LinkedIn Adds Martindale-Hubbell Ratings

LinkedIn has just announced that users can add new sections to their profiles. New boxes will be available for certifications, publications, and even patents, reflecting the broader types of users that LinkedIn has experienced beyond the business and IT communities. For example, I can now add my (American) nuclear medicine technology licenses, and my numerous speaking engagements, important to an aspiring litigator claiming some background in healthcare.

One new section might be of particular interest to lawyers. The Martindale-Hubbell Ratings, which provide scores based on client satisfaction and peer-reviews, are also available as a section feature. The two types of scores cover different types of practice which reflect that the client base for some lawyers tends to be other lawyers.

Displaying the rating allows other LinkedIn users to rate the lawyer right on the site by clicking directly on the profile. The company also states that articles and blogs will be profiled in the future.

Although this Lexis-Nexis product is used far more extensively in the U.S. than in Canada, the integration with LinkedIn could help make it the premeiere rating site for lawyers online.


  1. Omar the problem here is that rating of a lawyer is far too subjective , you can have clients who are over the moon happy for no real good reason or clients who are pissed at losing a case and blame the lawyer.

  2. Certainly, Mark.

    I don’t even try to suggest that those with higher ratings are necessarily better lawyers, and I have noted the limitations of ratings before.

    It doesn’t mean people, including clients, won’t use it.

  3. Hi Omar,

    Thanks for profiling the new LinkedIn application for Lawyer Ratings.

    Full disclosure – I am the product manager at LexisNexis Canada for, one of the sites where you will see the rating information (the other being

    One rating may be subjective. We’ve all heard of the lawyer who did a superb job but lost the case…their client may not be very happy, for reasons beyond counsel’s control.

    However, the real power of ratings occurs once there are many and then it becomes a trend. It is this trend that is very useful to consumers and others searching for a lawyer.

    Let us know if you want more information about this product – we are very happy to be supporting it and it is free for lawyers to use.



  4. Mr. Frank,
    Is it not true though, that the lawyers participating in the Client Review Ratings program have the option to view any and all Reviews prior to them being published on the site? And should it be a “bad” review that they do not wished published, then they may opt to remove the display of all their client ratings?

    And if this is true, then does this not set the system up to be skewed towards a positive trend? And does the lawyer continue to have control over whether the Ratings are displayed, giving them the ability to wait until the pendulum swings the other way before displaying the rating again?

  5. Mr. Robins,

    Great question!

    Lawyers cannot pick and choose which ratings to go live nor can they, for example, suppress the bad and keep the good.

    The functionality we do provide is that they have an all or nothing option.

    Your example would not be possible (suppress the bad until the pendulum swings the other way). When the pendulum swings the other way, if they want to display the good ratings, he/she will also have to accept the bad.

    What we do advise lawyers is to not be afraid of a poor rating and to look at it as a window inside their practice and perhaps there is something that can be improved.

    I hope this clarifies things. Please let me know if you have further questions.



  6. I would like to thank Greg for providing clarification on the rating features.

    It’s not often we get product managers commenting directly here in response to questions or concerns around a service.