I got a great question recently from a student about three attorney Web bios. I had brought them with me earlier this month as part of a presentation to a marketing communication class at Emerson College. Silvia Hodges had invited me to talk about how to create more client-facing content.

Here they are:

• Bill Klein, Hopkins & Carley
• Lisa Adams, Nutter McClennen & Fish
• Dori Yob, Hopkins & Carley

The question was, Did you interview each of these attorneys?

I said that I did and that this was how I was able to add strategic value to their pages and, by extension, to their firms’ sites.

Talking with lawyers typically creates an energy and opportunity that results in better sources of content.  (Far better than even the best of what I’m usually able to get in writing.)  And, this tends to result in content that’s more engaging for the reader and focused on what they need.

“An attorney in our Shively office recently argued a case before the Supreme Court of the United States.  He and his client — a manufacturer appealing a case involving commercial free speech — prevailed.”

This example used  the traditional default pronoun for indeterminate gender nouns.  When I was first taught grammar, students were instructed to go with male variations for pronoun forms — he, his, him.

Nowadays, however, we strive to rid our writing of such gender preferences.  Some guides suggest we resort to awkward and wordy constructions such as he/she and the like.  Or, we’re advised to eschew pronouns altogether, repeating proper and common nouns.

There’s another, far more elegant solution when you want a gender-neutral pronoun for…

• A person of unknown gender
• A generic type or class, or
• Where a person defies gender labels, such as Placebo’s Brian Molko

Use they and its inflected forms (i.e., their, them and the like) instead.

The singular they is perfectly acceptable, according to modern usage guides.  Some will defend it, explaining that it has been around for centuries in English, including formal writing.

I’ll add that they also sounds a lot better to the ear.

Creating humankind may be one of the Divine Spirit's greatest acts of faith. It's comparable (in a small, small way) to the hope you and I demonstrate when we risk rejection, uncertainty and everything else that comes with sales and business development.

Cathe Dykstra recently began an excellent essay about the organization she directs with an analogy.  She wrote in Louisville’s Courier-Journal that the things that make the rooftop garden at Family Scholar House grow and prosper can be likened to the things that the single, working, college-going participants at Family Scholar House need to grow and prosper.

I’ll extend Cathe’s wonderful analogy.  In addition to support and guidance and patience and so on, many things we do also take hope.

Or, perhaps, faith.  As in, leap of faith.  As in, be prepared, minimize your risk and then…jump.

I realized that what Cathe wrote about is also true of sales, fund raising and business development — and of many, many other things many of us do every day.  Such as having a child, matriculating to law school or making a cold sales call.

So, while I hope my readers get this far in this post (148 words), I know (from plenty of user-habit studies) that a lot of you won’t.

Nevertheless…

1. I write and post anyway, confident that if I don’t (or rarely) post anything, I predictably reduce my chances of Getting Found.
2. I make what I write as engaging as possible.  Such as leading with an interesting bit about Cathe’s rooftop garden and how it’s like the worker-scholars she plants and tends to.
3. I leverage the visual and ensure that I bake my main message into the caption under my post’s main image.

Get it?  I hope so.

Of course it's important to take bar rules on client communications seriously. However, there are plenty of effective ways to offer evidence that you're thinking about your prospects' needs without risking your license.

When I think about the three main reasons why clients and prospects visit your law firm’s Web site, I imagine that I also hear, “Yeah, but” in response.

As in, “Yeah, I realize studies say that clients want assurance that I can fix their problems and that I can make their lives easier (and that they’ll like working with me), but I have a professional code of ethical conduct.  I could be reprimanded or endanger my license if I make claims like that.”

My advice?  Don’t.

• First, back up.   Your state’s code of conduct probably isn’t a priority for most clients and prospects.  So, remember that they’re far more worried about their needs, not yours.

• Second, how you address Can you fix my problem? and Will you make my life easier? is more nuanced than a simple yes or no.

For example, a strategically-written case study can speak volumes about your abilities without ever promising a result.  Same with testimonials, rankings and other third-party endorsements.

