Back to the point, why does cross-selling so often fail to live up to its promise? Most formal cross selling programs start with flawed assumptions and suffer from a cultural misalignment between rewards and risks, an economic challenge found in the firm’s compensation and incentives program and business development training programs which are light on the unique challenges of cross marketing in professional service firms.
1.
The process typically starts with flawed assumptions.
a.
Clients are willing to lock in to a single
provider for multiple solutions. However, clients often see a great benefit in
maintaining flexibility and scalability.
b.
Clients will benefit financially from
aggregating legal services. However, the reward is typically too small to
warrant the disruption of existing relationships and the added hard and soft
switching costs.
c.
Clients
evaluate quality in the same way that attorneys evaluate quality. Attorneys
tend to evaluate quality in technical terms including legal strategies, work
product quality, educational background and case or matter experience. However,
many of the recipients of a proposal are non-lawyer business executives who use
a different set of criteria in their evaluation. These often include an
economic analysis such as a return on investment calculation, the intuitive
trust and personal appeal of the attorney, the value added services offered,
the speed of proposed resolution of the issue, and other criteria.
d.
The relationship attorney and their partner
equally trust one another. Trust is the most critical element of any
relationship. While building trust with a new client is recognized part of the
process in new client engagements, it is not so well recognized need in
internal cross marketing initiatives. You must trust your partner before your
client will trust him. Adequate time and attention needs to be paid to building
trust among the partners.
2.
Neither risks nor rewards are compelling enough motivators.
a.
The reward of selling another attorney’s
services is less than the risk of disrupting an otherwise good, productive
relationship. (What if they screw up?)
b.
The risk of losing a client relationship is not
worth the reward of cross selling. (What if they like her better than me?)
3.
Compensation and incentive systems are
misdirected or underdeveloped.
a.
Compensation systems fail to create a large
enough individual incentive to overcome risk aversion.
b.
Compensation systems and incentives often fail
to directly link cross-selling performance to individual attorney compensation.
Even where this path exists, it can be quite murky.
c.
Compensation and incentive programs often fail
to incent group activity. Even though doing so can focus peer pressure on breaking
down the barriers to cross-selling.
d.
Compensation and incentives that do reward
cross-selling typically reward the short-sighted goal of landing new work
versus the long term benefits to the firm of the lifetime value of a more
entrenched client. Continuing to expand work in the existing practice area is
just as important, if not more so, than adding additional practice areas to the
client relationship.
e.
Quotas and billing requirements often force
attorneys to focus first on growing their own book of business over expanding
their partner’s book of business. The subtle choices the attorney makes as a
result can grow into unrelenting barriers to cross selling success.
4.
Consultative cross-selling skills are underdeveloped
in law firms.
a.
Cross-selling requires a different process and a
slightly different set of skills than landing a new client- the focus of most
attorney business development training programs. Most attorneys have not been
properly trained in ‘consultative cross marketing’ techniques within the firm.
b.
Ineffective or incomplete pre-qualifying
analysis. Too often, attorneys rely on their partner’s knowledge of the client
to be briefed on the client’s business. This is often insufficient and should
be only a part of the preparation prior to meeting with a client.
c.
Hording key information and intelligence about
the client or misinterpreting its importance. It is not unusual for the
relationship attorney to hold back on key client information under the guise of
confidentiality, reluctance to share unpleasant experiences or even passive
aggressiveness toward cross selling the client.
d.
Inability to clarify and communicate the value
of another attorney’s experience and capabilities. Attorneys often have
difficulty articulating their own value to a client. Articulating the value of
a partner is even more difficult.
e.
Selling the practice instead of the solution. This
is a common mistake in many professional service firms. Clients do not buy the
practice, they purchasing the benefits of your practice which is the value of
the solutions you offer. Attorneys who understand how to articulate the ways in
which the business will benefit from the attorney’s experience, win a greater
share of their proposals.
Cross-selling is an incredibly effective way to improve the
profits of law firms and lock in long term client loyalty. However, it is
equally difficult to implement in most partnership-structured organizations.
The good news is that there are relatively simple ways to lay the foundation
which can ensure improved cross-selling activity in the firm.
Are you interested in improving your cross selling program? It costs nothing to talk. Call me at 502.693.4731
No comments:
Post a Comment