Check out our latest edition of Avvocating on the Law.com Legal Technology Blog. I talk about “disaster differentiation” and essentially ask our lawyer readers to better market their expertise.

In addition to Kelly Chang Rickert, Stephen Fairley and J. Craig Williams (who I mention in the LTB piece), I want to thank all of our panelists from the Avvo West Coast Tour: Jill Pugh, Venkat Balasubramani, Candice Aiston, Jonathan Stein, Collette Vogele and Gordon Levinson. Because of our panelists, the Avvo tour was a resounding success (not to mention a lot of fun). We look forward to visiting the East Coast in the fall.

Be differentiated!

Mark

PageRank is widely considered a generalized, inexact, imprecise, ballpark estimate of a site or page authority. Almost every search includes results where a PR 3 outranks a PR 6. If you want to read more anti-PageRank rantings, check some of these out:

Google PageRank Sucks
PageRank Sucks
Anti PageRank Rant
Google Page Rank Sucks!

Avvo’s PageRank just went from a 5 to a 6 and I opened a bottle of champagne. Here’s why:

However fuzzy PageRank may be, it is a widely adopted and widely referenced number among businesspeople. It serves as a proxy for a company’s importance, influence and success. Our change in PageRank reflects Avvo’s growth. The fact that we are now one logarithmic point behind Lawyers.com will not be missed by prospective advertisers, business partners and the media as they evaluate who they want to buy from, partner with and interview.

So stop snickering at PageRank . . . I know you look when you think no one is watching.

Based on those conversations, when scoring BigLaw’s SEO capabilities, we graded them on three factors important to potential BigLaw clients:

1. Some prospective clients of BigLaw start their search entirely on the web, especially when looking for a very specific skill set.
2. When given a referral to a firm, many prospective clients use the web to validate that firm’s subject matter expertise.
3. Most prospective clients (corporate and consumer) research their potential attorney through a name search.

We broke these factors down into 22 specific items and audited the 20 largest firms based on the AM Law 100 by gross revenue. As an example of the things we looked at, we noted that only one of the firms used SEO optimized alt text on their lawyer images. From the grades below, it’s pretty apparent that BigLaw is not proactively guiding the online conversation about their capabilities and their attorneys.

Sidley Austin	B+
White & Case	B
Weil Gotshal	B
Morgan Lewis	B
DLA Piper	B-
Sullivan & Cromwell	B-
Reed Smith	B-
McDermott Will & Emery	B-
Jones Day	C+
Mayer Brown	C+
Dewey & LeBoeuf	C+
Cleary Gottlieb	C+
Skadden, Slate, Meagher & Flom	C
Latham & Watkins	C
Kirkland & Ellis	C-
Paul Hastings	D+
K&L Gates	D+
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher	D+
Baker & McKenzie	D
Greenberg Traurig	D

Many people have biases when it comes to Google and Microsoft. For example, some passionately hate anything Microsoft touches, some fiercely defend Google as a white knight, and some can hardly wait for someone (anyone) to topple Google. And while these biases add entertainment value to the search engine war, they’re troublesome when you’re trying to objectively gauge Bing’s performance.

After trying Bing myself, I couldn’t find a reason to use it over Google. Then again, I’ll admit I’ve grown cynical and after seeing Microsoft serially “reinvent” its struggling search engine. Was I being unfair? Or is Bing the newest shade of lipstick on the same pig? Wouldn’t it be great if someone ran a blind “taste test” to take the bias out of the equation?

Thanks, Dolores Labs!

Dolores Labs ran a blind, side-by-side comparison of Google results vs. Bing results. Using Amazon’s Mechanical Turk job market, they hired people to look at Bing and Google search results  and mark which they preferred. The workers were not aware of which search engine produced which results, and the order was randomized to prevent the workers from favoring the one that appeared on the right or left.

What was the result?

In aggregate, people preferred Google over Bing by a small, yet statistically significant margin, which can be viewed as both good and bad for Google. But wait a minute. Forget the Google vs. Bing question for a minute. Is Bing even better than the thing it replaced? Dolores Labs tested Bing results vs. old Live Search results and found…drum roll, please… no aggregate statistical difference in preference— great ammo for those who argue Bing is just a re-branding job. Going back to the Google vs. Bing test, it’s worth noting that, despite a small difference in aggregate preference in favor of Google, there were individual queries for which people clearly preferred Bing.

