I managed to blag myself for my blog into a Manchester Digital Development Association / Pro-Manchester meet at Halliwells this week.

The title was earning a buck in the digital age and the subject was the misunderstanding / better ways to co-operate between the professional services and digital sectors.

The panel included:

Coral Grainger – Manchester Knowledge Capital

SimonWharton – PushON

Phillip Hemsted – Psycuity

Shaun Fensom – Manchester Digital

Steve Kuncewicz – Halliwells

Nick Rhind – CTI

And was hosted by Nick Jaspan of How-Do

I want to concentrate on how professionals services view digital suppliers.

However, the opening of the debate was about digital agencies using professional services firms. 

Nick Rhind of CTI I think summed up by saying that there is a lot of good information freely available online, however if you take shortcuts and rely on it you can get burnt – sometimes it really pays to have professional services advice in more ways than one.

Fees can be exorbitant and Steve Kuncewicz of Halliwells did point out that to work with digital agencies that law practices would have to “cut their cloth accordingly.”

Paul Jefferson also of Halliwells also made it clear that it is common for lawyers to offer fixed fees, so the perception that fees are an unknown quantity is essentially untrue in many cases.

Onto professional services firms hiring digital agencies:

Simon Wharton made a strong point that there is a “huge disjoint” between PS and digital.  Simon continued that many lawyers and finance professionals see digital as a “passing fad” and do not see the “threat from others that understand digital.”

Nick Rhind and Simon Wharton both said it was important to talk to people, off and online, before engaging them to build trust – digital being a way of starting this key part of the buying process.

I have to say I echoed Simon’s points in a question I made, which brought the attentive eyes of the gathered legal fraternity fixed upon me.  However on reflection I now know both sides have their cultures and issues and there is misunderstanding of each other’s standpoints – I have changed my views accordingly.

Paul Jefferson stated that the legal profession was very risk averse and that is how it needs to be: engaging in social media needs to be carefully considered.

After the debate I had a bit of tea in a nearby establishment and discussed the issues with Pauline Rawsterne of Turquoise PR.  I was roundly but gently told that anyone seeking higher level legal services would seek out advice from trusted legal professionals that had been used for years or were given the highest recommendations – not through Twitter or a blog!!

She continued that lawyers – and this met Paul Jefferson’s point- are risk averse and social media does not tally in with that, how can you let someone tweet or blog in case they give away key information unintentionally.  It has to be carefully controlled.

Pauline said that lawyers often wanted PR and marketing, they know their own minds, and they are acting with a thought out rationale in relation to marketing services.

So – deep breath – there is a chasm of understanding between both sides and one which I appreciate a bit more now.

I have worked with a tax accountancy on its PR and social media successfully, but perhaps this is a more unusual case in terms of what professional services practices are prepared to be engaged in.

I rounded off talking to Coral Grainger of Manchester Knowledge Capital and Richard Simpson of Tayburn, which in itself  makes such events worthwhile.

Anyway, thank you to Halliwells for their hospitality, to MDDA and Pro-Manchester, and to the panel and all participants.