Review requests triggered at the optimal moment after a case, when emotional relief peaks rather than when the file closes. Timed to the neuroscience of gratitude, inside the platform rules and your bar’s, and connected to the referral system that turns past clients into advocates.
The client walks out of the courthouse grateful. Two weeks later the file closes and the firm sends a survey nobody answers. The Multiplier asks at the peak, in the attorney’s voice, with one link and no incentive, and the review that arrives names the charge and the fear, which is exactly what the next visitor with that charge and that fear needs to read.
Automated review requests triggered at the moment after a case when relief peaks, written in the attorney’s voice, with one link.
No incentives, no gating, no filtering of who gets asked. Inside the platform rules and your state bar’s rules on testimonials.
A past client who is grateful is asked, once and kindly, whether they know someone who needs the same help. Advocates are made, not hoped for.
Emotional relief peaks in the days after the outcome, long before the file closes. The request goes then, when the client wants to say thank you.
The request comes from the person the client trusted, not from a system. One paragraph, one link, no survey.
Many clients will not go public about the matter. The request makes declining easy, and a review can name the outcome without naming the charge.
Everyone who is asked is asked the same way, and nobody is paid or filtered. It keeps the reviews real and the firm inside the rules.
A review that names the charge and the fear is placed on the practice page where the next visitor with that charge arrives. Persona-matched proof, from the Multiplier to the Foundation.
The referral ask, once and kindly, turns a grateful client into the reason the next one calls.
The moment in the matter when relief peaks is defined for each practice area and connected to ScoreBoard, so the request fires from the outcome, not the calendar.
One paragraph in the attorney’s voice, one link, no incentive. A gentle second note a week later if nothing arrives, and then nothing.
New reviews are answered, and the ones that name a charge and a fear are placed on the matching practice page as proof.
Undated, one at a time, and none on the homepage or the practice pages. Social Proof scored 1 of 10 with the proof already in hand.
And the map pack for your primary practice areas.
Proof specific enough to activate mirror neurons, naming the charge, the fear and the resolution. A review does that when it is placed where the decision is made.
Included in every engagement as part of the Multiplier. Reviews make the website more trusted, the ads cheaper and the intake warmer; every other mechanism gets cheaper when this one works.
Engagements from $7,500 a month for all five mechanisms. NACDL members $6,150. Thirty-day terms.
Yes, done carefully: no incentives, no gating, requests timed to relief rather than to the closing of the file, and inside the platform rules and your state bar’s rules on testimonials.
Many do not, and the request makes declining easy. A review can name the outcome without naming the charge, and persona-matched proof on the site uses only what the client consents to.
At the peak of relief for that kind of matter, defined with you and triggered from ScoreBoard. Days after the outcome, not weeks after the file closes.
To the platform where they are written, and then, when they name a charge and a fear, onto the practice page where the next visitor with that charge arrives.
It gets a calm, specific answer within a day. Reputation Monitoring handles it, and handled well it becomes proof that you are safe to disagree with.
