IDEO approached their work for Sloan-Kettering the same way they approach other design challenges; they put themselves and the clinic’s staff in the shoes of patients. In essence, they asked patients what their concerns were.
And, to Sloan Kettering’s surprise, the research revealed that patients did not mind the waiting time for treatment, which averaged 80 minutes at the busiest clinic; “patient” indeed. Rather, patients were troubled by another step in the process – waiting for the results of a test that determines if they are strong enough to receive treatment on a given day. The uncertainty of not knowing if they’d be able to get their treatment out-weighed the wait. In fact, many patients preferred making two trips to the clinic – once to determine if they were up to the treatment – and a second to receive treatment. There were other improvements Sloan-Kettering made to their patients’ care and management as a result of this work, but you get the idea.
Sloan-Kettering asked.
Now, back to Law Land. Obviously, the main point here is the value of asking. Even so, as powerful as asking is – it’s not enough unless you and your firm respond to what your client tells you. In the many, many interviews we’ve conducted, clients have demonstrated that they are more than willing, nay often eager to let you know what they need and value. Also, you are likely to hear ways to increase your work with that client – as long as you are listening and acting on what you hear. Another point is – if you just can’t ask the questions yourself – you can hire someone to do the asking for you. The important thing is to ask.
Any questions?
–Janet Stanton
I like the point about “you can hire someone to ask for you.” I’ve struggled to get meaningful feedback from clients; this article and other recent material on the same subject show I must just not be doing it right. So I can either try to learn more to do it better, or hire the expertise – and I think a third party asking probably has a lot of advantages.
Hi Bob –
You raise an interesting point; lawyers seem to think they are or should be good at everything. When something is outside your core competency – hire (or “rent”) someone with that capability. That’s what other types of companies do.
Cheers,
Janet
I think lawyers are scared that asking a question shows they are do not understand a client’s business; meaning the client instantly thinks ‘this guy doesnt have any idea’. Hence achieving the exact opposite to what is intended.
Sometimes the question is fine – the client doesnt know the answer or doesnt expect you to know. Sometimes the client does expect you to know.
I’m not just talking technical language or subject specific knowledge (eg acronyms or whatever); even general business arrangements or processes or policies can be something you are expected to know before you get the business (but, of course, can’t know until you get the business….).
Hi Chris –
Thanks for your note. I think clients would expect their lawyers to be very familiar with publicly available information or what might be unearthed by some basic business/market/industry intelligence gathering. Outside counsel would not be expected to know specifics of an issue – or the client’s desired outcome on a matter. Too often lawyers assume what the client’s goals are – which can be really dangerous to the relationship.
Cheers,
Janet