Legal directory submissions: Putting your best foot forward

LEGAL DIRECTORY
SUBMISSIONS:
PUTTING YOUR BEST FOOT
FORWARD
APRIL 2017

www.lexblurb.com

@ Copyright LexBlurb | All Rights Reserved.

Introduction
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 is currently the peak
submission period. The research deadlines for Chambers and Partners, The Legal 500 and
Asialaw Profiles along with some of the other directories have been disclosed and communicated
to law firms.

For lawyers who are not very familiar with the research process of legal directory rankings, it
typically comprises 3 major parts: the submission itself, client and peer feedback, and an interview
with the researcher compiling the directory. However, those managing the submission process for
firms know better. The process does not start at simply drafting a submission, nor does it end with
an interview call.

Considering that this is the submissions season, LexBlurb is pleased to share this guide on
Legal directory submissions: Putting your best foot forward. This guide aims to help law firms,
their partners, and the in-house personnel who manage the submissions to enhance their
submissions and make them effective.

Legal directory submissions: Putting your best foot forward

Special thanks
Hayley Eustace
Asia Pacific Editor, The Legal 500
A former journalist, Hayley Eustace started as a researcher at The
Legal 500 in 2010, before becoming a senior researcher in 2012.
Since 2013, she has been the Bar Editor, and in 2015, she also took
on the role as Asia Pacific editor. She now manages the two
directories. Hayley's work has allowed her to visit chambers and law
firms across the globe, and her role as UK Bar and Asia Pacific Editor
is to concentrate on building relationships with legal professionals
in the UK and Asia Pacific, oversee The Legal 500 coverage in both
directories and edit chapters. In her spare time, Hayley takes an
interest in arts and crafts and enjoys attending live music events.

Ralph Cunningham
Publisher (Asia), Euromoney Legal Media Group
Ralph Cunningham has more than 19 years as a B2B journalist,
including 6 years writing about intellectual property and 12.5 years
as managing editor of International Tax Review, a leading corporate
tax online and print publication for executives at multinational
companies around the world. He recently moved to Hong Kong as
the publisher (Asia) of Euromoney's Legal Media Group, initially
keeping his role with International Tax Review until he stepped down
in May 2016. Ralph is commercially responsibility for Asialaw
(www.asialaw.com), encompassing publications (Asialaw Profiles
and Asialaw Leading Lawyers) and events, including International
Tax Review's Asia Tax Awards.

Sarah Kogan
Editor - Asia-Pacific, Chambers and Partners
Sarah Kogan joined Chambers and Partners in 2011 as a Legal
Market Analyst. She was elevated to the role of Deputy Editor Asia
Pacific in 2012 and took the position of Editor in 2016. She
graduated from Oxford University in 2004 with a degree in English
Language & Literature and subsequently completed the GDL
(Graduate Diploma in Law) in 2011 at the College of Law. Sarah also
has experience as a researcher and associate producer in the
television industry.

Legal directory submissions: Putting your best foot forward

Contents
Getting started ......................................................................................................................................2

Drafting the submission .......................................................................................................................3

Information ........................................................................................................................................3

Format ...............................................................................................................................................4

Structure and depth..........................................................................................................................4

Selecting referees .................................................................................................................................9

Preparing for interviews .................................................................................................................... 11

Managing submissions ...................................................................................................................... 14

Participating in the research ............................................................................................................. 17

Concluding remarks ........................................................................................................................... 18

Legal directory submissions: Putting your best foot forward 1

Getting started
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 group (team), 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 submission.

Read the new submission guidelines.

Researchers work within very tight
Directories change their submission
guidelines based on the feedback received timeframes; the more submissions that reach us
and update their methodology, add more on time, the more time they can spend
practice areas (categories), and revise their researching the market and interviewing
formats annually. Do not assume that the - Hayley Eustace
practice areas or the format will be the same Asia Pacific Editor, The Legal 500
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 Although we will always do our best to be
researchers receive, and time dedicated to flexible, we do work on tight research
following up with referees to seek feedback deadlines, and so having the client referee and
and to conducting interviews with partners in submission on time will ensure we are able to
firms. Firms tend to cross the deadlines or take the information into full consideration.
ask for extensions frequently. Although
- Sarah Kogan
researchers do accommodate these
Editor - Asia-Pacific, Chambers and Partners
requests, it complicates the submission
process.

