A survey in January of 2,000 internet users shines a light on why so many faux pas are committed via social media. A quarter of those interviewed admitted writing personal remarks to someone online that they would not say to their face. Prof Robin Dunbar, Professor of Evolutionary Anthropology at Oxford and a behaviour expert has a theory of why this is the case. He blames the absence of the “checks and balances” found in everyday face-to-face communication for the trend of posting comments online that people later regret. Just last week four young men found themselves at the centre of a media uproar after the offensive emails they had been sending went viral. Emails they undoubtedly now regret sending.

It seems normal checks and balances are not always used with social media at work either. Last year a user of the Chrysler twitter account posted a tweet stating no-one in Detroit knows how to drive, with an added expletive that I’ve not included here! It was posted by an employee of the communications company employed by Chrysler who obviously hadn’t considered their “Imported from Detroit” slogan when he tweeted it.

As social media becomes an important part of our communication people must learn to use it with the common sense they apply to face to face or more formal methods of communication. Serious consideration must be given to all public and private messages sent via social media, be it through personal or work accounts. Most importantly, companies that use social media must have a clear policy in place for how it should be used and ensure that employees know how serious it can be if offensive or inappropriate messages are sent via social media.

Social media has developed as a method of quick and informal correspondence and, as long as people remember to use it with the same social etiquette you would when talking to someone in person, it will continue to be a valuable means of communication.

Research has shown that open organisations tend to be the most effective and successful. In order for an organisation to be truly open it must be aware of its external environments. This means it must act on feedback gained through surveys, interviews, questionnaires, community event and various forms of social media from its clients. This is where PR comes in, as not only should the PR team be raising the profile of an organisation, they should also be monitoring relevant external audiences and suggest organisational changes to reflect the mood of the external stakeholders.

A PR practitioner’s role is to manage these exchanges to build a mutual understanding between the different stakeholder groups. An open approach can also help position an organisation’s image in the eyes of both stakeholders and its environment, and in communicating this image.

A good example of an open organisation that has built its entire business on the grounds of what customers want is the global online fashion and beauty retailer ASOS plc (ASOS). Not only did ASOS take into account the changing habits of society by launching in 2001 as an online only store, but ASOS has continued to evolve according to the demands of their customers. From launching an online catwalk in 2006 so that customers could see products on models before buying, to the launch of Marketplace in 2010 where customers can buy and sell their own wardrobes in these harder economic times, the company continues to change according to customers’ needs. ASOS call this two-way communication a “transactional commoditised relationship” achieved through initiatives such as the introduction of ASOS Life and the online blog ASOS Today. This continual evolution would not have been possible without the research and feedback the PR team at ASOS will have provided, demonstrating how important this environmental evaluation is for the success of an organisation.

An open organisation can also limit crises by encouraging the organisation to anticipate difficulties and take early corrective action via environmental scanning which becomes a natural part of building a relationship with all stakeholders. Through the analysis of both the external and internal environments, organisations become aware of the wider environmental issues and therefore should be able to spot the early warning of issues that may lead to future risk and crises for organisations. In light of emerging issues identified through the monitoring of wider environments, organisations can adapt actions and strategies in order to avoid a crisis.

Open organisations should foster longstanding, two-way relationships with the external and internal audiences and act on this feedback in order to improve products, services, employee morale and the reputation of the organisation. It is only through effective communication that this can be achieved.

The Act allows non-lawyers to become partners in law firms, external ownership of law firms and multidisciplinary practices.  Whether you are for or against it, the LSA is happening and as the last month has shown, it is gaining steam.

Since the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) started taking applications for Alternative Business Structures (ABS) on 3 January 2012 there have been some dramatic developments in the LSA world.  According to reports in the last few weeks 92 firms have applied for licences with the SRA and the first license is expected at the end of this month.

This week saw the first private equity firm entering the ABS world.  It is reported that Duke Street has bought 50% of the law firm Parabis.  Parabis provides legal services to the insurance and travel industries.  According to the Independent, the deal will value Parabis at between £150m and £160m, and has already been struck but is going through the final stages of the regulatory approval process

The other ground-breaking news was that the first listed law firm, Australia’s Slater & Gordon has entered the UK market by acquiring Russell Jones & Walker (RJW). S&G is paying £36.4 million in cash and the issue of £17.4 million in Slater & Gordon shares, which is subject to restraints on sale for a minimum period of four years post completion.

