Law Journal Newsletters

An ALM Website

The Red Zone


By Allan Colman

  • E-Mail this Article
  • View Printable Article


Newer partners, senior assoicates and even third-years have been given their marching orders -- seek out new opportunities, pursue leads, get in front of prospects and close those deals. As in the Marco/Polo kids game, start popping up whenever and wherever there are prospects.

A few of the basic business development tools we find simplest to implement for our clients are discussed below and in following posts. They are designed for firm leadership which must take a strong role in making it all happen and ensure follow up is a constant.

Marketing IS like algebra. Keep this overarching theme in mind. Find a formula that works for each attorney, help them refine it when needed, and keep using it. One size does not fit all. Marketing should be tailored according to personality, needs of the firm and needs of the client.

One tactic that works for one won't necessarily work for another. In our work wiht clients the tools are simple, easy to implement and produce measurable results.


Be the first to comment on this post using the section below.

Add your comments

Log In

You must be logged in to comment


Enter your information below to begin your FREE registration

From Our Blogs



A Blurry Distinction with a Huge Difference: Commercial vs. Non-Commercial Speech

Imagine the following two scenarios, and try to figure out what the real difference is. First, your competitor blatantly lies in its advertising about the effectiveness of its products; second, your competitor blatantly lies to a reporter about the effectiveness of its products, and the reporter publishes the lies in an article or in a magazine. It seems like the same situation, but it is not. With the first, you could sue for false advertising because the advertisement is “commercial” speech, whereas with the second, you cannot because the magazine article is “non-commercial” speech. A similar difference is presented if a newspaper uses a picture of a celebrity without the celebrity’s consent to highlight a news article, as opposed to a company using the same celebrity picture in a print advertisement, in the same newspaper, to promote the company. A breach of the celebrity’s right of publicity claim is not available against the newspaper because the news article is “non-commercial,” but is available against the company because the print advertisement is “commercial.” The rationale for both is that while the First Amendment fully protects “non-commercial” speech, it protects “commercial’ speech in a significantly limited way.