I visit lots of attorney websites featuring testimonials from former clients.

Usually, they’re in written form, about a paragraph long, with a truncated signature.

Here’s an example:

“Attorney John Doe is outstanding. From the first meeting to the day the judge ruled, he stood by my side and protected me. I was more than pleased with the result, and I’ve already referred a co-worker and family member to him. He is amazing.

John D.”

Without getting into the substance of the testimonial and the need to comply with the professional responsibility rules in your jurisdiction, I have two comments about the above:

First, I don’t like the fact that it’s in writing. I’d much prefer a video. I’d prefer a horrible, terrible, awful video over the written testimonial. Video is believable. Written testimonials aren’t nearly as believable. In fact, many of your website visitors believe that you made up the testimonial. They believe it’s a fake. Video counteracts that assumption.

Second, I hate the signature. Was this guy unwilling to allow you to use his real name? Is he embarrassed about having been your client? Did you make it up?

The truncated last name reinforces the idea that this testimonial is a fake. Use the whole name. Identify the city and state where the client lives along with some other facts (like that was a custody case and that he’s 36 years old with 3 children). If the client won’t let you use his name and info, then skip the testimonial.

You’re better off without a testimonial if it’s going to call your honesty into question with a potential client. Use the full name or skip it entirely.

Testimonials can be powerful. They way most lawyers use them right now, they’re not.