More questions than answers

If people clearly prefer Bing over Google for certain queries, that raises several interesting questions—are the “Bing-preferred queries” random? Or are they groupable into certain areas? For example, if people clearly prefer Bing’s results when it comes to shopping or health, that may be good enough to chip away at Google’s market share. But if getting better results with Bing is a crapshoot, is that really enough for Bing to become a part of more people’s searching habits? Can Bing ever do better than its predecessors without performing better than Google on average? Is Bing trying to perform better than Google on average or is it targeting certain search types? And how much does performance ultimately matter when your competitor’s brand name has become a verb?

Only time will tell

As Dolores Labs points out, search engine user experience is about more than just relevancy, so this test certainly doesn’t paint a complete picture. Plus, like any pseudo-scientific study, people can easily find flaws with the methodology. But if you’re looking for objectivity in the search engine wars, studies like this are a refreshing change of pace.

I often speak to attorneys about their Core Web Presence and how a website, blog or even an Avvo Profile can serve as an excellent core. Oddly when it comes to blogging, attorneys consistently have two knee-jerk excuses:

1. I’m too busy to even figure out where to start; and
2. I can’t spend thousands of dollars a year on something that I may not use.

I usually put the first excuse to bed by referencing blogs like Leanna Hamill’s Massachusetts Estate Planning and Elder Law blog or Craig Williams’ May It Please the Court blog. Leanna and Craig have successful legal practices, and yet they find time to blog numerous times per week. And for every Hamill and Williams, there is an Ambrogi , Elefant or Greenfield. They all support the notion that there are thousands of busy lawyers blogging effectively, and the excuse-laden lawyer should be too. The marketing benefits far outweigh any effort.

But combating the second excuse is always harder. That’s because, when it comes to blogging platforms and tools for lawyers, there are few reasonable alternatives. Lawyers can either (1) use a very basic WordPress or Blogger template that may not have the professional look and feel that lawyers need, or (2) have a custom blog built for them that is expensive to both build and maintain.

To fill this gap, today we are introducing Avvo Blogs, a simple, effective and affordable blogging solution for lawyers around the world.

Simple

The key for lawyers in blogging is to start blogging, and Avvo Blogs make that very simple.

Avvo offers 9 simple templates to start that run on WordPress technology – the blogging platform for millions of blogs, including the NFL, Time Magazine, Ford, CNN, The New York Times and Techcrunch.

Avvo pre-populates a customizable blog roll, and also allows additional customization of highlighted pages, categories, etc.

Avvo Blogs also are supported by Avvo’s great customer service team. For two years, we have been helping thousands of lawyers get more business and Avvo Blogs are no different.

Simply visit the Avvo Blog page, follow the instructions and, voila, you will be blogging in no time.

Effective

To be effective, lawyers’ blogs must be professional looking and tailored to the lawyer’s web strategy. Each of the Avvo Blog templates is very professional in its look and feel. Additionally, we have kept each template clean and simple so that your ideas, rather than the blog design, do the talking – much like the Avvo website.

Another important feature is that Avvo Blogs can go on the lawyer’s own domain, which allows you to pick a catchy domain url (e.g., bestPIblog.com) or to integrate the blog into an existing website or other web property (e.g., blog.wilsonjones.com).

Affordable

With Avvo Blogs, you can blog for less than $1 per day. You shouldn’t have to spend a truckload to showcase your expertise in a professional manner.

Many companies will try to sell you “more-effective” blogging technology for thousands of dollars per year, but few bloggers will need such a fancy blog. Think of blogging like buying a suit. You can spend thousands of dollars on a custom-made suit, or you can buy one off the rack at Macy’s that your client’s will love just as much. Clients will focus on the brains in the suit, not whether you have hand-stitching on your lapel.

As with all things Avvo, we would love to get your feedback. We have intentionally kept our Avvo Blogs simple, so they don’t have every bell and whistle. But they don’t have the multi-thousand dollar price tag either. With your feedback we look forward to adding just the right amount of bells or whistles that lawyers want and deserve at a reasonable price.

