Disrupting the Lawyer Ratings Paradigm
Oddly, I always find pro-Avvo articles to be incredibly well-written. :-) Through that lens, here is an article that is INCREDIBLY well written. Entitled “Disrupting the Lawyer Ratings Paradigm,” the article is on Law.com and written by Joe Campos of Stanislaw Ashbaugh. Joe writes:
What makes Avvo a truly unique concept, however, is its ability to create a dynamic and interactive community of lawyers, clients and prospective clients. . . .
A collection of hardbound volumes cannot generate the sort of interactivity and real-world information about lawyers and law firms that is experienced, contributed and compiled on Avvo every day. Information about lawyers is being shared by those who have first-hand experience, resulting in a searchable database of information that is accessible to prospective clients around the country and the world. If information is power, then Avvo effectively shifts the balance of power away from lawyers and law firms to clients, prospective clients and every other user of its Web site.
As you may recall, I blogged about Stanislaw Ashbaugh being an innovative firm whose attorneys, without urging or compensation from Avvo, had all claimed their Avvo Profiles and put Avvo Badges on their website. Further enhancing his and his firm’s web presence, Joe Campos launched the blog DigitalMediaLawyer.com. Suffice it to say that these guys “get it,” and I am honored to have them waxing poetically regarding the “paradigm shift” we know as Avvo.
Also interesting is the amount of attention that Joe’s article has received. After Joe’s article hit the web, I received roughly 10 Google Alerts regarding other websites/blogs reporting or commenting on the article. One of them was Kevin O’Keefe, whose understanding of this space always impresses me. In his post entitled “Avvo to disrupt Martindale-Hubbell’s ratings system” he says:
The Avvo concept is here to stay. Consumers of legal services who can get online reviews on dishwashers are going to demand, through their behavior, that comments about lawyers be freely available. Whether comments come from other lawyers or clients, the information is just too valuable.
Martindale-Hubbell has been suppressing this concept for years. They want a monopoly on lawyer ratings. Money to made there. Plus when you’re charging law firms 10′s and 100′s of thousands of dollars to display their lawyers in a directory, you don’t want law firm customers walking when they don’t like what another lawyer or consumer has said.
Bloggers Carolyn Elefant and Scott Greenfield* also offered interesting posts, although Scott’s commentary sometimes leaves me scratching my head. For instance, in his latest post he criticizes lawyers for participating in Avvo Answers and Track Record. Soon he will be railing against pro bono work and rescuing homeless kittens.
Finally, the attention that Joe’s article received reminded me of how unpredictable the community voice can be. In January, the ABA Law Practice Management Section published this pro-Avvo article and no one even batted an eye. Then Joe’s article comes out and I thought my Google Alerts were malfunctioning. There is an interesting social study in all of this, or maybe Joe’s article *was* just that well written.
Mark
* Per Scott’s latest blog post, I would just like to let him know that, while I have yet to post to his blog, I love him and think of him most every day. One day I will write, but in the meantime I am swamped with trying to corrupt the legal profession by getting consumers answers to their legal questions. ;-)
March 5th, 2008 at 11:46 am
We all love Scott Greenfield. I’m sure, as with me Mark, you get up in the morning and wonder how Scott’s doing. It truly feels that this is the Scott Greenfield decade.