| Firm Name |
Design |
Content |
Usability |
Interactivity |
Intangibles |
Total |
| Milbank Tweed |
3 |
4 |
3 |
3 |
5 |
18 |
| Two years ago, I said redesign and reorganization are long overdue. Now, we are way beyond that. Let’s just say the value of this site has expired. I’ll assume a redesign is in the works, because the usability here is plummeting. At one point in time, this was an IMA elite site. However, that was long, long ago. |
| Parker Poe |
3 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
3 |
18 |
| Outside of a home page that stands out by being relatively meaningless, the site has a very dated feel. While the info is there, I could not imagine using the site except to grab a phone number or e-mail address. Of course, I could just print out the PDF Directory and be done with it. Not to suggest the site is not updated with more detail. The appearance just suggests otherwise.
|
| Sedgwick Detert |
3 |
4 |
4 |
3 |
4 |
18 |
| The highlight is the careers site, which is separate. The main site has a home page with traditional lawyer web site clip art. That might work for one of those companies that sell hundreds of little sites to little firms, but I expect more from you. The practice group content is maddeningly inconsistent. I could go on and on, but I don’t feel like it. Lots of room to build something better.
|
| Shook Hardy |
3 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
3 |
18 |
| On this review day in February 2006, I went to “News & Events” and was greeted with empty pages for both “Seminars” and “Alerts”. At least archive seminars that have passed, and probably do the same for alerts as well. I did take the “diversity quiz” under “diversity initiatives”—failing miserably I might add. Waiting for the downloaded graphic under “Vision”—essentially a mission statement—was not worth the price of admission. I’m also still not keen on the search results format from the Google tool. Still room for improvement, in both design and content.
|
| Steptoe & Johnson |
3 |
6 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
18 |
| The content is deeper and updating better than last time around, but my previous review stands…REPEAT -- Poorly conceived…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.
|
| White and Williams |
3 |
5 |
4 |
3 |
3 |
18 |
| Still love the picture of the lobby on the home page—not. Little has changed on this site in the last two years. It just lacks any originality. I’ve seen this site a thousand times, with different law firm names attached. It is fine, but not memorable. In this marketplace, you need to forge an identity that goes beyond “law firm.”
|
| Allen Matkins |
4 |
3 |
4 |
3 |
3 |
17 |
| Outside of a few good newsletters, not much more than online brochureware. The updating was a tad better than it used to be. A “presence”, but not much more.
|
| Bass Berry |
3 |
5 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
17 |
| I’m getting lazy, so I’ll repeat what I said TWO YEARS AGO…it still rings true today:
“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.” Invest in a new mousetrap. You’ll be glad you did.
|
| Luce Forward |
3 |
5 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
17 |
| Did my browser break or is the layout as bad as it looks? This site is a cluster-youknowwhat. I did find some decent articles and events after I got done cursing you out. For goodness sake, management committee or important partners, give the marketing team some money to buy something manageable and passable. By the way, the home page was not as bad as it first looked. It took so long for the meat of the page to download that I had already moved past it. Still too many clicks to get where I want.
|
| Moore & Van Allen |
3 |
3 |
4 |
3 |
4 |
17 |
| You had the unenviable timing of being reviewed right after Holland & Hart. Oy. The home page is lame. Outside of the bios, it is simply not an effort up to par with similarly situated law firms. Thin in too many places. Still not a firm priority.
|
