« Sander (1) - Introduction | Main | Are Black/White Disparities in Graduation and the Bar Getting Better, or Worse? - Sander 2 »

18 September 2006

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451b58069e200d834ea18f469e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Satisfied and Unsatisfied Clients:

Comments

William Henderson

Confused,

You need to reflect on the probabilities here: What is the likelihood that dissatified client experienced two or more of the above seven lapses in service versus the same likelihood for satisfied clients?

I have not done the math, but the probability gap is surely staggering. Note that the inability of a nonlawyer to detect the lack of analytical competent is the primary justification for the bar exam. Nonlawyer clients (cf. CLO at a fortune 500 company) don't know lawyerly competent but they do know when they are being ignored or neglected.

So in the same volume Foonberg provides this addition data:

Why do clients leave? According to one national survey (Foonberg, p 233):

1% die

3% move

5% dislike the produce [lack of analytical ability?]

24% have some dispute that does not get adjusted

67% leave because they feel they were treated discourteously, indifferently, or simply not given good service

You don't need Clarence Darrow to devise your will, probate your estate, or litigate your divorce. But it helps if the lawyer is empathetic, honest, and responsive.

Confused

Thanks for the response.

So then the numbers indicate "yes" responses to the positive quality listed? If that's the case, then it seems a significant number of dissatisfed clients felt that their lawyers possessed the above qualities. Although that wouldn't rule out an argument that such qualities were necessary, but not sufficient, for client satisfaction, it certainly seems to cut against the argument that these qualities are what really determines client satisfaction.

It would be useful to see how many satisfied clients felt that their lawyers were great guys but lacked analytical ability. Without that information, I don't see how the above table supports the argument that success in the legal profession is *not* primarily a function of analytical ability.

Confused

Thanks for the response.

So then the numbers indicate "yes" responses to the positive quality listed? If that's the case, then it seems a significant number of dissatisfed clients felt that their lawyers possessed the above qualities. Although that wouldn't rule out an argument that such qualities were necessary, but not sufficient, for client satisfaction, it certainly seems to cut against the argument that these qualities are what really determines client satisfaction.

It would be useful to see how many satisfied clients felt that their lawyers were great guys but lacked analytical ability. Without that information, I don't see how the above table supports the argument that success in the legal profession is *not* primarily a function of analytical ability.

William Henderson

Good question. Judging from context in which Jay discusses these results, it looks like a survey of clients who have hired lawyers; those who were satisfied answered yes to the questions above, those who were dissatisfied answer no. Jay's inference is that these attributes were integral to client satisfaction. And that sounds convincing to me.

Confused

What do the numbers in the table refer to? It's not intuitive...

The comments to this entry are closed.

Conferences

October 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  

Site Meter


Creative Commons License


  • Creative Commons License
Blog powered by Typepad