Many lawyers and firms consider legal directory rankings a necessary evil. Those managing the directory submission process for law firms dread the activity and consider it the bane of their lives. For law firms that include legal directories as a part of their strategy, this currently is the peak submission period.

The research deadlines for Chambers and Partners and The Legal 500 along with some of the other directories have been disclosed and communicated to law firms.

Considering this is the “submissions’ season”, LexBlurb has launched a guide to help firms, partners, and the in-house personnel who manage the process to enhance their submissions and make them more effective.

This post will share some tips and guidelines on managing submissions effectively with inputs and comments from editors of some of the leading legal directories.

Submissions: Getting started

The submission process is typically comprised of three major parts: the submission itself, client and peer feedback, and an interview with the researcher compiling the directory. The first part of this blog series will briefly discuss how to get started and what to include in a submission.

• If feedback was not sought from the editors and researchers when the current rankings were published, speak to them now. Seek feedback on how the submission could have been done differently or what led to the firm, practice area, or individual not attaining the expected rankings.

• Check the previous submissions. Reviewing the documents with a new perspective and after a span of many months will help identify areas of improvement in the overall content, structure, and quality of the submissions.

• Read the new submission guidelines. Directories change their submission guidelines based on the feedback received and update their methodology, add more practice areas, and revise their formats annually. Do not assume that the practice areas or the format will be the same as last year.

• Note the deadlines and complete the submission accordingly. This is critical considering the number of firms that participate in directory submissions, the quantum of information researchers receive, and the time dedicated to following up with referees to seek feedback and to conducting interviews with the partners in the firms. Firms tend to cross the deadlines or ask for extensions very frequently.

"Researchers work within very tight timeframes; the more submissions that reach us on time, the more time they can spend researching the market and interviewing.” -Hayley Eustace, Asia Pacific Editor, The Legal 500

"Although we will always do our best to be flexible, we do work on tight research deadlines, and so having the client referee and submission on time will ensure we are able to take the information into full consideration.” -Sarah Kogan, Editor - Asia-Pacific, Chambers and Partners

What information to include in a submission

• Irrespective of whether a legal directory has a prescribed format, each practice area should consider including the following information in the submission:

• Contact information of the submission coordinator
• Practice head(s)
• Other key partners
• Rising stars
• Number of partners and other fee-earners
• New fee-earners
• Practice area overview
• Active long-term clients
• New clients and panel wins
• Up to 15 work highlights (cases, matters, and deals)
• Awards and achievements in the last 1 year
• Practice development initiatives
• Client relationship management initiatives
• Thought leadership initiatives
• Any remarkable media coverage

• All information submitted for the practice areas by a firm must be related to activities, developments, and work done within the research period. The work highlights from last year’s submissions can be repeated in the new submission if the mandate was ongoing during the previous submission and has a significant development in the current research period.

• Firms, practices, or lawyers are usually reluctant to include client names, cases, matters, or deals which are confidential in the submission. To the extent that many times, the information is not even shared with the in-house communications team. Researchers routinely interact with thousands of lawyers and understand the sensitivity required for managing confidential information. Withholding the information and not trusting the researcher’s ethics will not help improve rankings. Therefore, it is suggested to include the information but also clearly indicate the confidential and sensitive text for the researcher’s reference.

"The thing we need most of all is information, so, while keeping within the guidelines of the amount of information we need, it’s important to give us as much as you can. It all goes into helping make us a determination about where your firm should sit in the ratings.” - Ralph Cunningham, Publisher (Asia), Euromoney Legal Media Group

How to structure a submission

• Prepare a separate submission for each practice area, unless specified otherwise in the research guidelines.

• Adhere to the format or template prescribed by the directory for its submissions. Researchers and publications spend a considerable amount of time handling the forms and the received information. Sending the submission in a custom format may not always work in the firm’s favour and may complicate the job of the researcher, who is probably handling hundreds of forms for a practice area.

• If there is no prescribed format or template, then ensure that the custom submission document being drafted is simple with clear headings, bullets, numbering and tables that are easy to understand and follow for a researcher.

