It would have been tough for this site not to show improvement. It has most of the basic characteristics of the “mass customization-style” web site design. While nothing stands out as original or exceptional—and there are pages with way too much stuff thrown on—it was a step in the right direction. The information provided is current, and that is half the battle.
It looks like the firm has taken a piecemeal approach to fixing things. The overall site stays the same from year-to-year, but is improving. It is still a last-generation site that needs a back-end overhaul to make the overall user experience more effective. Over the years, adding search functionality and better materials have helped. WILL ALWAYS LOVE…the artwork that is used on the site, and I hope is worked into any new site that is developed.
L&L…brings back memories. Back “in the day”, as I say in the ‘hood, this was the last law firm web site I ever sold. Before there were IMAs and I was “scared straight” (in other words, not peddling goods out of the back of a van). However, I never had any involvement in this site iteration and the weasels I worked for still owe me commission (along with a lot of other things). However, that is not Loeb’s problem. The site is basically the same as a year ago. Straight-forward and conservative.
You are withering with age, my friend. Time for a new site. And for goodness sake, a more intuitive domain name! New organization and search mechanisms would go a long way, especially since the site remains current and content-driven. Some pages are also getting a little too wieldy. WILL ALWAYS LOVE…commitment to the “daily features”…the printable firm directory.
Big problem that needs quick correction. The first thing I did on the home page was to do a keyword search in the little Google box. It brought me search results, but could not take me back to the SHB web site. It is just a matter of changing the link on the firm logo from the search results page. Having said that, the site is much improved. The design structure was a little “off” in terms of download time and everything loading properly. Some areas lacked depth. For example, the “employment litigation” profile does not show you anything more than a paragraph of data, yet if you click on the number of attorneys in the practice, it is quite significant. Pump it up. A step in the right direction.
The content depth is not up to par for a firm of 600 attorneys. The design is a little clunky, and too many pages have too many lines. In addition, the number of events and news items simply can not (can not!) reflect the things these people are doing. The home page did have a link to an audio broadcast currently running on American Airlines. That was cute. Overall, you can see the site is not marketing priority one. But, that’s okay. Life is always sunny on the site and in the ads.
IMA was shocked to see the firm still in business, with such a minimal web presence. Just kidding guys. You know where your bread is buttered. It actually seems like the site has improved a bit. The strength is still in recruiting. The site could really use a makeover, though. Last year, IMA compared your site to Cleary. This year, I’ll suggest you take a look at what they built. WILL ALWAYS LOVE…the virtual tour (under “working at S&C”).
Last year, I said the site was “typical”. The bio db is lacking in capabilities. The home page practice highlight is Sarbanes-Oxley (still important, but a little dated). Decent design. Another site a little bit thin. Although, the careers section is good. And I can not believe the “client services” section is still the same. It is called a list of links! The credits say this is a Hubbard One production. But, the site is not up to their standards. And not among the better efforts in the 250. Far from the worst, but nothing great.
This is one of those sites that succeeds on many levels, but fails miserably at others. There are some neat components that are still a little bit different, like the legal services index, the bio listings and an excellent “newsroom” page for media. However, the updating this year was seriously lacking. Poor navigation combined with no site map, no searching, lack of related content components and no bottom page nav help (or ability to return home) hurts. Still like the “where we come from” map in “careers”. But, the web site committee may have fallen asleep at the wheel. With a 36 score last year, I was either in a really good mood or just so excited to see some different things on display.
Last year, IMA mentioned that the design and structure was getting out of control. The Womble site has lost its bite. No offense to Winston the Bulldog, who probably could still take a chunk out of my leg. The navigation is inconsistent. If the cool news feeds are still there, I could not find them. The web cam, though not unique, was a nice touch. Now, it is much more like a same old-same old web site, where there once was some edginess. Maybe Winston needs a pit bull to join him in the web site department.
