change is a result; evolution is the process.
by bruce marcus
professional services marketing 3.0
editor’s note: 卡塔尔世界杯常规比赛时间 was privileged to have a long relationship with bruce w. marcus, who was ahead of his time in his thinking and practice in marketing for accounting. we are publishing some of the late expert’s evergreen work, which retains wisdom for the present.
it’s not difficult to understand, in this economic environment, why the word change looms so large in professional services dialogue. the nature of the professions, rooted as they are in history and tradition, can be fairly rigid, and resistant to innovation. but the times seem to have accelerated the need for new ideas and structures to cope with new economic and social problems and opportunities.
more: why value pricing works | accounting marketing 3.0: new rules | accountants don’t sell soap. | why competition matters most
exclusively for pro members. log in here or 2022世界杯足球排名 today.
the accounting profession, even as we know it today, is practically prehistoric, and is now so bound by traditions, rules, regulations and laws that any suggestion of serious structural change is seen as a virtual assault on the professions. the codification of laws and the legal profession go back about as far, and are just as resistant to innovation. in both cases, the rigidity in the professions is designed to maintain integrity and probity, as well as efficiency in firm governance. if the nature of products allows for constant and rapid change to match changing tastes and fashions, the nature of professional services requires a measure of uniformity and predictability. but now, there are cracks appearing in the wall. the potential for conflict between the ethical rules and their protection of integrity, and the need for successful competitive marketing, can be intense.
still, some things in the professions are different now than they were about a decade ago. we now have, for example, an increasing number of firms replacing hourly billing with value billing. we now have social media and we have technology. law firm governance is beginning to resemble corporate structure, and indeed, there is talk of law firms going public (which i predicted about two decades ago when it became clear that the growth of the professions would require infusion of more capital than could be supplied by the partnership. this is the kind of situation that begins an evolutionary process.) where once associates who seemed not to be partner material were let go, now they are being kept for their specific talents and experience – the so-called two-tier firm.
the accounting profession, recognizing the growth of globalization, is now seriously considering international accounting standards. (i helped run a vast international conference in england on the subject some two decades ago, and wrote a book on it with columbia university’s john burton. and they’re just beginning to act on it?) the changes in professional firm practices seem to be coming fast, and continue to do so, giving rise to professional services marketing 3.0.
and as i’ve noted, the clientele for both professions has changed substantially.
these things didn’t happen by accident, nor by just an inspiration by a few bright lawyers or accountants. they are the result of an evolutionary process – which is change.
what, exactly, is change?
in the context of professional services practice and marketing, change is alteration of a process, practice or condition that varies from the past.
first, for all the talk about change, and all the writing and talking and handwringing about change, it becomes clear that too many professionals see change as an event, finite, an end in itself. in fact, change is not an event that’s arbitrarily made to happen, but a process – the result of which is that something changes. most often, and with rare exceptions, that process leads to an evolution, and sometimes, even revolution (such as professional firm advertising, long forbidden – now common).
second, change is inevitable. it’s going to happen, whether we like it or not. why? because the events that contribute to change are too many to control or resist. they come from too many sources, motivated by too many external and unpredictable factors. we can learn to accommodate to the courses of action that portend change, but we cannot control it. in fact, as state bar and accounting associations are discovering, some change can’t even be impeded by fiat or legislation. they keep trying, though.
third, change, in the professions and in marketing professional services, isn’t often deliberately made – it evolves slowly in response to external stimuli. except for a few visionaries, like ron baker of the verasage institute and an early proponent of value billing, shepherd law group’s jay shepherd, exemplar law partner’s christopher marston, axiom legal’s mark harris and valorem’s patrick lamb, who anticipated the future in areas such as billing structures and firm governance, for most professionals change most often comes in response to changing needs of the marketplace, which demand new practices and new structures to serve those needs. electronic media, for example, wasn’t invented to change the practice of law or accounting – but it served to instigate change in those professions. and not overnight, either. it certainly was a response to the need to compete in an increasingly competitive market. (but that competitive market was virtually created in 1977, with bates. it’s taken all this time for responses in both the professional chambers and in marketing to evolve.) social media began as just that – social. but it evolved into a competitive tool by virtue of its easy ability to communicate to large numbers of people, as well as to individuals, which makes it a natural instrument of change. it was useful because it circumvented the rigors of external control of the message, which happens in the print media, and has a broader and more immediate reach than does the traditional media. opportunity, then, precipitates change. social media, new kid on the block as it was, significantly changed marketing from the seller shouting down to the prospective consumer, to a two-way conversation between the seller and the consumer. the impact of that change is still evolving.
another example of change is value pricing, which has been touted for decades, and is only now emerging as a viable practice. firm governance, and the traditional top-down firm management that’s long been the tradition in professional firms, is slowly, slowly emerging in new forms that better serve a practice’s ability to help clients. the concept of value now becomes a major issue, which undoubtedly will result in further change, as firms struggle to define it. and if you can’t define it, how do you bill for it? client service teams are emerging to replace the eat-what-you-kill culture, in which each individual in a firm is his or her own entrepreneur. on the horizon today is the corporately owned or public professional firm.
i point this out, not to carp, but to wonder, and to consider, how this process can be dealt with competitively, and whether there is an initiative that can be taken to stay ahead of the curve.
there are two main areas in which change is imminent in the professions – firm structures and practices that allow a firm to better serve the needs of its clients, and marketing that’s consistent with the clients’ changing economic environment. both are necessary for competitive reasons, both are imminent in order to keep a firm relevant to the dynamic changes in the world of both commerce and society. (there are, at the same time, many changes that occur daily as a result of new laws and regulations, but these are promulgated in response to external factors that precipitated the new laws, such as sarbanes-oxley.)