TL;DR

Regional law firms typically spend 2% to 4% of gross revenue on marketing and BD. The number matters less than whether the budget is built against a strategy. Most firm budgets are built against last year, which funds whatever the department was already doing rather than what the firm needs it to do.

Every fall, law firm managing partners sit down with their CFO and ask some version of the same question: what did we spend on marketing last year, and should it be more or less this year? The conversation usually ends with a number that is within 10% of the prior year, adjusted for whether revenue was up or down and whether the marketing director made a compelling case in the budget meeting.

That process produces a budget. It does not produce a strategy.

What the benchmarks actually say

Regional AmLaw firms typically spend between 2% and 4% of gross revenue on marketing and business development combined. That range includes personnel, technology, programs, and attorney BD support. Firms in active growth mode, entering new markets, or building a practice from scratch often push toward 5%.

Those numbers come from industry surveys and are useful as a sanity check, not as a target. A firm spending 2% against a clear BD strategy will consistently outperform a firm spending 4% against no strategy. The percentage is a ceiling constraint, not a planning tool.

What matters more than the total is how the budget is allocated across the four categories that determine whether marketing spend produces results.

The four budget categories and where firms get them wrong

A law firm marketing budget has four meaningful categories. Most firms get the allocation backwards.

Personnel. Salaries, benefits, and any contractor or agency fees. This is the highest-leverage category and the one most directly connected to outcomes. A well-staffed department with a clear mandate will outperform a well-funded program budget every time. Most firms underinvest here, particularly at the business development manager level where the attorney-to-department connection actually happens.

Technology. CRM, website, digital tools, and data subscriptions. This category is often either over-funded (a CRM no one uses) or under-funded (a website that has not been updated in three years). The right spend here is determined by what the department actually uses and what would genuinely improve attorney BD activity if it worked better.

Programs. Events, sponsorships, directories, rankings, and campaigns. This is the most visible category and the easiest place to spend money without producing results. A conference sponsorship, a table at a charity gala, a directory submission: each feels like marketing activity. None of it produces a client relationship without an attorney following up. Programs without attorney engagement are sunk costs.

Attorney BD support. Coaching, training, pitch materials, proposal writing, and individual client development activities. This is the category most directly tied to revenue and the one most consistently underfunded at regional firms.

Firm-wide versus practice group budgets

Most regional firms run a single firm-wide marketing budget controlled by the CMO or marketing director and approved by firm leadership. That works for funding department infrastructure and firm-level brand activities. It does not work well for funding practice group-specific BD.

When practice groups have no dedicated allocation, marketing spend defaults to whoever asks loudest. The litigation group runs a seminar. The real estate group sponsors a trade association. Neither activity was prioritized against the firm’s BD goals. Both consumed budget that could have supported a more deliberate pursuit.

A two-tier budget structure solves this. A firm-wide base funds the department, the brand, and shared infrastructure. Practice group allocations fund targeted activities tied to that group’s specific client development goals for the year. The practice group allocation requires a plan: who are we trying to reach, what is the relationship stage, what do we need the department to produce, and how will we measure it.

That requirement is not bureaucratic overhead. It is the mechanism that forces the conversation between attorneys and the marketing department that almost never happens otherwise.

How to know if your budget is right

The clearest signal that a marketing budget is wrong is not the total number. It is whether the people responsible for BD outcomes, attorneys, practice group leaders, and the marketing director, can name what the budget is supposed to produce in the next 12 months.

If the answer is “maintain what we have” or “support the department,” the budget is being set without a strategy. If the answer is specific, the budget is doing its job.

The number follows the strategy. Most firms try to build the strategy around the number. That is why most law firm marketing budgets produce the same results year after year.

Common Questions