Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered
Couldn’t agree more. Been in-house before. Absolutely couldn't stand it when firms we worked with "invite" (read: harass) us to give good reviews of their work come award season. It is almost as if the handsome rewards we give financially to them is not already enough.
Some of these awards have less credibility than the already-questionable google reviews, where at least those who feel like they got bad service could also give their 2-cents. From my experience, the firms that truly were a pleasure to work with were those who did their work well but quietly. These were sometimes cheaper too as they didn't waste time and money having marketing teams and instead let their work speak for themselves.
|
100000% agree. But broader question. What relevance are such awards for the end user? If you have a litigation matter, it is complicated and you have a lot of funds, you go for an SC and are probably sophisticated enough to know to ignore these. If you have a complex commercial transaction, you again would be sophisticated enough to know who can do a stellar job in those areas and will go to them. In those situations, these awards are unnecessary and a distraction. And the man on the street won't be able to tell the difference from jack and won't be able to understand any of this, nor would they be able to pay any premium even if they wanted to. So apart from being a vanity contest to sate egos as one poster mentioned, how do these awards help any firm in marketing?