Your bio is not merely a resume.  It’s the principal destination for most of your site’s visitors, one that offers you an opportunity to tell your story…in terms that matter to your visitors’ stated needs.

The ancient Romans (and many other cultures) understood the importance of perspective to beginnings and transitions. That's one of the reasons they created Janus, the (sometimes mixed gender) diety with two faces, one looking to the past and the other to the future.

What clients want from their professional service providers is pretty well established.  According to many experts, when prospects visit your law firm or architectural practice’s Web site or pick up your brochure, they probably have three questions in mind:

1. Can you fix my problem?
2. Will you make my life easier?
3. Will I like working with you?

Despite abundant evidence of this buyer’s perspective, a lot (no, most) of the marketing content I see (especially from law firms) puts the focus on the provider’s or the firm’s credentials instead of on the client’s needs.

Kon Leong, on the other hand, gets it.  He’s the co-founder, president and chief executive of ZL Technologies, an e-mail and file archiving company based in San Jose, Calif.  Here’s how he described his approach in a recent New York Times “Corner Office” interview:

One of my early jobs was selling computer hardware. What I learned about selling was probably more valuable than my M.B.A. I had seen selling as a process just about logic. Then I realized that has nothing to do with it.

You have to present your story in their context, not yours. They don’t really care if you’re standing on top of a robot and quoting equations. If they’re in the deep part of the forest, you’ve got to talk the language of the deep forest.

So, demonstrate (through case studies and the like) that you’ve solved your clients’ problems.  Demonstrate — don’t merely assert — that you care about client satisfaction by interviewing and surveying your clients…and then publishing the results.  And tell your readers what you’re like and what you do in your spare time, instead of treating this kind of Web content as something beneath you.

The film "Undefeated" won the 2012 Best Documentary Oscar, despite its rejection in 2011 by the Sundance Film Festival. The filmmakers' resiliency (they got the boost they needed from the South by Southwest conference) is the same kind of resourcefulness it takes out-numbered attorneys to Get Found and Get Picked.

The parallels between marketing a film and selling professional services ought to be obvious.

First, in either case, the numbers are apparently against you. A recent report in The New York Times, for example, noted that the Sundance Film Festival which begins today in Park City, Utah, vetted over 12,000 submissions for 193 slots. By comparison, I read recently that there are 1,250,000 attorneys in the United States competing for increasingly demanding markets less tolerant of hourly billings and other examples of business as usual.

Second, despite the numbers, there’s hope. If history is a reliable guide, many of the films that didn’t make the cut at Sundance will nevertheless earn critical and commercial success. Same with attorneys and other professional service providers who play it smart.

The Times piece describes the advice John Cooper, the director of the Sundance festival, has for the ways rejected films have skillfully used the Internet and other means to build an audience — Sundance or no Sundance.  Responding to a rejected filmmaker’s plans to offer his work via sites like iTunes or Netflix, the Times reported the following:

That’s a resourcefulness that Mr. Cooper would encourage. “Filmmakers need to be creative,” he said. “They should use the cleverness it takes to make a movie to also find an audience.”

This common-sense attitude is precisely what Mike O’Horo and other legal sales thought leaders have been offering their clients for years.  They say that lawyers are — by training or nature — relentless question-askers.  Lawyers also tend to be painstakingly systematic, analytical, well-prepared and hard-working and have a bunch of other qualities that serve business development and sales of their services and firms.

Makes sense, yes?

These tech-savvy characters lean heavily into the analog to see what they might not otherwise see.  Bourne carries a notebook with him, jotting down remembrances as if to make them better stick to his consciousness.  Blomkvist and Salander cover the walls of their cottage with clippings, photographs and more — all to supplement what Henrik Vanger refers to as Blomkvist’s “…keen investigative mind.” (Go to 2:32 of the following.)

I thought of these fictional characters and others when I read the latest about Evernote.  That’s the app that captures and syncs your hand-written journals, images and other jottings into something that can be shared, stored and processed across various digital platforms.

All of this reminds me of the power of the tangible to help the human mind gain perspective that it wouldn’t otherwise have.

