9A – Testing the Hypothesis, Part 2

For this assignment I interviewed five attorneys that replied to me indicating they would be reluctant or unlikely to purchase my software.  The specific reasons were:

• Software not bring intuitive to use / cumbersome interface
• Cost concerns
• Inability to customize software to the firm’s specific needs
• Concerns about data breaches
• Potential lack of client confidence in the system, difficulty of use for the client and complicated / multiple steps for clients to pay their bills
• Dislike for being charged for software “per user” as other solutions do
• Dislike for same per-user fees not taking into account how much or little one uses it (attorney every day vs. bookkeeper once a month)
• Concerns about compliance with state bar’s ethics responsibilities
• Compliance with other Florida Bar’s rules (trust accounting, credit card charges, etc.)
• Concerns about inability to easily download client’s entire file to a thumb drive (difficulty of export)
• Concerns that many other solutions already exist that do the same thing
• Reluctancy to experiment with a new company and turning over client data to a new company

I believe that most, if not of the above customer concerns can be remedied.

Who: Are there certain people or certain businesses that, although they share a lot in common with the others in your opportunity, nevertheless fall outside the boundary? Why?

Five attorneys I interviewed for the previous assignment appeared more entrepreneurial and more open to change and chance than the ones I interviewed for this assignment.  The new group were more established in their practice and had more support staff.  They appeared more reluctant to invest into a new system and making a change, often citing difficulty switching softwares, retraining themselves and their staff, even if they acknowledged that their current solution lacks many capabilities they would like to have.

I feel that some of their concerns I will be able to address by educating them on the benefits, ease of transition, intuitiveness of the software, unlimited support, etc.  Others will not make a change because they are comfortable where they are in their practice or simply too uncomfortable with change to make a change.

What: At what point does the need you identified differ from another need? (Is thirst the same as hunger? Or is the desire to appear fashionable the same as the desire to be loved by others?)

In general, lawyers tend to be a traditional group of people and tend to focus more on traditional lawyering rather than the business aspects of a law firm.  Even my wife, who I believe to be more progressive in her business vs. lawyering thinking, is reluctant to hire a virtual paralegal and insists on the overhead cost and need for supervision of an on-site paralegal, which is completely unnecessary in this day and age (in my opinion).  Some lawyers may feel the need to be more traditional, preferring their assistant’s phone calls to their client to online portal communication.  Some practice areas, such as elder law, are not ideal for technological advancements and automation.

Why: Is the underlying cause of the outsiders' need different than people who are inside the boundary?

Yes in some cases and no in others.  For those whose practice areas are not well-suited for automation and electronic communication with clients, my software solution system may not be 100% utilized.  Some who are reluctant to make a change can be converted, while others cannot.  I believe that customer education is key.  All legal software solution companies have sales departments whose main way of recruiting customers is through personal demonstrations, which are essentially customer education. 

Inside the Boundary	Outside the Boundary
Who is In: Entrepreneurial-minded solo and small firm attorneys.  Attorneys willing to make a change and take a chance.  Attorneys who realize (or are at least open to the idea) that a law practice is first of all a business.  Attorneys who are evolving professionally and looking to make their business more efficient and cost effective.	Who is Not: Traditional-minded attorneys.  Attorneys not open to transition or change.  Attorneys not willing to invest into their practice.  Attorneys whose clientele is not computer savvy or does not trust technology.
What the Need Is: The need is for a comprehensive solution that takes a law practice from its marketing efforts to completion of the client matter.	What the Need Is Not: The need is not for total replacement of attorney services or involvement, nor is it designed to completely eliminate support staff.
Why the Need Exists: the need exists because almost every small business owner could benefit from automation and tracking capabilities of technology. Because most business owners are looking to increase efficiency and to cut costs.	Alternative Explanations.  The software solution is not well suited for some practice areas or certain mindsets.  And while I believe many reluctant attorneys can be converted into customers, as with any product, not all will.