Rebuilding a multi-practice firm's website, intake routing and authority programme in one connected system

The firm had grown into four quite different practice areas and the website had grown with it, one page at a time, on a WordPress install that had accumulated enough plugin debt that routine edits were being deferred rather than made. Attorney biographies were attached to the wrong practice areas in several places. The team ordering on the people page was arbitrary. Booking was a single generic contact form, so a prospective client who wanted a specific attorney had no way to reach that attorney directly. Every submission from every form arrived in the same shared inbox with nothing to distinguish a newsletter signup from a cross-border expansion enquiry.

Every form on the site — newsletter, guide download, contact, booking — landed in one inbox with no source attribution. There was no way to answer 'where did this client come from?' for any matter the firm had opened.

1. 01

   The site could not be edited, so it was not being edited

   The real cost of the WordPress install was not hosting or speed. It was that nobody wanted to touch it, so content decisions were being postponed indefinitely. A publishing programme on top of that foundation would have stalled in week two.

2. 02

   Practice-area assignment errors were suppressing the pages that mattered

   Several attorneys were listed under practice areas they do not work in, and absent from ones they lead. This is a content-quality problem before it is an SEO problem: a buyer who lands on a practice page and does not find the person they were referred to leaves.

3. 03

   One generic form was destroying attribution

   With no per-form tagging, the firm could not tell which content, which webinar or which page produced an enquiry. Every marketing decision was being made without evidence.

4. 04

   The firm's genuine expertise was invisible to search and to AI answer engines

   The attorneys were operating at the front edge of cannabis regulation, digital-asset compliance and cross-border structuring, and none of that was in indexable, citable form. Competitors with weaker practices were being cited instead simply because they had published.

5. 05

   Webinars were being run as one-off events rather than as a programme

   Each session was designed, promoted and then abandoned. Nothing was repurposed, no registrant list was segmented for the next one, and the recordings were not published.

We migrated the site to Lovable so the firm's own team could make routine edits without an agency ticket, then rebuilt the information architecture around practice areas rather than around the org chart. Attorney records became a single source of truth mapped to practice areas, so a correction is made once and propagates. Per-attorney booking routes replaced the generic form. Every form on the site now writes to GoHighLevel and creates a contact carrying exactly one unique tag naming the form and the source, so a guide download, a newsletter signup and a cross-border enquiry are distinguishable forever. On that foundation we run a 90-day authority calendar and a live webinar series, with a breaking-news pipeline that researches developments in the firm's practice areas within 24 to 72 hours, verifies each against primary and government sources, scores eight to twelve candidate stories, shortlists five, and produces one publish-ready page.

1. 1

   Weeks 1–2

   Audit and content inventory

   Page-by-page inventory, practice-area assignment corrections, redirect map

   Owner: OmniFlow

2. 2

   Weeks 3–6

   Migration and rebuild

   Lovable rebuild, attorney records normalised, booking routes live

   Owner: OmniFlow

3. 3

   Weeks 5–7

   CRM wiring and tagging

   Every form writing to GoHighLevel with one unique tag per source

   Owner: OmniFlow + firm ops

4. 4

   Weeks 6–9

   Authority calendar build

   90-day calendar with owners, publication dates and review gates

   Owner: OmniFlow + attorneys

5. 5

   Week 9 onward

   Breaking-news pipeline live

   Weekly: research, primary-source verification, shortlist, one publish-ready page

   Owner: OmniFlow

6. 6

   Month 3 onward

   Webinar series

   Recurring sessions, segmented invitation campaigns, recordings published

   Owner: OmniFlow + attorneys

The measurable outcome of this engagement is attribution: from the point the forms were migrated, every enquiry the firm receives carries a tag naming where it came from. Publish the organic and enquiry figures once the post-migration window is long enough to compare like for like, and pull each from the tool named in the source line rather than from a dashboard summary.

Measured in Google Analytics 4, Google Search Console and GoHighLevel, window to be confirmed at publication. Supplied by the client and used with permission; identifying details removed. Cited: WordStream *2026 Google Ads Benchmarks*; Clio *2024 Legal Trends Report*; Hennessey Digital *2025 Lead Form Response Time Study*. ---.

These are the surfaces this engagement is run and measured from, shown with representative figures built around the benchmarks cited on this page. Every account we run reports into views like these, and you keep ownership of all of them.

4 of the figures on this engagement are not published yet. Rather than estimate them, this is the standard they will be held to: the system each is read from, and the exact definition and window that will be used. Nothing appears above until it has been pulled from the system named here.

We sequenced the authority calendar to start before the CRM tagging was fully live, which cost us clean attribution on the first few weeks of published content. On the next engagement of this shape the tagging goes in first and the publishing starts after, even if that delays the visible work by a fortnight.

Real client work. Every figure is measured in a named system and carries the window it was measured over. See all our work