Legal directory submissions: Putting your best foot forward 2

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

Contact information of the submission

coordinator The thing we need most of all is information,
Practice head(s) so, while keeping within the guidelines of the
Other key partners amount of information we need, it's important
Rising stars to give us as much as you can. It all goes into
Number of partners and other fee- helping make us a determination about where
earners your firm should sit in the ratings.
New fee-earners
- Ralph Cunningham
Practice group overview
Publisher (Asia), Euromoney Legal Media Group
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
Though leadership initiatives
Any remarkable media coverage

All information submitted for the practice groups by a firm must be related to activities,
developments, and work done within the research period. The research period is usually
specified in submission guidelines. The work highlights from last years 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, practice groups, or lawyers are usually reluctant to include client names or cases,
matters, and deals (matters) which are confidential in the submission. To the extent that many
times, the information is not even shared with the in-house communications team. Directories
such as Chambers and Partners, The Legal 500, IFLR1000, and Asialaw Profiles have been
conducting research and publishing their guides for several years across multiple jurisdictions.
They routinely interact with thousands of lawyers and understand the sensitivity required for
managing confidential information. Withholding the information and not trusting the
researchers 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 researchers
reference.

Legal directory submissions: Putting your best foot forward 3

Format
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. Every year, they revise their formats so that the submissions accommodate what
is relevant and provide the required information in a consistent, standard, and easy format.
Sending the submission in a custom format may not always work in the firms favour and may
complicate the job of the researcher, who is probably handling hundreds of forms for a
practice area. If required, additional information which is not a part of the prescribed format
can be included using alternate methods. Add annexures, or links where required and bring
those to the researchers notice with highlighted comments.

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

Structure and depth

Key contacts and information on team
Information related to the key contacts of the firm, the practice heads, and any other point of
contacts must be clear in the submission. Researchers may or may not always reach out to
the coordinator and may directly write to the practice group contacts or partners. This could
either be because their mailing list has not been updated or because they simply prefer to test
their experience of speaking to the lawyer directly to assess how cordial, polite, and open-
minded the lawyer is. Researchers assess the overall client experience and tend to evaluate
whether lawyers are approachable and
helpful and if they behave similarly with their All the boxes on the submission template are
clients and peers. there for a reason, and so following the
template should ensure all the key areas are
For key individuals in the team, include covered. This includes giving a short
information related to their experience, biography for the key unranked and ranked
which is relevant to the practice area; their partners in the team, something that is
recent matters; and their achievements. particularly useful when researching India,
Keep it concise but informative enough for where many law firms do not have a website
the researcher to determine how due to bar restrictions.
instrumental and active the individual is
- Sarah Kogan
within the practice group. The decision on
Editor - Asia-Pacific, Chambers and Partners
which individuals should be positioned or

Legal directory submissions: Putting your best foot forward 4

 recommended for a ranking must be made wisely. A submission must not contain superfluous
information on multiple team members or long lists of lawyers. The ranking is highly
dependent on which names are most frequently mentioned by clients when asked about the
lawyers in a firm, positive feedback, and the quantum of work highlights reflecting the name
of an individual within the submission.

Include information on new and ex- A common mistake that firms make is
employees (fee-earners). For larger firms, it is leaving out key partner departures in
advisable to provide the information only up
submissions in the hope we wont find out.
to a certain level of post-qualified experience
Just be honest with us. Its far better that
or designation. Withholding information
researchers hear it directly from the firm
related to ex-employees, particularly at the
involved (and that the firm has the chance to
partner level, does not help firms achieve
explain the situation in interview) rather than
their objectives. Researchers usually find out
leaving it for the researchers to find out
about these changes because they speak to
many firms. Not mentioning this information (which they will!) from another firm.
in the submission document might result in - Hayley Eustace
the ex-employee still getting mentioned as an Asia Pacific Editor, The Legal 500
active lawyer within the team in the research
analysis, which might not be the outcome a firm sought while making the submission.

