Page 68 - The Handbook - Legal and Accounting Networks 81
P. 68
Law and Accounting Networks and Associations
In a network, the members do not have to follow the recommendations of the network. They do not have to
provide information to their professionals. The professionals are under no obligation to use one network over
another. The challenge for the network is to set itself apart from other information channels. Each network will
be different, but the degree of awareness will generally correspond to the network’s level of development.
A Level 1 network will have a name, but the members do not seek to have a brand. They are clubs in which
only a few member professionals participate. Since there is no organization, there is nothing to brand.
Level 2 begins the process of internal branding. The brand begins with a distinctive name that will set it apart
from other networks. Meritas, TerraLex, Lex Mundi, Praxity, and UHY International are such names, which
are recognized as legal and accounting networks. A more generic name can also be a brand, but the brand has
to have underlying characteristics that separate it from other networks. PWC stands out because it is recognized
as the largest accounting firm. World Services Group (WSG) stands out because it is multidisciplinary.
The primary issue for a Level 2 network is that there are a limited number of professionals actually involved
in the network. In accounting this is not necessarily an issue in that the member may have adopted the name
of the network. Of course, this by itself will make everyone at the firm aware of the network. On the other
hand, in legal networks that are international, very few attorneys will ever make use of the network.
Practice groups are a method for a mature Level 2 network to increase awareness. When the professional’s
name is in a group and they begin receiving information from the group, this increases awareness. The premise
is, the more names the groups have, the greater the awareness. It is actually necessary that the groups be active
if there is going to be true awareness.
Legal and accounting are very different in regard to Level 3 internal awareness; the accounting networks have
an easier time creating it. The name of the network is prominently featured on all materials and the website.
There are practice groups for audit, tax, and consulting to which professionals in each firm belong.
Additionally, the benefit of a Level 3 accounting network is that common forms and materials are generated
to facilitate audits. Since accounting firms are generally located in one state, region, or country, the best
resource for referrals is members of the network.
Legal networks in Level 3 want to establish an internal brand. The difficulty is, unlike in accounting,
identification with a network is limited. The attorneys may belong to other associations in which they find the
expertise to refer business. The firms themselves may belong to multiple networks since legal networks are
almost all non-exclusive. Each network competes for awareness in the firm. Awareness alone will not create
this identification with the network.
Awareness in legal networks means operating on the premise of offering a menu from which members can
select. The members may have many other menus — including other networks and bar, alumni, and practice
area associations — but the one offered by the network should be superior. The challenge is to define a menu
that is both interesting and useful because it is the best way to assist clients. Awareness requires a plan with a
consistent and long-term approach.
Engagement marketing can also be called “relationship marketing,” as it is about creating the opportunities to
proactively develop professional relationships. In other words, engagement marketing is about creating the
framework in which members can act independently outside of the confines of directed network activities such
as to include meetings and practice groups. An awareness tool, like a publication, becomes an engagement tool
when the members are sharing information among themselves without going directly through the network. The
relationships become more collaborative because the members themselves take the initiatives rather than being
directed by the network.
56
In a network, the members do not have to follow the recommendations of the network. They do not have to
provide information to their professionals. The professionals are under no obligation to use one network over
another. The challenge for the network is to set itself apart from other information channels. Each network will
be different, but the degree of awareness will generally correspond to the network’s level of development.
A Level 1 network will have a name, but the members do not seek to have a brand. They are clubs in which
only a few member professionals participate. Since there is no organization, there is nothing to brand.
Level 2 begins the process of internal branding. The brand begins with a distinctive name that will set it apart
from other networks. Meritas, TerraLex, Lex Mundi, Praxity, and UHY International are such names, which
are recognized as legal and accounting networks. A more generic name can also be a brand, but the brand has
to have underlying characteristics that separate it from other networks. PWC stands out because it is recognized
as the largest accounting firm. World Services Group (WSG) stands out because it is multidisciplinary.
The primary issue for a Level 2 network is that there are a limited number of professionals actually involved
in the network. In accounting this is not necessarily an issue in that the member may have adopted the name
of the network. Of course, this by itself will make everyone at the firm aware of the network. On the other
hand, in legal networks that are international, very few attorneys will ever make use of the network.
Practice groups are a method for a mature Level 2 network to increase awareness. When the professional’s
name is in a group and they begin receiving information from the group, this increases awareness. The premise
is, the more names the groups have, the greater the awareness. It is actually necessary that the groups be active
if there is going to be true awareness.
Legal and accounting are very different in regard to Level 3 internal awareness; the accounting networks have
an easier time creating it. The name of the network is prominently featured on all materials and the website.
There are practice groups for audit, tax, and consulting to which professionals in each firm belong.
Additionally, the benefit of a Level 3 accounting network is that common forms and materials are generated
to facilitate audits. Since accounting firms are generally located in one state, region, or country, the best
resource for referrals is members of the network.
Legal networks in Level 3 want to establish an internal brand. The difficulty is, unlike in accounting,
identification with a network is limited. The attorneys may belong to other associations in which they find the
expertise to refer business. The firms themselves may belong to multiple networks since legal networks are
almost all non-exclusive. Each network competes for awareness in the firm. Awareness alone will not create
this identification with the network.
Awareness in legal networks means operating on the premise of offering a menu from which members can
select. The members may have many other menus — including other networks and bar, alumni, and practice
area associations — but the one offered by the network should be superior. The challenge is to define a menu
that is both interesting and useful because it is the best way to assist clients. Awareness requires a plan with a
consistent and long-term approach.
Engagement marketing can also be called “relationship marketing,” as it is about creating the opportunities to
proactively develop professional relationships. In other words, engagement marketing is about creating the
framework in which members can act independently outside of the confines of directed network activities such
as to include meetings and practice groups. An awareness tool, like a publication, becomes an engagement tool
when the members are sharing information among themselves without going directly through the network. The
relationships become more collaborative because the members themselves take the initiatives rather than being
directed by the network.
56
