For B2B Law Firms: The Distinctions Between SEO and PPC are Becoming Blurred

There was a time, not so long ago, when we would advise law firm clients with a business-to-business emphasis to consider pay-per-click  (PPC) advertising and search engine optimization (SEO) as analogous to advertising (in the traditional sense) and public relations respectively. Under the former, you paid for your ads and they ran. Under the latter, you developed content for your web site, social media or blog and you hoped the forces (i.e., Google) that vetted your efforts were kind and ranked you high on the search engine directories. 

Using that frame of reference, it was not uncommon for us to recommend to such B2B law firms that they refrain from PPC. After all, online ads were highlighted in their own column on the right side of the online page and were clearly seen as what they were – “paid for” bits of communication. A high organic page ranking, on the other hand, was a success story unto itself – Google had ordained your content as “relevant.” For the law firm reaching out to businesses, this was (and in some ways continues to be) a great means for enhancing one’s credibility as a “player” within the industry. After all, a more sophisticated buyer of legal services would probably rely on recommendations, references and credentials before keying in on a short (very short) advertising message.

But that is slowly changing. And it is doing so for two reasons. First, PPC ads now appear in the same column of listings as organic content. No great revelation there. However, what may have gone unnoticed is that the effect of this has been to blur the lines between where ads end and organic listings begin. Yes there is usually an icon that reads “Ad” for listings that have been purchased, but these are small non-descript notations which, after time, frankly fail to viscerally distinguish between the two types of communications. To underscore this, consider the last time you searched for a particular keyword or phrase. How aware were you of which listings were ads and which were not?  More importantly, how much did it affect your decision to click on one listing versus another? Probably not a lot.

You Really Want Your Law Firm's Web Site Optimized for... What???

A couple of years ago we encountered a situation that was a textbook example of how strict adherence to SEO guidelines can potentially do more harm than good. 

The case involved a small multi-practice firm seeking to drive up web traffic for its personal injury business. The firm’s web provider had done a good job in optimizing the site for PI, splashing all of the keywords and images across any and all of the site’s pages. The firm’s experience in handling PI was highlighted throughout and attorney bios emphasized personal backgrounds in this area of the law. Not surprisingly, traffic to the site increased several-fold. All of this would, under normal circumstances be considered a good thing.

Except that in this case, it was not.

The bulk of the firm’s revenue stemmed from practice areas geared more towards business and government than towards the general public. Its target audience, which often included business decision makers and governmental officials, was far less prone to visiting web sites based on online directory searches than it was to visiting web sites as a means for learning more about the firm as based upon professional referrals. Visitors to the site wanted to ascertain the depth of understanding the firm had in regards to business and governmental matters, the experience its attorneys had in these areas and the range of services the firm might provide.

Yet, when such visitors came to the site, they were besieged by headlines, photos and verbiage that screamed “Personal Injury” – in some cases, even on pages that had nothing to do with that topic. Instead of coming away with the perception that this was a firm with many practice areas, one of which was PI, the net takeaway was that this was, in fact, a personal injury law practice that, yes, “dabbled” in a few other areas as well. In short, the firm lost its opportunity to convey its legal acumen in areas where it was critical that they do. When one considers that personal injury did not represent even the largest of the firm’s revenue segments, it’s not hard to see how detrimental the SEO initiative was to the overall health of the firm.

This is why it is so very, very important to take a holistic approach to the task of business generation. Things are not always as they seem. In this case, there was a discussion to be had that probably never took place. That discussion would have elicited 3 possible approaches to address this dilemma. First, the firm might have taken a balanced approach and done the best that it could in highlighting all practice areas including PI. Second, it might have determined that personal injury represented the greatest potential revenue stream, all other practice groups be damned. Or third, it might have understood that optimizing for PI might cannibalize its other revenue sources and decided to have two sites, one focusing on the firm at large and the other, dedicated to personal injury and optimized to the hilt.

In deciding on a marketing approach – whatever type of business development tools are being used, it is important to understand how such tools fit into the big picture. Failing to do so only risks having that big picture become not so big.

Writing for Your Audience Versus Just for SEO

A few weeks ago I wrote a post in which I discussed how strictly adhering to search engine optimization guidelines can, at times, do more harm than good. This is because by focusing too emphatically on specific search terms we sometimes risk alienating visitors to the site who may be looking for content not related to those keywords.

