he was stuck. The Invisible Ceiling: The Belief You Don’t Know You Have Every founder carries a belief that helped them win early in their career. For many lawyers, the belief sounds like this: “If you want it done right, do it yourself.” That belief absolutely builds a seven-figure law firm. It absolutely destroys an eight-figure one. Because scaling requires you to let go. Let go of control. Let go of being the answer. Let go of being the bottleneck your entire team unconsciously depends on. But here’s the catch: You can’t see your own limiting beliefs. You’re standing inside the frame. You cannot read the ingredients on the cereal box from the inside. That’s why an invisible ceiling is so dangerous—it’s built from patterns you’ve repeated for decades, patterns that feel like strengths but function like restraints. Why You Cannot Break the Invisible Ceiling Alone Let me give you the blunt truth: There is no high-performing founder in the world who breaks through their invisible ceiling alone. Not because they lack intelligence. Not because they lack discipline. Not because they lack courage. But because no one in their life is positioned to tell them the unfiltered truth. Partners have their own political interests. Employees are influenced by power dynamics. Spouses want to protect you from discomfort. Friends want to support you, not challenge you. Only one person has no agenda other than your success: A coach. Someone who reflects the patterns you can’t see, asks the questions no one else asks, and challenges beliefs no one else would dare confront. This is why the founder in Berlin will not scale to eight figures until he stops trying to do it alone. And this is why my highest-performing clients scale faster than their peers—because they have a mirror, an accountability engine, and a strategic sparring partner all in one. Real-World Evidence: What Happens After the Identity Shift Let me make this real: A client of mine—also a seven-figure founder—was stuck. She had the team. She had the systems. She even had a leadership layer in place. But she still felt guilt about stepping back. She still believed she “needed to be in the weeds” to justify her value to the firm. She couldn’t imagine allowing her leaders to fail, even though failure is the only path to growth. Within six months of shifting from managing people to leading leaders: She worked fewer hours. Her firm’s revenue increased. Her leaders finally stepped into their full roles. She reclaimed her strategic headspace. The client experience improved. She became the CEO the business needed. She stopped being the operator and grew into the visionary. That is the identity shift required to go from seven figures to eight. The Question That Separates Leaders Who Scale From Leaders Who Stall If I could go back to that moment in Berlin, I still wouldn’t try to convince that founder he needed a coach. High performers shut down when you try to “fix” them. Instead, I’d ask him a simple question—the same one I’m going to ask you now: Are you willing to bet your eight-figure dream on the belief that you have zero blind spots? Sit with that. Now ask yourself a second question: What is the one belief that has always served you—but may now be the invisible ceiling holding you back? Every founder has one. The ones who scale are the ones brave enough to examine it. Your Next Level Requires a New You Scaling isn’t about doing more. It’s about becoming more: More aware. More intentional. More visionary. More willing to be challenged. More willing to see what you cannot see alone. The leaders who reach eight figures are never the ones who go alone. They’re the ones who choose to evolve.
The firms that will dominate client acquisition in 2026 are making fundamentally different strategic moves than their competitors. Will your firm lead the transition or chase after it? Today, there are six critical shifts reshaping legal marketing: The AI search revolution that’s already capturing a growing percentage of legal research queries The death of generic marketing strategies The rising importance of referral validation infrastructure The technical SEO factors separating visible firms from invisible ones The measurement frameworks that prove (or disprove) marketing ROI The specialization imperative driving client selection Understanding these trends and acting on them is the difference between growth and stagnation. At 9Sail, we’ve been tracking these shifts for more than a decade, and we’re seeing the competitive advantages compound for firms who moved early. The 12–18-month head start available to forward-thinking firms in early 2026 represents a once-in-a-decade opportunity to establish digital authority before markets become saturated. The AI Search Revolution Is Already Here (And Most Firms Are Invisible) The firms dominating these AI platforms aren’t there by accident—they’re there by strategy. What Generative Engine Optimization (GEO) Means for Law Firms GEO isn’t just another marketing buzzword—it’s a fundamental shift in how legal expertise is discovered: Content becomes citation-worthy. AI platforms need comprehensive, authoritative content that directly answers complex queries. Technical implementation matters. Structured data, clear schema markup, and LLMs.txt files signal credibility to AI. First-mover advantage exists. Only 2-3 agencies in the legal marketing space offer true GEO services currently. Timeline urgency is real. You have a 12–18-month window before this becomes table stakes rather than competitive advantage. Practical First Steps for AI Search Visibility Start with an honest assessment of where you stand: Audit your current