Comments on Martindale - Hubbell Connected : Will it go anywhere? | Real Lawyers Have Blogs

firm@harrismoure.com (Dan) — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 14:45:34 -0800

I don't see it either....

conniecrosby@gmail.com (Connie Crosby) — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 11:02:47 -0800

I'm curious to know how they expect to reach any sort of mass adoption if it takes 6 months to get approved as a member. If they want to participate in the Web 2.0 networking movement, it should be a matter of hours or minutes, not months. Even if you are an exception, that does not bode well for others.

The problem with keeping it so closed that only attorneys can get in is that it is often support staff such as marketing and professional development professionals who suss out the value of a tool first, and then encourage the attorneys in their firms or corporations to participate. And before those people hear about it, it is frequently consultants such as you and me who try them out and write about them. What partner or corporate counsel has time to test out the waters in a business networking site to see if it might be generally useful? If they even have time to hear about it and read about it in the first place, that is.

I'd say by keeping it too closed they are missing the boat on getting word out and getting people using it. Legal OnRamp clued in to this, not sure if Martindale-Hubbell will.

doug@compliancebuilding.com (Doug Cornelius) — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 12:53:16 -0800

Connie points out one of the reasons I am skeptical of using the Martindale database to authenticate. You have to let in the marketing people to help update and manage profiles. (Obviously, it would be better to have the attorneys do it themselves. That is unlikely to be the case for the vast majority of lawyers for a long time.) Where do you draw line for keeping out non-lawyers and non-practicing lawyers?

The other problem is that the Martindale database is just not that accurate. It's not Martindale's fault. But firms just have not been keeping on top of their martindale listings. (I see that the listings from my old firm are not accurate. Lots of departed people are still listed.)

david@davidshulmanlaw.com (David Shulman) — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 17:10:37 -0800

I've had nothing but frustration in trying to even set up a Connected account. When I log in for the first time and tell it my name is David Shulman, it provides a list of three David Shulmans and asks, "Is one of these you?"

I just left a firm last month and it has the listing for me at the firm. So the answer to that question is yes. But once I chose the profile that was me, it wouldn't let me update it to reflect the fact that I'm on my own. The "field" for employer was set permanently to my old firm and was unchangeable. Then I tried to make the change through Martindale.com and that didn't work either. It didn't seem like Martindale.com and Connected WERE connected themselves. I think I needed different login IDs for both.

I sent a number of frustrated public tweets to various Marhub people and of course, no response yet.

Do they want me to join? Why are they making it so difficult? Why can't I update my own profile? What's the point?

david.knott@lexisnexis.com (David Knott) — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 10:55:43 -0800

Edison is quoted as saying he failed countless times to create the light bulb. He only succeed once. Your arguments and that of some comments are understandable, but time will certainly tell if Connected will work. Those who would like to form their own opinion on the likely of success can view this short video. http://www.marketinglawyers.org/social-networking-lawyers/

mark@condolaw.net (Mark) — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 11:58:22 -0800

Democratization of the Web is where it's at. Time and time again, efforts to exclude and control access to information/connections/innovations loses as a "business model". MH doesn't get it: the Web is changing faster than any one person can keep up with and the only way to harness that power is to allow community control.

While the power of vetted approval counts... it is quickly being outstripped the the power of popular approval.

Popular social psychology theory says that groups do not make better decisions than the smartest individuals... but groups do hold more power.

My recommendation for MH!? Adapt to emerging business models and join with (rather than compete with) FB, LinkedIn, et. al.

david@davidshulmanlaw.com (David Shulman) — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 18:40:42 -0800

Update: On Friday I couldn't sign up at all because it wouldn't not let me change my firm information from the big firm I used to work at to my own solo practice. I emailed back and forth with a connected employee who said she was going to "expedite" things for me. Cool.

Went to log in tonight and while I now can change my firm info, it still won't let me join b/c they need 3 days to validate my info. Say wha?

I tweeted to @jonlin98 so I bet it will help.

anon@aol.com (anon) — Wed, 13 May 2009 11:12:28 -0800

As an ex-LNMH SEO specialist, I was an early part of the *only* currently (at the time, I suspect that hasn't changed) profitable part of MH - lawyer markteting. They know they are a dinosaur; the higher-ups know they are late-adapters. Unfortunately they went from beta to success TOO quickly, and cannot expand infrastructure quickly enough, leaving many unhappy clients. Since they are the sole profitable dept, the higher ups are expecting to keep the entire MH empire afloat. So while they charge an arm and a leg, the services get worse and worse as they cut spending to increase profits to keep all of MH afloat. It will ultimately be thier downfall. No offense, but when you hire new SEO 'specialists' that don't know what meta tags are, you're in trouble.

spin@justice.com (jrproper) — Thu, 28 May 2009 11:12:00 -0800

David, my experiences with the authentication are precisely the same as yours. I played with the Connected beta about year ago, got frustrated and forgot about it. I was re-inspired after a Connected CLE and being surveyed by the company and even went so far to complete my profile and etc (including a company name and email change â€“ re-branding) . . . and weâ€™re back to the authentication thing. Canâ€™t change my e-mail address etc without approval. My information on Martindale is wholly out of date and not for my lack of trying. Somewhere I had an old facsimile template Iâ€™d send in but its to the point where I could care less â€“ I donâ€™t put a lot of weight in Martindale anymore because if my information is hopelessly out of date I figure so is everyone elseâ€™s.

The other issues I have with Connected are (1) its slow, (2) â€œlawyerâ€™s onlyâ€ â€“ if Iâ€™m going to put the time and effort into a professional/social network, blog and etc fellow lawyers are good but it is the outside world of business people who are going to pay my bills and give me my next job that I really care about. Time better spent (in my opinion) with Linked-in and etc.

Mary.Dilworth@secalaw.com (Mary Dilworth) — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 11:42:25 -0800

Yes, Martindale needs to let us marketing folks in on Connected if they want us to convince our attorneys to use it. How can I train/recommend it, if I can't access it.