The Law Firm Mobile (LFM) blog is pleased to present its second annual research on which firms from the AmLaw 200 and Global 100 have entered the world of the mobile web (our first report can be found here).

Below are following sections: an overview of the report, statistics describing the extent of mobile web site penetration for large law firms, statistics regarding the type of content used in firm web sites, and a final section on mobile web best practices. The final section of this report provides a detailed list of the names of law firms with hyper links to a screen shot of each respective firm’s mobile site along with the URL for that site.

Overview

  • Of the firms on the 2012 AmLaw 200 list, 54 firms (27%) have mobile sites. This is an increase of 46% (17 additional firms) from 2011. Of the firms on the 2012 Global 100 list, 29 firms (29%) have mobile sites. This is an increase of 32% (7 additional firms) from 2011.
  • Of the firms on the 2012 AmLaw 200 or Global 100 list with a mobile websites, most firms (67%) have from 7-9 total content types for the mobile site.
  • Of the firms on the 2012 AmLaw 200 or Global 100 list with a mobile website, the most popular type of content offered to users is Professionals/Attorney Biographies (59), Offices (53), and Practice Areas (52). The next set of content includes News (45), About the Firm (42), Careers (40), Events (38), and Publications (34). Some of the least used content types included Contact Us (13) and Industries (9).
  • Even with the increase in firms with mobile sites, the majority of large law firms in the AmLaw 200/Global 100 do not yet have a mobile web despite the significant growth in smartphone use.

Part 1: What We found –  Firms With Mobile Sites

  • Of the firms on the 2012 AmLaw list, 54 firms (27%) have mobile sites. This is an increase of 46% (17 additional firms) from 2011.
  • The distribution of AmLaw law firms with a mobile site is slightly weighted toward the AmLaw 100 with the Amlaw 100 having 30 and the Amlaw 100-200 having 24.
  • Of the firms on the 2012 Global 100 list, 29 firms (29%) have mobile sites. This is an increase of 32% (7 additional firms) from 2011.

Part 2: What We found – Major Content Types

  • Of the firms on the 2012 AmLaw 200 or Global 100 lists with mobile websites, most firms (67%) have from 7-9 total content types for the mobile site.
  • Of the firms on the 2012 AmLaw 200 or Global 100 list with mobile website, the most popular type of content offered to users is Professionals/Attorney Biographies (59), Offices (53), and Practice Areas (52). The next set of content includes News (45), About the Firm (42), Careers (40), Events (38), and Publications (34). Some of the least used content types included Contact Us (13) and Industries (9).

Part 3: Best Practices

Best Practices

  • Layouts tailored for the size and proportion of a smart phone screen
  • Professional look-and-feel through appropriate graphics and layout
  • URL input box automatically hides itself
  • Amount of content on each page is appropriate to reading on a phone screen
  • Easily accessed “home” button
  • Simplified navigation interface
  • Appropriately sized text

Bonus Practices

  • Option to allow users to share content via social network services (e.g., LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter)
  • Mobile site automatically triggers offer to save website to the user’s phone desktop (like an app)
  • Metrics tracked separately from main firm website
  • Provide value added content either via app download or password-protected area on the site

Practices To Stop ASAP

  • Announcing to users on the home page that the user is on the law firm’s mobile website.

Areas for Improvement

  • Failing to provide attorney bio and contact information
  • A text-based site (This is deja vu for websites at the infancy of the web)
  • Having a cookie-cutter site that looks like many other law firm’s mobile sites (many firms appear to share the same developer)
  • Failure to automatically direct a smart phone user from the firm’s main site URL to the mobile website
  • Taking up significant space on the mobile web home page with general text about the firm
  • Too many navigation and content elements

__________________________________________________________________________

Part 4: AmLaw 200 Law Firms With Mobile Web Sites (*new firms for 2012)

