Tips for Successful Submissions
There are two main elements to the directories process: completing the submission itself and identifying client referees. For each element, follow the tips below:
Drafting the submission:
Use the submission form provided. Chambers has a “submission template” that can be found on its website. The form asks for a substantial amount of information all of which is most helpful to the researcher. For that reason, try to fill in as much as you possibly can—especially the sections on “what makes your practice different” and “feedback.”
Mindset: When drafting, think about what genuinely sets you apart from the opposition. Avoid brochure-speak and focus on true differentiators such as your niche expertise, unique client base, or impressive market-share. Take a look at the firms you are ranked with—or who you think you should be ranked with—and think about what you can genuinely say about your team they cannot.
Address the reader. Remember who your reader is and write in a way that will be clear and interesting to them. The Chambers researchers are generally graduates with a few years in the workplace; they are not former lawyers and are not even necessarily law graduates, so they will not understand the ins and outs of a property or banking transaction as well as a lawyer with over 10 years of experience. A good rule of thumb is to think more New York Post than New York Times. You need to be clear in your language and ask yourself if someone coming to this matter for the first time will understand what actually happened.
Don’t write War and Peace. Remember that the researcher will have dozens of submissions to look at. You will have their attention at the beginning of the submission and then it will begin to wane. You need to make sure that the researcher will want to keep reading.
Don’t list rankings in other directories. This is a huge no-no. Each directory is extremely proud of its own research methods and believes that they are superior to those of rivals. A researcher prefers to rely on who the lawyer acts for, what they have been doing for those clients, and what the market—especially clients—thinks of them.
Client referees.
Be robust in the selection of client referees. No matter how great you think your practice group is, the researcher will not believe it until he or she hears corroborative positive client feedback. Quality and quantity of client feedback is the single most important factor for achieving a ranking in Chambers. Too often lawyers assume that their clients will be accessible and positive when the client is neither. So when identifying your client referees, think: Will this client take the time out to get back to the researcher or will they be too busy? Who will be more accessible, the General Counsel or the in-house lawyer we interact with on a daily basis? Who is in the best position to comment on my work?
Also, before identifying a client referee, honestly assess your certainty that they will give positive feedback. Deep down, you may fear a negative comment about the depth of your firm’s team, its responsiveness, or any number of issues—and if so, heed those fears. Contrary to what lawyers believe, clients always speak freely when a neutral listener asks for off-the-record feedback.
Ask for the client’s permission before putting them forward as a referee. It is amazing how many people do not do this, despite the fact that it should be a basic courtesy. In requesting client permission, you may find, for instance, that the client is bound by company policy not to respond. More importantly, when prepped, clients are more likely to notice—and respond to—an e-mail from Chambers, improving your chances of success.
Hit the deadline. This is a basic one, and there for your own sanity as much as Chambers’. There may seem to be a long lead-in time between the time of submission and actual research, but Chambers has its own internal processes to follow, including the uploading of client referees. And in the event you think your submission will be late, place a priority on client referees—to a researcher, these can be more important than the submission itself.
Steering the ship home. You should keep an eye on the schedule and touch base with the relevant researcher regarding when they are contacting client referees and whether lawyers need to follow-up with their referees (to ensure they respond to Chambers). It is all well and good to send in the submission and referee spreadsheet, but you have to make sure that you have done all that you can to follow the process through. Please be careful though, although you can give a heads up to the client when Chambers has or is reaching out – do not actively interfere with the process. Some lawyers even draft what the client should say – and are promptly found out by the researcher!
Law firms frequently ask us about a third element of the process: the law firm interview with Chambers. Although the prospect of an interview produces much anxiety at firms, it should not consume your attention in preparing a submission. The fact is, a strong submission and referee feedback can preclude any need for an interview—which is why the current editor of Chambers USA is keen to emphasise that getting an interview should not be taken as an indicator that your firm will or will not be ranked.