The home page is a news page, with lots of “recent news” front and center. Nobody can accuse the firm of overdoing it on press releases—the last one on this date is from more than nine months ago. While the “recent news” was recent, a lot of the internal data sections were dated. I like that they provide logos and photos for downloading, so that vendors and sponsors can grab them without having to bother the firm. There is still a lot of good content—strong newsletters page, an alumni section and decent practice pages. However, the navigation and layout seems to have lost its way. RC has always done a nice job online, but probably needs a little kick in the rear to get back to a higher level.
As I’ve repeated in the IMA reviews, most visitors are not looking at a zillion law firm web sites like I am, but the Ropes Gray site is just way too cookie-cutter for me in today’s world. Looking at the graphics made me think about how much I liked the originality of graphics from a Troutman Sanders. Or even the simplicity of “name a big NY law firm”. I did like the Careers site, though. In general, many pages are too crowded. I’d like to see some efforts to differentiate.
Here is a firm from my neck of the woods that has slowly nudged itself onto the scene, joining the other “big” PA-based firms. Probably still operating just a nudge under the radar. Which is all the more reason you need to have a little bit more about who you are—front and center. Although, the highlighted “see the story behind the headline” effectively sends a pretty good message. There were some navigational flaws—like having to back-button it from those aforementioned stories. For some reason, the main category buttons at the top of the site were inoperable, forcing me to use the “back-up” hyperlinks at the bottom—meaning I was annoyed. Easy fixes.
With nowhere to go but up (the previous site scored an IMA “11”), Baker-D has put together a decent site that has all of the expected components in place. Nothing really stands out one way or the other, but that is not necessarily a problem. There is a separate site for the firm’s consulting arm, and a version of the firm web site in Chinese. On this day, the site search function was broke, so I could not see how the results were displayed.
Baker this, Baker that. I can never remember one Baker firm from another. And the home page does not help. It is still as boring as it was the last time I saw it. And it does not do justice to above-average content and tools inside. Another site that just needs a little rebranding. The hard part—the internal workings—are generally fine.
My last IMA review of this site assured that I would not be invited as the guest speaker at your next retreat, or the one after that, or the one after that. Remember how I made fun of the “driven to succeed” theme? Anyway, let’s get to something else. The “attorneys” page is a list of attorneys. If you do not already know who you want, this is not very helpful. On review day, the site was down once, and very slow the second time around. I’m not sure if that is the day or a recurring issue. One cool and pretty unique thing was listing the attorney’s legal assistants, with phone and e-mail, on the bios. Now, that is nifty! Look, I like the design and colors. The usability needs some work. You do a lot of good things well. Now, about that retreat.
If you are wondering what happens when you type in the boiesschiller.com without the dash, you’ll see a cyber pirate (arrrrhhhh, matey) has it. Now, if you like all-flash sites. I mean really, really like them—this is for you. Mostly flash and overview stuff. Not tremendously useful if you are trying to find something. Did I say it was really flashy already? There is a tremendous irony to this site. Mr. Boies, who probably has not needed much web site marketing to build his firm, is known for being all about content and not at all about looking flashy. Get it? The irony. Isn’t it ironic? Don’t you think?
I took “a look inside” at the photo albums of offices. Does anyone work there? They are all empty lobbies and corridors. Get to work! I did not see any value in these pictures, unless I was an architect showing off my client. However, that is nit-picking. The site continues to show improvement in uploading relevant content. There is more there than meets the eye. The amount of info is fine, but I’d like to see it slightly reorganized.
The site continues to add content and stay fresh. Nothing stands out particularly good or bad. Which could be a good thing…or a bad thing. Depends on your point of view.
Is it possible that the same site is better today than two years’ ago? Sort of. Many firms have taken to cutting back a little online—leaving them where Irell is—with a focus on the overview side. Still an excellent attorney bio db—like the e-mail link offering on each bio. The practice descriptions with the practice leader are decent. Outside of the “news,” there is little other content. More for those looking for background than those looking for detail.
