Redundant Twitter accounts damaging for firms

According to recent research into Twitter use by the top 50 UK law firms, those that have corporate accounts but fail to use them effectively could be "damaging their brand". The research, conducted by digital agency Intendance and reported in the Law Gazette, found that although the majority of the top 50 firms (66%) had set up accounts, some had failed to send any updates at all despite having hundreds of followers; of the 48 accounts reviewed (some firms have more than one account), 19 had failed to send a single tweet. The report concluded that this was "not only a wasted opportunity to connect with a range of stakeholders, it suggests laziness, lack of strategy and a lack of initiative". The report continued: "In many cases it would be better not to have a Twitter account rather than have one that is dormant."

The survey also flagged up some firms' lack of clear branding, finding that 35% of accounts did not make it clear that the firm in question was the owner. It called this "bad practice" and said that it "puts awkward questions in the minds of potential followers: have they set up the account just to show they are keeping up with web trends, or are they just too lazy to bother branding it? Neither is an advisable strategy, and is akin to inviting friends to your new flat and not having any furniture or decorations".

The research used web tool Twitter Grader, created by HubSpot, to assess the best law firm accounts. Those that came top were Allen & Overy, DLA Piper, Eversheds, Withers LLP, Clifford Chance, Shoosmiths, Olswang, Taylor Wessing and Norton Rose Group.

To read the report in full, download a copy from the Intendance website.