Keeping Clients In — And Competitors Out
These days, your clients have lots of choices.
You’re not their only source of information about the latest SEC or IRS regulation, the latest change to COBRA, or what some appeals court just decided.
You’re not the only one publishing client alerts or newsletters about such matters of import. So are your competitors — the very people who would like to take your clients from you and claim them as their own.
Your clients have choices, and they’ll exercise them. They don’t have to read your client alerts; they can choose from a wide selection. They can choose to read the client alerts that are the most timely, the most informative, and — since time is precious — the most concise. They can certainly choose to read alerts that are well written and ignore those that are not.
So, if your client alerts aren’t well written, informative, and concise, then you’ve left a door open — a door through which long-time clients can be persuaded to leave.
Introductions and First Impressions
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: if the intro to that client alert or newsletter article you wrote isn’t well done, then the alert or the article isn’t likely to be read by anyone but you.
People form their impression of the entire piece from the intro. If that intro leaves them with the impression that what you wrote is going to be worth their while, fine. If it doesn’t leave them with that impression . . . .
Three Examples from One Source
Example #1:
Consider the intro to this article appearing in this newsletter recently published by Proskauer Rose:
Employee Who Was Interviewed During Internal Investigation Was Protected From Retaliation
Vicky Crawford was interviewed during the course of an investigation into “rumors of sexual harassment” involving the Metro School District’s employee relations director, Gene Hughes. Crawford described several instances of sexually harassing behavior that Hughes allegedly directed at her; two other employees also reported being sexually harassed by Hughes.
There’s a hiccup in that intro, and it’s this:
Crawford described several instances of sexually harassing behavior that Hughes allegedly directed at her.
Sexually harassing behavior? Allegedly directed at her?
Had an editor gotten between the author and the reader, the reader wouldn’t even have thought the author capable of such awkward phrasing. And the reader might have kept reading.
Example #2:
Here’s an intro to another article in the same newsletter:
Diabetic Employee Was Protected Under Americans With Disabilities Act
Larry Rohr, an insulin-dependent type 2 diabetic, brought suit for employment discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”). The district court granted the employer’s motion for summary judgment on the grounds that he failed to raise a material issue of fact concerning whether he had a disability within the meaning of the ADA and because of his inability to complete a certification test, which rendered him unqualified for his position as a welding metallurgy specialist.
Consider the second sentence:
The district court granted the employer’s motion for summary judgment on the grounds that he failed to raise a material issue of fact concerning whether he had a disability within the meaning of the ADA and because of his inability to complete a certification test, which rendered him unqualified for his position as a welding metallurgy specialist.
A 57-word sentence with nine prepositional phrases, and a pronoun with no clear precedent? Is the author attempting to drive customers away?
Example #3:
Employee’s Defamation Suit Was Properly Dismissed
Leah Dible, who was employed by the Haight Ashbury Free Clinics as a psychiatric counselor, was terminated after a jail inmate as to whom she had some level of responsibility committed suicide.
This opening line screams for attention. Nobody but nobody uses a phrase like “as to whom she had” without causing others to wonder (about the author) or chuckle (at this fumble).
Shut the Door
Present clients with awkward phrases or unwieldy sentences, stuff such into the introductions to your client alerts of newsletter articles, and watch clients walk.
They’ll start reading better stuff from your competitors. And then those competitors will get their feet in the doors of your clients.
The Bottom Line
If you’re a law firm and you publish client alerts and newsletters and such, then you’re a publisher. Your attorneys are your authors. Your clients and prospective clients (your competitors’ clients) are the readers you want.
If you want your publications to attract them, then do what the pros do — put an editor between your authors and your readers.
