If you own or market a personal injury law firm, this question should guide every marketing decision you make.

Ideally, it's based on actual data.

How have your past clients found you?

What do you know about their journeys?

Unfortunately, many law firms don't do a great job at collecting this data.

If you don't have actual data, you might turn to research.

As part of our legal research program partnership with Near Media, we conduct behavioral research.

Put simply, research participants are presented the following:

A close family member who lives nearby has been seriously injured in an accident where someone else was at fault. Thankfully, they're expected to make a full recovery, but their medical team thinks it will take at least six months. They're overwhelmed and have asked you to help them explore their legal options against the person at fault for the accident.

On the next screen, you'll go to Google to find someone that you can speak with about your family member's situation.

They are asked to "think out loud" and indicate which lawyer or law firm they'd contact first.

If you follow me on various social platforms, you've probably heard me talking about this a lot (particularly on LinkedIn).

This research informs many of our strategic decisions.

It also reveals that much of the conventional wisdom about how people find and choose lawyers is, candidly, wrong.

Even firms that consider themselves "data-informed" are being seriously misled by incomplete pictures of client journeys.

This is particularly true for firms that mostly rely on last-click attribution data.

Too often, they're being misled about the impact of their brand on client acqusition.

For example, in many of the user behavior recordings that I've watched personally, what started as a non-brand search, became a brand choice. In other words, users started with a "car accident lawyer near me" type search but chose a law firm because they were already familiar with that firm.

Because of this misunderstanding, firms often make the decision to shift more resources to non-brand marketing and advertising campaigns and less to brand building and reputation campaigns.

This drives down conversion rates and drives up the costs to acquire new client.

In fact, it often completely eliminates the firm from consideration.

I recently had the privilege of presenting at Great Legal Marketing's Digital Marketing Bootcamp. My talk was titled:

Why Omni-channel Marketing Eats Single-Channel Direct Response Lunch.

Side note, if you haven't been to Ben Glass Law's office, you really should make an excuse to go see it. Ben and Brian have built a remarkable physical event space there and they generously invite local organizations to use it, for free!

If you're interested in the deck, feel free to contact us and we'll get it to you.

If you don't have the time to review the whole deck, I'll share a couple key takeaways here.

First, your attribution system is probably misleading you. If you're solely relying on your marketing agency's last-click attribution data, you're flying blind. But it's even worse. Your agency may be using that data to justify rising cost-per-client investments in non-brand direct response advertising and marketing.

Second, even if you have significant visibility in non-brand search engine results, without familiarity and reputation, you're much less likely to be chosen. Familiarity breeds liking. Familiarity with reputation drives choices. I can't tell you how many user journeys reflected this. Firms that users recognized and had great reputations were the firms that were selected.

Third, users use Google as a research surface, not just as a directory. Most law firm owners and marketers we talk to think that most people follow this journey:

Non-brand "lawyer lookup" search query -> Click or Call -> Hire

And make no mistake, some people do follow this path.

But many follow a much more meandering path filled with query refinements and multiple touch-points.

Honestly, you'd have to see some of these journeys to believe them (and you can if you subscribe to the program).

What becomes absolutely clear is that if you're overly relying on non-brand direct response advertising, you're missing out on a lot of opportunity. You're also very vulnerable to a variety of factors that are driving up your cost per client. It's an expensive mistake.

You see, when someone is already familiar with your firm when they start their journey, you already have a massive advantage over firms that aren't familiar. That advantage directly translates to much higher conversion rates. And this difference drastically impacts your cost to acquire clients, even in the non-brand search context.

The day after I presented at GLM, I attended Vista Consulting's A Seat at the Table event. The purpose of this event was to educate law firms about managed services organizations (MSOs). What does this have to do with how people find and hire lawyers? A lot.

In short, private equity firms are investing in MSOs that handle the marketing for law firms. This means that massive amounts of capital are pouring into lawyer advertising. This includes both offline media and digital media purchases.

These are sophisticated finance and business folks.

They know the value of brand, familiarity, and reputation.

And they're investing heavily into it.

In my view, local law firms that wish to compete in this climate need rethink their marketing resource allocation. More specifically, local law firms need to switch from single channel direct response to omni-channel marketing.

But "omni-channel" doesn't have to mean "be everywhere."

