Client Speak: Client Feedback ' Best Practices

For those of you who may need more convincing as to the greater effectiveness of interviewing in person, I suggest you query the litigators in your firm about how many depositions they have taken over the past year by phone ' and why, or why not.

Furthermore, in support of the continued use of in-person meetings as opposed to other state-of-the-art means of communicating, you may wish to refer to the report by Forbes Insights on the results of a June 2009 survey of 760 business executives entitled “Business Meetings ' The Case for Face-to-Face.”

• Primary use of one-on-one interviews ' Often, a target interviewee will wish to have a subordinate join in the interview, or a senior executive will want his/her team to jointly participate. Whenever there are two or more present, you run the risk of the classic focus-group dilemma ' i.e., one person, such as the CEO or General Counsel, may so dominate the discussion that there is no assurance that possibly differing observations and impressions of the others will be heard.

Group interviews are sometimes suggested under the mistaken impression that time will be saved by getting all the interviews completed at once. In fact, the only one whose time will be saved is the interviewer because a group interview will require more time from each of the interviewees.

• Interviews specifically tailored to each client and each interviewee ' Each client is different, as is each case, matter, engagement and the related ' and often numerous ' personal interactions. Accordingly, use of a set questionnaire for every interview at every client runs the risk of not uncovering the truly unique issues, problems and opportunities that may exist.

In contrast, an interview guide ' based on the orientation sessions (see A, above) and other research about the client and each of the interviewees (via applicable websites and public documents, including SEC filings) ' provides direction into those areas that will be most vital and relevant with respect to each client and each interviewee.

• Open-ended probes, not prompts ' Too often, the way a question is asked will result in a predictable or not completely candid response. For example, one of our clients had initiated an advertising campaign and we suggested it might be useful to determine the reactions of those we were interviewing ' in addition to their feedback on the other important issues. We could have posed the following question: “What do you think of the firm's advertising?” That would, of course, have disclosed that the firm was in fact advertising, and a positive answer might have been offered to please the firm even if its ads had not been seen. Instead, we asked the interviewees, “What do you think of advertising by professional services firms?”

While the answer to that question was only marginally useful, if the response included no mention of the firm's ads, we felt it realistic to assume that the ads either hadn't been seen or they weren't memorable. Those who did recall the ads volunteered their reactions as well as their comments.

• The 90/10 approach ' Aside from revealing the interviewees' impressions regarding areas and issues of most relevance, an important objective of the interviews is to make sure they dominate the discussion. Our intent is that they speak 90% of the time, and we speak 10%.

Stay Tuned

As mentioned, Part Two of this article is to appear in the September 2011 issue and will focus on the remaining five components of the How. The By Whom Best Practices will appear in the November 2011 issue. Included in that discussion will be the pros and cons of using in-house personnel versus a third party to design the CFP and/or conduct the interviews.

Donald E. Aronson is CEO of D. E. Aronson Associates LLC and a member of this newsletter's Board of Editors. Don's firm conducts market research by interviewing executives of professional services firms' Key clients with a primary focus on Client Feedback. Located in New York City, he can be reached at 212-874-4181 or [email protected]. Copyright ' 2011 by D. E. Aronson Associates LLC.

My articles in the September and December issues of last year discussed the 12 steps that are essential for a well-planned and well-executed Client Feedback Program (“CFP”). As mentioned in those two articles, “While all [12 steps] are crucial in attaining the desired end-result, how each step is implemented and by whom will obviously have a distinct effect on the outcome” (emphasis added).

The purpose of this three-part article is to elaborate on the How and the By Whom. In other words, for a successful CFP, it will require more than just going through the basic mechanics, or 12 steps. It will be necessary to implement certain and several Best Practices to assure a result that will achieve a firm's ' as well as the respective client service teams', practice groups' and/or practice offices' ' relevant goals and objectives.

The first two parts of this article will discuss the How. The third part will be devoted to the By Whom. The Best Practices to be discussed are based on our more than 20 years of experience with Client Feedback, both as Lead Partners at, and as consultants to, professional services firms.

While a CFP may incorporate interviews (in-person and/or by phone) as well as surveys (written or online questionnaires), this three-part article will be oriented primarily toward interviews as they are what you'll want to use with your Tier 1 ' i.e., most valuable ' clients.

The How Best Practices

Among the various components of the How Best Practices are the following:

• A. Background Orientations
• B. Client Selection
• C. Interviewee Selection
• D. The Interviews
• E. Communicating Feedback
• F. Follow-Up
• G. Summary Reports
• H. A Continuous Process
• I. Cost

This first part of the article discusses components A through D; Part Two will appear in the September 2011 issue and will discuss E through I.

A. Background Orientations

• Orientation with Firm Management ' This will reveal firm and service area goals and objectives as well as firm strategic and marketing initiatives, and also enable the interviewer to explain the approach and his/her qualifications.
• Separate orientations with each Lead Partner ' For the clients whose executives are to be interviewed, the purpose of this orientation is to determine Client Service Team goals and objectives, discuss major issues regarding the client relationship (including the fee and other competing service providers), and determine whom and how many to interview.

B. Client Selection

• Principal focus on Tier 1 clients ' A CFP is a major undertaking requiring considerable resources. Since maximum benefit will be derived from the feedback provided by key executives of a firm's most important clients, this is where resources should be allocated. Caveat: It is possible that actual plus potential billing should not in all cases be the prime determinant of which clients belong in Tier 1.
• Not just for problem clients ' Airing and then resolving issues with clients where problems exist is an important aspect of a CFP. However, significant value can also be derived from interviews conducted at clients with which the firm has an outstanding relationship. Here the objective would be to find out why the relationship has been so mutually beneficial and productive. And, once those qualities are revealed, the firm will want to capitalize on them. Consider the following: 1) How can those qualities be replicated with other clients? 2) How can they be used in the training of partners, associates and other firm personnel? 3) How can they be incorporated in promoting the firm and positively differentiating it from others for purposes of hiring, promotional materials, RFPs and other new business and strategic initiatives?
• Initially, voluntary participation by partners, then mandatory ' We have found that it is usually the more effective Lead Partners who will be the first to sign on their Tier 1 clients to participate. After it becomes evident how valuable the process is, others will volunteer. Thereafter, firm management should be comfortable in requiring it of partners who are still reluctant.

C. Interviewee Selection

• Focus on key decision-makers and key influencers ' The interviewees designated should be those involved in the selection, retention and termination of outside counsel as well as those who are most familiar with the firm's work and that of other firms.
• Interviewees from beyond the General Counsel's office ' These would include executives from other functional areas as well as from corporate and operating groups and the Board, depending on how the firm's services and personnel are deployed. As one business unit CEO told us, “They sure understand the law, but they know little about my business.” In this case, limiting the interviews to those in the General Counsel's office would not have revealed such a shortcoming.

D. The Interviews

• Primary use of in-person interviews ' This is particularly advisable for key executives of Tier 1 clients; the use of other methodologies can be considered for other interviewees. Several reasons for our strong preference for in-person as opposed to phone interviews were referred to in the September 2010 article (the discussion of Step 3). I won't repeat those. But let me here discuss the issue of cost, which is normally the most important consideration in favor of interviewing by phone. And the interviewees recognize that.

When a firm makes the effort and incurs the expense to send someone to an interviewee's office to conduct an in-person interview, many of those we've interviewed interpret that as an indication of the firm's enhanced commitment not only to the Client Feedback process, but also to the relationship and to the client.