Featured · Strategy
Internet marketing for a law firm: what actually produces cases
Internet marketing for a law firm is usually bought one piece at a time. Someone sells the firm a website, then somebody else sells it search, then a third party sells advertising, and within two years the firm is paying five suppliers who have never spoken to one another and cannot say which of them produced last month's instructions.
The pieces are not the problem. The absence of a plan that connects them is. Every channel below works, and every one of them fails when it is bought in isolation from the others.
What internet marketing for a law firm actually consists of
Strip away the vocabulary and there are only five things a firm can do online, and they sit in a definite order. Each one makes the next cheaper, which is why the order matters more than the individual budgets.
The site itself, which every other channel spends money driving people to. A weak site raises the cost of all four of the others simultaneously.
Search, which is the cheapest source of enquiries a firm can build and the slowest to arrive.
Paid advertising, which is the opposite: immediate, controllable, and it stops the day you stop paying.
Content, which is what makes search work at all and what gives the sales conversation something to stand on.
Reputation — reviews, profiles, and what the firm looks like when somebody searches its name — which quietly decides whether any of the other four convert.
Email and social sit underneath these rather than beside them. For most firms they are retention and referral channels, not acquisition channels, and budgeting them as though they will bring in new matters is a reliable way to be disappointed.
The order is not a ranking of importance. It is a dependency chain: advertising into a poor site wastes money, search without content has nothing to rank, and content without a reputation to back it converts badly.
Which is why the first question is never “which channel” but “which link in that chain is currently weakest”.
Where the money usually leaks
The same handful of leaks turn up in almost every firm that feels it is spending a lot online without much to show for it. None of them is exotic and all of them are cheaper to close than to keep funding.
Advertising sent to the home page rather than to a page about the specific problem the searcher typed, so the visitor has to navigate to their own answer and mostly does not.
Enquiries that arrive by telephone and are never recorded anywhere, which makes the best-performing channel look like the worst one in the report.
Content written for volume rather than for intent — long guides on topics that attract readers who will never instruct anybody.
Five suppliers with five reports, none of which reconcile, and no single view of cost per instructed matter.
A follow-up process that ends at the enquiry. A large share of the money firms think they are losing on marketing is actually being lost between the enquiry arriving and somebody responding to it.
Building a plan that produces instructed matters
The plan does not need to be long. It needs to name the matters you want, the searches that precede them, the page that answers each search, and the number that tells you whether it worked.
Start by naming the three matter types you actually want more of, and their value. Everything downstream is chosen against that list.
Work backwards to what somebody with that problem types, and be honest that it is rarely the name of the legal service.
Give each of those searches one page whose only job is to answer it and offer a next step.
Fix the response process before increasing the spend, because faster follow-up is the cheapest improvement available to any firm.
Put paid advertising on the matters worth the most while search on the same terms is still maturing, then taper it as the rankings arrive.
Record every enquiry in one place, including the telephone ones, with the channel attached.
Review quarterly on cost per instructed matter by channel, and move budget on the evidence rather than on the invoice size.
Leave one channel deliberately unfunded each quarter so you can see what it was contributing. Nothing else reveals dependency as quickly.
A firm that does only this — three matter types, the searches that lead to them, one page each, and one honest number at the end — will outperform a firm spending twice as much across five uncoordinated suppliers. The advantage is not in the channels; it is in the fact that somebody is holding them together.
FAQs
What should a law firm spend on internet marketing?
Set the budget from the value of the matters you want rather than from a percentage of turnover. Work out what an instructed matter of each type is worth, decide what you would pay to win one, and let that ceiling govern the spend across every channel.
Should we start with SEO or with paid advertising?
Usually both, with different jobs. Advertising buys enquiries now on your highest-value matters while search is still maturing; search lowers your cost per enquiry over the following year. Starting with search alone means a long quiet period, and starting with ads alone means never getting cheaper.
Do law firms need social media?
For most firms it is a referral and recruitment channel rather than a source of instructions, and it should be resourced accordingly. The exception is practice areas where clients research publicly and at length before they choose anyone.
How do we know which channel produced a matter?
Record every enquiry in one place with its source attached, and make sure telephone enquiries are captured too. Without that, the channels that generate calls appear to produce nothing and get cut first, which is the most common self-inflicted wound in legal marketing.
How many suppliers should a firm use?
Fewer than most firms end up with. What matters is not the count but whether someone is accountable for the whole chain — if no single person can explain how the site, the search, the ads and the follow-up fit together, that is the gap to close first.
End Note
Most firms do not have an internet marketing problem. They have five suppliers, four reports and no one holding the chain together, which produces all the same symptoms and costs considerably more.
Name the matters you want, find the searches that precede them, answer each one properly, and count what arrives. Everything else in this guide is detail hanging off those four steps.
Key Takeaways
Five channels, one dependency chain — the site first, reputation underneath everything.
Advertising sent to a home page instead of an answer page is the commonest leak.
Unrecorded phone enquiries make your best channel look like your worst.
Name three matter types, then work backwards to the searches that precede them.
Review on cost per instructed matter, not on traffic or invoice size.