It also reminds me of the nature of technology as a solution in relentless search of a problem.

It’s simple.  Be practical and responsive.

At least, according to a panel of managing partners convened earlier this month in Boston.  The occasion was the annual conference organized by the New England chapter of the Legal Marketing Association.

Why practical and responsive? The reason they offered was just as simple:  It’s what clients’ customers expect from them.

It occurred to me that this is an extension of the wisdom imparted by Laura Meherg — namely, that clients tend to want lawyers who can:

1. Fix their problems.
2. Make their lives easier.
3. And, are nice to work with.

The challenge is how to best convey practical and responsive to your clients and prospects, short of demonstrating it.  In other words, how can your marketing content reflect these abstractions.

Consider case studies.  Here are a couple of real-world examples:

• A major engineering company brought John into a case after being hit with a variety of commercial and IP claims by an oil and gas equipment company in Texas.  “My strategy was to aggressively develop evidence before I even asked for documents.  So, I examined a key executive who had all of the information and was driving the dispute…before my opponent’s defenses were in place.”  As a result, John got damaging admissions into the record early, changing the risk calculus for both sides and setting up a favorable settlement.
• When a competitor sued a global manufacturing company with a patent infringement claim, John suspected that there was another, more deadly scenario in store for his client.  “My sense was that my opponent was leveraging the patent infringement claim in an attempt to get information to support a trade secret claim and get an injunction against my client.  If successful, this could effectively shut down my client.”  John developed a strategy based on what was best for his client in the long-term by admitting the patent infringement claims and, thereby, initially denying the competing company the ability to assert the more damaging trade secret claim and quickly enjoin his client.

Well, what do you think?

Hockey players understand this.  It takes somewhere in the neighborhood of 8 to 11 shots to score one goal.

At least according to David Freeman.   Freeman was one of the keynoters at the recent annual fall conference of the Legal Marketing Association — New England chapter.

Of course, Freeman was analogizing to business development.  As in, you’re not finished when you hit SEND.  Probably not even close.

So, while it’s important to be efficient, remember that once is not enough.  In fact, once is a waste.

The average client or prospect is simply too busy and too human to remember you or me and the first seven times we blogged, called, e-mailed, tweeted or had coffee with them.

Or, more importantly, the last time we did any of those things. Capice?

By the way, while it takes repetition to be remembered, keep in mind that people make lasting impressions based on the smallest detail.  Ironic, yes?

Oh, Freeman and others at the conference also noted that clients are looking for two deal-breakers in every business relationship. They’re asking, Are you practical? and Are you responsive?

Thanks, LMA-New England!

Ancient cultures were obsessed with tracking and measuring time long before Simon Vouet's 1627 "Time Vanquished by Love, Hope & Beauty." But in the business world, to manage something, you have to measure it.

Phyllis Korkki, who reports on workplace issues for The New York Times, recently tag-teamed with Robert Pozen to challenge the notion that putting in more hours is a sign of productivity and value.

Pozen, a former attorney who’s a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and a lecturer at Harvard Business School, is the author of Extreme Productivity: Boost Your Results, Reduce Your Hours (HarperCollins).

Among other benefits, Korkki offers that regular breaks not only reduce stress but also amp up creativity.  In a second, related Times article, Pozen echoes what law firms have been hearing with increased frequency and sincerity from clients for at least a decade:  Measure results, not hours.

He says there are three things most of us could do to significantly boost our efficiency: Run better meetings, read smarter and let go of our Inner Perfectionists as writers.

This last point reminded me of what my friend Mike O’Horo calls DemandTrigger — the business need that helps drive a sale.  In my case, I might write for a living, but what I sell (i.e., my Demand Trigger) is time management.

As in, let me get that off your to-do list.

Because chances are good that every busy, high-earning lawyer or other executive has some writing chore on their desk that they keep putting off.  It’s simply competing with too many other priorities for which the Cost of Doing Nothing (thanks again, Mike) is less than finishing or editing that article-practice group description-proposal or whatever.

But, hey, who’s counting?