Local Citations
Office and solicitor records.
- Home
- Industries
- Legal
Vertical programme
SEO and AI visibility for Legal
Legal demand is local, urgent and comparison-heavy. Most enquiries come from people who did not know your firm existed an hour earlier.
At a glance
- Targeting
- Matter × location
- Authors
- Named solicitors
- Also in scope
- Review profile
- Reported by
- Matter and office
- Directories
- Supplementary
What changes in this vertical
Almost every commercially valuable query is a matter type bounded by geography. National visibility without local resolution produces enquiries you cannot serve.
Jurisdiction bounds everything
Visibility outside where you can act wastes both parties’ time.
Reviews decide the shortlist
Visibility that outpaces reputation wastes itself.
Attribution is the credibility signal
Generic legal explainers are treated as authoritative by nothing.
How legal clients actually find a firm
Between finding three firms and calling one, reputation does most of the work.
Practice area plus location
How the enquiry is actually phrased.
Reviews close the gap
The final step is where visibility is most expensive to lose.
Assistants avoid advice
They decline to advise but will name reference sources and local providers.
Where programmes usually go wrong
The pattern is consistent across firms of every size.
One page per practice area, nationally
Broad pages compete with directories and lose, then produce enquiries from jurisdictions the firm cannot act in.
Matter type by location: Pages built for the intersection of practice area and jurisdiction.
Buying directory placements as strategy
Legal directories absorb large budgets and return leads the firm competes for against everyone else on the page.
Owned demand first: Directories as supplementary, with primary investment where the enquiry comes to you directly.
Content written by marketers
Generic legal explainers are indistinguishable from every competitor.
Named solicitors as authors: Attributed content from practising lawyers, which is more persuasive and materially more citable.
Ignoring review infrastructure
Firms invest in visibility while their review profile loses them the instruction.
Reputation in scope: Review generation and response treated as part of the acquisition programme.
How an engagement runs here
The same five phases we run for every client, with the vertical detail set out at each one. The full model is on our methodology page.
Audit
Day 01 to 10Baseline by practice area and location, plus a review-profile and listings audit across directories and map platforms.
6 platforms500+ queriesBaseline reportDiagnose
Day 11 to 21Whether enquiries are constrained by local resolution, matter-level coverage, or a reputation profile losing you the instruction at the final step.
Content gapsEntity deficitCorpus gapsArchitect
Day 22 to 30A roadmap targeting the matter types worth competing for, with named solicitor authors agreed before content is commissioned.
90-day roadmapPillar planEntity planExecute
Day 31 to 180Office and solicitor entity work and review infrastructure first, then matter-and-location pages, then legal publication outreach.
Embedded teamWeekly shipMonthly reviewMonitor
OngoingPosition tracked by matter type and office rather than firm-wide, with review volume and response coverage reported alongside.
Weekly scansDrift alertsQBR recalibration
What you receive each month
Reported by matter type and office, because a firm-wide average tells a managing partner nothing actionable.
01
Visibility by matter and office
Position for the practice areas you want more of.
02
Enquiry attribution
Which pages and queries produced enquiries.
03
Review profile
Volume, rating and response coverage.
04
Listing consistency
Office and solicitor records checked for drift.
05
Placement register
Coverage earned in legal and mainstream publications.
06
Next-cycle plan
Which matter types to push and which to stop funding.
Services that apply here
Frequently asked questions
Can you help us rank for high-value matter types?
Where the firm can credibly compete. The most valuable terms are contested by firms with a decade of authority, so we build from adjacent and location-qualified matters upward.
Are legal directories worth the money?
As a supplement, sometimes. As the primary channel, rarely: you pay to appear beside your competitors and compete again for the same enquiry.
Do solicitors need to write the content?
They need to be named on it and to have reviewed it. Our writers can draft; attribution to a practising, verifiable lawyer is what makes it credible.
How do reviews affect this?
Substantially, and late in the journey where it is most expensive to lose. Visibility with a weak review profile is a well-funded way to lose instructions.