The first entrant into the ABS race came with the news that Aim-listed Quindell Group, a brand extension company that provides consulting, software solutions and outsourcing, had taken over personal injury law firm Silverbeck Rymer for £19.3m.  The Lawyer noted that it was inevitable that the first mover in the post ABS-world was going to be an insurance firm.  With ABSs enabling a new structure of an integrated claims-handling operation for the insurance industry you can see why.

Despite all these developments ABSs are still very much a known unknown.  The impact to the legal industry in the wider prospect is yet to be seen.

Byfield will be launching an ABS quarterly newsletter to keep track of all these changes. The first will come out at the end of February.  If you would like to receive the newsletter please email: Lydia@byfieldconsultancy.com

In the meantime, please see some of the thought leadership papers Byfield has produced with our sister company Jures on Alternative Business Structures:

Brave new worlds

Big Bang: opportunities and threats in the new legal services market

Shopping Around: What consumers want from the new legal services market

With this back drop in mind a variety of media experts gathered to discuss the question of whether the media can ever be regulated.

The debate was a Precise Exchange event in association with CorpComms Magazine and the speakers were varied in background, with different views, but all shared a depth of knowledge and experience of the media.  The speakers comprised of Jonathan Collett, Director of Communications at the Press Complaints Commission (PCC), Dan Sabbagh, Head of Media and Technology at The Guardian, Oliver Smith, Consultant Solicitor at Keystone Law and a specialist in media and libel law, and Robert Johnson of Jobson Media, official royal commentator for NBC, ITN News and Daybreak.

On the question of if the media should be regulated there were arguments both for and against regulation. It was noted that more stringent regulation had not negatively affected the broadcasting industry, but there were those that believed regulation of the struggling print media could be the final nail in the coffin for an industry already struggling to compete with online news. The difference between print and broadcast was also highlighted by Oliver Smith who made the point that to “apply OFCOM type rules to print and online media… would be unenforceable and would kill a lot of the variety which is the spice on our media diet.”

The current regulatory body was defended by Jonathan Collett who stated that the PPC’s mandate had only ever been to deal with complaints against the media and they had served that remit well. Predictions as to what future regulation and the regulatory body may look like were that there would be a body responsible for standards and also for providing an arbitrational service to remove the high costs of libel and defamation claims. The latter was welcomed by those who believe the cost of libel and defamation cases is stifling the media.

Whether the recommendations made by Lord Leveson will be capable of being enforced so as to ensure the media is fully regulated remains to be seen. There are certainly concerns that it will always be the print media that is easiest to hold accountable rather than internet news. There is already an example of this by what happened with the Giggs story. The tabloids were prevented from publishing it, but it was revealed on Twitter with no action taken against those individuals that posted the information.

However, given some of the evidence heard at the Leveson Inquiry and the extent of the scandal that has engulfed the media it is clear further guidance and regulation is needed for this industry and that it must be enforced. In doing so it will hopefully regain some of its credibility and ensure its future sustainability.

The debate was lively and thought provoking with many important points made. It was also very well chaired by Helen Dunne, Editor of CorpComms Magazine, who I understand will be writing a more detailed article on the debate.This can be found here

CSR, and in particular sponsorship, is a growing trend amongst businesses and as can be seen from the T.S. Eliot issue, both organisations and sponsors must be very careful when choosing who to align themselves with.  The T.S. Eliot controversy was attributed to the provenance of the funding – some people do not like the idea of arms manufacturers, oil companies, or in this case financial institutions, sponsoring arts or charity organisations. Although, Aurum may have benefited from extra column inches gained in this case, there are procedures to follow to ensure such situations do not occur.

From the point of view of the corporate sponsor, in order to make CSR programmes as effective as possible, companies should choose a corporate partner based on fundamental company values. If CSR is practised along those guidelines it will have a lasting impact on reputation, sales and hopefully the organisations client base. At the heart of the motivation should be both enhancing the company’s reputation, but also making a real difference to society.

An organisation must also fully integrate the sponsorship into company activities. Press releases can be written around the partnership, events can be held in conjunction with the organisation being sponsored and employees should be able to see the benefits internally. This could include tickets and discounted entry for an arts organisation or employee participation in charity events in the case of a charity. It should be clear to stakeholders that the partnership makes economic, social and reputational sense.

