Why client feedback isn't working for most law firms

Most law firms want to provide the best service that they can to their clients. They understand that gaining client feedback can improve relationships, provide key business insights and help to generate more work. They may sometimes be a little nervous about what the feedback from clients may include, but they buy the theory.

That's one reason why most firms now undertake some form of client research or feedback. Other prompts include the accreditation criteria for Lexcel or to join a legal network, a desire to understand and improve service levels, an attempt to reduce client losses, an attempt to grow volumes of work from clients, or simply because many other firms are doing it.

Client research promises a high return on investment - both in direct financial terms and how the firm can use it to improve its performance in a whole host of ways. But, in many cases, efforts don't deliver against these aims and they can impose administrative burdens and costs exceeding the value that firms secure.

I don't want to imply that it is only professional services firms that get this wrong. I was recently telephoned on behalf of my bank. I'm actually a good prospect for research and feedback exercises, because I know that they ?can be useful both for the bank and ?for clients.

But, about 15 minutes later, I was losing the will to live. It felt like a never-ending list of multiple-choice questions, read by rote from a script by someone who was bored. Topics were raised that didn't matter to me and had no impact on my satisfaction with the bank, my loyalty to it, the issues I was facing, or my appetite to use the bank further.

It was a real shame: there was some useful feedback that I could have given my bank, but the questions didn't go there. I now feel less satisfied with my bank.

I've seen client feedback exercises commissioned or undertaken in-house by professional services firms that fall foul of exactly the same problems.

The five traps

I don't know any law firm that would happily and knowingly invest time and ?cash on something that isn't working. ?So why does it happen? There are five ?key reasons.

1. The aims of the exercise are unclear. The firm hasn't thought through what it really wants to ?achieve from the programme, or ?the value that it can provide. This ?can often lead to the next problem.

2. The wrong questions are asked. Knowing how a lawyer performs ?in technical detail or on each ?moving part of a transaction may ?be interesting for the firm. But it ?may have no impact on how satisfied clients are or how likely they are to give you business in future. You get lots of data, but little of it helps you ?to build a healthier firm. Instead, focus on what is important to the client.

3. Not enough clients respond. And, ?of course, they won't respond if ?there is no value from the exercise ?to them. The client's view of the firm should improve as a result of a ?well-structured feedback process. ?A poor one detracts from the client's perception of the firm.

4. The administrative and cash cost is too high. Some firms still chase and collate paper forms; this takes a lot of time and admin costs. Because the time commitment can be high, the job gets given to someone without the expertise in analysis or, indeed, the ability to determine what the implications are for the firm. It's an unnecessary opportunity cost from every perspective.

5. The firm does nothing with the results. Any of the above problems, by definition, reduces the likelihood that the firm will act on the feedback obtained and secure any benefit from it. Even without these issues, some firms haven't got the processes in place for their management team ?to use the insights to make the ?right decisions.

Return on investment

There is a multiplicity of benefits that firms can get from an effective client feedback programme - from investing in the right capabilities to positioning the firm better and getting a better return on training though to winning more work.

But, if there is no accountability for following up on specific client issues (or ?the process doesn't even enable clients to be identified), then none of the client's specific concerns - or opportunities for more work - can be responded to.

There are enough demands on management teams at the moment. It's tough dealing with changing compliance and regulation, increased competition, ?new market entrants and business models, and a still-fragile economic environment. There is no value in running a client feedback process that absorbs time ?and doesn't help anyone to make a ?better decision.

Robin Dicks has over 20 years' experience in professional services and B2B services marketing (www.thrivingcompany.co.uk)