AI search presence by testing your firm name and practice areas in ChatGPT, Claude, and Perplexity. Identify content gaps by asking which client questions AI platforms answer without citing your firm. Prioritize comprehensive, authoritative content over thin keyword-stuffed pages that served the old SEO playbook. Consider GEO-specific technical implementation for your highest-value practice area pages. Traditional SEO focused on keywords and backlinks. Generative Engine Optimization (GEO) requires citation-worthy content structure and authoritative source signals that AI platforms trust and reference. AI search represents the most significant shift in client discovery since Google transformed legal marketing two decades ago, but it’s compounded by the death of generic marketing strategies. Generic Marketing Strategies Now Actively Harm Multi-Practice Firms The “one-size-fits-all” digital marketing approach that many large, multi-practice firms have relied on for years is now actively costing firms high-value clients. When a boutique firm with specialized expertise outranks a full-service firm with superior resources, it’s not an accident—it’s the market punishing generic positioning. Why Specialized Boutique Firms Are Winning Digital Battles Sophisticated clients don’t search for “law firms near me.” They search for specific solutions to specific problems. Boutique firms optimize deeply for narrow specialization. Multi-practice firms often optimize shallowly across everything, trying to be all things to all people. As a result, boutique firms with 10 attorneys outrank their much larger counterparts because their digital presence screams expertise rather than whispers competence. The solution isn’t becoming a boutique firm. It’s marketing like you have deep, niche expertise in each practice area. That requires abandoning firm-wide generic approaches in favor of practice-specific strategies that demonstrate depth rather than breadth. Practice-Specific Content Architecture Implementation starts with honest assessment: Audit your website structure. Do you have generic “practice areas” pages or deep, authoritative content that answers every question prospects ask? Develop practice-specific content calendars that address the unique questions criminal defense clients ask versus questions business law clients’ research. Create practice-specific conversion paths instead of funneling everyone to the same generic contact form. Build practice-specific landing pages for paid campaigns rather than wasting ad spend sending prospects to your homepage. Specialization matters more than ever because referral validation has fundamentally changed how prospects evaluate law firms. Referral Validation Infrastructure Determines Conversion Rates The most expensive marketing failure isn’t generating too few leads—it’s losing warm referrals during their digital validation research. When a CPA refers a client to your business law group, and that client researches your firm online but never calls, you’ve lost a qualified prospect with the highest possible intent. This “referral validation gap” costs firms millions in lost revenue. Referral Research Before They Contact You. For Real. The referral journey has changed permanently: Data shows referred prospects research the attorney online before making contact. Referral sources expect firms to have strong digital presence that validates their recommendation. What prospects look for during validation: specific expertise demonstration, recent relevant content, professional credibility signals, and a clear engagement path. Weak digital presence doesn’t just fail to generate leads—it actively kills referrals you’ve already received. Your digital infrastructure either converts referrals or loses them. There’s no middle ground. Building Digital Infrastructure That Converts Referrals Converting referrals requires specific digital assets: Recent, relevant thought leadership that shows active practice rather than stale content from 2009. Clear, immediate contact mechanisms instead of a single contact form that is removed from the intake process. Social proof and credibility indicators including case results, speaking engagements, and third-party publications. Mobile-optimized experience because many prospects research on phones during initial contact moments (not to mention Google gives preferences to well-optimized mobile experiences). Measuring Referral Conversion vs. Lead Generation Track referrals in a central database: Monitor referral source attribution separately from organic traffic. Measure time between referral received and prospect contact. Identify drop-off points in the referral journey (where do they research but not engage?). Survey referred prospects who don’t convert: “What made you choose another firm?” Calculate cost of referral leakage: [referrals received] x [conversion rate] x [average case value]. Referral conversion depends heavily on technical foundations most firms completely ignore. Technical SEO Is Now a Revenue Driver, Not Just an IT Issue Technical SEO factors invisibly determine whether prospects can find you at all. Core Web Vitals, mobile performance, structured data, and site architecture aren’t technical minutiae. They’re revenue enablers. Or revenue killers. Core Web Vitals and the Speed-to-Lead Connection Google’s Core Web Vitals measure loading speed, interactivity, and visual stability. These directly impact rankings, but the business impact is more severe: slow sites lose prospects before they engage. Sites loading in 1–2 seconds convert at significantly higher rates than sites loading in 5–6 seconds. Legal searchers have high