Acquiring Feedback from Your Legal Firm's Clients

Some attorneys feel uncomfortable receiving criticism, and some clients feel uncomfortable giving constructive criticism face to face with the attorney. However, the discipline required on the parts of the attorney and the client in dealing with these problems often develops a better channel for two-way communication. If the qualitative interviews are an ongoing process, as they should be, eventually a greater comfort level can be established, and the quality and sincerity of the feedback improves.

As an alternative, if the attorney cannot overcome the comfort obstacle with one-on-one interviews, an outside consultant can be hired to conduct interviews and interpret results.

SELF-ADMINISTERED PERSONAL INTERVIEWS

Setting. It is vitally important to the objectivity of the process that the interview be conducted in an arbitrary, nonsocial setting. The client should not be a guest of the attorney in the attorney's office or conference room. The interview should never be conducted during a meal paid for by the attorney or in any situation where the client may feel some social obligation to be "kind" to the attorney. The purpose of the whole process is objective, even if negative, feedback.

On more than one occasion, attorneys have invited clients to their offices or taken clients to lunch or dinner to discuss their feelings. The attorneys have returned from the interviews feeling good about a client's perceptions and their practice services only to be surprised later when the client changed attorneys! The attorneys had let themselves hear what they wanted to hear while at lunch. The clients, of course, did not feel comfortable being completely candid in a social setting and felt an obligation to be pleasant. The true purpose of the meeting, to uncover possibly yet undisclosed client perceptions, ended up being one of the casualties of a very comfortable meal.

The best place to conduct a personal interview is the client's office (or home, if the person is a retail client). Besides showing an interest in them and their environment, the interview time spent remains clearly distinct from any billable time in the attorney's office. Client research that benefits the attorney's practice should never be billed to the client, and the client should understand this.

Preparation. A list of questions should be carefully prepared prior to the interviews and strictly followed during the interview so that all interview results can eventually be compiled. This also helps to ensure that all subjects important to the attorney's practice will be covered, meaning the
discussion will stay on track.

Individual questions should be based on issues important to the attorney, firm partners, associates, and most of all, clients. All of the responses by the clients may or may not be based on fact. That is immaterial. What do clients think they are getting? This is the real concern.

Active listening on the part of the attorney is vital. One way to do this is to paraphrase client statements verbally immediately after they are said to confirm understanding. Key words and phrases should be noted with as much additional detail as needed to reconstruct the conversation later.

Notes may be reviewed with the client at the close of the interview to confirm a mutual sense of emphasis and priority.

QUALITATIVE ISSUES

There are four general areas where client surveys can provide significant information on attorney performance. They are communication, work response, competence, and billings.

Communications and Accessibility. Communications and accessibility can be a source of contention between attorneys and clients. An attorney must know client perceptions regarding this matter. Do telephone calls and written requests receive a prompt reply? Some law firms have a goal of returning telephone calls within 24 hours. Is this satisfactory? Should calls be handled more promptly, even if by someone else? Some clients have said that even if their attorney is not available, they still want to hear from someone in the office, whether a secretary, paralegal, or associate familiar with the client. It is often better for someone else to respond with apologies for a specific attorney than it is to let the call go unanswered.

Does the attorney keep the client informed regarding the work in progress? Does the client have to ask how things are going? A frequent complaint of clients is that they don't feel informed. Even during protracted matters, clients have said they like to know what they are waiting for, why, and when
it is likely to occur.

Work Response. Another issue is the work response. Is the client satisfied with the work response time? More than one client has asked an attorney to review a contract before execution, but, by the time an attorney response was received, the issue had become moot because a negotiation deadline had passed. The burden is on the attorney to determine needs and expectations in each situation. What the attorney can reasonably do is not always satisfactory. Responsiveness goes beyond merely returning phone calls, but speaks to ability and willingness to complete work in a timely fashion, according to the needs of the client.

Competence. Competence is another area of client perceptions. Is the client confident in the quality of work and expertise? Most clients will not feel competent to judge an attorney on legal knowledge and application. Clients have more pragmatic criteria. Did the attorney always make deadlines for courts, agencies, and negotiations when known in advance, particularly when by statute? Did the attorney understand the client's business? Most important, did the client get the results she expected or needed?

Research is often perceived by clients to disguise a lack of competence. From the attorney's point of view, it is better to research an issue carefully than to advise improperly. But often the client's perception is that researching simple issues should not be necessary. The attorney must share with the client the nature of the research and the results as soon as they are learned.

Clients often judge their attorney's competence by matters of appearance, Do documents and correspondence always appear correct and efficient? Clients have been heard to complain that too often a document is incorrect or needs to be redone. Detail has a huge impact on the client.

Billing. This issue of billing is emotion laden by its very nature. Were the bills reasonable for the task accomplished? Were they fair in relation to the value of the work? Were the amounts in keeping with expectations? Are they understandable? Had a clear understanding, with written confirmation, been reached before the matter was undertaken? Billing may be one of the most critical communications of all. The billing process affects the client's perceptions of value, fairness, and competence.

FOLLOW-UP AFTER THE INTERVIEW

Not only should the attorney verbally thank the client for his or her help, but follow with a letter specifically citing the areas discussed. If remedial action was indicated, the client should be advised as to when (or not) the action will be implemented. The attorney's skills in active listening will be critical at this point.

There may be areas mentioned by the client which are clearly out of the attorney's hands. The attorney should tell the client when that is the case but also indicate that an effort will still be made to effect change. In a situation where clients complained of staff ignorance on certain matters, one attorney considered follow-up action to be complete when offending staff people were disciplined or terminated. Naturally, the client has felt responsible for a termination that perhaps was not necessary.

The attorney, on the other hand, was able to "hide" from the main point that the client was trying to make—which was that staff members were not informed by the attorney. Further, the client became less willing to give feedback after that incident.