• The practice area overview should ideally be 250–300 words on how well the practice had performed in the last 1 year. Most often, firms simply provide information from their practice brochures as an overview each year. The practice area overview included in the submissions is not a sales pitch; it aims to provide researchers with information on the key strengths of the practice by sharing facts. Avoid punchy marketing statements or phrases and avoid repeating the same information each year.

• For key individuals in the team, include information related to their experience, which is relevant to the practice area; their recent work highlights; and their achievements. Keep it concise but informative enough for the researcher to determine how instrumental and active the individual is within the practice.

• When shortlisting the work highlights to be included in the submission, be realistic and submit only notable work highlights that will facilitate achieving the positioning objectives of the firm. Include at least 3 publishable and non-confidential work highlights so that the researcher can write about these highlights. For each work highlight, mention the:

• Name of the client
• Summary of the matter
• Firm’s role
• Interesting aspects
• Lead partner(s) and lawyers involved
• Other parties or entities involved
• Other law firms and advocates involved
• Matter value
• Current status or completion date
• News’ links

These tips should help in getting started with the submission draft; or reviewing if all the necessary information that should go in making an effective submission has been included or not. In the next part of this blog series, we will briefly discuss how to manage referees and interviews.

Selecting referees

Selecting appropriate client referees is an essential part of the submission process. Ensure the following for each client referee prior to submitting the information to the researcher:

• They have been informed and have provided consent, preferably to share their information with multiple directories.
• They had a positive experience with the firm and will be providing a positive feedback, preferably about multiple lawyers of the firm and not only 1–2 individuals.
• They are fluent in English. Almost all researchers are based in London and Hong Kong, a language barrier can lead to concerns with the feedback process.
• They are not only responsive to emails but also comfortable with a telephonic conversation.
• They have been active with the firm during the submission period.

A referee need not be the most senior person of the legal team in a company. Often, it is best to give contact information of those individuals from the client’s legal team who have been working closely and regularly with the firm on the mandate and who are at a mid-level position.

"Put forward referees who are more likely to respond (bearing in mind that senior figures are generally busier).” - Hayley Eustace, Asia Pacific Editor, The Legal 500

The referees submitted can also include foreign lawyers from international law firms involved in a matter. International lawyers appreciate the value of feedback calls and interviews with legal directories, and will be responsive to researchers.

The names of the researchers are typically available online on the directory website or in the submission guidelines. Inform the referees regarding who will be contacting them so that the email from the researcher does not get ignored.

"We always encourage firms to give their clients prior warning that they have been nominated as a referee.” - Sarah Kogan, Editor - Asia-Pacific, Chambers and Partners

Managing interviews

An interview is an opportunity to ensure that the key strengths of a practice group (team) have been correctly communicated to the researcher. Selecting which team members will participate in the interview is an important decision for firms, because the interviewee must be an individual who can talk about and represent the practice group as a whole.

The interviews are typically structured into 4 main parts:

1. Recent trends and developments in the market: This discussion does not focus on the firm but focuses more on law and policy trends relating to the practice area within the country. Researchers discuss this aspect in every interview to get insight on the market trends and prepare the analysis of the jurisdiction.

2. About the firm’s practice group: This part of the interview aims at not repeating factors already mentioned in the submission but elaborating on these factors. Elaborate what distinguishes the practice group from other firms, how it has improved in the last one year, share information on team members who play an instrumental role, and talk about the 3 most notable work highlights, preferably the publishable ones.

3. Feedback on current rankings: The feedback related to the current rankings of the firm or individuals must be brief and balanced. Firms or individuals discontent with their positioning in the current rankings must ideally be professional and objective when sharing the feedback.

4. Peer review: The researcher will inquire about the interviewee’s thoughts on the firms and individuals listed in the current rankings, whether the interviewee feels that the rankings given to the other firms and individuals are justified, and whether there are any firms or individuals missing that the interviewee feels should be included.

"An important element of the research is peer review, which is anonymous, allowing firms to be honest as they can be about the market, so don’t shy away from giving your opinion.” -Ralph Cunningham, Publisher (Asia), Euromoney Legal Media Group

It is important for interviewees to skim through the submission made by the firm and the current rankings published by the directory. The interview will prove futile if the points discussed by the interviewees during the interview do not relate or coincide with those mentioned in the submissions. Similarly, the interviewees may not be able to provide honest feedback on the current rankings if they have not looked at the list of firms and individuals currently ranked.

