Spurred by Martha Sperry’s recent post about the numerous benefits to bloggers that Facebook offers, I decided it was past time for me to revisit and complete an old project: creating a Facebook Fan Page for my blog Law21. It’s still early in the process, and I’m learning as I go, but I can see a lot of valuable applications of a Facebook Fan Page to a legal practice, and I thought I’d share some of my initial thoughts here.

By way of brief explanation: a Facebook Fan Page is a dedicated page on Facebook for your business, organization or other commercial entity. You use it to publicize and promote your business by publishing news, updates, information, offers and so forth, and by inviting your professional contacts and interested friends to become “fans.” These people show up as members of the Fan Page, they can post messages and engage in conversations on the page, and they receive new entries from the Fan Page in their Facebook update feeds. Considering there are now 400 million people on Facebook, there’s good reason to take it seriously as a marketing platform. Nicole Black has an excellent summary of how to set up and use a Facebook fan page for a credit union — you should go read that first, substituting “law firm” in the appropriate places, and then come back here.

Setting up a Facebook Fan Page for your law practice is one thing — turning it into an exceptional value-add for both its members and your business can be another. A lot of Fan Pages seem to just sit there, rarely issuing updates, not really telling visitors anything interesting about the company or taking advantage of the features Facebook has to offer. This silence suggests that their owners created the Page because someone told them to and haven’t given it much thought since. These desolate Fan Pages don’t give people any payoff for becoming fans, and their low member totals are duly reflective. Their lesson is: don’t start a Facebook Fan Page unless you intend to give it regular attention; like an abandoned blog, it can actually drive down your prestige by conspicuously collecting dust by the side of the road.

Many other Facebook Fan Pages are active, but they’re not always the right kind of active. Just like a lot of personal Facebook accounts and Twitter feeds, these Fan Pages suffer from IAAM Syndrome: It’s All About Me. Every update and every data point on the Page is all about the business: its latest accomplishment, its newest office, its most recent press release, and so on. Absolutely, there should be some of this content — part of the goal of a Fan Page is to keep your Fans engaged in what you’re doing and what you’re up to, and to use them to spread that word far and wide. But it needs to be balanced, if not outweighed, by content about and focused on the Fans and what interests them.

For every entry on your Fan Page about your firm’s activities or offerings, there should be at least one or two entries that focus on your Fans: a link to a mainstream news article about one of your key practice areas that your clients (and potential clients) care about; a question or opinion poll about a current-affairs issue that affects your client community; a conversation-starter that lets your fans kick around an engaging topic, serious or otherwise. As Niki says in her article, a good Facebook Fan Page is a community, and you should do what you can to encourage interaction, facilitate dialogue and build relationships within that community.

On top of that, you can make this community even more special by giving your Fans bonuses or insider access they can’t get from your website or your firm’s newsletters. Write an article that’s only accessible by clicking on a link from your Fan Page. Provide an exclusive offer — a half-hour’s free consultation, say, or free parking in your building, or a list of kid-friendly diners near your office — that only your Fans will hear about. Set aside one hour to do a question-and-answer session for your Fans on any legal subject of interest. Give people an incentive to become Fans and to pay close attention to every new announcement or addition to the Page — increase their sense of belonging and exclusivity.

What’s more, remember that Facebook offers you a lot of unique options for packaging your content. You can create Photo Albums of your office or staff members, maybe for a special event like a birthday or baby shower, helping to humanize the members of your firm who are otherwise only known through those stiff, posed, smiling photographs on your website. Schedule Events at your firm like in-house seminars or outside speaking engagements by lawyers. Post Videos now and again, either little three-minute advisories from the managing partner or links to a relevant and interesting item at YouTube. Use the RSS Grafitti application to send your Twitter feed directly to your Fan Page. Profile one of your Fans once a week or once a month, introducing him or her in more detail to the other members of the club.

In short: keep it active, keep it interesting, and keep it about your Fans. Those are the three keys to a successful Facebook Fan Page — and, not incidentally, to everything you do, say or publish under your firm’s banner.

As we  just announced on Clawbies.ca, the nomination period is now open for the 2009 Canadian Law Blog Awards, with the awards list set to be released on New Year’s Eve.