To us, it means implementing attribution systems that provide a more holistic view of client journeys.

It means diversifying marketing and advertising campaigns across many channels and media.

It means delivering messaging that means potential clients are relevant stages of their journeys.

By creating compounding marketing assets, the marginal cost of the next prospect drops over time.

Instead of optimizing to cost per leads, law firms are able to optimize for best experience which leads to dramatically improved conversion.

Brand trust is pre-built and post-case experiences are part of the system. Therefore, referrals compound. Put simply, the math works out much better in the firm's favor.

If you want to compete in the increasingly competitive and saturated world of personal injury marketing, I encourage you to explore optimizing for most signed cases and conversion rates.

In my opinion, this is the most defensible marketing position.

Trust is future-proof.

Here's a recent Google SERP for "𝘄𝗵𝗼 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗯𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗰𝗮𝗿 𝗮𝗰𝗰𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗹𝗮𝘄𝘆𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗶𝗻 𝗽𝗵𝗶𝗹𝗮𝗱𝗲𝗹𝗽𝗵𝗶𝗮."

Ads? ❌
LSAs? ❌
Local Pack? ❌
Links? ❌

🔷 AI Overview? ✅

6 firms listed.

Only one tiny 🔗.

Click the 𝗦𝗵𝗼𝘄 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲 button?

𝗬𝗼𝘂 𝗴𝗲𝘁:

Here's a more detailed look at some of these firms:

THE PEARCE LAW FIRM, P.C.
Edith Pearce, the founder, has extensive experience in car accident law and has secured multi-million dollar settlements. 🔗

The Levin Firm:
This firm offers personalized attention and aggressive representation, with lawyers handling cases personally from start to finish. 🔗

Rosen Justice
This firm is known for its dedication and experience.

van der Veen, Hartshorn, Levin & Lindheim:
This firm is recognized for its strong reputation and success in car accident cases.

Ciccarelli Law Offices:
With over 20 years of experience, they have a proven track record of helping clients win their cases.

Anapol Weiss:
This firm offers support and guidance to clients, focusing on maximizing compensation and recovery.

𝗕𝘂𝘁 𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲'𝘀 𝗮 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴…

The firms link to, get this, a new search on the firm's name!

So, clicking on one of the firms from the 𝗡𝗢𝗡-𝗕𝗥𝗔𝗡𝗗 search generates a new 𝗕𝗥𝗔𝗡𝗗 impression for the firm.

Assuming the user clicks from the brand SERP, a new 𝗕𝗥𝗔𝗡𝗗 click.

Assuming the user calls, a new 𝗕𝗥𝗔𝗡𝗗 call.

Assuming the user hires a new 𝗕𝗥𝗔𝗡𝗗 client.

So, even with a more sophisticated data infrastructure, this will cause overreporting on brand and underreporting on non-brand.

In other words, it will make it look like more people are searching on brand than are, and fewer people searching on non-brand than actually are. Even though non-brand impressions may not be impacted, clicks, calls, and clients will be.

A data-informed firm might deploy more budget to the brand and less to non-brand.

Don't get me wrong; statistically speaking, most firms would benefit from more investment in demand generation.

However, they're being misled about actual brand demand.

I'd be very cautious about making significant resource adjustments as we navigate this massive flux and disruption in SERPs.

All the more reason for better data infrastructure and attribution systems.

It's a massive competitive advantage to those who have invested in their data.

On April 22, 2025, Google sent an email updating Local Services Ads Additional Terms for Providers:

Subject: Action required: important updates to Local Service Ads Additional Terms

Many people are arguing that lawyers cannot participate in Local Services Ads, as this would constitute a per se violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct related to Confidentiality.

Here are a few thoughts.

First, I'm not a legal ethics expert. You should review your own RPCs and discuss these issues with your Bar and folks who provide ethics counsel for a living.

Second, since there are variations in the rules by jurisdiction, I'm going to focus on the ABA's Model Rule 1.6: Confidentiality of Information, which says in relevant part:

(c)  A lawyer shall make reasonable efforts to prevent the inadvertent or unauthorized disclosure of, or unauthorized access to, information relating to the representation of a client.

