Law firm marketing plan example: the empty structure
This page is the empty structure, not a filled-in one. A law firm marketing plan needs 7 sections, and each is finished only when it passes a stated test — a sentence somebody outside the firm could check. The worked instance, with real figures attached, is linked below.
Last updated: 5 August 2026
Is this the empty structure or the worked example?
The empty structure. The worked one is a separate page.
Two documents get asked for under the same words, and they are not versions of each other. One is the shape: which sections exist, what each is for, and how you know when you have finished writing it. The other is a single instance with a city, a practice area, real figures and a page list. The shape teaches you what to produce; the instance shows you the output.
This page is the first. The second is sample law firm marketing plan, built around one hypothetical practice with measured demand figures behind it. Most firms writing a plan for the first time end up wanting both, in that order.
The admission worth making early: a template is the easiest thing in this market to produce and the least useful thing to receive. Anybody can list seven headings. What makes the difference is the test under each heading, and the reason most templates omit the tests is that tests make a document capable of failing. This one is written to fail.
What sections must a law firm marketing plan contain?
Seven. Each one has a job and a condition under which it is done.
| # | Section | What it is for | Done when |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ownership | Names who is answerable and who can approve | One named holder and one approving partner are written down, with a stated response time |
| 2 | The constraint | States what is actually short | The plan says in one sentence whether the shortage is attention, inquiries, or capacity |
| 3 | Scope | Fixes which work the firm wants more of | The practice areas in scope are listed, and the ones deliberately excluded are listed beside them |
| 4 | The build list | Converts intent into artifacts | Every item is a URL that either exists or has a month against it |
| 5 | The judgement rule | Says what evidence would end each line | Each line has one sentence describing the evidence that would stop it |
| 6 | The calendar | Fixes the earliest honest read | Each line carries the earliest date it can be read without lying |
| 7 | The refusal list | Bounds the document | At least three things the plan will not do are named |
The order is not decorative. Section 2 can make sections 3 to 7 unnecessary: a firm whose shortage is capacity should not be writing a marketing plan at all, and finding that out on the second page is much cheaper than finding it out in the third quarter.
Section 4 is where most drafts collapse. "Content" is not an item. "A blog" is not an item. An item is a web address, and if it does not exist yet it has a month written next to it. That single rule converts a document of intentions into a document somebody can be held to, and it is the reason the build list is the section suppliers resist tightening.
What makes a section finished rather than written?
A sentence in it that could be checked by somebody with no stake in the answer.
That is the whole test, and it is worth stating plainly because it rules out most of what gets written into these documents. A section that says the firm will improve its visibility is written. A section that says a named page will be live by a named month is finished, because a stranger can open the page in that month and see whether it is there.
The consequence shows at review time. A written section can be defended indefinitely, because there is always an argument that things are progressing. A finished section either passed or it did not.
It also protects the sections that need protecting. A search line that is honestly unreadable before its stated month cannot be cut in the month before it, because the calendar section already said so and everybody signed it. Of the 40 legal-marketing suppliers we read in full on 3 August 2026, 8 claimed a guarantee of some kind — the calendar section is what a firm has instead of a guarantee, and it is worth more, because it is a claim about evidence rather than about outcomes.
What does a failing section look like next to a passing one?
The failing version is always the one that cannot be wrong.
| Section | Fails | Passes |
|---|---|---|
| Ownership | "Marketing is a firm-wide responsibility" | One person named, one partner named, approvals inside five working days |
| The constraint | "We want to grow" | "We have capacity for more matters in two of our four practice areas and not in the others" |
| Scope | "All practice areas" | Two named in, two named out, with the reason for each exclusion |
| Build list | "Refresh the website and publish content regularly" | Nine URLs, each with a month |
| Judgement rule | "We will monitor performance" | "This line stops if the pages are not live by the stated month" |
| Calendar | "Ongoing" | "The search line is not read before month six" |
| Refusal list | (absent) | "No paid campaigns, no intake changes, no promise about position" |
Read the left-hand column aloud in a partners' meeting and every line sounds reasonable. That is the problem. None of those sentences can be false, so none can guide a decision, and a document made entirely of them survives the year without being consulted.
The right-hand column is not more ambitious — in several rows it promises less. It is simply capable of being checked, which is the only property that matters in a document nobody wants to read twice.
Which sections can be dropped, and which cannot?
Two are optional in practice. Five are not, and one of the five is the one always dropped.