Today I would like to address another concern regarding an overemphasis on SEO. Too often, many law firms (and many businesses in general), perceive their web site to be a tool used to generate new business. This is fine and is, in fact, one of the ways in which a quality web site can serve a positive function in the firm’s business development efforts.  

But it is not the only one. Any purchasing process involves both the generation of potential new customers as well as converting those prospects into clients. A web site is not just a lead generation tool—it is also a conversion tool. As such, it is visited by prospects for information about the firm, its areas of focus, its attorneys and also to get a sense of the very essence of the practice.

When content is developed that focuses too heavily on having the “right” keywords appear the “right” number of times in the “right” places, we lose sight of what we are actually trying to do – sell the site visitor on the merits of our organization. This requires a writing style that understands the target audience, that is user-friendly and that underscores the firm’s benefits. When we do not do that, we run the risk of falling into traps exemplified by the admittedly exaggerated line, “Smith & Jones are divorce attorneys who focus on divorce and assist those individuals going through the divorce process to get through that divorce process smoothly.” 

While Google and the other search engines have learned to account for such extreme examples of trying to get keywords into the content as often as humanly possible, the point remains the same.  There is a fine line between writing for SEO purposes and writing to the needs and interests of the reader. If you don’t focus enough on the SEO elements, you risk losing new visitors. Focus too much on the SEO and not enough on what you are saying (or how you are actually saying it,) you risk losing prospects. Copy written in a format as highlighted above will almost certainly not convert educated, high net worth prospects into clients that family law firms so often seek to obtain.

In many ways, this has become a very critical part of legal marketing in the 21^st century. The degree to which your firm moves more in one direction versus the other needs to be carefully thought-through and should be a function of the type of practice areas in which your firm is active, the sophistication level of your target audience, the culture of your firm, how the percent revenue generated from different practice groups breaks out and the nature of the “purchasing” decision making process of prospects in your firm’s areas of emphasis. 

You Really Want Your Law Firm's Web Site Optimized for... What???

We recently encountered a situation that was a textbook example of how strict adherence to SEO guidelines can potentially do more harm than good for a law firm.

The case involved a small multi-practice firm seeking to drive up web traffic for its personal injury business.  The firm’s web provider had done a good job in optimizing the site for PI, splashing all of the keywords and images across any and all of the site’s pages. The firm’s experience in handling PI was highlighted throughout and attorney bios emphasized personal backgrounds in this area of the law. Not surprisingly, traffic to the site increased several-fold. All of this would, under normal circumstances be considered a good thing.

Except that in this case, it was not.

The bulk of the firm’s revenue stemmed from practice areas geared more towards business and government than towards the general public. Its target audience, which often included business decision makers and governmental officials, was far less prone to visiting web sites based on online directory searches than it was to visiting web sites as a means for learning more about the firm as based upon professional referrals. Visitors to the site wanted to ascertain the depth of understanding the firm had in regards to business and governmental matters, the experience its attorneys had in these areas and the range of services the firm might provide.

Yet, when such visitors came to the site, they were besieged by headlines, photos and verbiage that screamed “Personal Injury” – in some cases, even on pages that had nothing to do with that topic. Instead of coming away with the perception that this was a firm with many practice areas, one of which was PI, the net takeaway was that this was, in fact, a personal injury law practice that, yes, “dabbled” in a few other areas as well. In short, the firm lost its opportunity to convey its legal acumen in areas where it was critical that they do. When one considers that personal injury did not represent even the largest of the firm’s revenue segments, it’s not hard to see how detrimental the SEO initiative was to the overall health of the firm.

This is why it is so very, very important to take a holistic approach to the task of business generation.  Things are not always as they seem. In this case, there was a discussion to be had that probably never took place. That discussion would have elicited 3 possible approaches to address this dilemma. First, the firm might have taken a balanced approach and done the best that it could in highlighting all practice areas including PI. Second, it might have determined that personal injury represented the greatest potential revenue stream, all other practice groups be damned. Or third, it might have understood that optimizing for PI might cannibalize its other revenue sources and decided to have two sites, one focusing on the firm at large and the other, dedicated to personal injury and optimized to the hilt.

In deciding on a marketing approach – whatever type of business development tools are being used, it is important to understand how such tools fit into the big picture. Failing to do so only risks having that big picture become not so big.

SEO or Pay-Per-Click. Which Route Should I Take?

In initiating their online marketing programs, clients often ask us whether they should focus on optimizing their web site (SEO) or engage in paid advertising (PPC).