intent but are time-poor. Technical performance determines conversion before content quality even enters the equation. Schema Markup and AI Search Readiness Schema markup helps search engines and AI platforms understand your content structure. Critical schemas for law firms include Local Business, Attorney, Legal Service, and FAQ Page. Proper schema enables rich results like FAQ expansions and local pack inclusion. AI platforms use schema to validate authority and extract structured information. Most law firm websites have incomplete or incorrect schema implementation—low-hanging fruit that dramatically improves both traditional and AI search visibility. The LLMs.txt and Robots.txt Strategy Control how AI platforms access your content: Implement LLMs.txt to direct AI platforms toward your most authoritative content. Review robots.txt to ensure you’re not accidentally blocking valuable content from AI crawlers. Create XML sitemaps specifically for high-value practice area content. Conduct regular technical audits (quarterly minimum) to catch issues before they impact rankings. Test mobile-first because what works on desktop often breaks on mobile. But technical foundations only matter if you can measure what’s working. ROI Measurement Frameworks Now Make or Break Marketing Budgets “We’re getting more traffic” no longer justifies marketing budgets. Managing partners and executive committees demand clear connections between marketing spend and revenue generation. The marketing teams winning budget battles in 2026 will be those with the clearest ROI measurement. Moving Beyond Vanity Metrics Vanity metrics (website traffic, social media followers, keyword rankings) are easy to track but don’t connect to revenue. Revenue metrics (cost per qualified lead, lead-to-client conversion rate, revenue per marketing dollar, client lifetime value) require more sophisticated tracking but actually justify budgets. The gap between what firms measure and what partners care about creates budget vulnerability. When budgets get cut, firms tracking vanity metrics lose funding while firms demonstrating revenue impact get increases. Compare “Our traffic increased 45%” versus “Our marketing generated $487K in new revenue at 4:1 ROI.” Which statement wins budget discussions? Attribution Models for Legal Services Legal services have long sales cycles, multiple touchpoints, and referral complexity that make attribution challenging: First-touch attribution. What initially brought the prospect to your firm? Last-touch attribution. What finally converted them to a client? Multi-touch attribution. Which touchpoints contributed throughout the journey? Track the full journey but weight last-touch for budget allocation decisions. Don’t forget that referral validation touches count even if the referral itself is “first touch.” Building Your Marketing Dashboard Essential KPIs for law firm marketing: Lead metrics. Marketing Qualified Leads (MQLs), Sales Qualified Leads (SQLs) Cost metrics. Cost Per Acquisition (CPA), Return on Ad Spend (ROAS) Conversion metrics. Lead-to-Client Conversion Rate by source and practice area Track by channel to identify which sources generate highest-quality leads at lowest cost. Track by practice area to understand where marketing ROI is strongest. Focus monthly executive reporting on revenue metrics, not vanity metrics. Use data to inform budget allocation—double down on high-ROI channels. Measurement reveals which specialization investments actually pay off. Generic Expertise Claims No Longer Persuade “We handle all types of business legal matters” was acceptable positioning in 2015. In 2026, it’s a liability. Clients don’t want generalists who can handle their case, they want specialists who’ve handled dozens, if not hundreds, of similar cases. Digital marketing must reflect this specialization, not obscure it. How Clients Actually Select Attorneys Clients choose attorneys based on specific experience, not general capability. So naturally, digital content must demonstrate depth, not breadth. Being known for everything means being known for nothing. (Or as my father liked to say, “Some men know everything. But that’s all they know.”) The expertise paradox is real: the more broadly you position yourself, the less credible you become for any specific need. Content Depth as a Competitive Moat Build unassailable positions in your strongest practice areas: Identify 2-3 practice areas where your firm has deepest expertise and highest revenue potential. Build comprehensive content libraries for those areas (50+ pieces minimum). Address every question prospective clients ask during initial consultations. Use content depth to differentiate from competitors with thin practice area pages. Measure content effectiveness by tracking which pieces drive qualified inquiries. Specialization is about demonstrating depth in the areas where you compete for high-value work. Decisions to Make in 2026 The landscape in 2026 rewards firms that understand these critical shifts. The common thread across all six is strategic sophistication. Firms that view digital marketing as a cost center to minimize will lose ground to firms that view it as a revenue driver to optimize. The question isn’t whether to invest in these areas—it’s which priorities to address first based on your competitive positioning, practice mix, and current digital foundation. Begin your 2026 planning by auditing where your firm stands across these six dimensions. Which represent your biggest opportunities? Which pose the greatest competitive threats?
Advertisement
Flip through our latest digital editions now!
ORANGE COUNTY
SAN DIEGO
Powered by
