In the case of delivering probate services, the chance to get feedback may not always present itself. Sometimes it can feel challenging to ask executors who may be grieving for feedback about your services. However, not only do you benefit from receiving feedback, but clients also often value the opportunity to provide it. If you publish your feedback, it can provide useful information that helps other consumers make informed decisions when choosing a probate firm. As accountancy firms, it can also provide a competitive advantage to show how you stand out from others in the probate market
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is encouraging firms providing probate services to seek customer feedback as a key part of its wider strategy to enhance transparency of quality of service and empower consumers in their choice of legal service providers. We also know from research published by the Legal Services Consumer Panel that consumers benefit from understanding the experiences of others when selecting a legal service provider.
An area of focus
With client satisfaction as one of three areas of focus reported in ICAEW’s last Practice Assurance Monitoring Report, the results showed that 52% of firms reviewed had a method for obtaining feedback, and 35% had requested feedback from all clients.
We spoke to some of ICAEW’s probate accredited firms to learn more about their overall approach to gathering and sharing client feedback, and whether they do anything differently for their probate clients.
We also asked them where their new clients tend to come from. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the overwhelming response was that new business is most likely to come from word-of-mouth referrals from existing satisfied clients.
For probate, this link was even stronger, with business coming mainly from existing clients choosing their accountant for probate in addition to other services.
A mix of approaches
In this first article on the usefulness of client feedback for firms providing probate services, we aimed to share how gathering feedback can support firms in promoting its services, including probate services, more widely.
Firms employed several methods to gather feedback, ranging from formal surveys, questionnaires and reports to informal chats with clients.
“There are a number of ways we collect feedback, some more formal than others,” explains Molly Rushworth, Research and Insights Manager, within the Marketing and Business Development team at Price Bailey, a top-30 accountancy firm with offices in East Anglia, London and Guernsey.
The collection of their client feedback includes probate clients within their standard client survey and feedback routes.
“We send out email surveys, for example, and we also do a net-promoter-score survey, where we just ask one question once a year. And we use Google reviews, too.”
“We have opportunities for our clients to provide ad hoc feedback through either key account meetings or just as we are going through a project at different stages, as well.”
“A number of the probate cases we deal with are linked to clients we have already done work for in the past,” explains Catherine Hardinge, Compliance Partner at Price Bailey. “We tend to have other relationships with them, rather than it just being a purely probate case, so they would be surveyed as part of our wider client list.”
360-degree feedback
Bishop Fleming, which has offices in the South West and West Midlands, employs nearly 500 people. It uses a mix of approaches to gathering client feedback.“We’ve developed a firmwide programme of client listening, which we call Engage,” says Alex Robins, partner at Bishop Fleming.
“It goes across all of our clients and service lines and whilst the questions we ask aren’t specific to probate per se, we can segment the feedback we receive by service line, relationship partner or client team to delve deeper into the results.”
“It’s a 360-degree feedback process.” he explains. “So, we don’t just listen to our clients’ feedback, but we measure and contrast our senior managers’, directors’ and partners’ perception of their own client service, too. It provides a unique gap analysis of what we think we do well and ultimately what the client thinks.”
“We use an external consultancy who provide independent insight and analysis,” he adds. “We talk to them about the questions we want to ask, particularly things that are perhaps testing us and where we want to know a little bit more.”
On top of that, Bishop Fleming has created bespoke client listening programmes for several service lines. “This has allowed us to drill deeper into specific lifecycle processes and really focus on the marginal gains to exceed our clients' expectations. Our plan is to roll this out wider across the firm, including probate services, in due course.”
Quality of service
Although firms might differ in their approaches to gathering feedback, they usually want the information for similar reasons, and they do connect the quality and direction of their services to customer input.“For us, it is definitely to improve the quality of the service and ensure consistency of that quality of service across the firm,” says Molly at Price Bailey. “And it is about identifying risks (any potential issues or complaints) and learning from those and identifying any training requirements.”
“It is also so we can better understand market fit,” she adds. “Are we providing what our clients need from us, and how do we adapt to ensure we stay fit-for-purpose and add value to our clients?”
Whatever route a firm chooses to obtain feedback, the key is to ensure that the information gathered is shared and acted upon.
“Our ambition is to be most rewarding for our clients, our people and our communities,” says Alex at Bishop Fleming. “And part of that is acting on the feedback we receive: ‘You said…we did’…”
“Our feedback is deliberately attributable to each client and the team members responsible for their client service,” he explains. “Therefore, any findings relating to our probate service are directed back to our probate team. That means when we need to fix any issues we can resolve them quickly, but when we deliver excellent client service, we can pass that rewarding feedback on to the relevant team members too. It’s a win-win result.”
Reaping the benefits of satisfied clients
For the firms we spoke to, word of mouth (mainly referrals from existing clients) was the most important avenue for new business. If your clients are satisfied with the service they’re receiving, they’re likely to refer other contacts, do more business with you, and provide positive testimonials and reviews.“The vast majority of our clients come from word of mouth,” says Alex at Bishop Fleming. “It’s client referrals. Then, for some disciplines, it may lean more towards professional contacts or due process. So, it does vary by service line. We obviously also get the odd enquiry that comes in via the website.”
For probate services specifically, the majority of work comes from existing client relationships and their contacts, plus website searches. “We get little by way of professional introductions,” says Alex.
Generally, new client opportunities come from existing clients and internal cross selling,” agrees Molly at Price Bailey. “And then probably closely followed by referrers. We also have the new inbound leads that come through our web and off the back of our content and through other media marketing activities.”
“For probate,” adds Catherine, “a lot of business comes from relationships we have already got. Occasionally it might be a referral from another firm, but predominately it is existing relationships with a client.”
Do it properly
The firms we spoke to all agree that obtaining client feedback, by whatever method works for their firm and client base, is crucial.
“The feedback is really relevant and really useful,” says Alex at Bishop Fleming. “And if we didn't think it was, we wouldn't be doing it.”
“If you're going to do it, do it properly,” he advises. “And have some agreed actions off the back of it. You can't please everyone all the time, so pick your most common themes and concentrate on those.”
In conclusion, it was useful to learn how different kinds of client feedback impacted different service lines. For instance, with probate-related services, it was:
- existing relationships versus word of mouth and referrals; and
- to a lesser degree, professional contacts and introductions.
It was also enlightening to learn that reflecting on client feedback on a regular basis and being proactive with it helped firms gauge what was working and what needed improvement by its service lines.
In a future edition of Regulatory and Conduct News, we will be publishing a case study exploring in more detail how one of our probate accredited firms approaches obtaining and sharing its client feedback.