This is the fourth year we’ve held the awards, and similar to last year, we’re bringing back the social nomination to let everyone share their favourite Canadian law blogs!  You can read more about he nomination process on Clawbies.ca, but here’s a quick rundown on the 2009 rules:

1. You can tweet your nomination on Twitter, but please include the hashtag text: #clawbies2009. We’ll be monitoring!
2. You can also email in your favourite blog, along with a sample post or two, or any other notable highlights to Steve Matthews at steve@stemlegal.com. It’s not a public nomination, but still perfectly acceptable.
3. And perhaps the most influential method, write a blog post about three other Canadian law blogs you currently read and tell us why those blogs are important to you.
4. If you are nominating via your blog, remember to act like a humble Canadian and tell us NOTHING about your own blog.  In return, we promise the nominator’s blog will receive a thorough review, as will your suggested peers, PLUS you get a chance to plug a fellow Canadian blogger!
5. Don’t include or suggest categories. We’ll figure out that part.
6. You don’t have to be a Canadian to make a nomination.
7. Don’t bother nominating Jordan Furlong.  Feel free to say nice things about him, but he’s kinda conflicted now. :)
8. And finally, we’re on the look out for sleeper picks! That fantastic blog flying under the radar!

Vote early and vote often! (pretend that volume counts, even if it doesn’t…)  And have fun promoting the Canadian legal blogosphere.

Cheers!
Steve

I’m about a week late with this post, but it’s always a good time to plug ABA Techshow! Right?

The paper I wrote with Reid Trautz last year, titled Supercharge Your Referrals With Technology, has been released as part the Best of ABA Techshow series. It’s the full version of the paper that was given out to attendees, in PDF format & around 15 pages.  I just re-read some of it, and was reminded of some of the great ideas we covered.

You can download more presentation papers from ABA Techshow, which runs again March 25-27th, by clicking over to the newly created section on the conference website.

And speaking of Mr. Trautz … Every year Reid publishes his guide on holiday shopping for lawyers. Reiding Reading his blog a few minutes ago, I notice the 2009 Gift Guide went up a couple days ago. It’s great fun, as usual!   Where else would I find an online store for a gas-powered blender! (seriously, near the end…)

My latest Web Law Connected column is up at Slaw.  The article is titled Social Media & Business Productivity, and addresses the current trend of law firms using proxy servers to block in-house access to social media websites.

Perhaps unexpected, I really sit on the fence on this issue; and didn’t take the anti-blocking stance.  There are a number of ‘middle-ground’ alternatives which few firms have explored to date – including time based restrictions, and role-based (ie. based on business need) blocking.

The opinions and solutions on this issue are, unfortunately, extremely polarized.  I think it’s also worth noting that neither extreme position (global blocking or unfettered access) actually aligns with the business goals of most law firms.

For a more detailed review, please link on over… I think the article does a reasonable job of describing my thoughts on the debate.

I spoke at the Pacific Legal Technology conference this past Friday with Susan Van Dyke. The topic, as perhaps expected, was web 2.0 tools for lawyers, with a slant toward business development.

The PPT slides are now available via slideshare, and embedded below.

Heather Morrison of the CNW Group, formerly Canada News Wire, released a 11-pg report yesterday titled Canadian Law Firms and their Use of Social Media. I am quoted in it, so please excuse the vanity reference.

The report itself offers a nice overview of the benefits of social media investment. That’s important, but the part I appreciated most was the focus on relationship building. Great relationships are a key driver of success for any law firm (or lawyer’s) search strategy. The reason? Relationships not only improve our network of contacts, which alone is a worthy goal, but they form the basis of the link network behind most firm websites.

Links, remember, are ultimately a form of online currency and a driver of what many people refer to as ‘google juice’ – a measure of trust, and better search rankings.

At one point in the paper, I’m also quoted saying that firms ‘not skip steps‘. Let me explain that further. Broken down, I often consider these three components:

• content – eg. blogs, papers, newsletters;
• distribution channels – eg. twitter, email, RSS, JD Supra; and
• relationships - either mirroring & codifying one’s existing relationships with links, or driving new relationships with social media;

Most firms (not all) have content at least partially covered. They may be sending out paper or email newsletters (distribution) and connecting with existing clients. In the past, that’s what firms had to work with. Could they now have more forms of content? or distribute via more channels? Absolutely, but it’s hard to argue that having those basic pieces functioning (think: 80:20 rule, existing clients…) didn’t create some success.

But this 2/3 element scenario, also created a huge gap in search marketing. Without relationships driving links, firms weren’t creating any kind of an ‘after effect‘; where their published content continues to rank well in the search engines, and continues to drive new readers creating exposure. But with Social Media participation (I include blogger-to-blogger relationships here), and creating new relationships with the associated links, firms are often able to make their publishing work harder & longer. In the cases of extremely popular content, years after the date of publication.