Of particular concern is Google's proposed language:

New provisions allowing Google to select, modify, display, and use rich content (including but not limited to photos, provider bios, service descriptions, special offers, pricing information and discounts) from:

(a)your phone call and message conversations with Local Services end users that are routed through Google; and any web URLs or destinations you identify or share in your Local Services Ads account.

Not cool.

Are they saying they plan to use call and message conversations to display content?

Seems problematic.

Somewhat interestingly, at the time of writing, "display" does not appear in any of their linked terms.

Here's what the (current) linked Local Services Additional Terms for Providers (United States) say:

Access to Data in the Service. You authorize Google, its affiliates, and their agents to access, monitor, and record telephone calls, text messages, live chat, and other communications initiated through the Programs (e.g., click-to-call ads). You also will obtain the necessary permissions required under local law and will notify your Team that these communications may be recorded and will obtain their consent to the recordings. Google may use information collected under this paragraph in compliance with its Privacy Policy and as Content under Section 3 above.

Of course, Google could change this at any time.

Nonetheless, the confidentiality question hinges on the concept of reasonableness.

Is it reasonable for a lawyer to conclude that Google won't inadvertently disclose client confidences?

Great question.

I think this reasonableness standard is undergoing a massive evolution.

I recall when lawyers considered it unreasonable to use the cloud.

That didn't age well.

The cloud protects client confidences much better than lawyers talking on their phones in public places.

There are legitimate reasons to be skeptical of Google.

But there are also legitimate reasons to believe that Google will do everything in its power to ensure that lawyers can still spend money on advertising there.

If you're in the, "this is unethical camp," check out Carolyn Elefant's Can Lawyers Legally and Ethically Record Conversations With Clients Using Artificial Intelligence?

As Carolyn notes concerning Fireflies.AI:

Overall, the Fireflies.AIi terms and policies offer sufficient protection for most routine client communications.  That said, mileage may vary depending upon the nature of a given matter and degree of sensitivity of the information so be sure to consider your unique use case in evaluating whether to transcribe client conversations with AI and what tools to choose.

This is a sound perspective.

I sense that many of you're already using these tools without having reviewed their terms and policies or given much thought to whether they're reasonable in light of the nature of the matter.

But that's just a hunch.

In any case, most technology is moving towards AI.

And it will use your data to train.

You can certainly opt out.

But you're likely to be at a massive competitive disadvantage.

🍿

Conrad and I recently joined Zack at Lawyerist to record a conversation about AI and marketing.

You might think that we spend the whole time on how lawyers can use AI to publish content.

You'd be wrong.

While AI can certainly support publishing, there are many more interesting ways to use it in legal marketing.

The most exciting aspect is the ability to "talk" to your firm's marketing and client data.

A lot has to happen to get this work reliably.

But once you do, your head will explode.

You'll get insights about your audience and how to better appeal to them that you, quite frankly, are unlikely to come up with as a mere human.

Skeptical? So was I.

Until I started using it on our marketing data.

While some of my notions about what matters most to our clients were validated, there were many others that I hadn't considered, even after doing this for almost twenty years.

But don't take my word for it. Ask anyone who has started down this path.

Talk to legal tech vendors who are deploying this technology.

Talk to their users.

Talk to sophisticated firms that don't compete with you.

We believe our ability to use research, data, and artificial intelligence to support our clients' growth objectives will set us apart from our competitors in the future.

As more legal services consumers turn to ChatGPT for local law firm recommendations, a fascinating intersection between AI, search, and maps unfolds. While Google remains the undisputed leader in local business data, ChatGPT is increasingly becoming an entry point for searchers seeking legal representation.

But here’s the kicker: instead of keeping users within its ecosystem, ChatGPT often directs them back to Google Maps, Apple Maps, and traditional search results. This shift raises critical questions about attribution—how do we measure and understand how these clients find their way to law firms?

The Attribution Black Hole

In this evolving landscape, the traditional models of attribution, last-click, first-touch, and multi-touch start to break down. When a legal services consumer asks ChatGPT, “Who are the best car accident lawyers near me?” They receive a curated list, often pulled from Google and Apple Maps. Clicking a link from ChatGPT sends them back to Google Maps, where they might click to call, visit a website, or get directions.

Now, when that client eventually retains an attorney and is asked, “How did you find us?” what’s their response likely to be?