Practice group overview

The practice area overview should ideally be 250300 words on how well the practice group had
performed in the last 1 year. Most often, firms simply provide information from their 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 group by
sharing facts. Avoid punchy marketing lines or phrases and avoid repeating the same information
each year. The overview should ideally include the following information:

Any sector or industry specialisation with

work examples
Any practice development, client relationship,
or thought leadership initiatives undertaken
by the team
Any unique mandates (matters)
Breadth of clients with examples of each type
Any remarkable achievements or media
coverage
Never underestimate the importance of the
submission overview. This your chance to
highlight the key messages you wish to get
across to the researcher. It puts everything into
context and should be easy to read putting
lawyer names/standout mandates in bold in
this section also helps to draw the researchers
attention to the points of note.
- Hayley Eustace
Asia Pacific Editor, The Legal 500

Legal directory submissions: Putting your best foot forward 5

Think of the overview as the annual executive summary of a practice group. It should include all
positive developments to demonstrate the growth and enhancement of the practice, and to help
the researcher to make a more accurate analysis. Avoid exceeding 300 words while drafting it;
researchers require a brief and concise overview. Researchers receive thousands of submission
forms; therefore, if they find it easier to obtain the relevant information, they would precisely and
more rapidly understand the practice and justify the rankings.

Work highlights
When deciding on the work highlights to be included in the submission, the following points must
be considered:

Be realistic and submit information on only notable matters that will facilitate achieving the
positioning objectives of the firm - whether to showcase the breadth, volume, expertise, or
specialisation. It is better to submit 56 strong and notable work highlights rather than 20
ordinary matters.

Include at least 3 publishable and non-confidential work highlights so that the researcher can
write about these highlights and include them in the practice area analysis as an example of
the type of work done by the firm.

For each work highlight, the following information should be included:

Name of the client: Mention the name of the entity, entities, or companies, and the sector or
industry. Frequently, lawyers mention the names of only the promoters or individuals they have
advised. This may be accurate if the promoters or individuals were advised independent of
the entity or against the company; however, mentioning the actual entity name or their role in
relation to the entity or company helps the researcher understand the matter comprehensively
and strengthens the work example if the entity or company is an established brand.

Summary of the matter: Avoid legalese and legal jargon. Researchers are not lawyers;
therefore, the summary must be kept simple. They need not know the section numbers of the
law in question. The summary is not a court document and requires soft skills. The matter
must be summarised in simple English as if it is the summary of a factual story for a layman.

Firms role: Describe the role played by the firm in the matter; example: the firm was the
lenders counsel, or was advising the acquirer, or representing the plaintiff, or such. Also,
elaborate the work done by the firm; example:
the type of documents drafted, negotiations The best submissions we receive will explain
done, advice provided, or the value the firm not only what was done, but why this work
brought to the matter. highlight stands out, and what makes it
significant.
Interesting aspects: Specify in detail if a
- Sarah Kogan
precedent was set; high values involved;
Editor - Asia-Pacific, Chambers and Partners
complexities that were managed; unique

Legal directory submissions: Putting your best foot forward 6

 structuring; high profile entities; market, sector, or industry impact; or any multi-practice
involvement. Again, avoid using legalese and legal jargon.

Lead partner(s) and lawyers involved:

Mention the titles of each team member.
Researchers look out for rising stars and
associates within the work highlights. They
notice if a specific associate is mentioned in
multiple work highlights. If multiple practice
groups are involved in a matter, clearly
categorise the list of lawyers as per the
practice groups. This demonstrates a cross-
practice, multi-disciplinary approach within
the firm.
Other parties or entities involved: Mention the
other companies, banks, consultants, and
transactional advisors involved in the matter
and the role they played. This information
helps the researcher to obtain a complete
perspective and understand the size of the
mandate.
Try not to send too much extraneous detail
and instead focus on the key messages the
firm wants the researcher to take into
consideration. Half an A4 page should be
allocated to each work highlight (a whole
page at the very most).
There is a tendency for firms to get bogged
down in the technicalities when describing a
deal/case; ensure that the submission clearly
illustrates why each work highlight is a
highlight. Explain how it is complex,
ground-breaking and/or unique. What did the
lawyers bring to the case?
- Hayley Eustace
Asia Pacific Editor, The Legal 500

