Branding & Web Design for Public Law Firm
Please find under a summary covering project details and feedback. The innate facts are kept as they are, private information is amended.
Introductory information
A fast induction on the buyer’s organisation
Respondent 1: We’re a legitimate aid community whose comcommission is to prepare legitimate services and helpful services to low-income populations. I’m the ruler of outgrowth for the organisation.
Respondent 2: I’m the web director of the structure.
Desired goal
What challenge were you trying to address with Constructive?
R1: We have multiple business units, diverse hearerss, and a hard story to tell. We needed to un-silo ourselves and have a unified interaction to present to these hearerss. Our leadership determined that we needed to initiate with a rebrand along with a new website to follow it.
Provided solution
What particular tasks were responsible for?
R1: Constructive helped us in many ways. They held surveys and workshops, followed by extensive meetings, to articulate what seebody was assertion. In the workshops, we addressed each and see hearers and came up with a cohesive program, interaction, and story for our rebranding.
Constructive also worked with our leadership to articulate our most significant priorities and subordinate effects—a very confused process owing we had a lot of stakeholders. Constructive stayed true to what they needed to do and helped us navigate all the different variables that came up. It was a very difficult process, made much simpler owing of Constructive.
R2: I came into this process behind the website had been designed. I was hired to be the day-to-day director. I was struck by how well the rebrand was reflected in the design of the website. We were trying to converse in a unified tone athwart multiple practices and siloed departments, and to keep those multiple hearerss in mind. I veritably appreciated the reflection that went into designing a website that reflected those goals.
R1: As an sample, civil is just one of four practices we have here. We have civil, illegal, youthful rights, and a pro bono practice. In civil alone, there are 23 different units.
Constructive came up with our phraseology lead, redid the logo, made a lot of templates for different goods, and design pieces throughout the edifice, including signage for the walls. They made templates for our PowerPoint presentations and designs for the fountain pens we give out at meetings. They also do our annual report. Our tagline was already in locate, but the comcommission statement was slightly changed. It was tweaked to be more reflective of a unified tone.
Was there a dedicated team?
R1: There were 8–10 nation implicated in total. Some of the staffing changed athwart the rebrand, website design, and annual reporting design. Matt (Founder and Executive Director, Constructive) has always been my main touch. He’s not always the point individual for each of the projects, but at the end of the day, if I had a issue or needed to clarify something, Matt was my point individual. We also had a project director who changed during the process.
R2: In my day-to-day interactions managing the website, Johanna (Senior Project Manager, Constructive) has been the first touch, although we have worked with other nation on the team for specific things. Lily (Senior Project Manager, Constructive) was our project director for the annual report. We have another touch for getting our Google Ad Grants optimized. I believe he’s a Google Ads consultant.
How did you come to work with Constructive?
R1: I initially heard almost Constructive at a rebranding debateion, and was struck by the fact that they dealt with not-for-profits, and that they understood the weight of a brand. I come from a commercial, for-profit background, and rebranding and marketing are very much in my wheelhouse. Because I had that background, I was tasked with finding three companies that our leadership could meet with and make the determination.
The initial determinationmakers ended up not being the nation who worked on the project. I was just the one that establish the three, but I surely had sway at the time. All three were very different, and leadership determined to go with Constructive.
What are you approach expents (if diclosed)?
R1: It’s approaching $500,000.
What is the terminal result of working with ?
R1: We began working with Constructive in 2017.
Results achieved
Are there any measureable or plum results?
R1: I don’t know if we’ve gotten feedback from outside nation owing of the rebrand. I ponder it was more sly for them. Our board of rulers was very lucky with the rebrand. Everyone understood that we needed to do something with the confused interaction we had. The website only got real feedback. R2: We haven’t had a lot of major issues with the website. Usually, it’s a full effect, and that’s something I’m able to help Constructive with. They’re answering and reflectionful, and they try to apprehend what the goal is. I can debate things with them, and they come back with the best discretion for us. They’re always clear almost timelines, so we can always prioritize.
R2: The feedback I’ve gotten is a pliant different. I',ve gotten outside feedback from my peers in the activity. It was very real, and it’s a big step up from where we came. The website we had precedently was supposed to be present. It was good for what it was, but this has been a nice upgrade.
R1: For our staff, the most significant thing was to liberate a mobile-friendly website to our clients. Most of them do not have desktops, so 60–70% of them approach the internet exclusively through mobile devices. In accession, our clients are faced with awful, life-changing situations that demand proximate observation. They can now visit the website and find a phone number or developed information that will help them mitigate the crisis they’re facing. I know that our staff is thrilled that the client feedback has been excellent.
R2: The way it’s shaped makes a lot more perception. It’s a lot more intuitive for someone who’s trying to get help. One of the reasons why we wanted to shape it differently is that someone with an migration issue may not apprehend that that’s a civil issue. If one of the categories is migration, that obviously makes it much clearer. That’s part of what made it such a step up.
As we did our beta testing, we identified new things that we wanted to have, and Constructive was a big associate in helping us prioritize.What is (from your point of view) the key factor to pay observation while interorder with
R1: It’s their endurance. We’re a beast of an structure whose members are very articulate and windy. Constructive stayed their order and kept us on track. It wasn’t always a smooth process, but it wasn’t their defect.
R2: I felt that Constructive always kept an eye on the big picture, pondering almost the goals we set out for the website—what we were trying to execute and how we’d articulate that when making changes and figuring out the best way to do something. They were always comcommission-focused, pondering almost what we were trying to execute. That’s a big lens to view any project through.
What aspects of their work would you like to get improved?
R1: Constructive could do a better job of articulating to my cluster what the best practices are. It’s a double-edged sword. Sometimes, they needed to furnish to our preferences as a client. Other times, they needed to converse up from their professional experience and head us off from a poor determination.
Do you have any advice for forthcoming clients of theirs?
R1: They were able to summarize our surveys and workshops in writing, and our customary calls were also very helpful.
