We spend a lot of time talking about how to adapt sophisticated thought leadership to new media since questions like “How do you elevate the conversation on Twitter” weren’t being asked 15 years ago. And we treat that pace of change as remarkable – a sign we’re living in an age of exceptional ingenuity.
But communicators have been adapting to shifting media landscapes for centuries, trying to meet audiences where they are and take full advantage of the available platforms. If you want to see what I mean, you should visit an art museum.
For Employee Appreciation Day this year, Greentarget threw it back to our school days and took us on a field trip to the Art Institute of Chicago (our colleagues in New York took a similar trip to Cooper Hewitt, the Smithsonian Design Museum). Once we arrived, our friend Howell Malham Jr. introduced us to Gloria Groom, a curator at the Art Institute; together they led us around the European Painting and Sculpture wing, stopping to give us historical perspectives on four particular pieces. Each piece was not only a work of lasting importance in the art world, but also an example of the artists, and subjects, directing the conversations of their time.
The last piece we saw, Model for a Statue of Louis XV (1746-8), struck me the most. Gloria noted that the statue was essentially a solution to a communications problem. King Louis XV of France was perceived as weak and incompetent by the French citizenry. So he did what any resourceful king would have done: commissioned a sculptor to create a massive statue that would portray Louis XV the way he wanted to be seen – as a stirring, dynamic leader who did heroic things with swords.
To depict Louis as a strong leader, capable of leading with wisdom and conviction, the artist Jean Baptiste Lemoyne put a scroll in the king’s outstretched right hand. The sword in his left hand suggests the king was a strong warrior, ready to lead his people to victory. Louis’s relaxed pose conveys a sense of confidence, inviting the French people to trust him, to believe in his prowess as a ruler.
The piece at the Art Institute is not the statue itself, but the model that was to serve as a reference for the monument. The model is a little over two feet tall and made from terracotta, a pliable material that, nearly 300 years later, still bears the artist’s imprint on its surface. The material makes the piece look like it’s still in progress, as if Louis XV could still be imploring the artist to make him a bigger sword.
It’s a far cry from today’s image-making, which leans heavily on social media and made-for-mobile video. But while commissioning statues is no longer the norm, we haven’t entirely abandoned the idea that image can be shaped through art.
Gazing at the miniature statue of Louis XV, I kept thinking about Kehinde Wiley’s portrait of former President Barack Obama, unveiled a few weeks before our field trip. In the painting, Obama leans toward the viewer, hands folded over each other, as if listening intently to whatever we’re saying. It clearly reflects the demeanor Obama projected throughout his presidency: a calm, collected thinker invested in his people – a listener.
Unlike Louis XV’s statue, the Obama portrait is part of a tradition going back to George Washington. But presidential portraits have shifted over the years. Early American presidents were depicted in dark colors, appearing stoic and unwavering. Later POTUS painters have taken a more casual approach, with more colorful surroundings and relaxed poses.
While the medium and images change with the times and technology, some things are timeless. Whether it’s terracotta or Twitter, it’s the message that matters.
Blog
The comment came at the 2018 Legal Marketers Association National Conference in New Orleans — and it says a lot about the state of play in a hypercompetitive industry.
“You can be the best lawyer in the world,” one general counsel said. “But it’s worthless if you can’t communicate with me in a timely way.”
The GC was talking specifically about outside counsel responsiveness. But he could have just as easily been talking about the effectiveness of communicating through law firm-generated content. It’s a topic that weighs heavily on law firm marketers, one we hear about every day — and the focus of Greentarget’s State of Digital & Content Marketing Survey.
Of course, content was far from the only topic of conversation among the 1,500 attendees at LMA two weeks ago. In my first time attending an LMA national conference, I got a virtual crash course in the hottest issues facing Greentarget’s law firm clients and the industry itself. Here are the ones that stood out to me:
- Relationships Matter for Legal Buyers. From the opening keynote on “The Science of Happiness” to the general counsel panel I referenced above, one message came through loud and clear: building strong relationships between attorneys and in-house counsel is critical. One in-house executive noted that attendees weren’t taking advantage of the opportunity at hand. “I recently attended a legal event with several attorney speakers. I was shocked when, after the panel, all the attorneys were standoff-ish, and rushed out to head back to their billable work instead of speaking with me. It was a major missed opportunity.”
- Marketing Is Evolving. At the LMA Northeast Cocktail Event sponsored by Greentarget, I spoke with a marketing leader from a firm in Boston. She was starting to take on more of an operational role simply because she had been with the firm for an extended period of time, was intellectually curious and organized, and had built up a lot of internal support. The next day, the Marketing 3.0 session illustrated how many marketers with these traits have transitioned into a practice-group manager role — a great fit for marketers looking to grow within their firms and take on new responsibilities.
