[hidesy / istockphoto.com] Click here to see full sized version.

Lawyer-rating websites are no longer a mere curiosity in Canada, but opinions throughout the legal community are divided on how big a role they should play in helping clients pick the best lawyer to represent them.

There are sites such as martindale.com (which is owned by LexisNexis, the publisher of The Lawyers Weekly), which features the Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings, which are compiled from evaluations by other lawyers, and lawyerratingz.com, which bases its rankings instead on feedback from clients.

While both kinds offer insight into a lawyer’s abilities, it’s a far from perfect science as sites are susceptible to gaming, both positive and negative.

Jordan Furlong, Ottawa-based senior consultant with Stem Legal, a partner with Edge International Consulting and a columnist for The Lawyers Weekly, says there is little stopping lawyers from recruiting their friends to post rave reviews about their skills and abilities on one or more websites. On the flipside, an 'impossible-to-please' client could ruin a lawyer’s online reputation with an unfair review.

'Smart sites will have systems in place to defend against that, but it’s still a potential issue. Just like with everything else, as a client, you can’t take ratings and reviews completely at face value,' he says.

The fundamental question about any review is whether the reader trusts the reviewer. A series of glowing reviews of a lawyer posted by 'Anonymous' or a pair of initials won’t carry nearly as much weight as the recommendation of a friend or colleague. Furlong points to Amazon.com, where book reviews can be posted anonymously but there are often 50 or more reviews of a single title, so there’s a sizeable bank of opinion.

'Most clients are one-time users of a lawyer’s service and you can’t necessarily extrapolate from one experience what a lawyer is like. At a certain point, you need to ‘rate the rater,’ to decide whether or not his or her review has value to you,' he says.

Shannon Metivier, partner and chair of marketing at McKercher LLP, a 60-lawyer firm in Saskatchewan, says she’s skeptical about the quality control of these websites because she doesn’t know the process they follow to arrive at the ratings.

'I’m not certain how they choose who is asked to review the particular lawyer (in the peer review process). Some of the sites also have a client review. I’m not sure if that’s voluntary. We can’t give out the names of our clients, so I’m not sure how they arrive at that,' she says.

'You could have 100 satisfied clients and one disgruntled one and I imagine it would be the disgruntled one that would go through the effort to post something on a website.'

Metivier says as the number of rating websites has increased over the last few years, so, too, has the number of requests for firms to participate in the rankings process.

'Sometimes we aren’t even familiar with the organization conducting the review. You’re hesitant to respond because you don’t know them but you’re hesitant not to respond because you have no input into the process. It’s one thing if there’s one or two per year but when it gets to be 10 it becomes an infringement on your professional time,' she says.

Lisa Azzuolo, Toronto-based national marketing director at Ogilvy Renault LLP, agrees, saying managing the directories process has become nearly a full-time job at her firm, which has 450 lawyers and agents in five offices across the country.

'Legal directories are a necessary evil from a law firm marketing department. The ones that are credible and well-established definitely serve a purpose, particularly with validating a lawyer’s expertise or reputation in an industry. That’s why we invest a lot of time and resources in making sure our lawyers are properly ranked,' she said.

Azzuolo says lawyers and their firms are becoming increasingly savvy about which rating sites have value and which ones don’t. They’re also dedicating more time to take part in the process to improve the results, including participating in interviews and providing written submissions.

'We can’t criticize (the ratings) if we think they’re wrong if we don’t do our part to provide accurate information, not only about ourselves but our peers in different sectors. I think it’s important when lawyers do these interviews that they appear neutral, that they identify and recognize other industry experts besides themselves. It lends more credibility to their own information. If you only toot your own horn, you won’t be given much credit,' she says.

But there’s no free lunch for lawyers that attain a high ranking on a rating website because they’re immediately asked if they’d like to place a profile advertisement in either the online or print version, which will usually set them back between $500 and $1,500.

Metivier says the advertising component raises concerns about the objectivity of the websites because such costs could present an unfair advantage to larger firms.

'They have a better ability to pay for that advertising but it doesn’t necessarily make them better lawyers,' she says.

Dave Hill, a partner at Winnipeg-based Hill Sokalski Vincent Walsh Trippier, says the rating can be sufficient promotion in itself, particularly for smaller firms such as his, which has 12 lawyers.

'They’re a good source of advertising without doing more traditional forms of advertising, like taking out ads in the newspaper. In-house counsel in major centres, for example, before they hire you, they’ll check out these sites to see if you’re ranked,' he says.

Hill says he has found website rankings can help seal the deal with would-be clients.

'I’m finding more and more when people come in and (potentially) want to hire us, it’s like an interview (for the firm). Rather than me do the talking, I’ll say, ‘I’ll let you know what our peers apparently think of us. I’ve found the clients have been quite impressed by (the rankings). That’s why I have them in hard copy,' he says.

Furlong says the best thing about ranking websites is their potential to increase the amount of knowledge available to clients looking for legal help.

'They shine some light into a marketplace for legal services that really needs more illumination. Until now, pretty much the only information about lawyers available to clients was what the lawyers said about themselves, on their websites or in their marketing materials,' he says.

Furlong says client-rating sites will even change the stakes for lawyers in dealing with their clients.

'Every client is now also a potential critic with a nationwide audience and lawyers need to be aware of that,' he says.