Law Journal Newsletters

An ALM Website

The Red Zone

2013 - BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT IS RARELY SIMPLE OR EASY

By Allan Colman, CEO the Closers Group

  • E-Mail this Article
  • View Printable Article

2013 - BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT IS RARELY SIMPLE OR EASY

Growth in a free market is there to be gained. Firms can always find ways to use growth as a powerful marketing asset. But for firms that finally recognize the need to pursue legal business development, two questions need to be asked: First, how can your firm exploit the current marketplace? And second, what long term strategic and pragmatic business development lessons can you learn, firm size not withstanting, from the modified knowledge that has driven legal services purchasing during the past 4-5 years?

Business development is rarely simple or easy. But marketplace fluctuations raise problems for clients as well as for law firms. Those who prepared contingency plans, or learned from the past 4 years, are now prospering. They are the "it" as in Hide and Seek's "tag, you're it." They are out from behind the trees and actively pursuing new business. And 2013 will be no exception for them.

Comments

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

Add your comments

Log In

You must be logged in to comment

Register

Enter your information below to begin your FREE registration

From Our Blogs

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

THE CORPORATE COUNSELOR

How Privileged Are Your Privileged Communications?

Corporate counsel may be surprised to learn that, under certain circumstances, plaintiffs in shareholder litigation have gained access to privileged materials upon a showing of "good cause" under the fiduciary exception. This article discusses the basis for the fiduciary exception, the factors involved in the good-cause analysis, and the circumstances under which courts have turned over privileged materials to plaintiffs.

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY STRATEGIST

Biosig Instruments, Inc. v. Nautilus, Inc.

In Biosig Instruments, Inc. v. Nautilus, Inc., the Federal Circuit held that the functional claim language of "spaced relationship" was definite in view of the inherent parameters of the claimed apparatus, notwithstanding the lack of any specific quantification of exactly how wide the spacing should be.

Tweets