Faced with the accelerating increase in the volume of Electronically Stored Information (ESI) and the emergence of the concept of Big Data, enterprises worldwide need next generation IT systems to fulfill their corporate compliance, information governance and eDiscovery requirements to process and analyze all of this data. It is in response to this demand and the result of recent legal precendents that Technology Assisted Review (TAR), also known as Predictive Coding or Computer Assisted eDiscovery, is emerging as a legally viable and court-recognized option.
I spend the last 3 days walking the exhibit hall and meeting with technology vendors at the 2012 International Legal Technology Association (ILTA) Conference held August 26-30, 2012 at the Gaylord National Resort and Conference Center in Washington, D.C. ILTA is the premier peer networking organization, providing information to members to maximize the value of technology in support of the legal profession. As such, ITLA’s annual conference is a great place to talk to most of the technology vendors targeting the legal market, see demos of their technology offerings, listen to presentations from industry experts and judge the current status of the evolution of technology adoption within the legal community.
Today DCIG and eDiscovery Solutions Group are pleased to jointly announce the availability of a new DCIG Buyer’s Guide, the DCIG 2012 Early Case Assessment Buyer’s Guide that weights, scores and ranks 25 software tools that help law firms, litigators and organizations reduce their overall cost of eDiscovery. This Buyer’s Guide gives these entities the resources they need to assist them to quickly complete what is typically a very arduous and time-consuming process: selecting the right ECA software that matches their specific requirements.
DCIG expects to unveil its DCIG 2012 Early Case Assessment (ECA) Buyer’s Guide in Q2CY12. As prior Buyer’s Guides have done, it puts at the fingertips of organizations a Buyer’s Guide that provides them with a comprehensive list of ECA software that can assist them in this all-important buying decision while removing much of the mystery around how ECA are configured and which ones are suitable for which purposes.
Later this month DCIG will be unveiling a new product designed to aid end users, value added resellers and sales teams within our coverage community. The product is based on a successful line of analysis that DCIG has been producing since 2010 – the DCIG Buyer’s Guides.
Companies who execute Information Governance plans are looking for eDiscovery products supporting Early Case Assessment (ECA). ECA is a combination of search, workflow management, information processing, and multilingual user interfaces. ECA requires a cohesive set of technology, business and data science stakeholders to select products.
ECA is powerful business process, but identifying ECA products is a beleaguering task. ECA mashes together eDiscovery and technology requirements. The “mashing of requirements” creates a broad matrix of products and functionality. Without question, eDiscovery has significantly evolved within the last few years.
Enterprise and holistic investigation, as concepts and strategies, generate many questions, concerns and risks. Our investigator, legal and security community is made up of 50+ professionals. Our community helps develop working Investigation Playbooks to intersect pressing investigative issues. For example, our community collaborates with us to develop Investigation Playbooks to manage retention policy, business continuity and information security issues. Some of our community members includes KPMG, ARC Group NY and individuals, such as Steve Harper of Crucial Security and Randy Barr Chief Security Officer at WebEx.
As corporate counsel becomes more savvy and comfortable with the ‘reasonable’ standards of due diligence, they have begun to take control of the spend. The first question that many a General Counsel asks is “Why don’t we just do this ourselves?” Your vendors will have a polished set of answers sprinkled with names like Morgan Stanley, Qualcomm and Merrill Lynch, all designed to use the Sanction Scarecrow to keep their golden goose producing. The smoke and mirrors have lost their effectiveness in the face of new guidance from the Sedona Conference, EDRM, conference panels and waves of webinars.
I would agree with that 70% of the time reviews require more data from the source, in fact, it is probably higher. The reason the source data needs to be recalled during review is based on a simple fact – “the review phase is the FIRST time a qualified reviewer has looked at the data qualitatively, i.e. custodians, concepts, context etc.” Waiting until the data is in a review system to evaluate it is causing companies thousands if not millions annually. Those dollars would be much better spent as pennies, which is the cost of ECA tools in terms of review budgets. The goal’s are simple 1) reduce data sets going into review 2) improve data review during collection.
Joshua Konkle: In companies with multiple litigations and complex IT the argument is often made for soup-to-nuts approach, preservation to production what are your thoughts on such a system? — Greg Buckles: First let me say that information management is one of the most important pieces of the eDiscovery reference model. Second, the soup-to-nuts approach may lack flexibility by design and could create inefficiency depending on the scale of a matter. For example, a system that works for a small HR case, may not work for a shareholder lawsuit.