Unexpected Benefits of Proprietary Client Surveys

There are several reasons to take client feedback seriously. First, if you don't know what your clients are unhappy about, you won't be able to fix it. Second, because you wouldn't really know what makes clients jump ship, you'll inevitably engage in guesswork which may lead you astray with ensuing business decisions. Third, sometimes there's a gem of an idea concealed within, waiting to be extracted and polished into a novel offering, or a major service or process improvement. Finally, opportunities for upselling, cross-selling and new business often present themselves in the intelligence gathering process.

For these reasons, firms that consistently collect client feedback will find themselves in a better position to make strategic decisions than firms with a sporadic approach to market signal analysis.

Three Categories of Client Feedback

All client feedback can be categorized into three broad groups that capture: what clients think (e.g. self-reported surveys, questionnaires and polls), say (interviews and discussions) and act (behavioral analysis). TSA: think, say, act. The question “How well do our professionals pay attention to your commentary?” can be posed in all three TSA feedback categories. Despite their interconnected nature, a client's answers to the same question may sometimes differ. In other words, what a client thinks isn't always what they say or do.

Therefore, it is essential to recognize two inherent challenges: (1) client's thinking, oral statements and actions may be misaligned, albeit possibly unintentionally, and (2) relying on any single feedback mechanism reduces the probability of getting the whole client satisfaction story. The most accurate client feedback on any given evaluation criteria must tap into all three TSA categories which should be in alignment with one another.

It follows that any one kind of client survey (i.e. thinking, or T-type) should not be viewed as sufficient, but rather as complimentary to other essential feedback mechanisms (saying and acting, or S- and A-type). Whatever measures are captured in a survey, these must be triangulated via S-type and A-type feedback instruments for accuracy.

For example, if a client is asked to express their agreement with the statement, “When requested, your firm always provides fast turnaround,” a similar question — albeit, posed differently — should be asked during a face-to-face interview or a roundtable. In addition, professionals should confirm that no client behavior contradicts the statement's rating and preferably confirms it. Similarly, because some (polite) clients will be reluctant to tell it the way it is, to your face (S-type feedback), two supplemental measures (T and A) are critical to establishing what's really going on.

Client Surveys as Management Instrument  

Because any T-type survey can only produce a partial representation of the whole client experience story, it may not be valued unless administered with other S- and A-type feedback instruments. Which, of course, immediately invokes the sense of yet another tedious chore among professionals and top management. However, what is often unrecognized is how surveys affect those whose work product and service is being assessed.

If used properly, any client survey serves as market intelligence and a management tool. What you measure becomes an accountability mechanism. Feeling the foci of attention, professionals will aim at getting better at what's being evaluated, provided management monitors and rewards desirable behavior.

Once your firm gets feedback on what to improve, you can act on that knowledge for the betterment of tomorrow. Therefore, it is paramount to be deliberate about which gauges to build into surveys. For example, if you measure responsiveness, and clients consistently report it is low, management should put mechanisms in place to improve this attribute. Otherwise, why bother asking?

If you don't want to be held accountable for any specific measures, you shouldn't include those in your surveys. However, what's absent in surveys tells just as much as what's present. From the client perspective, it's a reflection of your priorities — especially since other firms are administering surveys as well.

For example, any client will be more frustrated with your firm for knowing about an issue and not doing anything about it, compared to just having that same issue. In that sense, it may seem unwise to ask. However, if you don't ask the client what matters to them while competitors do, that is strong enough evidence you don't really care to know.

The same principle applies to professionals, of course. If no one consistently monitors my (e.g.) productivity, I have no reason to believe it's important for the firm.

If your law firm or practice group seeks competitive advantage, by definition, your surveys should be customized to reinforce your business strategy. Off-the-shelf surveys can do more harm than good, unless they somehow miraculously match your business strategy. There is really no point in measuring — thus signaling strategic prioritization of — (e.g.) teamwork if your firm intentionally rewards individualism. Opposite directions create confusion, which leads to absence of results.

Iterative Three-step Process

Designing and administering client surveys is a first step in a three-step looped process. The second step is about ensuring management actually wants to be informed about whatever concerns, complaints, desires and needs clients may have. Understanding management's reaction and gauging their willingness to learn about their own and firm's shortcomings will inform which questions to include in the next survey iterations.

Unfortunately, executive leadership often knows what needs measuring, but prefer to avoid asking clients about it because learning the truth may prove to be very uncomfortable. Oftentimes, status quo is cherished more than a reality check.

The third step is an actual commitment to making hard choices and following through with any decisions. Behavioral change is a prerequisite for any successful client feedback program.

Willingness to know what's not working (and what is), learning from mistakes (and successes) and then actually doing something about it, which requires change in (one’s own) behavior, is a painstaking, tedious and uncomfortable process. Yet, precisely because of that, it's the best way to establish a formidable competitive advantage.

Conclusions

No single client feedback instrument should be considered exhaustive. At minimum, one of each type (Think, Say, Act) is required. For accuracy, any one question pertaining each TSA category must be triangulated with other two categories. Such triangulation must be carefully formulated to minimize confirmation bias. Therefore, it is beneficial to design your own client feedback mechanisms rather than rely on mass-market instruments.

When asked, almost every professional will confirm that client feedback is important and valuable. However, the challenge most firms struggle with rests with acting in a disciplined manner, which requires certain degree of prioritization of competing activities. Hence, inevitable sacrifice of short-term benefits in favor of long-term success.

One of the various paths of getting around this conundrum is having professionals formulate questionnaire items themselves. Tapping into their intrinsic need for autonomy, professionals will be more likely to commit to self-imposed, voluntarily accepted measures.

Learn More About Client Services with the Third Edition of the LMA Body of Knowledge The content in this feature correlates with the Client Services domain in the LMA Body of Knowledge (BoK). Dive deeper and access the latest edition of the BoK online. The Third Edition of the LMA BoK showcases enhanced expertise across every domain, introduces new competencies in Client Services, Communications and Technology Management, features more advanced skills across all domains and broadens coverage of competitive and business intelligence skills. Plus, it emphasizes a stronger commitment to nurturing diversity, equity, and inclusion across the entirety of the BoK. Learn more.