Digital White Papers

I L T A W H I T E P A P E R | L I T I G A T I O N A N D P R A C T I C E S U P P O R T 60 C O N Q U E R I N G E M A I L I N E D I S C O V E R Y : H O W D A T A A N A L Y T I C S A R E C H A N G I N G T H E G A M E workflows today, there could be 1,000 messages in your review workflow with 600 inclusive messages. But if you look at the number of thread groups (unique conversations), there may be as little as 200 conversations taking place. Identifying those unique conversations represents a significant reduction in content to be reviewed (up to 80% in some recent testing), which is a big leap from the estimated 40- 50% reduction achievable with the more common approach of reviewing inclusive messages only. If individual messages can actually be coded from this viewpoint, the ability to make surgical coding decisions on individual messages, branches, or sub- sections of a conversation becomes available to the reviewer—a lifesaver for identifying what portion of a thread should be included in a production and emails that may not be present in the top most email that was collected. This can uncover hidden email participants that may have an impact on privilege decisions—music to the ears of privilege log warriors everywhere—but the value can expand beyond that to create powerful research and fact discovery tools in investigations and case preparation use cases. Separately, advances are also allowing email headers in document viewers to come alive and act as access points for more information about individual participants. This can greatly improve the utility of name normalization output for diving deeper into who the participants are, what role they play in your matter, or how they may influence privilege decisions. Threading evolution: What's on the cutting edge? What if you didn't have to worry about what was inclusive and what was non-inclusive because you could review an entire conversation as a whole in one view? What if you could apply coding decisions easily to individual messages, combinations of messages, select branches, or entire threads, with full visibility and context into which messages you were coding and how those decisions relate to earlier and later messages? A new approach now being offered is the assembly of email thread content into a singular conversation that creates an entirely new unitization of email content to maximize the value of email threading. In common email threading review C O N V E R S AT I O N V I E W

• Cover