Is it possible that ninety-seven percent of legal tech companies have no firm grasp of their go-to-market strategy or, at best, a scattered one, and that the vast majority lack an understanding of their products positioning and customers as reported by legal PR and marketing Baretz+Brunelle in their Legal Tech Go-to-Market Report?
LexBlog’s editor-in-chief and widely recognized legal tech reporter, Bob Ambrogi doesn’t think so. From his piece in Above the Law:
My impression of this survey is that its conclusions are overbroad. I have no doubt that many legal tech companies lack a cogent go-to-market strategy. But I strongly doubt that it is anywhere near 97 percent. I likewise have no doubt that many companies are confused about their product and customers, but again, I doubt that it is as endemic as this survey suggests. The fact is that many legal tech companies are highly strategic and successful in their sales and marketing.
Though Baretz is a widely respected organization, Ambrogi added another kicker.
Of course, given that this survey comes from a PR and marketing firm, there is also a subliminal message to be found between its lines: Hire us and we’ll help you sharpen your strategy.
What the the report really misses is the large amount of networking through the Internet being done by legal tech companies for branding, product positioning and selling. It’s being done to strategically nuture relationships with buyers, consultants, and influencers in order to develop business.
I regularly engage legal tech company founders, executives, financiers and the influencers of those reporting and leading the discussion on legal tech companies via Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn and blogging.
It’s a real, authentic and vibrant discussion – person to person, as opposed to company marketing and communications.
Though there are many legal tech companies participating in networking through the Internet, person to person, admittedly the number doing so is less than half.
Of those legal tech companies not networking authentically, person to person, most attempt to network through the net via their company brands. The results are sketchy at best as those they are trying to reach see through the awkwardness of their approach.
Maybe I miss the point of the study, which admittedly is brief and limited in scope. But wouldn’t networking through the Internet even be acknowledged? Wouldn’t the large amount networking through the Internet by legal tech companies be seen in advance of the study? After all, networking online is a marketing method uniquely suited for technology companies.
Maybe the use of the Internet, as it pertains to the study, is just a tactic within a strategy, or the lack of a strategy. Admittedly other tactics were not addressed.
But to miss the online marketing taking place and skip the strategy altogether?
Comments
Post a Comment