As the years pass, and a firm’s volume of substantive publishing increases, so too does this ‘after effect‘.  And the driver in all this is pretty consistent. Having a solid network of ‘web friends’, who are also web publishers, is one tough combination.

There are lots of other benefits to social media usage, which are covered in the report. But that’s my take on the why SM participation reflects positively on search marketing.

About an hour ago, Kelly Phillips Erb, aka TaxGirl, put an entry on Twitter that I think most regular users of the service would agree with:

Some people obviously see value to twitter, and some think it’s a waste of time.  Everyone has a right to critique, so that’s not (entirely) at issue. But when it comes to writing about the nuances of Twitter (or any web tool for that matter) – those ‘how to become a success‘ type stories – having a little experience should be a prerequisite. No?  Frankly, there are a few ‘personas’ out there that I think most of us wish would stop before they start.

Here are my ‘top-10 tests’ to figure out if you should stay away from that fashionable Twitter article:

1. You don’t have an account.
2. You have an account, but have six tweets to your name.
3. You followed six hundred people with no tweets in your account, and can’t figure out why no one returned the favour.
4. You’ve been on (but mostly off) the service for less than three months.
5. You’re a journalist and your editor told you to start an account.
6. You’re a journalist who’s opened an account expressly to write a story about twitter.
7. You’re evaluating the ROI of twitter as a business development tool.
8. You’re a marketing consultant and you think “it’s about time” to write about this twitter thing.
9. You’re intentionally set to write a Twitter critique article purely for the backlash & media exposure.
10. You’re David Letterman. (ok, funny filler. enjoy!)

A fun idea germinating from a discussion with Jordan Furlong… Is it possible to reduce a company’s elevator pitch down to the 140 character limit of a twitter entry?  Brevity never being an easy task, it seemed like a challenging & hopefully productive exercise. So, I’m in.  I’ll queue the entry below up on my own account in a few minutes.

If anyone reading would like to also take part, please include a #TEPitch hashtag.  And for those of you not on twitter, here’s what I came up with:

Stem does leg work to help law firms get noticed: in search engines & social web + build grass roots brands, trans 2 profile & MSM #TEPitch

Fitting everything into an entry like this is near impossible, so getting down to the company’s core services was essential.  Obviously, our phone rings here at Stem because we are a lawyer SEO company. That’s a foundation, so I’m putting it right up front. We also stick to working within the legal industry. I think that’s decipherable from the company name, but important for the message. Our development of new ideas, fleshing out of web brands, and the ‘trickle up’ effect on media coverage round out the last few words.

While we deliver a fair bit of consulting, both informally within our retainer service and via written reports, I always like to say that Stem executes projects on behalf of clients, and that our opinions come along for the ride. The word consulting is also a tough term to differentiate, so while ‘doing the leg work‘ may be too casual for some, at least for me, it’s a more expressive way of putting it.

I’m also overlooking some of the web development work we do, but again (& like any elevator pitch) something had to give.  I consider web development a ‘value add’ element we bring to client relationships, and (at least for now) not directly why we get hired.

So there you have it. My tweetable elevator pitch for Stem. If you’d like to try the same for your company or organization (or blog, or ???), please do. The more the merrier!

And… Happy July 4th to all our friends & clients down south!

Cheers,
Steve

In an ongoing effort here at Stem, we’ve been tracking the growth of the “Law Practice Industry” category on LinkedIn. For a bit more than a year now, we’ve run periodic searches on Google to see how many profile pages are indexed which include the industry class ‘law practice industry’.

Predictably, but still impressively, that number continues to grow. June’s number now shows 840,000 people within the law practice industry. In reviewing these profiles, we see a very high percentage of those people are lawyers; although it is an industry class and not professional.

