PZ0%Loading — Patrik Zukal
PZPatrik Zukal
CZEN
← Back to work·Sample analysis

What I found on a law firm's website

A sample analysis on a real structure, with an anonymized brief. It shows the kind of output you get: concrete findings ordered by impact, clearly and without jargon — from missing link previews when sharing to details that quietly undermine client trust.

Law firm · anonymizedMay 20266 findings

What I reviewed

  • Tech and loading speed
  • Content and clarity of services
  • Credibility and proof
  • The conversion path to contact
  • Technical SEO and sharing
Findings

What the site costs in enquiries — and what to do

  1. 01
    CriticalTech

    Sharing on LinkedIn shows a bare URL instead of a preview

    Finding

    The site has no Open Graph or Twitter meta tags. When the lawyer or a client pastes the link on LinkedIn, into a message or a social network, no preview with an image and title appears — just a bare URL.

    Impact

    The link looks untrustworthy and gets lost in the feed. In the very network where the clients are, the firm looks worse than competitors who do have previews. Click-throughs drop.

    Recommendation

    Add Open Graph and Twitter tags and a generated 1200×630 preview image with the logo, firm name and specialisation. Verify in the LinkedIn Post Inspector.

  2. 02
    CriticalTech

    On mobile the main content takes over four seconds to load

    Finding

    The largest element on the page renders in more than 4 seconds on a mobile connection. The culprits are unoptimised full-size images and a render-blocking script.

    Impact

    Every extra second raises the bounce rate. A client who came from Google often leaves before they even see the site — and the firm never knows.

    Recommendation

    Compress and serve modern image formats, defer non-critical JavaScript and target the largest paint under 2.5 seconds on mobile.

  3. 03
    To fixConversion path

    A visitor ready to call has to hunt for the contact

    Finding

    The first screen has no clear call to action and no visible contact. Phone and email are only in the footer; a form is missing entirely.

    Impact

    A decided client has to scroll and search for how to reach out. Some give up — and an enquiry that was within reach never arrives.

    Recommendation

    Add a clear CTA (e.g. “Free consultation”) to the header and the first section, and make the contact reachable in one click.

  4. 04
    To fixContent

    Services are written in legalese, not the client's language

    Finding

    Services are described in expert terms with no explanation of what they mean for the client and when they're needed. The translation into concrete situations is missing.

    Impact

    A layperson can't tell whether the firm is the right one for their problem. Uncertainty makes them not reach out, or keep looking.

    Recommendation

    Rewrite the services into client situations (“I'm getting divorced”, “I'm starting a company”, “I'm recovering a debt”) with a short, plain explanation.

  5. 05
    To fixCredibility

    No face, no specific experience, no references

    Finding

    The site shows no professional photo of the lawyer, no specific specialisations, no references and no bar registration number. It reads as generic and interchangeable.

    Impact

    With legal services, trust decides before price does. Without a face and proof, the site gives a visitor no reason to trust this firm specifically.

    Recommendation

    Add a professional portrait, specific specialisations, the registration number and two or three references or anonymized cases.

  6. 06
    MinorSEO

    Google understands the site less well

    Finding

    Pages have no unique title and description, and the heading hierarchy is inconsistent — some pages have several H1s and skip heading levels.

    Impact

    The search engine recognises the topic and relevance of pages less well. The firm then shows up worse for the queries its clients actually search.

    Recommendation

    Set a unique title and description for every page, a single H1 and a logical heading structure that reflects the content.

Summary

The site isn't bad — but it loses enquiries in places you can't see: when sharing, when loading on mobile, and at the moment a visitor should take the first step. Together that means it does less work for the firm than it could.

Cosmetics won't cut it here, but there's no need to build from scratch either. I'd recommend a targeted fix of the technical base and a rewrite of the key content — five or six interventions that give the site back its main job: bringing clients.

I want an analysis like this for my site