• Google? Because that was the last app they used.
• Search? Because that’s how they conceptualize looking for a lawyer.
• Online? Because the journey was fragmented.

What’s unlikely? “I asked ChatGPT.” Therein lies the problem. AI-driven consumer touchpoints become invisible in traditional reporting structures without quantitative tracking mechanisms.

The Challenge for Legal Marketers

For firms investing in local SEO, Google Business Profile (GBP), and Local Services Ads (LSAs), this new pathway complicates attribution models:

• Local SEO practitioners might claim credit for traffic originating from ChatGPT but landing on Google Maps.
• Self-reported attribution is more unreliable than ever, as searchers don’t consciously recognize AI’s role in their journey.

This AI-driven funnel remains difficult to parse even with call tracking and UTM parameters.

The Way Forward: AI-Aware Attribution

Legal marketers need to evolve their approach to attribution by:

1. Leveraging AI-specific touchpoints: Encouraging direct engagement with AI channels by tracking referrals from OpenAI’s ecosystem (when available).
2. Enhancing First-Party Data: Asking better intake questions like, “Did you use an AI assistant, search engine, or a maps app to find us?” instead of, “How did you hear about us?”
3. Experimenting with ChatGPT Plugins: As OpenAI expands integrations, legal marketers should explore ways to connect directly with AI-driven search paths.
4. Shifting to Incremental Lift Measurement – Comparing overall traffic trends before and after investing in AI-focused optimizations.

The Bottom Line

ChatGPT is reshaping legal consumer journeys, but its role is mainly invisible in current attribution models. Law firm marketers must rethink how we capture and measure AI-driven referrals to avoid misattributing conversions. The firms that adapt will gain a more transparent, more accurate view of how potential clients find them in an AI-first world.

P.S. I'm publishing more AttorneySync content over on Reddit.

When law firms contact us, they usually want to talk:

• PPC Ads

• SEO Rankings

• Lead Generation

Very few want to talk:

• Brand

• Trust & Recognition

• Emotional Connection

Admittedly, much of this concerns that AttorneySync is known for lead generation across those common digital channels.

But even when we start the conversation about brand, many firm owners and marketers don't want to invest in it.

"It takes too long."

"It's not trackable."

"We've got that covered."

Whatever the reason, more firms would benefit from investing in brand building.

You see, brand amplifies every other marketing effort.

It makes your PPC ads cheaper, your SEO more effective, and your conversion rates higher. People trust what they recognize, and if your law firm has a distinctive, memorable brand, every marketing channel performs better.

And Investing in Brand Isn’t Just a Vanity Project.

It’s not just logos and taglines.

It’s about being the firm people remember when they need help.

It’s not just about TV ads or billboards.

It’s about creating a presence that makes people search for your firm rather than just “car accident lawyer near me.”

It’s not just about awareness.

It’s about preference and affinity. Like and trust.

So Don’t Starve Your Brand While Feeding Your Lead Gen.

How many clients never contact you because you’re indistinguishable from the competition?

Brand is the foundation. Invest in it, and watch everything else improve.

How Law Firms Can Invest in Brand (and Measure Its Impact)

A strong brand makes every marketing campaign more effective, but building one requires intentional investment in the right areas. Here’s how law firms can actively develop their brand and determine whether those efforts are paying off.

Define a Clear, Differentiated Brand Identity

Craft a Strong Brand Message

What are you into? What do you stand for? What’s your unique value proposition?

Create a Brand Voice & Story

Are you authoritative, educational, empathetic, or aggressive? Your tone should be consistent across ads, website copy, and client interactions.

Build Brand Affinity Across Multiple Channels

Invest in Video Marketing & Advertising

Ads on TV, YouTube, and social media can make your firm recognizable. But the key is creativity. If your ads look like everyone else's, they won't work.

Stand out.

Use Social Media to Reinforce Brand

Organic and paid posts that share client success stories, firm culture, and legal insights help build long-term trust. Let them see who you are and why you do what you do. Why is choosing you better than the thousands of other lawyers in your community?

Leverage Local Sponsorships & Community Engagement

Sponsoring local events, charities, and sports teams puts your name in front of potential clients in a positive, non-advertising way. Don't just put your name there. Show up, give your time, and participate.