- “Snackable Content.” While many legal marketers are focused on creating sophisticated content with the depth to engage in-house attorneys, one GC at a large consumer goods retailer took a different perspective. “I’m all about reading snackable content,” she said. “It’s how our consumer marketers engage, and internally, it’s how we’ve been trained as a company. This is how we digest information best — short, memorable emails and pieces of content with relevant information.”
- Importance of Diversity, for GCs and Marketers. The session titled Making the Business Case for Diversity was popular, and I spoke with a few marketers who were glad the topic was on the agenda. One GC from a top retailer shared how diversity is a critical part of their agency selection: “It’s important for our firms to understand our diverse culture and reflect that in their attorneys.” Another in-house attorney agreed: “If we are looking at two similar law firms with the same skill set, a diverse attorney team can make a difference in the selection process.”
- AI and Machine Learning. The AI session was one of the most well-attended breakouts at the conference. Whether AI is being used to sift through data or assist with digital marketing plans, it’s top of mind for many marketers in the legal space. We’ve implemented AI for research for several of our clients at Greentarget, and we’re excited to see how this trend grows in the future.
- “Misalignment Between Budget and Ambition.” In the Website Deep Dive breakout session, one legal marketer shared her challenges in overhauling her firm’s website. Planning and objective setting are critical to a successful marketing initiative, but some marketers or executives might not be realistic about what is achievable. As a new business lead, I see this issue time and time again — it’s important to understand what is achievable with limited resources.
- “Substantive Subject Matter Expertise.” Several sessions featured breakout speakers who shared tips for improving website navigation, layout and content. But I think one GC said it best: “When I’m looking at a firm’s website, I’m looking for substantive subject-matter expertise. It’s not just surface level knowledge — I’m looking for people who understand my business.”
This last point really stuck with me. The ultimate goal of much of the work we do at Greentarget is to position clients as substantive subject-matter experts, to differentiate them for prospective buyers and decision-makers. Clearly, meaningful and substantive points of view are critical to elevating brand awareness and driving smarter conversations.
Mark Zuckerberg likely didn’t begin his congressional testimony in Washington last week hoping to do much more than limit the damage to his company’s tattered image. And, in a testament to the effectiveness of solid media training, he probably accomplished that goal.
But Zuckerberg could have done so much more. He could have elevated the conversation around Facebook, data privacy and the future of the internet.
To be fair, Zuckerberg took a couple of baby steps. He said that his own data was compromised, which effectively humanized a man who badly needs humanization. And he laid plain his company’s business plans (they aren’t changing). But the wunderkind who had the foresight to build one of the world’s most important companies stayed stubbornly locked on the past – and failed to discuss the future, notably how Facebook and other companies can secure the data of billions of people.
Sure, by remaining defensive and focusing all of his energy on the testimony, Zuckerberg made sure he’d get out of Washington alive. But he didn’t fulfill his obligation – the way we see it at Greentarget – to drive a smarter conversation.
We believe that business leaders like Zuckerberg, who have informed and unique perspectives on important conversations, have a responsibility to help their audience better understand those conversations. That was especially true in Zuckerberg’s case – billions of people trust Facebook with their personal data. And yet for all the preparation that Zuckerberg put in, he didn’t realize the opportunity he had, in front of an audience of millions, to address the fears of those who had their information stolen – or are worried they could be next.
At Greentarget, we regularly counsel clients on how to get their message across. In interviews with reporters, published opinion pieces, public speaking and other forums, the same principles apply. Fortunately, Zuckerberg – and indeed a whole host of Silicon Valley executives – will have more opportunities to improve on the communications front.
What Zuckerberg Can Still Do
Zuckerberg is one of the world’s most important business leaders, so he still has a chance to build on what he said in Washington. The best way to do that is to consider what Facebook users want to know. Where is their data? What steps should they be taking? Do they need to worry about this again? Exactly what is being done to address the problem? It all needs to be conveyed in layman’s terms, but with precision.
This might sound obvious. And yet, so many Silicon Valley leaders – who are best positioned to answer these kinds of questions – have remained silent and instead crossed their fingers that Facebook would take the fall, leading to a stalled conversation. Regulators, corporate executives and average Joes simply don’t have the knowledge of Zuckerberg or his counterparts in the upper echelons of Silicon Valley.