So, while CSR must make good business sense in terms of helping a company’s financial position, recruitment and reputation, it must also act as a powerful investment for long-term sustainability.  This means companies who understand CSR must do so because the organisation they sponsor fundamentally concurs with the company’s own values and the company genuinely wants to make a positive impact on society.

It was a great event, and well received, and made me think about the links between PR and events.  Having a background in events I have decided to address the questions of what key ingredients should an event include to be successful and how can PR help?

1)      Topic and Speaker

This is obvious when hosting an event.  The topic has to be relevant and interesting to attract people.  Having a well known speaker also adds to the interest.  PR can help here by developing and identifying themes in a sector that will be of interest.

2)      Time and Venue

It is important to have a venue that fits the size of the audience and is appropriate for your needs.  It also essential to think about the date and time of the event – when are people more likely to attend an event? Also think about the setting of the stage.  Will the audience be able to see/hear the speaker?  Are there places which provide a good setting for photos which can be used in coverage after the event?

3)      Audience

It is important to target the right people.  At the ‘Future of Pharma’ event 30 companies from the pharma community in Watford and its surrounding area attended which included large firms such as Pfizer and AstraZeneca.  The audience totalled over 100 people and included press from the Pharma sector.  Encouraging press to attend at the event can lead to more coverage rather than just sending out a press release.

4)      Interest

Besides garnering interest in the event through invitations, it can also be raised in advance through the media.  At this event a piece was secured in the Watford Observer the week before.  As a result MAB were contacted by people from the Pharma community who wished to attend the event.

5)      Feedback and Follow Up

Always do a press release after the event.  Not only does this increase the likelihood of coverage, it also further develops relationships with the media.  Figures and data always add value to a press release.    One of the ways this can be done is by asking for feedback from the audience, perhaps through a poll.

Events can be useful to all sectors, including the professional services sector.  Next time that you think of doing an event also think how PR can help throughout the process.

The company, already a leading legal aid advice provider, is looking at offering family, housing, conveyancing, wills and probate, personal injury and clinical negligence advice to what it calls the “coping classes” – people who sit just above the eligibility line for legal aid – as well as a business-to-business service to support small to medium-sized enterprises and start-ups.

A4e has made no secret of its interest in the possibilities opened up by alternative business structures (ABSs), but has thus far been cagey about the scale of its ambitions.

Chris Peel, A4e’s director of advice services, told a report published yesterday on new thinking in legal services: “The reason why we are keen to expand on our traditional socially excluded client base is that if you look at our core business – getting people back into long-term sustainable employment – we are contributing to the “coping classes”. We’re shifting people out of legal aid eligibility. It’s a natural extension of our offer.”

On the business service, he added: “Much of our work is supporting people who want to set up their own businesses as a way out of unemployment.”

The report, Brave new worlds – new thinking in legal services, which was commissioned by online legal document company Epoq and produced by Jures, painted a picture of a legal services market in transition with a number of existing and new players seeking to gain first-mover advantage.

Mr Peel told researchers that as well as having to rethink its business in light of the legal aid cuts, ABSs allow A4e “to think more innovatively about how we can move into services that are paid-for but at much more affordable rates than presently in the market.

“Our analysis has shown that there’s a lot of market failure in the paid-for legal services market as well as in legal aid.”

It is developing a “collaborative model” where it will work with “forward-thinking solicitors”. He said A4e offers three benefits to potential law firm partners: “a route to the market through diagnosing the needs of existing customers”; using “alternative delivery channels” through its experience with telephone- and Internet-based legal advice services; and having the ability and resources for “scalable delivery to our target cohorts on a national basis”. A4e has some 200 branches in the UK.

Mr Peel told Legal Futures that the company is still evaluating the most appropriate vehicle, timing and opportunity to fulfil its ambitions.

Speaking more broadly, solicitor Richard Cohen, the executive chairman of Epoq, said: “Law firm clients want and expect better standards of service and increased options in terms of how those services are delivered and how they are paid for.

“Opening up the legal services market – as controversial as many lawyers might find the process – marks a genuine opportunity for lawyers and their clients. As our report shows, a number of law firms and new entrants are now taking advantage of this opportunity and it’s important that the rest of the market responds, or it will be left behind.”                         

