The graphic design was so boring (have I seen that look on another site…on no, I stand corrected…on 100 other sites) that I had to go back to the previous site I happened to review (Schiff Hardin) and up their design points. Anything was going to be an improvement over the previous iteration. And it is better than it was. But, it is cookie-cutter. A lot of “laundry lists” of information. It would be nice to see some originality.
Wow, an office in Qatar, with rotating attorneys. I could not read the page in Arabic (I think it is Arabic), but my question is…do the summer associates rotate through this office? The home page still uses the “see things differently” tag. But, from the web site world, the only thing different is that this is one of the last of the big firm old-tyme web sites. However, it is more up to date than many newer showroom models I’ve seen. Which is an improvement from a year ago. One of those sites in which I can not help but think the “new site” is around the corner.
On the home page, I liked the soothing shade of blue. Enough said. The Human Resource Law Page site was better than the firm’s overall site. That should not be happening. However, kudos to the HR gang. There is no way that site should not get a little play on the main home page. I thought the attorney search categories were cool, but having all the results piled on one another was not. Give me a list and the link to each individual. There was a lack of overall site mapping here. The detail in many areas is too sketchy. Not a great effort. Too much focus on clip art and not enough on content.
You need—to get rid of the frames, get a sharper (less boring) redesign, make better use of the home page and the boxed “highlights” flashing top-right. At present, the home page is a laundry list of practice group “update” PDFs. Having all of the office names, addresses and phone numbers taking up a part of every page is annoying. At one point, I found myself on a practice description page, out of the frames and with no way back home, or to any other section of the site. The attorney page, with only alphabetical choices (although other attorney bio search options exist elsewhere) is not too useful. The good news is that the firm content (publications, events, news) is better than the online presentation. My guess? The web was low-priority on the business development plan.
IMA is still not a big fan of the home page and the “get me a compass” navigation style. The “subject listing” as a practice area search option is a good one. Otherwise, trying to find things can be confusing. There are some decent resources, but the overall journey is clunky. Like my ’98 Mazda, the site could use a realignment. The site smacks of a “committee” approach of compromise.
Since this is the last year that I write these things, this is the last time I will tell you to get rid of the damn splash page! Quit wasting my precious surfing time. The lesson here is that you are better off with a more simplistic set-up (like Baker McKenzie) than a site that (I guess) is supposed to be more visually appealing. The content is good but the organization still leaves a lot to be desired. The depth of content is not reflective of the firm size. WILL ALWAYS HATE…the splash page, the navigation and structure.
Last year, I noted there were a few apologies for things that were coming soon. It is about 15 months later, and there seem to be even more apologies. More than the number of times I have to tell my wife, “I’m sorry. I forgot” in a week. That is not good. The site is slightly improved. Far from horrible, but not great either.
I hate to bring up again that WC was the last of the U.S. 250 largest to get on the web. The site is relatively static and has one of the last remaining splash pages (remember, they are playing catch-up here). However, if you compare it to many first-generation tries, it is way better. More brochure than interactive resource, they do present a classy overview, without stale clipart or cliché design.
DPW Online has gone in reverse over the last few years. While many similarly situated NYC firms are finally beefing it up on the web, Davis Polk is going backwards. What was once one of the finest home pages in the land is now a brochure cover. Boo-hoo. The posting of publications has gone from few to zip. While the layout and design are clean and uncluttered, the site is now the old New York “brochure plus recruiting info”. You are soooooo 1999, dude. The attorney bios do not offer keyword searching. And the scrolling and dumping of content in areas potentially high-impact areas as pro bono and “news” are inexcusable. One highlight is the choice of print size for readers, to go with the printing option. IMA expects more from those that once did it so well.
Let’s see…the home page has one design, the internal pages another, and the recruiting a third. The home page is not all that bad, focusing on the firm’s big-money advertising theme. Unless you’ve been living in a cave, you’ve seen a Saul Ewing ad (with all those animals). And if you do not recall that it was for Saul, then those lawyers are going to freak. Few firms did more print advertising this past year. Beyond the home page is the firm’s ancient web site, which does not match up with the rest of the firm’s brand. My guess? A new web site must be in the works. As I mentioned in another review, take a few of those print dollars and give them to the web committee. It seems like SE turns over marketers monthly, which would make a consistent business development theme tough.