  1. Adams and Reese
  2. Andrews Kurth*
  3. Arnold & Porter
  4. Baker & McKenzie
  5. Baker Donelson*
  6. Bingham McCutchen
  7. Blank Rome
  8. Bracewell & Giuliani*
  9. Bradley Arant Boult Cummings*
  10. Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft
  11. Carlton Fields*
  12. Choate Hall & Stewart*
  13. Curtis, Mallet-Prevost, Colt & Mosle
  14. Dinsmore & Shohl
  15. Dorsey*
  16. Faegre Baker Daniels*
  17. Fisher & Phillips
  18. Foley*
  19. Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson
  20. Haynes and Boone
  21. Herrick, Feinstein
  22. Hodgson Russ*
  23. Hogan Lovells
  24. Honigman Miller Schwartz and Cohn
  25. Ice Miller
  26. Irell & Manella*
  27. Jones Day*
  28. K&L Gates
  29. Kaye Scholer
  30. Kelley Drye*
  31. Kirkland & Ellis
  32. Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel
  33. Kutak Rock*
  34. Loeb & Loeb
  35. Mayer Brown*
  36. McGuireWoods*
  37. Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler*
  38. Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker
  39. Perkins Coie
  40. Polsinelli Shughart
  41. Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan
  42. Reed Smith*
  43. Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi*
  44. Ropes & Gray
  45. Schulte Roth & Zabel
  46. Sheppard Mullin*
  47. Shook, Hardy & Bacon
  48. Sidley Austin
  49. Sills Cummins*
  50. Stoel Rives
  51. Sutherland Asbill & Brennan
  52. Venable*
  53. Vinson & Elkins
  54. WilmerHale

Global 100 Law Firms With Mobile Web Sites (global firms in AmLaw not duplicated)

  1. Allens Arthur Robinson
  2. Clayton Utz
  3. Freshfields*
  4. Minter Ellison
  5. Norton Rose
  6. Slaughter & May*

__________________________________________________________________________
Adams and Reese (mobile)

Allens Arthur Robinson (mobile)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Andrews Kurth (mobile)

Arnold & Porter (mobile)

Baker Donelson (mobile)

Baker & McKenzie (mobile)

Bingham McCutchen (mobile)

Blank Rome (mobile)

Bracewell & Guiliani (mobile)

 Bradley Arant Boult Cummings (mobile)

Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft (mobile)

Carlton Fields (mobile)

Choate (mobile)

Clayton Utz (mobile)

Curtis, Mallet-Prevost, Colt & Mosle (mobile)

Dinsmore & Shohl (mobile)

Dorsey (mobile)

Faegre Baker Daniels (mobile)

Fisher & Phillips (mobile)

Foley & Lardner (mobile)

Freshfields (mobile)

Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson (mobile)

Haynes and Boone (mobile)

Herrick, Feinstein (mobile)

Hodgson Russ (mobile)

Hogan Lovells (mobile)

Honigman Miller Schwartz and Cohn (mobile)

Ice Miller (mobile)

Irell & Manella (mobile)

Jones Day (mobile)

 

K&L Gates (mobile)

Kaye Scholer (mobile)

Kelley Drye (mobile)

Kirkland & Ellis (mobile)

Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel (mobile)

Kutak Rock (mobile)

 

Loeb & Loeb (mobile)

Mayer Brown (mobile)

McGuireWoods (mobile)

Minter Ellison (mobile)

Norton Rose (mobile)

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler (mobile)

Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker (mobile)

Perkins Coie (mobile)

Polsinelli Shughart (mobile)

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan (mobile)

ReedSmith (mobile)

Robins Kaplan Miller & Ciresi (mobile)

Ropes & Gray (mobile)

Schulte Roth & Zabel (mobile)

Sheppard Mullin (mobile)

Shook, Hardy & Bacon (mobile)

Sidley Austin (mobile)

Sills Cummins & Gross (mobile)

Slaugher & May (mobile)

Stoel Rives (mobile)

Sutherland Asbill & Brennan (mobile)

Venable (mobile)

Vinson & Elkins (mobile)

Williams Mullen (mobile)

WilmerHale (mobile)