He said new entrants to the market like banks and insurers see legal services as an attractive addition to an existing service offering and a way to increase revenues.

“The bundling up of legal services with other complementary services is exactly the kind of one-stop shop envisaged by the Legal Services Act and new entrants to the market are already moving in this direction.”

To see the article on the Legal Futures website, please click here

It contains interviews with both established law firms and new legal services providers who are beginning to shape the future of the market.

The deregulation of legal services took another step forward on January 3rd 2012 with the Solicitor’s Regulation Authority accepting applications for potential Alternative Business Structures (ABS). To date over 65 organisations have applied for ABS status.

Against this backdrop of new competition Brave New Worlds looks at how traditional law firms have been responding to a changing marketplace and how new entrants are using innovation in technology to open-up legal services to consumers.

“Law firm clients want and expect better standards of service and increased options in terms of how those services are delivered and how they are paid for,” comments Richard Cohen, Executive Chairman and Group Counsel of Epoq. “Opening up the legal services market – as controversial as many lawyers might find the process – marks a genuine opportunity for lawyers and their clients. As our report shows, a number of law firms and new entrants are now taking advantage of this opportunity and it’s important that the rest of the market responds, or it will be left behind.”

In comparing how existing and new legal services providers are responding to the legal services reforms Brave New Worlds includes profiles of some of the leading players, including:

Quality Solicitors – formed as the legal profession’s answer to the growing threat posed by banks and supermarkets as a result of the reforms of the Legal Services Act, Craig Holt, its Chief Executive, believes his company will have 30% market share.

Co-Operative Legal Services – with more retail outlets than any other organisation in the country, does the Co-Op plan to become the biggest high-street legal brands in the country?

Irwin Mitchell – the national giant gearing up to become the first British law firm to float on the Stock Exchange.

DAS Legal Expenses Insurance handles 50,000 claims a year through motor and household insurance policies sold by intermediaries and sees the LSA a ‘fantastic opportunity to open up legal services directly under a DAS banner to policyholders.’

Russell Jones & Walker – the national law firm delivered over 1,200 online wills to clients over a 12 month period through its Your Legal Rights service and using Epoq’s technology.

The Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) Mentor, a regulatory compliance service for 14,000 businesses and RiskRemdey, an online self-service employment law and health and safety compliance package also aimed at the SME market.

Brave New Worlds paints a picture of a legal services market in transition with a number of existing and new players seeking to gain first move advantage. For new entrants to the market like banks and insurers, legal services offer an attractive addition to an existing service offering and the prospect of increased revenues. “The bundling up of legal services with other complementary services is exactly the kind of one-stop-shop envisaged by the Legal Services Act and new entrants to the market are already moving in this direction as our report shows”, concludes Richard Cohen.

To see the article on the Legal IT Porfessionals website, please click here

The deregulation of legal services took another step forward on January 3rd 2012 with the Solicitor’s Regulation Authority accepting applications for potential Alternative Business Structures (ABS). To date over 65 organisations have applied for ABS status.

Against this backdrop of new competition Brave New Worlds looks at how traditional law firms have been responding to a changing marketplace and how new entrants are using innovation in technology to open-up legal services to consumers.

“Law firm clients want and expect better standards of service and increased options in terms of how those services are delivered and how they are paid for,” comments Richard Cohen, Executive Chairman and Group Counsel of Epoq. “Opening up the legal services market – as controversial as many lawyers might find the process – marks a genuine opportunity for lawyers and their clients. As our report shows, a number of law firms and new entrants are now taking advantage of this opportunity and it’s important that the rest of the market responds, or it will be left behind.”

In comparing how existing and new legal services providers are responding to the legal services reforms Brave New Worlds includes profiles of some of the leading players, including:

Quality Solicitors – formed as the legal profession’s answer to the growing threat posed by banks and supermarkets as a result of the reforms of the Legal Services Act, Craig Holt, its Chief Executive, believes his company will have 30% market share.

Co-Operative Legal Services – with more retail outlets than any other organisation in the country, does the Co-Op plan to become the biggest high-street legal brands in the country?

Irwin Mitchell – the national giant gearing up to become the first British law firm to float on the Stock Exchange.

