So, I thought I'd dig in a little deeper to internal search.
To start measuring internal search, you need an internal search engine. If your site has one, then read on. If not, consider the following excerpt from the article Internal Site Search Analysis: Simple, Effective, Life Altering! from A List Apart:
No matter how modest your site, internal search should be in place as an alternative navigation method for users. So, if you don't already have internal search, go get it.Now when people show up at a website, many of them ignore our lovingly crafted navigational elements and jump to the site search box. The increased use of site search as a core navigation method makes it very important to understand the data that site search generates.
For those with internal search in place, let's roll up our sleeves and start tracking it with Google Analytics.
The first step is to recognize how your site interacts with your internal search engine. You do this by performing a search and then examining the resulting Web address. To illustrate this, go to Google and search for Association Forum. Google presents a results page.Or does the search result in no choices? There is great value here as well. Besides providing the opportunity to create a new page or redirect the search result, a no-option search also uncovers some subtle issues. Sometimes users misspel common words or transpoes certain letters. In these cases, you can anticipate these mistakes and direct users to the appropriate page.
The A List Apart article goes into great detail on internal search analysis using Google Analytics. I highly recommend a careful read through before your next internal search analysis.
Confusion or even anxiety can be provoked when clients learn that their lawyer is leaving their law firm. While there are a number of reasons why this may have occurred, a big reason among medium- to large-sized or niche firms is a result of “conflicts.”
To the average person, “conflicts” sounds like disagreements among attorney. However, it usually has to do with the firm’s clients. Each time a lawyer wants to add a client to the firm’s roster, it reviews its client list and determines whether there is a conflict of interest between the existing clients’ interests and the potential client.
If there is a conflict, the lawyer may request the existing client sign a waiver. The client has the right to agree to the waiver or not. If they do, in certain instances, the firm may be obligated to set up “a screen” or fire wall between the two groups working on each client’s behalf.
As lawyers become more knowledgeable and specialized in a particular topic area, the greater the likelihood there will be conflicts that some clients won’t be willing to waive. Sometimes the decision to sign a waiver or not relates to public perception. For example, a non-smoking coalition may not want to be on the same client list as a tobacco manufacturer, regardless of the anticipated legal work. Conflicts in firms are inevitable. Usually, they are amicably worked out among the parties involved. Over time, the lawyer may decide that in order for his or her law practice to grow, s/he needs to be in firm with less client conflicts.
If the lawyer does leave the firm, clients must actively select to go with the lawyer. Otherwise, the firm assigns a new attorney to the client's work. In order to go with the departing attorney, the client writes a letter to the existing firm stating its decision and requesting delivery of their files to the new lawyer within a certain timeframe.
As always, if you have questions, talk to your lawyer about it.
In my recent article, "Demystifying Lawyers and Law Firms" published in the Forum (Sept 2009), I describe the inside workings of a typical law firm and touch on issues of structure, compensation, billing, roles, and expectation setting. Here are a few additional tips about your role as client:
What tips do you have for working with lawyers or clients?
Click here to access Digital FORUM.
This month features the Chicagoland Entrepreneurial Center (CEC), a nonprofit affiliate of the Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce.
Obviously, the dishonest person that committed the fraud is to blame, right? Of course, but that is only part of it. Many others are responsible in at least some way shape or form. The Board of Directors has a fiduciary responsibility to the organization and is expected to provide oversight and make decisions for the good of the organization. Why didn't they ask more questions when expenses were over budget? Why didn't they ask if the organization has implemented any fraud controls? Did they make it clear to management that fraud was a concern? Management is responsible for monitoring the operations. Are they doing their job properly? Are they taking short cuts? Do they trust a certain long time employee enough not to review their work? The long time trusted employee is often the one that commits the crime because the opportunity is there. In addition, other employees may have suspected that something inappropriate was occurring, but never spoke up or didn't have an outlet. Other employees may not have been doing their job correctly allowing the fraud to occur unnoticed.
Preventing fraud is a process that starts from the top at the board of directors and filters down through the staff of the organization. Just the notion that the organization is aware of fraud and it will not be tolerated is a strong deterrent. It is important that the Board of Directors takes an active role in preventing fraud. This can be done by merely making fraud a priority and declaring a commitment to deter fraud. Hopefully, management will jump on board with the commitment and it will become a concept within the organization.
Talking about saving money within our associations has led me to think (again) about how to save money in my own life. (And of course I plan to spend a majority of that saved money on professional development opportunities to make myself a better, more involved, more committed employee.) Until recently I worked at the Institute of Real Estate Management, for which the Chicago Headquarters is located right next to a kindly Starbucks on Michigan Ave. Now, there are many coffee shops I enjoy, but this Starbucks happened to be the nearest and most convenient, so I ended up going there quite a little bit. And, especially in the summer, I started to notice that the receipts were really adding up. I blame this, of course, on the copious amounts of ice put into iced coffee beverages. Even when you repeatedly ask for "light ice," the result is almost always half a cup (or more) of ice. So you have to drink--and buy--twice as much to be a coffee-motivated, productive worker. Right?
Well, fortunately I found a cost-saving solution to this little problem. I ask for NO ice. Revolutionary thinking, yes? It seems counterintuitive to ask for an "ICED venti NO-ICE green tea latte," but let me tell you, it is possible. You get twice as much of the good stuff and, if you're so fortunate to have an accessible freezer with ice cubes available, you don't even have to sacrifice temperature quality. This is the secret to savings for which we've all been longing.
Association Forum works to advance the professional practice of association management.
Recent Comments