Anyone can write a check.

Dominate Local Search & Word-of-Mouth Channels

Optimize for Branded Searches

The goal isn’t just to be the “car accident lawyer near me.”

It's to be the lawyer they're searching for.

Encourage Reviews & Testimonials

Are you delivering "testimonial-worthy" experiences?

If not, fix that first.

Make it easy for people to sing your praises.

Listen for the opportunities to ask.

When a client says, "Thank you so much. You changed my life. What can I ever do to thank you?"

That's a great time to request that they:

• Leave a review on your Google Business Profile.
• Record a video testimonial.
• Recommend you to their social networks.

How Law Firms Can Measure Whether Brand Investments Are Paying Off

Track Branded Search Volume & Direct Traffic

Are more people searching for “Smith Law Firm” instead of just “personal injury lawyer”?

Direct traffic (people typing in your URL) is a strong brand signal.

Measure Ad Efficiency & Lower Cost Per Lead

Branded PPC Ads Have Lower CPC and CPA Costs

If clients already recognize your name, they’re more likely to click and convert, reducing cost per click (CPC) and cost per lead (CPL).

Visitors who land on your site after searching for your brand will convert much more efficiently than those from generic searches.

Monitor Reputation & Awareness Metrics

Review Volume & Sentiment

A growing brand should see more positive reviews and mentions.

Surveys & Social Listening

Use tools like Surveys or Feedback to gauge brand recognition.

Brand Compounds Over Time

Unlike PPC, which stops working when you stop paying, brand investments pay dividends for years. The firms that dominate their markets build their brands first, and as a result, their other marketing efforts become exponentially more effective.

The best time to invest in brand was 10 years ago. The second-best time is today.

According to an October 2024 study by SE Ranking:

"The legal niche triggers the highest percentage of AIOs (77.67%).

The average number of links matched between the AI Overview resources and the top 20 search results was 6.49 for legal topics.

AI Overviews for legal topics most frequently link to NYCourts.gov (114 links), YouTube.com (48 links), and FindLaw.com (46 links)."

As Google continues integrating AI Overviews (AIOs) into search results, law firms should research how these AI-generated summaries impact visibility, traffic, and client acquisition. Here’s what you need to know from my perspective.

How AI Overviews Affect Law Firm Websites

AI Overviews appear when Google’s AI systems determine that a generative response would be beneficial—often when users search for broad legal topics or need quick explanations from various sources, including web pages and Google’s Knowledge Graph.

While law firms do not necessarily need to do anything to appear in AIOs, optimizing for AI-driven search experiences will likely improve organic visibility and ensure your firm remains a trusted source for potential clients.

How to Improve Your Law Firm Website's AI Overview Visibility

AI Overviews pull from high-quality, authoritative sources that best support the AI-generated response. To maximize your firm’s chances of being referenced:

Create Clear, Concise, and Well-Structured Legal Content – AI models favor direct answers to common legal questions, making FAQ sections, how-to guides, and case explanations more likely to be sourced.

Follow Google’s E-E-A-T Guidelines (Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness, Trustworthiness) – Ensure your attorney bios, case studies, and legal content highlight your firm’s credibility.

Use Structured Data (Schema Markup) – Implement schema for legal services, FAQs, and reviews to help Google’s AI better understand and surface your content.

Optimize for Local & Branded Search – AI Overviews often surface local business results, so fully optimize your Google Business Profile and ensure your NAP (Name, Address, and Phone Number) is consistent across directories.

Monitor Performance in Google Search Console – AI Overviews can impact your firm’s total Search impressions, clicks, and rankings in Search Console. Regularly track changes and adapt accordingly.

Why AI Overviews Matter for Law Firm SEO

AI Overviews are reshaping the search landscape by offering direct, AI-curated answers to users—potentially reducing the need for users to click through to websites. Law firms that optimize content for AI-generated search results will have a competitive advantage in local and organic visibility.

As AIOs evolve, legal SEO strategies must adapt. Now is the time to ensure your firm’s website is AI-friendly, authoritative, and strategically structured for maximum exposure.

By understanding how AIOs work, most commonly linked sites, and how users interact with search results, savvy law firms are already gaining visibility against traditional SEO juggernauts.