DAS Legal Expenses Insurance handles 50,000 claims a year through motor and household insurance policies sold by intermediaries and sees the LSA a ‘fantastic opportunity to open up legal services directly under a DAS banner to policyholders.’

Russell Jones & Walker – the national law firm delivered over 1,200 online wills to clients over a 12 month period through its Your Legal Rights service and using Epoq’s technology.

The Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) Mentor, a regulatory compliance service for 14,000 businesses and RiskRemdey, an online self-service employment law and health and safety compliance package also aimed at the SME market.

Brave New Worlds paints a picture of a legal services market in transition with a number of existing and new players seeking to gain first move advantage. For new entrants to the market like banks and insurers, legal services offer an attractive addition to an existing service offering and the prospect of increased revenues. “The bundling up of legal services with other complementary services is exactly the kind of one-stop-shop envisaged by the Legal Services Act and new entrants to the market are already moving in this direction as our report shows”, concludes Richard Cohen.

To view a full PDF of the report, please click here

The deregulation of legal services took another step forward on January 3rd 2012 with the Solicitor’s Regulation Authority accepting applications for potential Alternative Business Structures (ABS).  To date over 65 organisations have applied for ABS status. 

Against this backdrop of new competition Brave New Worlds looks at how traditional law firms have been responding to a changing marketplace and how new entrants are using innovation in technology to open-up legal services to consumers.  

“Law firm clients want and expect better standards of service and increased options in terms of how those services are delivered and how they are paid for,” comments Richard Cohen, Executive Chairman and Group Counsel of Epoq. “Opening up the legal services market – as controversial as many lawyers might find the process – marks a genuine opportunity for lawyers and their clients. As our report shows, a number of law firms and new entrants are now taking advantage of this opportunity and it’s important that the rest of the market responds, or it will be left behind.”                         

In comparing how existing and new legal services providers are responding to the legal services reforms Brave New Worlds includes profiles of some of the leading players, including:

Quality Solicitors – formed as the legal profession’s answer to the growing threat posed by banks and supermarkets as a result of the reforms of the Legal Services Act, Craig Holt, its Chief Executive, believes his company will have 30% market share.               

Co-Operative Legal Services – with more retail outlets than any other organisation in the country, does the Co-Op plan to become the biggest high-street legal brands in the country?       

Irwin Mitchell – the national giant gearing up to become the first British law firm to float on the Stock Exchange.    

DAS Legal Expenses Insurance handles 50,000 claims a year through motor and household insurance policies sold by intermediaries and sees the LSA a ‘fantastic opportunity to open up legal services directly under a DAS banner to policyholders.’      

Russell Jones & Walker – the national law firm delivered over 1,200 online wills to clients over a 12 month period through its Your Legal Rights service and using Epoq’s technology.

The Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) Mentor, a regulatory compliance service for 14,000 businesses and RiskRemdey, an online self-service employment law and health and safety compliance package also aimed at the SME market.

Brave New Worlds paints a picture of a legal services market in transition with a number of existing and new players seeking to gain first move advantage. For new entrants to the market like banks and insurers, legal services offer an attractive addition to an existing service offering and the prospect of increased revenues.  “The bundling up of legal services with other complementary services is exactly the kind of one-stop-shop envisaged by the Legal Services Act and new entrants to the market are already moving in this direction as our report shows”, concludes Richard Cohen.                     

 -Ends-

For further information call:

Gus Sellitto, Byfield Consultancy                                              0207 092 3988 gus@byfieldconsultancy.com

Notes to editors

About Epoq

Founded in 1994, Epoq has been a pioneer in changing the way legal services are delivered by using cutting-edge technology to enable legal documents to be completed faster and more easily than before.  Epoq’s document automation system combined with internet delivery allows complex documents to be drafted simply by users completing online questionnaires tailored to their specific circumstances.  Underpinned by its extensive range of detailed and up-to-date document templates, Epoq’s system is being deployed by an increasingly wide range of law firms and organsiations to deliver legal services with greater efficiency, convenience and profitability via the web.

About Jures                      

Jures is an independent research company dedicated to the legal services market. It combines expertise from a number of different disciplines: journalism; research; PR and communications; as well as publishing in both traditional and new media. The idea behind Jures is to become the leading source of considered, independent-minded and thought-provoking commentary on the law in a way that informs and influences debate within the profession and beyond.

To view the full report, please click here