Other law firms and advocates involved: Many firms refrain from mentioning this information,
which might not be the wisest decision. Including information on other advisers that were
involved and the role they played in the
matter helps the researcher validate the
information. Sometimes, seeing the names of
larger or established firms as the opposing
counsel helps create a more favourable
impression of a newer or a smaller firm.
Matter value: Considering that researchers
are typically based in London, Hong Kong or
Singapore and that the directories are
published and referred to by many foreign
firms and multinational companies, it is
preferable to mention the deal or matter
values in their USD equivalent, or both INR
and USD. Journalists generally mention
numbers greater than thousands in groups of
3 digits followed by a comma; whereas
frequently in India, the numbers are grouped
in 2 digits followed by a comma. Such
inconsistency can lead to inaccuracies. Thus,
Sometimes the work highlights provided to
us do not give sufficient context about a
matter to fully explain the significance of the
work completed. A couple of additional
sentences can help to shed light on the
interesting aspects of a deal or case, whether
this be a novel or complex structure, a matter
with great strategic significance for the client
or a market first.
At the same time, I would encourage firms to
be succinct in the description they provide. We
do not require a very long detailed
explanation of the fine detail of the matter,
which is why we ask that each work highlight
takes a maximum of one page.
- Sarah Kogan
Editor - Asia-Pacific, Chambers and Partners

Legal directory submissions: Putting your best foot forward 7

 it is also suggested to round off the values to the nearest million or billion. Mentioning values
in their entirety or with too many 0s will only lead to errors rather than impressing the reader.

Current status or completion date: Specify the completion date or the current status of the
matter if it is ongoing. This helps the researcher validate if the work highlight is eligible for the
current research period.

News links: Provide any online links to news articles that are available for the work highlight.
This information helps save the researchers time spent on searching for information and
validates the existence of the matter.

Media coverage
Keep the media-coverage (visibility) related information limited to only notable or impactful
examples. Do not list all the articles published, every instance of a quote or comment that was
featured, and every interview that had been given to the press. A lengthy list only risks losing the
attention of the researcher from the section. If a firm still wishes to include a list, which may exceed
1 page, such a list should ideally be added as an annexure at the end of the form or submission
document. Ultimately, rankings are not based on the number of times a firm featured in a
newspaper but on clients and peers feedback about the firm and its expertise.

Sector specific submission categories

For sector or industry-specific (categories) submissions, it is advisable to include the work
highlights and team members (who are active within the sector) from across practice groups of
the firm. Do not limit the information to just commercial or regulatory work done by the firm within
a sector. For example, for Real Estate category, provide information on not only in the commercial
work, due diligences or title searches but also financing, corporate, investment, or litigation
matters if the firm has such experience. The same approach can be adopted for categories such
as Aviation, Telecom, Media, Technology, and Shipping. However, read the guidelines, and seek
clarification from the researcher to avoid overlap. For example, many times, an overlap occurs in
the Projects and Energy category (financing, developmental projects, transactional, disputes and
regulatory mandates). In such situations, researchers typically provide clarification on the type of
matters to be included in a specific practice area (category) submission if the related guidelines
are unclear. Showcasing a multi-disciplinary approach for sectors strengthens the positioning of
the firm.

Legal directory submissions: Putting your best foot forward 8

Selecting referees
Considering that rankings are markedly
dependent on client feedback, it is imperative to
submit a list of appropriate clients (contacts) well
within the deadline. Complete the compilation of
client referees and send it to the researcher first
so that the researcher can commence work on
seeking feedback.
Referees sent to us before the deadline will be
contacted earlier on in the research process,
leaving time to recognise any problems with
response rates before the writing begins.
- Hayley Eustace
Asia Pacific Editor, The Legal 500

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. Do not assume that a contact will be happy to respond to research
calls from multiple directories.

They had a positive experience with the firm and will be providing positive feedback, preferably
about multiple lawyers of the practice group or firm and not just 12 individuals.