I'm grateful for my friend, Charley Mann of Law firm Alchemy. If you're a lawyer, subscribe to his Free Email List.

In a recent email, Charley calls out bad guru advice on hiring:

This resonates.

Lawyers regularly contact us asking for "SEO."

It usually sounds something like this:

How fast can you get me to rank for [insert X keywords]?

The moment we try to educate them as to why this isn't a great question?

On to the next firm that will guarantee rankings (good luck).

You can't hire for what you don't understand.

Technically, you can. But it won't go well.

We spend a lot of time educating lawyers on the role SEO plays in legal marketing.

Why?

Because we believe they shouldn't hire us unless they understand.

That doesn't mean they need to understand all of the nuances and technical aspects of SEO.

But they do need some basic understanding of the fundamentals.

Most importantly, they need to understand how to measure success and hold SEO accountable for business results.

They need to understand how to connect organic traffic to qualified consultations and open cases.

They need to understand their non-brand organic cost-per-client.

They need to understand how to segment brand from non-brand traffic.

They need to understand how to do multi-touch attribution modeling.

They need to understand how to segment Google Business Profile qualified calls and consultations.

You can't effectively hire for what you don't understand.

Maybe you CAN hire for what you don't understand.

But you won't be making an informed hiring decision.

And an uninformed hiring decision will cost you a lot more...

If you’ve spent any time on LinkedIn, you’ve likely seen posts from law firm SEO experts showing off charts with an “up and to the right” trajectory.

These screenshots, often pulled from tools like Semrush or Ahrefs, are meant to signal SEO success.

And it’s not just the agencies celebrating—𝗹𝗮𝘄 𝗳𝗶𝗿𝗺𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗵𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝗵𝗶𝗿𝗲𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗺 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝘂𝗱𝗹𝘆 𝘀𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘀𝗲 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗿𝘁𝘀 𝗮𝘀 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗼𝗳 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗶𝗿 𝗺𝗮𝗿𝗸𝗲𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘄𝗶𝗻𝘀.

🫣

But here’s the reality: 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘀𝗲 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗿𝘁𝘀 𝗼𝗳𝘁𝗲𝗻 𝗱𝗼𝗻’𝘁 𝗺𝗲𝗮𝗻 𝘄𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗹𝗮𝘄𝘆𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗸 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗺𝗲𝗮𝗻.

𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝗧𝗵𝗲𝘀𝗲 𝗦𝗘𝗢 𝗖𝗵𝗮𝗿𝘁𝘀 𝗔𝗿𝗲 𝗠𝗶𝘀𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴

Unmarked Axes: What Are We Even Looking At?

Many of these charts lack labeled axes, giving us a vague sense that “something” is increasing. Is it impressions? Clicks? A tool’s estimated traffic score? The lack of clarity makes it impossible to tell if there’s any real business impact.

Third-Party Traffic Estimates Are Not Very Accurate

SEMrush, Ahrefs, and other SEO tools use algorithms to estimate traffic based on rankings, search volume, and click-through rates.

These numbers are very loose estimates, especially for smaller sites. Lawyers and SEO experts posting charts showing “10,000 visitors per month” often report much less organic traffic from Google Analytics, Search Console, and other sources.

Not All Traffic Is Created Equal

Even when charts display “organic traffic,” that traffic isn’t necessarily valuable. Is it potential clients searching for legal services? Or is it law students, competitors, or people reading your blog out of curiosity? If the traffic isn’t converting into cases, it’s just a vanity metric.

Failure to Distinguish Between Branded and Non-Branded Traffic

Many of these SEO charts don’t differentiate between people searching for the firm by name (branded traffic) versus those discovering it through non-branded legal queries. If a law firm’s “traffic growth” is mostly from people already searching for their name, that’s not an SEO win—it just means they have a recognizable brand.

I can't tell you how many law firm SEO agencies are "taking credit" for the brand.

𝗘𝘃𝗲𝗻 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝘀𝗲, 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗹𝗮𝘄𝘆𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗰𝗲𝗹𝗲𝗯𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗺.

🙄

The best time to get a second opinion about your SEO agency is when they tell you "𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘆'𝗿𝗲 𝗰𝗿𝘂𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗶𝘁."

