Your submission isn’t just a document. It’s one of the most valuable assets your firm already has.
Most firms treat submissions like buying a bouquet of fresh flowers: carefully assembled, impressive for a moment, then quickly forgotten. A more effective approach is to treat them like a garden: something you cultivate, revisit and build on over time, with value that grows well beyond a single season.
Because the reality is this: legal directory submissions are one of the most resource-intensive pieces of content your firm produces. Think about what actually goes into a submission. You’re not just pulling together a few highlights, you’re capturing your most sophisticated work, your most important clients, and the matters that genuinely define your practice. You’re showing how your firm operates, be it across jurisdictions or in niche practice areas. That is not generic marketing copy, it is some of the most carefully considered, evidence-based positioning your firm produces. And yet, in most firms, it is created for a single purpose and left to rot in the depths of your hard drive.
From annual scramble to strategic asset
The way most firms approach submissions hasn’t really changed. Everything is compressed into a short window, information is gathered quickly (and often retrospectively) and drafting happens under pressure. Once the submission is done, attention moves on.
There’s very little continuity from one year to the next, and even less connection to wider marketing or business development activity. The result is predictable. Messaging becomes inconsistent and valuable insight into what actually differentiates the firm is lost. A more effective approach is to treat submissions as part of a year-round process — one that doesn’t just support rankings, but how the firm presents itself to the market more broadly.
What good looks like in practice
When firms take that step, submissions stop being a one-off task and start becoming something much more useful — a content engine that feeds multiple parts of the business. Take a typical matter description. In a submission, it might be a concise summary of a complex dispute or transaction. But with a slightly different mindset, that same piece of directory content can be developed into a client-facing case study, used as a credential in a pitch, included in a panel tender, or broken down into a short, accessible insight for LinkedIn or a client update.
The content already exists — it simply needs to be repurposed.
The same applies to referee feedback. On its own, a single comment might feel anecdotal. But when you step back and look across multiple referees, patterns emerge. Those patterns can be translated into clear, consistent positioning across your website, profiles and BD materials.
Even something as straightforward as a submission bio is often underused. In many cases, it is the most up-to-date and carefully written summary of a lawyer’s work. Yet it rarely feeds into website profiles, internal promotion cases or award submissions, all of which would benefit from that level of clarity and precision.
Example 1: Matter descriptions → client-facing credentials
A submission might include:
Acting for a multinational energy company on a multi-jurisdictional dispute involving £500m+ exposure.
When this directory content is used strategically, this becomes:
- A website case study demonstrating sector expertise
- A pitch example for disputes or energy work
- A panel tender credential
- A short-form insight for LinkedIn or client updates
Example 2: Submission bios → stronger individual profiles
Submission bios are often the most current and carefully drafted summaries of a lawyer’s work.
With minimal adaptation, they can support:
- Website profiles
- Internal promotion cases
- Award submissions
- Pitch documents
Why execution breaks down
Most firms understand that submissions matter. Where things tend to fall down is in execution. The process sits across multiple stakeholders. Fee earners, marketing and BD teams, and clients — but without clear ownership or structure tying it all together. As a result, it becomes reactive. Deadlines drive behaviour, rather than strategy.
A more structured approach
At ELE, we work with firms to ensure submissions are not just completed, but fully leveraged. That involves aligning submissions with the firm’s broader priorities, capturing and refining key matters throughout the year, and producing clear, accessible drafts that reflect how researchers actually assess the market. It also means taking a more strategic approach to referees, ensuring that feedback supports and reinforces the story being told.
Just as importantly, it means thinking about what happens after submission: how that legal directory content can be used to support pitches, profiles, awards and wider marketing activity. In practical terms, the goal is simple: to ensure that the time and effort invested in submissions continues to deliver value long after the deadline has passed.
That includes:
- Strategic planning
Aligning submissions with firm priorities, growth areas and target rankings - Ongoing content capture
Working throughout the year to identify and refine key matters - High-quality drafting
Producing clear, accessible submissions aligned to how researchers assess the market - Referee strategy and management
Supporting selection, briefing and engagement to strengthen feedback - Content reuse
Turning submission material into assets for pitches, profiles, awards and campaigns
By working with ELE, the effort invested in submissions continues to deliver value across the year, not just at the point of submission. Handled properly, submissions can become:
- A central source of marketing and BD content
- A consistent articulation of market positioning
- A tool for winning work — not just securing rankings
Treat it like a bouquet, and it fades quickly. Treat it like a garden — something you build, maintain and return to — and it becomes something far more valuable.
