Peer to Peer Magazine

45 WWW.ILTANET.ORG The Evolving Business of Law FEATURES » Designate witnesses prepared to testify regarding the technology and processes used Companies with high litigation or investigation profiles are increasingly bringing in-house technology tools, people and processes for data preservation, identification and collection. The increased emphasis on data security and privacy has also raised the profile of internal e-discovery teams and expanded their responsibilities. Companies with infrequent litigation or investigations will find less value in handling e-discovery services internally, especially with its potential to increase their own risks and expenses. For those companies, relying on an outside provider is usually more cost-effective and efficient. Most companies rely on third- party providers for data processing, imaging, review and productions, but a few that have enough litigation to justify the expense (and generate the savings) are also handling review and productions in-house. The most common pitfall I see is companies that build teams or tools and then lose the perspective to evaluate their success adequately. The risk is that once an investment is made, the company will try to extend use of the team into areas with greater risk and less defensibility or will fail to maintain the skills and tools of the team at the appropriate level. When To Involve Outside Providers Good outside providers improve their technology, people and processes continually to meet business demands. Below are a few factors that weigh in favor of involving outside expertise. Unique and complex problems requiring: » Specialized legal knowledge not available internally » Specialized tools or resources (technology, people or processes) » Accessibility or ability to scale up quickly to address needs » Physical/geographic presence Legal problems involving: » Significant legal or financial risk/benefit 1 2 » Significant precedential value » Unique or rarely occurring issues » The need for a third party or outside opinion » The need to use a known or respected expert or resource for greater defensibility Maers where the corporation: » Needs to use internal resources for more valuable/significant projects » Needs to use internal resources for maers requiring their expertise » Lacks expertise or desire to invest in the area (not our line of business) » Lacks the capacity to handle a specific maer In a quick internet search, I found a 1970s law review article debating the internal team-outside provider issue when the in-house corporate law department was taking shape. Just as legal options and client needs continually develop and evolve, this issue must be re-assessed time and again, always depending on the unique needs of a given client and the specific legal issue at hand. P2P 3 The most common pitfall I see is companies that build teams or tools and then lose the perspective to evaluate their success adequately.

• Cover