How They Should Do It
While there’s no question that a two-day congressional testimony is not the same as a 30-minute interview with a reporter, Zuckerberg applied the concepts and tactics that go into media training – the type we often provide our clients before conversations with reporters. Namely, Zuckerberg stuck to his message, he retained composure and he didn’t answer any question to which he didn’t confidently know the answer. And if we had trained Zuckerberg, we’d have said he almost nailed it – with one exception.
We always tell our clients to leave a reporter with three things at the end of the conversation – and most of the time, the reporter will never have considered at least one of those things before. That’s the definition of driving a smarter conversation. It’s giving new information to someone who is going to put it out in the world for the public’s consideration.
Of course, Zuckerberg probably wasn’t going to conclude his testimony by giving regulatory advice to Congress or laying out detailed technical plans for his company. He has shareholders to answer to, and executives like Zuckerberg might perform better in a less combative environment than Capitol Hill. But he could have explained how Facebook’s approach to data collection will change in the next year.
He didn’t, and that’s too bad. But the good news is that Zuckerberg, even among tech executives, has a massive megaphone. The question is, will he use it – and will others in the valley do the same? Facebook, Google, Yahoo, Amazon and everyone else should focus on sharing their perspectives on technology and data privacy, including their successes and failures. There are questions that must be answered, and there are others that we don’t know we even need to ask.
It’s possible that Zuckerberg limited his testimony to looking backward because he doesn’t know what the future of data will look like. If that’s the case, he and other Silicon Valley executives need to tell us what they don’t know. Simply posing those questions would make this a smarter conversation.
It was a pretty impressive maneuver. When Kentucky Fried Chicken ran out of fried chicken in the United Kingdom, it managed to turn it into something of a PR coup – all in the course of a week.
Humor was key to KFC’s approach – reversing its namesake letters to “FCK” in a large newspaper ad and playing off the riddle “Why did the chicken cross the road?” And that was indicative of a larger crisis strategy – one that showed up in another narrowly averted PR disaster for Crock-Pot, which was identified as the cause of the death of a beloved (though fictional) character on the hit show “This Is Us.”
The successful efforts by both companies made us think about crisis PR response lessons for professional services organizations that might confront similar situations – even if the details will obviously differ. That is, unless a law firm or management consulting outfit ends up running out of drumsticks.
- Words matter – and the first words matter most. In most crises, quickly responding is as important as the statement itself. The morning following the “This Is Us” episode that implied Crock-Pot’s responsibility in the character Jack Pearson’s death, the company published a statement sharing the audience’s devastation and encouraging consumers to continue using their slow cookers in his memory. A timely and persistent demonstration that your organization cares is critical to properly addressing a crisis, as is demonstrating empathy. KFC, meanwhile, handled its persistent crisis with apparent ease, taking to Twitter every couple of days after the chicken shortage to reiterate that the situation was under control.
- Address situations head-on. KFC’s statement was successful largely thanks to its full-page apology, which was simple and sort of genius. It featured a stark photo of an empty chicken bucket accompanied by the text, “A chicken restaurant without any chicken. It’s not ideal.” Successful statements include acknowledgment of the issue, denial (if something isn’t true), acceptance of responsibility (if it is), actionable steps and reinforcement of an organization’s values without diminishing the impact the event has had or will have on stakeholders. It’s also important that organizations reinforce critical facts. For example, Crock-Pot’s crisis response team provided the media with facts such as, “For nearly 50 years, with over 100 million Crock-Pots sold, we have never received any consumer complaints similar to the fictional events portrayed in last night’s episode. In fact, the safety and design of our product renders this type of event nearly impossible.”
- Empathize, dammit. The perception that you don’t care is the single biggest predictor of broken trust, reputational harm and loss of competitive advantage from a crisis. Just as a single term or phrase can destroy a company’s reputation, it can also save it. Empathy was key to the effectiveness of KFC’s and Crock-Pot’s statements. The first words in KFC’s message were “We’re sorry” followed by a clear acknowledgment that their consumers, team members and franchise partners were all affected. Crock-Pot began each of its messages with empathy and concern for their users (and “This Is Us” fans), describing their own sadness over the character’s demise.
- Be ready when you have to take action. Wouldn’t it be great if all crises ended with quick, clear and sympathetic public statements? Here’s something that won’t shock you – they don’t. Good leaders take action because they know that when a crisis strikes, empty words don’t mitigate the situation. All stakeholders – whether employees, consumers, stockholders, board members, media, etc. – expect an organization to take action. We advise our clients to have a crisis plan in place ahead of time – one that plans for potential threats and identifies which employees will be doing what when a crisis arrives. At that point, you should make sure to gather all the facts and determine the appropriate message (and who needs to hear it). And make sure to continuously evaluate the circumstances and modify the course of action as needed.