They are fluent in English because almost all researchers are based in London, Hong Kong or
Singapore, 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. A growing number of
researchers prefer speaking to the referee
over the phone to eliminate any possibilities
of the law firms interference through emails
on the provided feedback.
They have been active with the firm during
the research period.
A referee need not be the most senior person of
the legal team in a company. Often, it is best to
give references of contacts from the clients legal
team who have been working closely and regularly
with the firm on matters and who are at a mid-
level position. Researchers find it easier to reach
such contacts and seek an appointment with
them. The senior GCs or CEO and MDs are difficult
Put forward referees who are more likely to
respond (bearing in mind that senior figures
are generally busier).
Sometimes firms focus too heavily on referees
that are likely to impress us, but we find it
more effective to measure the number of
responses rather than the profile/seniority of
those responding.
When selecting referees, think about those
who have a good relationship with firm
(rather than just one partner). That way, they
can also provide quotes on service from the
firm as a whole, as well as other lawyers in
the firm that they have had dealings with.
- Hayley Eustace
Asia Pacific Editor, The Legal 500

Legal directory submissions: Putting your best foot forward 9

to reach, and receiving prompt email responses from them could be difficult. Researchers cease
follow-up with a referee after a certain number of attempts.

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.
Similarly, the intermediaries and any other We always encourage firms to give their
consultants involved in a matter with the firm can clients prior warning that they have been
also be considered as referees. nominated as a referee. We find that where
this step has been taken, clients are far more
Directories and researchers have become willing and open to having a conversation
increasingly transparent each year. The names of with us, and this will mean the responsiveness
the researchers are typically available online on and quality of feedback provided by the firms
the directory website or in the submission clients will be higher.
guidelines. Inform the referees regarding who will
be contacting them so that the email from the - Sarah Kogan
Editor - Asia-Pacific, Chambers and Partners
researcher does not get ignored.

Legal directory submissions: Putting your best foot forward 10

Preparing for interviews
Interviews between the researcher and the lawyers of a firm are a critical part of the research
process. Almost every directory conducts such interviews. Chambers and Partners schedules
interview calls for every practice area, and thus, spends the largest amount of time on interviews
compared with most directories. Other directories such as The Legal 500 or Asialaw Profiles may
make only 13 calls to the key individuals in the
firm who are most involved across practice We will typically ask firms to choose up to
groups or who can talk about majority of the three practice areas they would like an
practices groups. Irrespective of the directorys interview for. Our research period is only two
approach, an interview is an opportunity to months in length and therefore the researchers
ensure that the key strengths of a practice group cannot interview every firm on every area they
have been communicated to the researcher. have submitted for. Firms should nominate
practice areas for interview by choosing those
Selecting which team members will participate in
that (a) they feel are under-ranked, or (b)
the interview should be decided objectively by
where there have been significant
firms. The interviewee must be an individual who
developments over the past 12 months.
can talk about and represent the practice group
as a whole. For the interview calls or meetings, - Hayley Eustace
researchers normally prefer only 12 individuals Asia Pacific Editor, The Legal 500
from a firm.

The interviews are typically structured into 4 main parts:

1. Recent trends and developments in the market: The interview starts with a discussion on the
developments in the market, the law related to the practice area, and the industry. This topic
does not focus on the firm but focuses more on law and policy related trends within the
country. Researchers discuss this aspect in every interview to get insight on the market trends
and prepare the analysis of the jurisdiction. Therefore, it is best to share genuinely noticed
trends and deliberated opinions. Researchers compare notes related to the market trends
obtained from every interview and notice any unreliable information or trending claims if none
of the other firms have mentioned a specific development.

2. About the firms practice group: This part of the interview focuses on changes within the firms
practice group in the last 1 year. It aims at not repeating factors already mentioned in the
submission but elaborating on these factors. Mention and elaborate what distinguishes the
practice group from other firms, how it has improved, and provide information on team
members who play an instrumental role. Researchers will be interested in discussing the 3
most notable work highlights, preferably the publishable ones. The interviewee must be
prepared to answer why those matters have been included in the submission; how they are
notable; what were the unique aspects; which team members played an instrumental role in
the matters; and which other firms and advisors were involved.

Legal directory submissions: Putting your best foot forward 11

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.
This can be accomplished by quantifying, stating examples, and making a case for it. Being
too aggressive or off-handed with the researcher will not yield positive outcomes.

