The quarterly publication of the International Legal Technology Association
Issue link: https://epubs.iltanet.org/i/116777
best practices The courts have yet to stake out a clear position on either method of collection, but the Sedona Conference has provided some general guidance in this area. In their "Best Practices Commentary on the Use of Search & Information Retrieval Methods in E-Discovery," practice point one states: "In many settings involving electronically stored information, reliance solely on a manual search process for the purpose of finding responsive documents may be infeasible or unwarranted. In such cases, the use of automated search methods should be viewed as reasonable, valuable, and even necessary." Regardless of the collection methods used, it is the education about, compliance to and ongoing review of your data management policies that are the critical tasks that should be undertaken by corporations and outside counsel to maintain a repeatable and defensible ESI collection process for e-discovery. Develop workflows to deal with the potential for large amounts of nonsearchable data, including hard copy documents. 3. Prioritize Data Sets There are three primary methods used to prioritize and organize data sets to be reviewed by counsel: • Keyword searching • Concept searching • Use of analytics or predictive coding technology Each approach has its own unique set of advantages and disadvantages and, when used in conjunction with careful documentation and appropriate iteration, should survive a challenge by a party's opponent in litigation. The optimal workflow will likely require a hybrid approach applying two, or perhaps all three, of these approaches to reach the best results. For example, the use of analytics and predictive coding typically returns more relevant documents without the limitations of traditional searching logic. However, a wellplanned and well-constructed keyword search can be more 16 Peer to Peer effective for certain situations, such as locating specific date ranges and/or proper names. Putting these technologies and methods together with the proper workflow, methodology and documentation will deliver the best results and better maintain defensibility if challenged. More important than the actual technology is how the legal teams — and the professionals who are familiar with system limitations — combine them into the optimal workflow best suited to meet the requirements for a given case. In the end, the success of these approaches is based more on the personnel and workflow and not the technology itself. 4. Select the Best Technology Tools Many law firms and organizations have responded to the explosion of data and the resulting increase in litigation matters by choosing to invest in their own e-discovery software tools to manage tasks. With so many software options available, companies have to evaluate their needs carefully before determining the right e-discovery software for their specific requirements. Every organization is unique, and there isn't a "one size fits all" option available. Therefore, the evaluation process of e-discovery solutions that are affordable and guarantee a good return on investment is of the utmost importance. The first step in evaluating the actual tools is to decide which part of the e-discovery process you want to invest in. Some firms have decided that having ESI processing and analysis capabilities in-house is their priority over developing their own robust document review platform. Others have determined they are best served by outsourcing their processing needs and prefer to host and manage their own document reviews internally. Still others have made the decision to invest in all areas of the e-discovery continuum and take greater ownership of the entire process. Only the professionals inside each individual organization are capable of making these decisions, and they should only be made after careful and thorough analysis. Any investment in e-discovery technology can be quite expensive, and you don't want to lock yourself into a solution that won't deliver what you need. These systems should be fast, powerful and versatile enough to process and manage a large and diverse population of data. Surveys have shown that lawyers' top priorities are speed and ease of use when using document review software. Selecting a tool that contains the features and functionality your lawyers and review teams desire while maintaining the necessary speed and ease of use will go a long way toward ensuring a successful implementation. Scalability and flexibility are other important factors in selecting the right tool. A typical challenge for many organizations handling large projects is ensuring their tools can scale to handle very large volumes of data in a short time frame. In addition, a tool that has the flexibility to be customized to meet the unique and specific needs of any matter can prove to be very beneficial.