With all factors consistent on each dated sample, here’s how things have stacked up:

• April 2008: 118,000
• June 2008: 216,000
• December 2008: 406,000
• March 2009: 563,000
• June 2009: 840,000

So what’s new in the world of lawyers on LinkedIn? A couple of observations:

• Groups: From legal marketing and technology to practice-specific groups for almost any area of law you can think of, lawyers on LinkedIn are getting more value out of their network by engaging in discussion. Groups are being used for Job postings, vendor recommendations, general questions, and sharing articles and links.
• Applications: Applications are basically widgets; tools that allow you to add external data into your LinkedIn profile. Two popular amongst lawyers are the Slideshare Presentations app, which lets you share presentations; and the RSS feed display, where you can post the feed from your blog, JD Supra documents, or any other content you like.
• Company pages: Just as important as individual profiles are company pages within LinkedIn. For instance, Clark Wilson’s profile includes a description of the firm’s services, a snapshot of current and former employees, location and contact details, and interesting auto-generated statistics such as median age, gender split, and top schools. Savvy law firms and other companies in the industry recognize this as a valuable opportunity to sculpt their online image.

Want a quasi brave prediction? That 840K number is going to be well over a million profiles by September 1st.

And thank-you to Larry Bodine for his email request to update the numbers!

Project work has been plentiful here at Stem recently (which I’m blaming for my lack of blog posts). And like so many of you whose inboxes are constantly running out of control, I found myself needing to take additional action this week.

On Wednesday, notifications for twitter follows and friendfeed alone peaked at 45 emails, so I decided to route them around my inbox. We use Google apps for business, but the same thing can be done with Outlook or exchange. I simply created a filter for all incoming email from the two services, sending these messages into their own folder, and archiving them out of my inbox.

So here’s my new routine: I’ll scan these ever day or so, and will delete or follow back on Fridays.

Is this novel or innovative? Not at all. Lots of friends have recommended this to me for some time. If the volume had been a little lower, I’d probably have put up with it…  But setting the bar a little lower isn’t always a bad thing, and inbox management helps everyone.  So I’m passing it along.

My latest Web Law Connected column is now posted on Slaw and on JD Supra.  The article is titled Lawyer Twitter Practices: 29 Do’s and Don’ts and offers an intemized list of ways lawyers are currently using Twitter. As the title alludes, some of those practices are helping to support the user’s professional reputation, and some are not.

If this is a topic that you’re looking to explore further, I have two additional recommendations. First, take the time to work through the comments at the bottom of the Slaw article. There were a number of great suggestions made there.  And second, drop over to Jordan Furlong’s Law21 and read his thoughts on Twitter. There wasn’t much duplication between the two articles, and Jordan’s post addresses a number of issues I didn’t get to.

One of the groundwork slides in my referral networking session at ABA Techshow with Reid Trautz was Stem’s ongoing tracking of the “law practice industry” category on LinkedIn.  The slide quoted the number of profile pages indexed by Google on four different dates over the course of the last year. Those were:

• April 2008: 118,000
• June 2008: 216,000
• December 2008: 406,000
• March 2009: 563,000

And here is the associated graph:

The question I posed to attendees was this: What do you think these numbers are going to look like in a year’s time? two years? three years?  The point, of course, is that the adoption rate is skyrocketing. It’s also important to recognize that each of these profile pages was created by, and actively managed by, the participant’s effort.  Not a massive updating process by firms to keep their records current in a directory – but based upon actual participation.

For me, that’s the promise of the read write web.  And to those looking for proof of Susskind’s ideas within the 2009 Techshow keynote, look no further.

The second edition of Law Practice Magazine’s LegalWeb2.0 column is now online. This month, Doug Cornelius has authored a great roundup of the issues faced by law firms who block internal access to social media websites. His article, titled Online Social Networking: Is It a Productivity Bust or Boon for Law Firms? covers a broad range of issues, from productivity and virus exposure to bandwidth and brand monitoring.

A couple of additional notes I’d like to mention:

• First, there’s a nice web-only appendix on the magazine website that includes the comments received from the survey. I’m not sure how long this page will be available, so best to drop by this month.
• Second, a feature only blogging & the social web could provide, Doug has just posted his response to the survey process & the results. He also has a sample social networking/blogging policy for a law firm.  Both these items are worth checking out.
• Third, a big thanks goes out to David Lat and Above the Law for helping us get the word out about the survey.  ATL didn’t get a mention in the article, and that was an oversight. Chalk it up to the rookie column editor (me).
• Fourth, we can’t pin this on Big Law. The numbers were consistent across firms of all sizes. We segmented the results to isolate each of the firm size demographics, and the numbers were almost identical.
• Fifth, 45% of law firms blocking social networks surprises me, and also doesn’t surprise me. The sample size was admittedly pretty small, but the fact the percentages were so consistent across firm size gives me a bit more faith in the results. Even if that number drops to 33%, one-third of an industry blocking is still a big number.