Additional SEO Pitfalls Lawyers Should Watch For

Beyond misleading charts, law firms should be cautious about how SEO “success” is measured. Here are a few common issues:

The Wrong Keywords – If an SEO agency brags about ranking #1 for “best car accident lawyer 2024,” but that term gets no search volume, it’s a hollow victory. Rankings only matter if they drive qualified leads.

Blog Content – Many SEO agencies churn out blog posts without a real strategy. You're not getting value if your blog attracts traffic from people researching legal topics but not hiring a lawyer.

Lack of Local SEO Strategy – Many law firm clients come from local searches, yet some agencies focus on broad, national SEO strategies that don’t drive relevant local cases.

Ignoring Conversion Tracking—If your SEO agency isn’t tracking how many visitors turn into calls, form fills, or actual clients, its “success metrics” are meaningless.

What Law Firms Should Measure Instead

If you’re investing in SEO, focus on business impact over vanity metrics. Here’s what matters:

✅ Qualified Leads – How many website visitors turn into qualified calls or form submissions?

✅ Conversion Rate – What percentage of organic visitors take meaningful action?

✅ Non-Branded Search Visibility – Are you appearing for relevant legal terms, not just your firm’s name?

✅ Local SEO Performance – Are you ranking in Google’s local pack for searches in your city?

✅ Actual Signed Cases – Is your SEO strategy leading to more clients, not just more traffic?

The Bottom Line

Lawyers must stop celebrating charts that don’t correlate with business success. Just because a line goes “up and to the right” doesn’t mean your firm gets more cases. If an SEO agency can’t tie its efforts to real client growth, it just sells vanity metrics.

Before trusting an SEO provider, demand transparency. Ask them what they’re measuring, how they define success, and—most importantly—how their work translates into signed cases for your firm.

Meh, links!

All things being equal, links still tend to move the dial more than any other factor in legal SERPs.

Maybe links are having a diminishing impact internet-wide. But in my experience, quality links, especially relevant links (both topically and geographically), tend to improve law firm visibility in search more than most everything else.

Admittedly, there are some limited exceptions to this maxim, specifically related to the local pack. Here they are:

• Keywords in your business name.
• Primary category.
• Reviews.
• Proximity.

Honorable mention: User engagement (I’m really close to elevating this one, but not quite yet).

Of course, most of these are table stakes.

After all, anyone can change their firm name to include keywords. Anyone can update their primary category.

Anyone can buy a ton of fake reviews (but don’t do this and report those who do).

Anyone can move their office.

But not everyone can earn reliably earn a competitive number of links from topically and geographically relevant websites.

Links are the gatekeeper.

Google knows this too.

Why Meh, Links, Meh, Now?

If you’ve been following me, you now that I’ve been “meh-ing” about links for about as long as I’ve been doing SEO. Why do I feel compelled to write about this now?

The answer is two-fold.

First, there seems to be an increasing sentiment of “links matter less.” Maybe they do, generally speaking. But it’s simply not been my experience in working with law firms. But don’t take my word for it, go search on any major lower-funnel head term in legal and see what sites come up. I bet you lunch that those sites have hundreds, if not thousands of linking root domains (again, with the exceptions listed above).

Correlation is not causation. But correlation is also not usually merely coincidence.

Secondly, Patrick Stox at Ahrefs recently published: Google Says “Links Matter Less”—We Looked at 1,000,000 SERPs to See if It’s True. Go read it.

Here’s some interesting data:

Meh, links. Especially, in local queries…

Joy Hawkins at Sterling Sky has also been on a “links kick.”

Per Joy:

”Interestingly, while links had a substantial impact on organic rankings, their effect on local pack rankings was much less pronounced. In the same test, the site’s local ranking only improved by one position, despite the significant organic boost. This suggests that while links can contribute to local rankings, they are not as critical as they are for organic rankings.”

In terms of net position improvement, my experience is similar to Joy’s research.

However, even a one position improvement in local pack position can be an absolute game-changer. This is particularly true for moving from position 4 to 3 and from position 2 to 1.

Again, meh, local links.

Anyway, it can all be true that:

• Overall, links matter less.
• Links impact traditional organic results more than local packs.
• And Links are one of the most important factors for rankings.

All at the same time.

If your agency or marketing people are talking about the “diminishing value of links,” please contact us.

Most likely, they’re saying this because earning links is hard.

Meh, links and carry on.