UK v US websites: different strokes for different folks?

So what happens when you take 10 leading law firms' websites - five from each side of the Atlantic - pick general and specific criteria against which to measure them, and assess how they stack up against each other? In this age of the global law firm are their national characteristics to be found in each group, or are they chameleon-like, blending perfectly with their local surroundings? And among them, can we identify a front-runner?

We have homed in on some specific attributes, especially the extent of recruitment information available and evidence of the firms' pro bono work and corporate social responsibility (CSR) policy. We were also interested to see whether US firms were more inclined than UK firms to offer content for alumni. In other words, how much attention is the firm paying to the gallery - its non-fee paying audiences?

To add a little more to the mix, we also gave consideration to some features firms do not always consider to be fundamental: accessibility compliance, a choice of language, a facility to print web pages and the existence of online services, the latter being either password-protected or in the public domain. Finally, each site was assessed on the impression given by its homepage - a subjective but useful exercise.

Before we launch into our findings, to head off the media departments of our 10 law firms, we appreciate some umbrage may be taken at pigeonholing our law firm sample into transatlantic groupings. Recognising that many firms on our list are truly global players, or at least truly international, for the purposes of this discussion we have assigned them to one of two nations: the UK or the US; not difficult to do when one looks at the home of each firm's head office.

Notwithstanding differences in word usage and spelling conventions, are there differences between our UK and US firms?' At first glance the broad answer appears to be no, but further investigation does reveal some interesting national differences.

One of the most striking differences between the two groups is the convention of UK firms to include a clear statement on their home page - perhaps just a single sentence - about who they are and what they do. Conversely, their transatlantic cousins assume any visitor will know what site he or she had landed on, so the firm launches with a brash credibility statement or a trumpet of a recent award, as if to say: "Cut the introductions, we're the best so let's get down to business". There is no unequivocal right or wrong formula for a homepage and by definition, all our top 10 law firms have a very high profile, but we always advocate including a brief statement on a home page to introduce the firm. It is surprisingly useful information.

There is also a difference in tone of strapline between the nations. Compare Clifford Chance's (CC's) opening statement: "Committed to helping our clients succeed" and Linklaters' "Finding solutions" with Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom's succinct "Leadership" and Baker & McKenzie's straightforward "Delivering results". Each firm will have given very careful consideration to the way it portrays and positions itself online - an essential component of any coherent website stratagem - but there is a distinct cultural difference in approach. US firms tend to be more aggressive; UK firms more subtle. Rather like our national stereotypes, Americans tend to be more forward, while we British do not like to appear too direct.

Although not as distinct, a cursory check of some accessibility compliance features also shows a difference in attitude between the US and the UK. Based on universal guidelines issued by the World Wide Web's watchdog - the 'W3C' - some years ago, accessibility compliance moved firmly into the UK spotlight last year on the back of older DDA legislation. Conscious of leading by example, many UK firms have worked hard to ensure their online offering is accessibility compliant at least to the lowest priority level. It is not easy and continuous monitoring is essential to prevent fresh content from breaching accessibility guidelines. A good website content management system will help considerably, but vigilance is still required. Our brief survey suggests UK firms have moved further towards achieving compliance than their US counterparts. As an aside, we were curious to see if there was a trend regarding the inclusion of content for the firm's alumni, but this service has been adopted almost universally. Only three firms appear to have no alumni pages: CC, Jones Day and Sidley Austin Brown & Wood. We speculate that in time all will recognise the benefits of supporting their community of former employees online and the remaining three firms will add content in due course.

It is widely recognised that the largest law firms use their public-facing web content as a sophisticated means of attracting high-calibre recruits and all firms in our sample have dedicated an extensive number of web pages to tempt potential recruits.

Earlier this year Intendance decided to test this perception by polling 50 of the top 100 UK firms, and 92% told us their website featured extensive recruitment information. We find a similar story among these 10 law firms.

In some cases - CC being a good example - graduates in particular are offered dedicated microsite content. Sidley welcomes graduates with a slick flash sequence, while Linklaters encourages interaction via its 'Discuss' feature. Many encourage applicants to apply online and Latham & Watkins has gone a step further by devising a facility for interview processing - Callback RSVP Portal - to eliminate the risk of potential recruits playing voicemail tag. Conscious of the demands of their contemporary audience, most firms are careful to be inclusive by making clear diversity and equal opportunity statements. Current vacancies are listed wherever possible. Contributions from recent joiners add an extra dimension and 'seal of approval' to some websites.