Interviewees often feel that the researcher interacting with them isn’t knowledgeable enough about law or isn’t experienced enough. Directories spend a considerable amount of time and effort in training their researchers, rotating them between jurisdictions and hiring those with journalistic proficiency. Respecting researchers, their timelines, helping them, and nurturing a relationship with them must ideally be a part of the marketing process for firms. After several years of work, many researchers have notable journalistic designations at some of the most reputed media houses. Moreover, a few editors and researchers have launched their own consultancies for legal communications services.

Hope these tips help in selecting the right contacts to serve as referees, and to prepare for the practice area interviews with researchers. In the next and final part of this blog series, we will briefly discuss and suggest some tips on firm’s internal processes for legal directory submissions.

Processes

For firms that regularly participate in directory submissions and league tables, it is essential that they establish an in-house process to maintain an updated database of matters that they have been involved in on an on-going basis. Such a process should ideally involve the following:

• Centrally appointed personnel to maintain, manage and update the database (either manually or through a software)
• A standard template that can be used by lawyers to fill the information related to the matters that have been completed or are already in the public domain, if a software (automated system) is not being used by the firm. If you do not have a standard template, feel free to download our ready-to-use template which is available in the Resources section of LexBlurb’s website
• Regular reminders to lawyers to send or submit the information. Such reminders can either be sent to all lawyers within the firm or to pre-identified members within each team or practice group

For firms that do not have dedicated personnel or process to manage such a database throughout the year, it is important that they identify an accountable person to manage and coordinate the submission process of the directories.

A seamless internal process to manage legal directory submissions should typically include the following steps:

• Prepare an overall annual schedule that is updated regularly by checking all research schedules. Include at least 2–3 early deadlines internally for collecting information, and conduct internal reviews of submission drafts by working backward from the first due date.
• Complete the steps mentioned under “Getting Started” in part 1 of this blog series.
• Compile and shortlist the information in advance. The information compiled must not only include shortlisted matters and client referees but also data related to (a) awards and achievements; (b) list of new and ex-employees of the firm; (c) development initiatives that were undertaken by the firm (related to practice groups, client relationship management, information technology, and thought leadership); and (d) notable media coverage (visibility).
• Identify and prepare a list of individuals who will be reviewing the final practice area submissions after they have been drafted and edited.
• Identify and prepare a list of spokespersons (interviewees) who will be participating in the interviews with researchers for each practice area.
• Submit the completed draft and client referee sheet to the researcher within the deadline.
• Coordinate the interview schedule with the relevant interviewees for the practice area, or seek an interview call with the researcher if a request has not been received.
• Help the relevant interviewees to prepare for the interview by giving a briefing or a copy of the submission and current rankings.
• Follow-up with the researcher after the interview to determine whether any further information is required. Also, follow-up with the interviewees to determine if further information needs to be sent immediately.
• Follow-up with the researcher to check for any difficulties in contacting the referees.

Finally, keep researchers informed until the entire research process is closed or completed about any further developments related to the firm, practice groups, lawyers and updates related to the work highlights.

The submission process is not just an ‘information collection and reproduction’ activity. It involves efficient time management and project management, soft skills, meticulous eye for detail and accuracy, proactive approach and a persistent ‘can-do’ attitude.

If you have any questions or queries, please do not hesitate to email us at .

Hope these tips help with managing submissions. More comprehensive guidelines and professional insights including extensive comments from editors of legal directories have been included in LexBlurb’s eBook “Legal directory submissions: Putting your best foot forward”. The eBook is available for free download here or below.

Special thanks:

• Hayley Eustace, Asia Pacific Editor, The Legal 500
• Ralph Cunningham, Publisher (Asia), Euromoney Legal Media Group
• Sarah Kogan, Editor - Asia-Pacific, Chambers and Partners

Legal Directory Submissions - Putting Your Best Foot Forward (a LexBlurb Publication) by LexBlurb on Scribd