header-logo header-logo

04 October 2013
Issue: 7579 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Is it good to talk?

Lawyers’ telephone technique loses them clients

A mystery shopping exercise among law firms of all sizes has revealed a catalogue of telephone inefficiencies, missed business opportunities and inappropriate comments. 

In more than a third of 254 “mystery calls”, neither party knew who they were talking to because the caller’s name was not taken and the call handler did not introduce themselves.

In 97% of the calls, the call handler failed to either ask if the caller wanted to go ahead or make an appointment. 93% of firms called during lunchtime either had nobody available to deal with the enquiry or were closed with a recorded message.

Telephone bloomers include one call handler who told a potential client: “Yes, a broken ankle is a very good injury…and if you are lucky, it will develop complications and you can claim more.”

Another potential clients was told: “If it’s a quote you want for a will, you should know we don’t do cheap wills. You see the problem with doing cheap wills is that there is very little profit on it, until people die and often it’s a long time before that happens.”

The research, by Ian Cooper, a business development consultant for the legal profession, included interviews with senior management in 92 law firms about strategy.

Cooper found that 70% of firms made no attempt to formally track and monitor incoming new enquiry calls and conversion rates, and nine out of 10 people who dealt with incoming potential client calls admitted to not liking it or not being good at it.

However, 90% of firms who trained their staff in how to deal with potential clients benefited from at least a 10% improvement in conversion rates within a month.

Cooper said: “It is quite amazing that at a time of massive competitive pressure and changes in the legal sector, law firms have not yet fully embraced the importance of converting their leads into profitable business. Most firms don’t have a proper strategy and have simply not switched on to the fact that this is a high priority area, which is costing them business.”

Issue: 7579 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll