Client alerts and legal updates are among the most common things law firms publish, and among the least read. The reason is simple: most of them restate the judgment, circular or notification that the client could read for themselves, often on the same day from ten other firms.
That does not mean firms should stop publishing. It means they should publish differently.
The update
An update tells the reader what happened. It is accurate, fast and forgettable. It typically opens with the date and title of the instrument, summarises its provisions in order, and ends with an offer to discuss. It demonstrates that the firm is paying attention, which has some value, but it rarely changes what the reader thinks or does.
The insight
An insight tells the reader what the change means for them and what to do next. It takes a position, names who is affected and how, and gives at least one practical step. That is the version a general counsel forwards to their chief financial officer, and the version that makes them think of the firm when the issue becomes urgent.
Insights are harder to write because they require judgment. They also require the firm to be willing to say something specific, which some lawyers find uncomfortable. But specificity is exactly what makes them valuable.
A test for every piece
- Does the first paragraph say who should care and why? If a reader has to get to the fourth paragraph to find out whether it applies to them, most will not.
- Is there at least one practical recommendation? Something the reader can do this week.
- Could only your team have written it? Because of your experience in the forum, the sector or the kind of matter.
- Is it short enough to read on a phone? Most are read between meetings.
- Does the title promise something useful? "What the new rules mean for your board" beats "Notification dated 14 March".
Beyond alerts
The same principle applies to longer thought leadership: articles, reports and lectures. The pieces that build reputations are those that help readers understand something they could not easily work out themselves, whether a trend across many judgments, a comparison between jurisdictions or the practical experience of how a new process actually works.
Within the Rules
Thought leadership is one of the safest ways for advocates to build a reputation under Rule 36, as long as it stays on the side of information. Commentary on law, policy and judgments the author was not involved in is appropriate. Discussing one's own matters, results or clients is not.
Publish less, think more
Many firms feel pressure to publish constantly. In practice, one genuinely useful piece a month outperforms four routine updates, because readers learn which firms are worth opening. Clients remember the firm that helped them decide, not the firm that emailed first.
For CA and CS firms
Budget notes and circular summaries are where CA and CS firms most often send updates when clients want insight. Every firm reports that a rate changed. The note clients keep explains what it means for a manufacturer, a startup or a listed company, and what to do before the next deadline.