AI search visibility for law firms and legal advisers
Somebody with a legal problem searches before they call, and what they find decides who they call. The firms being read are not the ones with the most polished practice-area pages. They are the ones that answered the question plainly, said which jurisdiction it applies in, and put a name to it.
The firm that answers the question in public is the firm on the shortlist before anyone picks up a phone.
What buyers ask law firms and legal advisers
Examples of the shape these questions take — not a measurement of your market. The Demand Scanner finds the ones your own buyers are actually asking.
Publish once. Show up three times.
The same question, published once on your own hub — as the answer above the results, as the source an assistant quotes mid-sentence, and as the result underneath.
Under Dutch law it runs from one to four months depending on length of service, and the contract may extend it. It is illustrative here: the figure that matters is the one in the employee's own contract and the route the employer takes.
Aanswers.yourcompany.comAn illustration of the three surfaces, not a screenshot of anyone’s placement — the domain is a placeholder. Google and ChatGPT are shown as places answers surface, not as endorsements.
People ask an assistant their legal question before they ask a lawyer.
It is the most private kind of question, which is exactly why it gets typed into a box rather than asked out loud. The assistant answers from whoever wrote something specific and current enough to quote — and a practice-area page describing your expertise gives it nothing to work with.
- A page that settles one question is quotable; a practice-area overview is not
- Assistants prefer sources that state the jurisdiction and the date
- Being the source of the answer is how a firm is named in the recommendation that follows
The same question, a different answer in every jurisdiction
Nothing generalises across European legal systems, and a page that answers without naming the system is not merely incomplete — it is wrong for most readers. That is a risk and an opportunity at once: firms that publish jurisdiction-specific answers own questions that international content farms cannot address at all.
- Name the jurisdiction in the sentence that carries the answer, never only in a disclaimer
- Publish in the language a client would ask the question in, including the local legal term
- Where EU law and national implementation differ, say which one the reader is subject to
- Show a revision date, because a change in case law makes a page wrong rather than old
The five answers a firm should publish first
Each of these is an explanation somebody at the firm gives every week, to one person at a time.
Why law firms start with AnswerLink
The knowledge is already written — in memos, in intake notes, in the same explanation a partner gives every new client. It is not published because publishing it feels like advice, and because nobody owns the job of turning a memo into a page. AnswerLink structures what the firm has confirmed, drafts the answer from those records, and marks anything that has not been settled so a lawyer decides it rather than a model.
- Nothing is written from a model's general knowledge — only from records the firm confirmed
- Every statement carries the record it came from, so a partner can check it in seconds
- Where the answer depends on jurisdiction, the page is built to say so in the same sentence
Your memos and precedents, structured
Intake notes, standard explanations and practice knowledge become records with sources attached. The writing draws only on those, which is the difference between a page a firm can stand behind and a page a model improvised.
Read moreThe qualification travels with the statement
A summariser drops the caveat first, so the caveat cannot sit two paragraphs away. The writing attaches the jurisdiction, the client category and the date to the sentence that carries the answer.
Read moreThe answer stays free; the checklist asks for a name
A deadline checklist or a document list beside the answer, for the reader who has recognised their own situation in it. The reasoning is public; the conversation is the next step.
Read moreWhat law firms and legal advisers ask us
Does publishing this count as giving legal advice?
General information about how a rule works is not advice to a specific person, and firms have published it for decades in newsletters and seminars. The boundary is stated on the page in plain words rather than buried in a disclaimer, which is also what makes a summary of it safe.
Our partners will not let a model write about law. Should they?
They should not, and it does not. The writing draws only on records the firm has confirmed, marks anything it cannot support, and produces a draft a lawyer approves before it exists publicly. A partner who would not sign the page should not publish it.
We work in several jurisdictions. Does that mean several hubs?
One hub with the jurisdiction in each answer. Separate estates drift apart, and a contradiction between two of your own pages is worse than a gap.
Will this compete with our own practice-area pages?
They answer different things. A practice-area page tells somebody who already found you what you do; an answer page is how somebody finds you at all. In practice the answers become the entry point and the practice pages become the destination.
See what your own company already knows.
The scan is free and takes about four minutes. What comes back is your company, structured — not a demo of someone else’s.
Scan my website