Let the blogging begin!

Mark

According to Bella Online, your average two-year old:

• Wants exactly what he wants when he wants it [Since Avvo’s launch, we have had high expectations for our products and the ongoing evolution of the legal profession. We have also been very impatient with these expectations. Upon further reflection, I see all of this as a positive and we won’t be changing anything over the next year.]
• Will not usually give in [If it relates to getting consumers better guidance regarding their legal issues and more business for top-notch lawyers, I don’t see us changing this either. Geez, I didn’t expect to be so unyielding!]
• Everything has to be done just so [Well, yes, we are particular. You can’t effectuate change by being wishy-washy.]
• Likes to give orders [We like to give orders as long as we are simply implementing the feedback of consumers and lawyers. However, if we ever come off as bossy, please let us know. We are here to serve passionately, not bossily.]
• Has trouble making decisions [Well, this is sort of true. Because we are a small company without the infinite budgets of some of our competitors, we make choices everyday regarding how to allocate our limited resources. It is always hard, but I think we have done a decent job to date. Stay tuned for some neat products we have coming down the line.]
• Wants to continue doing whatever he is doing no matter what [Well, that’s true. And if you talk to our customers, they want us to continue as well.]
• May begin to bite. [Hmmm . . . we’ll have to handle that one on a case-by-case basis.]

After thinking this through, maybe we’re in pretty good shape. Could it be that many of the behavioral characteristics of the “terrible twos” are actually required to succeed in the competitive marketplace? Paging Jim Collins: There is a best-selling management book in there somewhere.

Thank you to everyone who has helped make Avvo such a success. 2008-2009 was a banner year for us, and we look forward to 2009-2010 being even better. I am reminded of one lawyer’s quote that “Avvo may be the greatest thing for lawyers since the invention of a laptop.” I’m not sure how we are going to top that, but we will (greatest thing since cloud server architecture maybe?)

And finally, I would like to give the biggest of all shout-outs to Team Avvo, a highly talented group of individuals up here in rainy Seattle that has worked tirelessly to make the Avvo marketplace something special. It is my honor to work with each and every one of you every day – let’s just keep the biting to a minimum.

Giddyup!

Mark

For its inaugural issue, OurCity San Diego focuses on issues such as water rationing, vacation getaways, and . . . San Diego’s best consumer lawyers. With the help of Avvo, the magazine offers up the “top 10″ San Diego attorneys in the categories of family law, personal injury, criminal law, estate planning and consumer and small business finance.

For those who made the list, we say congratulations. For those who fell just short, we say keep making contributions to the legal community – and keep adding that info to your Avvo profiles.

Note the change in the Seattle venue from Avvo’s offices to a Perkins Coie Conference Room to accommodate the demand and the slight change in time frame (from 2 to 4:30 to 2:30 to 5).

"Rollerderby Wave" courtesy of San Diego Shooter via Flickr CCL

Featuring: Michael A. Conger, Gordon Levinson, Mark Britton, Stephen Fairley & Conrad Saam

Co-sponsored by the Law Practice Management and Marketing Section of the SDCBA and AVVO, Inc.

This CLE is worth 1.0 LE & 1.5 GEN

Local Lawyers and online marketing experts will share tips on how to use the internet to your advantage, including advertising, thought leadership and social media marketing. Learn what works, what doesn’t and explore cost-effective secrets to doing it yourself.

Agenda Items: 

• Discuss best practices for retaining existing clients through the power of the web;
• Proactively manage your online reputation;
• Building relationships with other attorneys online;
• Tactics and tools to get started easily; and
• Explore legal/ethical concerns about participating online.

Registrations are due by noon on June 12, 2009:

 https://www.sdcba.org/index.cfm?pg=events&evAction=showDetail&eid=1557  

Late registrants and walk-ins will incur a $5.00 late registration fee.  Walk-ins will be accomodated as space allows.  Registrations will be held until 25 minutes after the published seminar start time. The SDCBA certifies that this activity has been approved for MCLE by the State Bar of California.