Providing the Right Services? Or Quality of Service?

Jim Hassett at the Law Firm Business Development blog had a great post a few days ago (okay, almost a week, but who's counting...where DO these days go, anyway??).

I always read Jim (a very thoughtful blog), but I saw this post extra early when he kindly gave me the opportunity to approve a quote (vehement opinion) of mine from our previous exchanges about weaving sales pitches into client meetings that are initiated for the purpose of measuring client satisfaction.

Jim's new post features the award winning sales campaign of Womble Carlyle (a firm I first admired in the late 90's when they adopted their adorable bulldog branding campaign). Their sales campaign is centered around client meetings called "a client service review."

Along with approving the quote, below is what I wrote back to Jim (with some minor tweaks for clarity). The gist, though, is that I don't perceive WC's campaign as "selling during a client satisfaction measurement meeting." Here's why:

This meeting doesn't seem to be primarily a client satisfaction measuring instrument, with a sales component added, which is what I am opposed to.

Instead, this seems to be a well-orchestrated marketing/sales campaign (with good infrastructure) that has just a small component of exploring what the firm can do better from a service standpoint.

If I understand WC's purpose correctly, their objective is to have discussions with clients to assure the firm is addressing the clients' needs through providing the right servicES.

I interpret it this way because of the specific language Steve Bell (Dir. of Sales at WC) used in his quotes:

1) a "...client service review..." (as opposed to a satisfaction review); and

2) "...for any firm that wants to focus on client services..." (versus the use of "service")

Given the meeting details in his description and the wording above, I read these uses of "service/s" to mean "Are we offering you the right services? Do they match your needs?" Not so much "how is our service?"

WC's is a true sales campaign that maximizes conversation with an intent to introduce (remind) the client about the firm's other services relative to their needs. There are many things that I like about their approach:

• that the engagement partner IS the interviewer because s/he has (or should have) intimate knowledge of the customer and can avoid discussing irrelevant services (the checklist approach someone less knowledgeable of the customer might take)
• that it gives the engagement partner the opportunity to deepen the relationship (I love the "stop the clock" part. More firms should listen to their clients and get to know them....withOUT billing them by the hour for it.)
• that they are (hopefully) going to be routinely reviewing the client's needs and offering appropriate solutions to newly discovered or evolving needs

This process coincides nicely with some comments I've heard directly from "A-level Clients":

• I saw a full list of services when I interviewed the firm, but I've forgotten what they provide.
• I'd like, on a yearly basis, to be refreshed of the firm's services and which might be applicable.
• I'd much rather have other services presented to me, personally, rather than by mail. It's best when you talk to me in person. Maybe a yearly meeting where we talk about what's going on for the next year, touch base, share updates and tell me about additional services.

Patrick Lamb and Dan Hull have addressed Jim's post on WC's campaign and neither seem to have interpreted it they way I did. So, perhaps I'm wrong. I suppose I could just call Steve Bell and ask him, but sometimes it's more fun to discuss semantics...

Ultimately, what matters most is: how is the meeting purpose presented to the client?

If the meeting is set up to explore "How well are we meeting your legal/accounting needs? Can we review the services that we provide to you and discuss if we are doing the right things?" then great, talk about what WC discusses and introduce new/other services.

But if you are meeting with the client to "Follow up to assess our service quality/your satisfaction," then it isn't the right time to present a list of other services you offer or ask "what other services do you need that we can provide?"

ACTION ITEM: Conducting Your Own "Service Reviews":

In my client firms, I often recommend focusing on a few key clients (usually it's best to select "B" clients who have potential, with a little nurturing, to become "A" clients) by conducting (non-billable) meetings that include everyone on the service team and a few other people from other practice areas, too.

For a focused 1/2-hour, the team just talks about the client. What they hear, what they do, what they think. Others ask questions. New ideas and what-ifs are shared. Pretty soon, almost like magic, there's a whole list of great follow-up items...things that would never have come up with each of the same people working in separate rooms.

This is the synergistic thinking that clients want and deserve. It is also the thinking that results in the purchase of additional services from your firm. Take your client to a nice lunch and say, "our whole service team was talking about you the other day and here are some questions (and a few ideas) we have for you..." and sit back and LISTEN.

Of course, if you want to ask how you are doing from a service standpoint, too, that's okay...  :-)