The answer is simple.

It depends.

It depends on any of a number of factors, the four most important being the nature of the target market, what it is you’re promoting, the level of competition and the short vs. long-term goals of the firm. Notice I didn’t say money, because how much you spend on an SEO or PPC effort is really a function of the other three variables. Pay-per-click may require out-of-pocket dollars while an SEO effort may not.  But the amount of time required to develop an effective SEO campaign may be unfeasible for the firm to implement, in which case it is either hiring an in-house professional or an outside provider. And of course, this then becomes an out-of-pocket expense as well.

So I repeat, in determining whether to go down the SEO or PPC paths, it really depends.

In that it can be launched immediately, if you are looking for quick hits, then PPC is a much better way to proceed. Set your budget, determine your key words, write your ads and off you go. On the other hand, SEO takes time. It will take lots of man-hours to develop content rich web site pages hyperlinked to hundreds of other sites, and it will take even longer for the major search engines to recognize this and reward you with high directory rankings. In fact, in developing web sites, we often suggest that our clients begin with a PPC effort until that time when the full effect of an SEO campaign is beginning to be realized.

PPC may be a better way to proceed if you are looking for fast clicks-throughs. But if you’re looking for quality leads, then you might wish to skew your efforts towards SEO.  This is because high placement on the organic listing of the directories are generally thought to have more credibility than the paid-for ads that usually appear at the uppermost and right side of the directory pages.  Think of it as being akin to the difference between traditional advertising and public relations.  In public relations, when you get an article placed in a newspaper or magazine, you are in effect being vetted by an objective third party entity such as an editor or producer. But you have no control over when or where your article will appear (or if it even will).  In contrast, with a print or broadcast ad, while you’re guaranteed of being seen, your target market understands that the communication is being paid for by you and thus carries less credibility.

The nature of the practice and its target market are also key variables to consider.  For practice areas that target the general public, PPC may make more sense as the prospect is often an unsophisticated shopper who may or may not understand specific questions or ask or credentials to review. A carefully crafted ad may entice this individual drawn to being hit over the head with visions of successful outcomes (think your typical personal injury commercials). Law practices targeting the business community on the other hand, may be dealing with more sophisticated prospects looking for very specific types of law firm features.  Here, an SEO effort may be preferable, unless of course the firm has challenging competitors more solidly entrenched among the higher rankings, in which case, an alternative PPC initiative may be considered.

The fact that there is no clear-cut answer to the question of SEO vs. PPC, underscores that even in the online world, marketing is as much art as it is science.

Why You Should Not Focus on Search Engine Rankings

Let me start by saying something sacrilegious. Search engine rankings do not matter. Well actually, they do matter somewhat, but not as much as many think. That is because many legal marketers tend to look at where their site is listed in a Google search as the end result of a search engine optimization (SEO) or pay-per-click (PPC) effort rather than as just another interim metric.

“Wow. We’re listed in the top three!” we’ve heard many a client attest, undoubtedly feeling as though they’ve discovered the holy grail. Similarly, we’ve known some clients where anything short of such placement is cause for excessive hand-wringing.

The truth is that the only reason why it’s good to have a top listing is to generate greater number of impressions (exposures to the web site link) so that more people both visit the site and then contact the firm in some manner.

The variable that many miss is the expense involved. For example, consider a situation in which one firm is paying $10 per click to achieve a number one ranking and winds up generating 100 total clicks with a total expense of $1,000. Then compare that to a second firm that is paying $5 per click to be ranked lower. This effort generates 30 clicks costing the second firm $150. Compared to the first firm, the efficiency this firm has achieved will allow it to either invest more dollars into the campaign or recoup the savings.

The same can be said for an SEO program in which a staff member or outside vendor is paid to ensure that the firm is listed high on the organic section (i.e., left side) of the search engine directories. The cost of obtaining that service must be weighed against the potential revenue lost by not having that service. Perhaps that individual or SEO provider achieved the goal of a top listing…what was the cost of that effort versus the additional revenue earned by being listed first?

The point is not that search engine placement is irrelevant, or that being first is not often the preferred position. Rather, such a position is a means to an end, as is the monthly budget applied and the dollar amount of the click bid itself. If the goal of your firm’s PPC or SEO initiative is to generate more revenue for the firm, then the leads (or actual clients) generated per dollar is a much more significant metric. As important, it is also a better metric for directing you as to how your on-line dollars should be allocated.