Can Pa. Law Firms Start to Close Revolving CMO Door?

, The Legal Intelligencer

   | 1 Comments

Filling and keeping filled the chief marketing officer position within Pennsylvania's law firms has often been a struggle.

This article has been archived, and is no longer available on this website.

View this content exclusively through LexisNexis® Here

Not a LexisNexis® Subscriber?

Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via lexis.com® and Nexis®. This includes content from The National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at customercare@alm.com

What's being said

  • Mike O‘Horo

    The executive committee, or whomever will make the final decision on a CMO or BDO hire, should first be tasked to think through and create the person‘s annual review criteria, and define what specific accomplishments would constitute "exemplary-", "better-than-average-", and "merely acceptable" performance. Once you‘ve established objective success criteria, you can engineer backward from there to define the skills and capabilities necessary to be exemplary. Next, you define what might constitute reliable evidence that the person has has those skills and capabilities. This becomes your search consultant‘s recruiting guidelines, and your interview guidelines. Next, fix the interview process. Don‘t merely schedule interviews with any partner who wants to get in on the act. Have a purpose to each interview, and a concrete reason for including each interviewer. For example, certain partners or firm executives should be assigned to skill/capability validation; others to culture fit, etc., instead of having everyone try to assess all factors. Each interviewer should have to submit a written interview plan explaining what the interview is supposed to ascertain and accomplish, and how. If a partner won‘t take the time to think through and prepare the interview, a good candidate will recognize that and correctly conclude that this position isn‘t important. Now, you can assemble a rational interview scheme and avoid redundant, repetitive interviews that tell the candidate that your firm doesn‘t have its act together. I would encourage the firm to prepare a project or other "tryout" assignment that validates the claimed skills and emulates some key component of the job responsibilities. Someone can either perform or not. This avoids false positives or negatives based on the person‘s relative ability to interview. Do you want to hire a good interviewee, or an executive who can get the job done?

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article# 1202656683338

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.