We have also taken a look at another nonfee earning aspect of our sample's websites: the extent of pro bono, community and CSR information offered. The acronym CSR is encountered increasingly frequently in the corporate world and our brief survey demonstrates all of our 10 firms are anxious to reassure the world they have a charitable streak. Whether described as corporate social responsibility, pro bono, community or similar, every law firm surveyed features a website section dedicated to good works. Described by DLA Piper Rudnick Gray Cary as "yet to be defined as one fixed approach to good business practice - but includes areas such as management of environment impact, corporate governance, diversity or the way in which a business responds to the needs of the wider community", CSR has become a critical part of many organisations' offerings.

With only one exception - Sidley - all firms dedicate extensive copy to their pro bono and community services. We looked for not only general references to the firm's activities, but also evidence of specific projects and stake-holders within the firm who could be contacted directly if necessary. Keen to spread the word offline as well, several firms offer a downloadable brochure describing their charitable activities. We identified DLA's website as being one of the best in this area. In addition to extensive pro bono and CSR information, it directs visitors to a dedicated 'New Perimeter' website, introducing its global initiatives.

Remaining on the global stage, all but three of our firms have taken steps to offer content in languages other than English. At the more limited end of the scale, Allen & Overy (A&O) offers a bilingual selection on some pages, whereas Jones Day goes thoroughly international by offering eight language versions of their web-site. Not surprisingly, extent of language choice reflects the regional emphasis of each firm. It should go without saying that any organisation should be able to respond in every language it offers, but some do get caught out.

Offering online tools and extranet content moves us further away from the pure non-revenue generating website offering, although none of the firms surveyed appears to charge for additional online services.

Only Skadden and Jones Day offer no additional material to their website visitors, either on public access pages or within password-protected sections. As we have not attempted to access restricted content we cannot comment on the extent of information offered, but the UK firms seem to have the edge in providing access to additional material.

Finally, we rated each website by a first impression based on the home page alone.

One of the cornerstones of all Intendance website reports is not to judge a book by its cover. However, as a temporary departure from this ethic, we were curious to assess how each firm attempted to entice visitors to travel beyond the homepage and explore the content within. Striving to be as objective as possible, we could not help coming to the conclusion that not all firms have been successful, or maybe national differences just dictate different priorities.

The homepage will be the entry point for most visitors, and hence their first experience of the firm online. The look and feel of the home page will transmit both conscious and subconscious messages to the visitor, helping them form that vital first impression. Get the impression wrong and an opportunity has been lost. None of the firms in our sample has fallen into the trap of near-pointless flash introductory sequences or barren front pages, both widely perceived as an irritation by contemporary website users, but our loose rating of each home page reveals a surprisingly wide range of results.

Our top scorer for its home page is CC, closely followed by Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, Linklaters and DLA Piper. We were scientific to a degree, establishing how much information and navigation was presented on the homepage and how easy it was to orientate oneself, but we also relied on an emotional response, gauging how comfortable and inviting the homepage felt. It is difficult to discern exactly what triggers the right response, but after reviewing many websites over the years we have developed an instinct for what works.

Design plays an essential role: clashing colours and overcrowded information are off-putting, whereas subtler colours and plenty of white space are easier on the eye. The usability of the page is important too. A visitor wants to assess quickly the extent and location of content, without feeling swamped by information. It is important to strike the right balance and CC comes closest to achieving this. Mid-ranking home page results go to Bakers and Latham, followed by Skadden, A&O and Jones Day. Bringing up the tail is Sidley.

As already mentioned, to broaden the base of our website assessment we have also taken into consideration the extent of publicly accessible content offered, the usability of the website and the general design quality.

Weighing up all criteria has given us a revealing spread of results: the UK firms take the top four places and the seventh; the US firms dominate the lower positions, with Lathams leading the pack in fifth place. Sidley takes last place.

So what can be learnt from these findings? We have focused on the softer side of a website as one can often tell more from the quality of the humbler offerings than the 'big-ticket' items, and although the scoring system used for this study was not intended to be exhaustive or particularly scientific, some sufficiently clear trends have emerged.

The US firms do have a different style to their UK counterparts, which is no bad thing in itself, although it does show that while all firms present themselves as global players, calling no one place home, to the keen eye, national stereotypes are revealed.

James Tuke is client relationship director of Intendance.