Many thanks to Doug for putting this together. I’d like to encourage everyone to check out Doug’s article and review the materials noted above.

This past Sunday I published my latest Web Law Connected column over at Slaw, titled “The Formal-to-Informal Rule of Lawyer Web Publishing“.

The title of month’s article is a bit of a misnomer, and my suggestion of a rule is a mental guideline more than anything. The basic premise is to be careful about taking raw unfiltered conversational exchanges online, and automating (RSS imports, Widgets) their re-publication to your business network. As stated in the article:

My formal-to-informal rule is simply that it’s always ok to route formal commentary to informal and conversational web tools; but that unfiltered, informal, or conversational tools should be considered a place of final destination.

For those who consistently stay on message, don’t mix their personal & business networks, or see little use for flippant or sarcastic comments, having a content routing strategy may make little difference. Unfortunately, I seem to fail those tests on a number of fronts. :)  But that’s ok. The important message here is self-reflection in an honest way, and recognizing when fail-safe measures are required.

As I said at the end of the article, I don’t know if everyone else needs a rule… but it makes sense to me. And if it raises awareness of potential problems with content routing, especially for those lawyers with more conservative clientele, then mission accomplished.

As an aside, I’ve altered my personal publishing routine, and will now try to coordinate new article releases to Stem’s JD Supra account. The rationale, for those interested, is two-fold. First, Canadian published content isn’t treated as nicely in the US search results (a.k.a. geo targeting), so I’m attempting to improve cross-border search exposure; and second, I want those JD Supra syndication partnerships to help increase content distribution.

TechCrunch published an important post yesterday about the amount of time we invest in Twitter. Using Robert Scoble as an example, this post demonstrates a valuable lesson for everyone. There’s a risk involved when we disproportionately web-publish to another company’s service. The cost is that we increasingly ignore our personal web-publishing efforts.

While this may seem strange coming from the guy who penned Lawyer Marketing with Twitter, the issue is not about twitter, facebook, linkedin or friendfeed. The issue is our ability to create a balanced approach.

Earlier this year, D’Arcy Norman wrote about social network sharecropping. The idea that we are dumping our thoughts, pictures, notable links and relationships into the hands of others. And let’s make no bones about it, that’s what’s happening. When we publish to servers that are not ours, we are giving away control. But at what price?

The issue as I see it, is not that we’re using these services. But rather, that we are participating in an unbalanced way. In the legal sphere, my big concern is for those lawyers are engaging these tools without first having a personal web presence. That’s right, a blog!

Using social networks and social media without a blog to tie these services together, is simply a bad move. Especially for lawyers, who may be starting late in the game, you cannot skip steps. Guess what Connie Crosby did last year when her twitter account was accidentally cancelled? She blogged about it, and more important, she got results! Not having a blog means you are not a player. If you lack that personal publishing presence, that means you don’t have a voice on the modern web. It’s a position of web marketing weakness.

The other problem I see is the ‘no follow’ trend of the big social networks. Most of these services, including Twitter, have cut off the outbound link value of their links, including individual profile pages. That means, while many believe they are contributing quality content to these services and getting a valuable link back to their firm or company website, this is increasingly not the case.

Unfortunately, that’s not the way the ‘nofollow’ attribute or link popularity was intended to work. Link popularity is supposed to reward quality content & the people who create it.  Similarly, the ‘no follow’ attribute was created to prevent blog comment spam. But now combined, these two features are used by the big social networks to create black holes of link value. Draw you’re own conclusions here, but either way, the loss of publishing control puts the content creator at a disadvantage. At the whim of a third party, who may delete your account at a moment’s notice, and without recourse.

Now what all this adds up to, is that web publishers should own their own land (ie. websites & blogs). This is an extremely important point for lawyers & law firms. You wouldn’t let an outside company own your firm domain name, right? You protect it! It’s the same lesson here.

I’m not saying you shouldn’t participate in these communities. You should participate! But in a balanced way, and not at the expense of establishing a personal blog. Frankly, twitter without a blog is just playing around. If you are using social media to participate and build a reputation, you need to back it up with some substance. And though some may disagree, my take is that substance frequently requires more that 140 characters.

I understand that blogs are hard work, and that twitter is easier. So what? If you’re going to put hours into this, the last thing you want to do is take the easy way out. As the TechCrunch post says, blogging  delivers those memorable pieces that you (and others!) will refer to for years to come.

It’s an easy equation really. Blog something of value first, and then go chat with your friends about it.