In Philadelphia, the renowned restaurant critic Craig LaBan (and if IMA has a “critic” idol, it would be the Inquirer’s four-bell dining scribe) tells you when he “last visited”. I was sure that I would see some improvement from my last online visit. It lacks depth and luster. In my home base city, I rarely even hear the firm mentioned anymore in the circles where Wolf Block, Ballard Spahr, Dechert and company get lots of play. It is plain vanilla without the ability to search. The practice group sections are really inconsistent. It is not the worst large-firm site in the city, but it is far from the top. Like that $26 chicken dish that would you would have enjoyed better at $14. It was okay, but you would not go back. On the LaBan four bell scale, one bell for average. And for those visiting Philly, the four-bell MoFo or Faegre platinum equivalent of restaurants is Django.
I chuckled as I looked at the “press releases”, most of which were not exactly newsworthy. This is often quite the dilemma for law firm marketers, when an attorney says “we should do a press release on this” and I answer, “Who cares?” I’d rather see at least one listing under “events” than a zillion press releases on “Joe Schmo Joins HRO”. The site lacks depth. And as I said last year, when you are in the same region as Holland & Hart, the web can be a tough town. A strength was the simple sentence description at the top of the home page. As many of us know, getting the firm down to two sentences is a chore. You get a quick read of what the firm is about. That is important. The headlines were very, very stale!
You know how we used to all yell out “jello shot” when hanging out in seedy bars getting hammered? No? Neither do I. But, I do yell out “lobby shot” every time I come across the old office lobby photo as the centerpiece of home page design. There must be a drinking game in this. All kidding aside, the firm finally has a respectable web presence to call their very own. Flash in the design and in the recruiting section. A decent biographies section. Not the deepest site in the ocean; but it floats. And one of my old whipping boy web sites is laid to rest. The appropriate contact info is there. Now, let’s get rolling on adding some seminars, newsletters and such.
I’m not sure what was going on with this site on review day, but the “news” section was “out of order”. There continue to be significant download time issues (and that is on a high-speed connection) that made getting from page to page painful. I stumbled across the interesting “Gold Dome Report” (it came up during a test of the keyword search results). However, I’m not sure how people are supposed to find it, since there is no site map and it is not mentioned on the home page. For a site that has “technology” on the navigation bar (not necessary; give it a page under firm overview), the site is lacking. Time for an upgrade to web version 2.0. WILL ALWAYS LOVE…one of the best “locations” pages out there.
The firm has a great rep and the news items show that good things are happening all the time. They have just not been able to get that so-called “web site thing” down. The design is last-generation. It is not well structured. As I said last year, re-org. And while you are at it, a little redesign as well.
It pains me when I see a brand-new site, and it is so poorly conceived. Yes, Steptoe did trade in an old model for a new one. But, they should have read the Consumer Reports first. It is a lemon. (Contact IMA winner lemonlaw.com?). It was such a painful experience that I am not even going to rag on the firm for the irrelevant “when experience matters” tagline. Download time was in slo-mo. Terrible frames formatting. Content seemed sparser than on the previous version of the site. The home page looks like a shiny new model (it is the best part of the site), but the insides rattled. For a new launch, it should be better.
Words that quickly came to mind here – old-looking, scrolling, html. This is still a site with better information than meets the eye. It is current, but lacks needs an architect and interior designer to make it sing. WILL ALWAYS LOVE…the newsletter in html, with the option to print in pdf.
The term “user unfriendly” comes to mind. While there were some improvements in the last year—download time, associate bios—the music, movies, and display of information just do not do it. I’m not sure which end-user audience would feel a sense of satisfaction here. Next time, less focus on design; more on display and usability.
Last year, I was perturbed. This year, I’m peeved. Not much to say except to repeat the 2003 comments--too much concern with graphic design and not enough focus on providing an information resource. Graphics are out; content is in. The content is there, as is some strong interactivity with e-mail briefings and client extranets, but there is a need for a new framework. Download time was ridiculous. A few searches hit dead links. You really need a better back-end to house some darn good content. Find a developer and tell him/her to put what is on the site into a better organized tool. I did like the dates as a relevant component on search results—seeing freshness in relevant results is a great thing. WILL ALWAYS HATE…those frames, too much graphic design and not enough end-user concern.
The frames and inconsistent navigation take away from a somewhat well-organized home page. Internal pages looked like someone blended parts of a previous site with a new one. The patchwork method rarely works in today’s web development. It would not take much to make the site more user-friendly, and in turn, a better marketing tool.