Sections 3 and 6 can be compressed for a firm with a single practice area and a single line of work — the scope statement collapses to a sentence, and the calendar has only one date in it. Nothing is lost.
Sections 1, 2, 4, 5 and 7 cannot go. The one that gets dropped is the refusal list, because it is uncomfortable to write and because it reads as negative in a document intended to be encouraging. Its absence is what produces the argument in the second quarter, when somebody assumed the plan covered running the advertising, or fixing what happens when the phone rings, and it never did.
Our own refusals, for the record: we do not run paid campaigns, we do not touch intake, and we make no promise about position — not from us and not from anybody else. Our prices are $1,450 for a Practice Sprint and $2,900 for the build tier, fixed and published, no minimum term. We never charge per inquiry, per case or per matter. US lawyer advertising runs through ABA Model Rule 7.2(b), adopted differently in each state.
What does this template deliberately leave blank?
Three fields, and any template that fills them in is inventing them.
- A percentage of revenue to spend. There is no defensible national figure. Firms buy attention at prices that differ by an order of magnitude between cities and practice areas, so a single percentage would be wrong for almost everyone applying it. We hold no survey of what firms allocate and we are not going to estimate one.
- A salary for whoever owns the plan. We hold no compensation data of any kind. A template that prints a range is repeating something it read.
- A rate at which inquiries become matters. This is the number that makes every downstream projection in a marketing plan look rigorous, and it is the number nobody supplying a template actually has. We do not have it either. A firm can measure its own, from its own intake log, over its own year — and until it has, the projection is decoration.
The blanks are the honest part of this page. 15 of 62 questions buyers ask on these searches are price questions, and the reason that gap persists is that supplying a plausible number is easier than supplying a real one. Leaving three fields empty is less impressive and more useful.
Which suppliers publish a plan template, and do they publish a price?
Three of the 40 sit close to this search, and one of the three published a price.
practicepanther.com, clio.com and attorneyatlawmagazine.com were all in the set of 40 legal-marketing suppliers we read in full on 3 August 2026. Of those three, clio.com had a price on the page we read and the other two did not. Across the whole 40, 12 published a price, 5 of those showed only a "from" figure, 8 claimed a guarantee, and 1 stated no minimum term. Nothing further is asserted about any of the three here; the benchmark recorded a presence check on the page as published on that date.
Where one of them is the better choice: if what a firm wants is a document to fill in and work through alone, at no cost, take it from a publisher rather than paying anybody. Clio's advertising in this market has run 367 and 366 days selling exactly that kind of document, which is a purchasing decision repeated daily by somebody with the data. We sell the build, so we are the wrong supplier for a firm that only wants the template.
Before you shortlist anyone
Of the 40 legal-marketing suppliers we read in full on 3 August 2026, twelve published a price and one offered work with no minimum term. Three of them are named above.
The free report gives you the full count, named, so you can repeat it rather than take ours. It also shows how many people search for your practice areas in your town, and what those clicks cost to buy at Google's own prices.
Get the report — five questions, about two minutes →
No call required. Our own prices are on that page.
Where should I read next?
If the plan's build list is the section you are stuck on: law firm content marketing and law firm website design templates.
If the scope section keeps expanding: law firm marketing techniques.
On who executes what the plan commits to: law firm seo expert and law firm marketing nyc.
Frequently asked questions
Is this the template or a worked example?
This is the template — the empty structure with an acceptance test under each section. The filled-in instance, built around one hypothetical practice with measured demand figures, is the sample plan page linked from the first section.
What sections does a law firm marketing plan need?
Seven: ownership, the constraint, scope, the build list, the judgement rule, the calendar, and the refusal list. Each is finished only when it contains a sentence a stranger could check.
How do you know when a section is finished?
When it contains a claim that could be found false by somebody with no stake in the answer. A section promising improved visibility is written; a section naming a page and the month it goes live is finished.
Which section is most often missing?
The refusal list. It is uncomfortable to write and reads as negative, and its absence is what produces the second-quarter argument about whether the plan ever covered advertising or intake.
What should the build list contain?
Web addresses, not intentions. Every item is a URL that either exists already or has a month written against it, which is what converts a document of aims into one somebody can be held to.
Why are some fields left blank in this template?
Because no honest source for them exists in our data: a percentage of revenue to spend, a salary for the plan's owner, and a rate at which inquiries become matters. Any template printing those is inventing them.
How many suppliers on this search publish a price?
One of the three named here, and twelve of the 40 we read in full on 3 August 2026. Five of those twelve showed only a "from" figure rather than a number.