4. Peer review: The researcher will inquire

about the interviewees thoughts on the firms An important element of the research is peer
and individuals listed in the current rankings, review, which is anonymous, allowing firms to
whether the interviewee feels that the be honest as they can be about the market, so
rankings given to the other firms and don't shy away from giving your opinion. Try
individuals are justified; and whether any to be as impartial as you can. It helps
firms or individuals are missing that the everyone.
interviewee feels should be included. For any
- Ralph Cunningham
change being suggested, the interviewee will
Publisher (Asia), Euromoney Legal Media Group
be asked the rationale for the
recommendation. Corresponding answers
and examples should be given to support any suggestions. If additions have been suggested,
the interviewee must have worked across the firm being recommended or must be directly in
a position to make the suggestion based on experience. Honesty is the best policy during this
discussion, give due credit to those who deserve it. If a firm or lawyer in the market has a good
reputation, the researcher will often come across the name and will verify the information
during other interviews.

It is important for interviewee 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 The Legal 500 research team includes ex-
rankings if they have not looked at the list of firms lawyers, law graduates and former
and individuals currently ranked. It is best to have journalists. Researchers work on a cycle,
the submission and rankings at hand so that the typically covering four directories a year. In
researcher and interviewees can refer to the page 2016, most Asia Pacific researchers had
numbers and focus on the work highlights being either researched the region or their specific
discussed. jurisdiction before.

Interviewees often feel that the researcher
interacting with them is not knowledgeable
enough about law or is inexperienced. Directories
spend a considerable amount of time and effort in
training their researchers, rotating them between
jurisdictions and hiring those with journalistic
proficiency. Researchers may not be lawyers and
might not be Indians, however, after skimming
through hundreds of submissions received from
In order to ensure researchers are aware of
the nuances of practice areas as well as
varying legal markets, we have an ongoing
training programme carried out both
internally (by editors) and externally (by law
firms).
- Hayley Eustace
Asia Pacific Editor, The Legal 500

Legal directory submissions: Putting your best foot forward 12

law firms in a jurisdiction, conducting approximately 23 interview calls with each firm, and
speaking to clients, they have a very realistic representation of a firms reputation and accurate
analysis. 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 consultancies for legal
communications services after having moved on from their roles with the directories. It can prove
to be valuable to have an ex-editor as a friend to guide you about a directory in unclear situations.

Legal directory submissions: Putting your best foot forward 13

Managing submissions
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 template1 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

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. Irrespective of whether such a person is a fee-earner or
marketer or a consultant, it is ideal for the person to be:

aligned with the overall objective and focus of the firm

good at project management and handling multiple deadlines

familiar with the directories methodology or be self-driven to learn it

possess an understanding of various practice areas and sectors

centrally placed to be able to coordinate with multiple individuals and offices

good at managing relationships and interfacing with external media, editors, and researchers

great at soft skills, proofreading and can simplify technical information or legalese

good at conducting further general research on matters to enhance the drafted information

1If you do not have a standard template, feel free to download LexBlurbs ready-to-use template which is
available to download for free here

Legal directory submissions: Putting your best foot forward 14

 proactive to speak to the lawyers involved in matters to seek further clarity or information to
improve a submission

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 23 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 in Getting Started at the beginning of this guide.

Compile and shortlist the information in advance. The ideal time for this is normally in
November because this is when India Business Law Journal, IDEX, Asian Mena Counsel, and
other established award committees commence their research and nomination process. The
final deadline of the annual league tables for the deal value and volume rankings is also
typically disclosed by November. The information compiled must not only include shortlisted
matters and client referees but also data related to the following:

Awards and achievements

List of new and ex-employees of the firm
Development initiatives that were undertaken by the firm (related to practice groups,
client relationship management, information technology, and thought leadership)
Notable media coverage (visibility)

A collaborative approach with various departments within the firm is required for this activity
to be successful.

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. If
a deadline breach is likely, speak to the researcher and obtain a suitable extension. If possible,
client referees must be compiled and sent first so that the researcher can start seeking client
feedback.

Proactively check with the researcher whether the submission is in order or any further
information is needed after it has been sent.

