Overcoming misconceptions or objections to using eDiscovery

eDiscovery and the peripheral solutions are no longer processes that only apply to large matters, either in terms of the volume of documents or the value of the dispute or action. The reality is that eDiscovery has evolved and done well, it is enveloped in a range of complimentary services that create a competitive advantage for legal teams from who are responsible for identifying, collecting, analysing, and reviewing data in any legal or quasi-legal environment. There is an increased adoption of eDiscovery technology and processes, and it is expected that this will only continue to increase. Any objection held to the application of eDiscovery to a matter, particularly a dispute, is generally based on outdated assumptions about the technology and service or poor experiences with sub-par providers.

Consider

• The rapid adoption of technology and the resulting exponential growth of data relevant to legal review exercises which has created a capacity gap that can’t be bridged by human resources.

• The cost and time associated with manually reviewing large volumes of documents particularly in the context of what might be proportionate to the value of the matter and any deadlines for compliance.

• The ongoing changes to Court Rules and Case Law that show an expectation, and in some cases a requirement, that lawyers consider and adopt eDiscovery processes as early as possible.

• The position of various Regulators requiring responding parties to provide their responses in an eDiscovery compliant format.

• The efficiency and accuracy gains, along with the relative risk reduction, that comes with adopting an eDiscovery-powered review process, particularly in comparison to traditional review workflows.

• The relative reduction in the commercial eDiscovery fee models. The fees associated with using eDiscovery services have been greatly simplified and have reduced by up 90%, in recent years.