With Volume Surging, Clear and Documented Direction Becomes More Valuable
We live in an age of information overload. And consumers in the world of legal marketing are all too familiar with content created without an overall strategy. That’s what makes the findings of Greentarget’s new Legal Technology Service Providers’ Use of Content and Social Media Marketing Survey so troubling. Far too many marketers at companies that provide services to law firms said their own organizations create content – and plan to create even more – without creating and documenting strategies. And many of those marketers will be creating more content without commensurate increases in resources – a sure sign that the quality of their content won’t be increasing, either. These results, collected in early 2018, illustrate that the end goal of content marketing, no matter the intended audience, is generally to win new business. And failing to think strategically about content makes achieving that goal much harder – no matter if you’re a law firm or a business trying to market to law firms. But there’s a flip side. Organizations with documented content strategies that keep their audiences in mind can successfully break through the noise and stand out – if for no other reason than many of their counterparts still haven’t seen the light. More Content, Not a Lot of Strategy Respondents from almost every legal services company surveyed (94 percent) said their organizations planned to produce more content in 2018 than in 2017. Meanwhile, half of respondents said they had no documented content strategy. About a third said they had a strategy that wasn’t documented, and 13 percent said they planned on documenting a strategy within the next 12 months. Perhaps not surprisingly then, the top challenges for content marketing were lack of staff time (38 percent) and budget (34 percent). And while 59 percent did say their content marketing budget had increased for 2018, the gap between that group and the larger one that intends to publish more indicates that many organizations will be producing more but not better content. As marketers try to determine how best to use their budget and staff resources, now’s the time to focus on quality over quantity. Marketers clearly know the value their content can bring, with one respondent noting that content marketing efforts “generated nearly $200,000 in new revenue from leads that came through the website, landing pages, white papers and other content.” Another respondent recounted an interaction with a customer prompted by content work. “We had a partner at an Am Law firm call us and ask for a demo that led to the firm subscribing to our service,” the respondent said. “Previously, the CMO had not responded to our calls.” New Business Is the Focus Winning new business was the top goal for individuals involved in content marketing, followed by building new website traffic and lead generation. Despite this clear focus on attracting new customers, more than half of respondents also identified several other goals – from demonstrating thought leadership to gaining exposure and building new relationships. While this in part reveals the broad usefulness of content marketing, the lack of clarity also may reveal a pervasive failure to carefully plan and target content marketing efforts. More Budget Allocation Needed Respondents to the Greentarget survey reported more widespread budget increases in 2018 than respondents to a recent survey by the Content Marketing Institute (59 percent compared with 39 percent). But relatively few marketers in the space spend as much as their peers in other industries. Sixty-nine percent of the respondents to Greentarget’s survey allocate less than 20 percent of their budget to content marketing. A wider group of business-to-business marketers spends an average of 29 percent of marketing budgets on content, according CMI. “If you’re not spending a third of your budget on content marketing, you’re not keeping up,” said Kevin Iredell, Greentarget’s director of research. LinkedIn, Email Strongly Valued Seventy-five percent of respondents said email was very valuable when it comes to content distribution – much higher than any other channel. But LinkedIn may reach some readers that even email doesn’t. All respondents said LinkedIn was at least somewhat valuable, whereas 6 percent said email wasn’t valuable at all. Email can miss its target for several reasons, from over-active spam filters to unlucky timing. But as a business-focused social network – one that has consistently proved popular in professional services ranks – LinkedIn adds a layer of curation. Readers see only content from their network and only from individuals, not from companies or organizations, boosting the authority of the content published there. Comparing information sources, there was only a slight difference between the value of traditional news media and blogs. They were equally seen as very valuable by respondents, but traditional media was seen as somewhat valuable by a slightly larger group. But that might not be surprising. Greentarget’s 2017 State of Digital & Content Marketing Survey found that in-house counsel continue to give traditional media (e.g., Wall Street Journal, The Economist) higher marks for credibility as sources of legal, business and industry news and information – even in an era of so-called “fake news.” For the full results of the survey, download the report.The legal industry faces a gathering storm of financial, demographic and economic forces. In an effort to illuminate the risks and opportunities those forces present, our 2018 Legal Industry Outlook curates multiple studies, surveys and white papers into a single, easy-to-read package.
A big shout out to Citi Private Bank; Altman Weil; Hildebrandt Consulting; Major, Lindsay & Africa; Reuters Legal Institute; Georgetown Law; and Oxford University SAID Business School. Their insights on the acceleration of change and disruption sweeping the legal industry were nothing short of invaluable.
Click here to view the full 2018 Legal Industry Outlook.