Coordinate the interview schedule with the relevant interviewee(s) for the practice area, or
seek an interview call with the researcher if a request has not been received.

Legal directory submissions: Putting your best foot forward 15

 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.

Keep researchers informed until the entire research process has been 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.

Legal directory submissions: Putting your best foot forward 16

Participating in the research
The rankings provided by the directories are ultimately based on the expertise demonstrated
through work highlights, and client and peer feedback. It is imprudent to assume that legal
directory rankings are a starting point to establish a practice. Legal directory rankings and
mentions must be considered a validation of an established practice group or expertise.
Irrespective of whether the objective is the recognition of a practice group or an individual, the
planning and strategy for such recognition start with getting and doing notable work, happy clients,
peer commendations, and overall market visibility.

The efficacy of legal directories for obtaining new

clients is an unending debate. When evaluating
law firms for legal panels, a growing number of
multinational companies with empanelment
processes ask for information related to
achievements and industry recognition of firms,
practice groups, and individuals. With directories
also launching new products related to general
counsels, clients increasingly seek legal
information from the directories each year and
gain more insight into the credibility of the
directories.
Remember what the directory is designed to
do. It is about helping in-house counsel
identify the most appropriate adviser for their
matter in a particular jurisdiction. If they have
a bad experience based on what they may read
in a directory, that isn't good for us and it
certainly isn't good for the market.
- Ralph Cunningham
Publisher (Asia), Euromoney Legal Media Group

Law firms globally refer to the directories to identify possible networking and relationship building
opportunities for their marketing strategies in foreign jurisdictions. In a survey completed last year
by Legal Marketing Association and Law Firm Media Professionals, majority of international law
firms agreed that they benefit from legal directory rankings through improved morale internally
and increased confidence of the existing clients.

For Indian law firms and lawyers, the web versions of these directories provide added visibility and
industry recognition from authoritative benchmarking publications which can be leveraged further
with the appropriate marketing strategy. The online traffic of established directories, such as
Chambers and Partners, The Legal 500, Asialaw Profiles and IFLR1000, and certain other practice
area-focused (specialised) directories such as International Tax Review and Global Arbitration
Review has markedly increased with the various product enhancements made each year.

Legal directory submissions: Putting your best foot forward 17

Concluding remarks
The appropriate and efficient management of the overall submission process is time-consuming
and requires dedicated attention. However, it does not have to be a troublesome experience or a
dreaded phase for the firm or the person managing the process for the firm. Some initial effort
and experienced personnel may be required to achieve efficacy in the submission process. For
some firms, the value of the submissions may need to be promoted internally among the
employees to ensure a seamless process, but it can be achieved. The desired results will possibly
not be obtained immediately in the first year; consistent participation over 23 years may be
required for positive changes to reflect in the rankings.

Many firms assign the responsibility of managing the submission process to fee-earners, as
opposed to employing a marketer or communications expert. This could either be due to a lack of
resources with relevant experience within the industry, or simply to save the cost of additional
hiring or contracting additional manpower. This may not be suitable for firms considering that
submissions require soft communication skills and persistent relationship management, resulting
in a significant investment of a lawyers billable time in performing a nonbillable activity.

Legal directory submissions: Putting your best foot forward 18

 About LexBlurb
LexBlurb is focused on providing marketing and communications services
exclusively to law firms and legal professionals in India.

In todays dynamic and competitive landscape, it takes skills combined with

experience and industry knowledge to maintain or enhance the market
position. LexBlurb offers a complete solution to law firms and legal
professionals to achieve their communications and positioning related goals.

As a communications consultancy, LexBlurb stands out for its exclusive focus

on the legal industry, its first-hand knowledge and its approach of
collaborating as business partners. LexBlurb enables clients to achieve growth
in visibility and reputation; demonstrate expertise and thought leadership;
improve communications; enhance community engagement; and strengthen
business relationships.

LexBlurbs objective is to establish itself as a results-driven communications

consultancy with a reputation for excellence, transparency, trust and integrity.
Marketing and communications is not just a business for us; it's a passion.

Contact
If you have any suggestions or questions, please feel free to drop us a line:
contact@lexblurb.com
Thank you!

www.lexblurb.com

Legal directory submissions: Putting your best foot forward 19