P2P

65 I L T A N E T . O R G review at the outset. And, adding insult to injury, the government can always request additional data and information throughout the review process. Further, some industry-specific challenges may add to the difficulty of conducting a quality antitrust review. Heavily regulated industries – and those that deal with the public sector – might simply require more work. Healthcare companies, for instance, must not only collect data regarding their geographical footprint and overlapping services, but also include a vast range of sensitive data such as patient information, health treatment information, clinical study data, and more. With so much data at play, companies will be hard-pressed to deliver the right information at the right time. Nevertheless, this is the expectation. Organizations committed to a quality review must work to sidestep four common mistakes during the review process: • [1] Failure to set clear goals. Muddy waters make for uncertain outcomes. If the whole review team isn't on the same page, a team member might miss critical information – or worse, get it wrong completely, which may lead to bigger problems. Collaborate with your team, set your priorities, map out your processes and stick to budgets and schedules. Pay strict attention to details such as search terms, as poor terms can lead to misidentified workflows. • [2] Failure to coordinate. Once all priorities are set, coordinating key information between the primary stakeholders – the government agencies involved, the company under investigation, its outside counsel, a data or eDiscovery service provider, and a document review service provider – is absolutely crucial. We know it can be difficult to coordinate all parties' schedules, but you must do so as often as you can. There's no substitute for constant collaboration; team calls, video chats or even in-person meetings are essential to ensure everyone is on the same page. • [3] Lack of creativity. Though its importance might not be immediately obvious, creativity within a review is a commitment you can't afford to skimp on. Often, the document review process is more art than science, benefitting from creative and innovative ways to achieve the project's overall goals while making the engagement faster and more efficient. Jeff Guttman is a longtime eDiscovery and managed review expert who serves as Level Legal's Director of Client Services and focuses on delivering outstanding customer-focused compliance, privacy, investigation, eDiscovery, analytics and review solutions. He holds a B.A. in political science from Davidson College and a J.D. from Rutgers University Law School. The development and use of data analytics, for example, has exploded in the last decade, resulting in various new technologies and ways to review projects and present data. With an antitrust review's strict timeline, a targeted business might fail to demand creativity from its service providers in favor of simply getting the job done by the deadline. • [4] Failure to prepare. Take it from the Scouts: You need to be prepared. Some outside counsel or service providers don't adequately prepare target businesses for what to expect during an antitrust investigation, a matter made worse when the government demands even more data collection, or the process incurs additional costs. By managing expectations upfront, providers and counsel can help prevent client frustrations down the road. Antitrust investigations can be daunting. That's why you need an exceptional document-review provider at the ready to help guide you through the process. At Level Legal, we know a thing or two about quality. Our commitment to excellence plus our customer-centered approach helps us stay the course – keeping you informed and on track during an investigation. ILTA

• Cover