Implement a defensible deletion strategy to manage risk and control costs
Keeping corporate data just in case or because it is hard to dispose of is not a sustainable practice.
July 23, 2012 at 07:06 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Keeping corporate data “just in case” or because it is hard to dispose of is not a sustainable practice. Even in light of big data strategies, if an organization has not been able to make large volumes of content actionable and achieve measurable success, big data may simply end up as a big headache. Organizations need to understand what content exists, develop a reasonable, good-faith plan to manage it and then take action. One of those actions should be regular and defensible disposition of content that no longer presents value to the organization.
Although it may sound easy, the corporate, legal, regulatory and technological landscape of today's business environment is extremely interconnected and complex, making judgments regarding content disposal a daunting task. Traditionally, organizations have made such decisions within a variety of management silos including IT, legal and records management, each with its own perspective on the value of content and its own business agendas. Taking such a splintered approach to the management of enterprise content can put an organization at risk for a variety of undesirable results such as over-retention of content, premature disposition of content and difficulty defending disposition activities to regulators and courts.
By committing to viewing information management from a higher, more strategic perspective, organizations can move from the mere management of information to true governance of information in which overall corporate goals, risks, obligations and budget are properly balanced. From there, they can make decisions as to which specific management tactics to take so that an organization successfully achieves its goals. That way, organizations effectively mitigate risk in accordance with their particular risk tolerance, including how best to dispose of content.
Even with sound policies and procedures in place, simply finding specific content is an enormous undertaking. In most organizations, information is continually created, received, replicated, re-stored and hidden throughout an enterprise. Once you have found the content, understanding it and then applying and enforcing appropriate management principles becomes a huge time-consuming task.
In order to develop a defensible deletion program, organizations must define a methodology. The program must be manageable and achievable. The best place to start is by defining a plan that targets the highest risk data first. Ongoing litigation must be considered in any defensible deletion plan, so understanding the organization's legal and e-discovery requirements and accounting for those in the plan is critical.
The next step is to get a solid understanding of the content the organization is retaining so that valuation can occur. By developing and using a data map, an organization will be able to obtain a strong understanding of what information it has, what information it regularly generates and where that information is stored. Additionally, data maps will offer insight into appropriate risk assessment. Using the insight from the data map, the organization can then develop an overall information governance strategy that defines what a reasonable deletion methodology should look like.
The concept of reasonableness is a key theory for organizations to apply when developing information governance strategies, policies and procedures. Courts do not ask, expect or necessarily reward organizations for perfection. Courts do expect, however, that whatever information management tactics an organization undertakes are appropriate to how that particular entity is situated (size, financial resources, regulatory and litigation profile, etc.).
Further, courts expect that as an organization develops and executes its information management programs that it does so in good faith, without malice or intent to defraud. Defensible deletion has many benefits that increase shareholder value by controlling costs and managing risk. Knowing that hidden data liabilities lurk in corporate networks, desktops, servers and offsite storage vaults keeps many executives up at night, or at least it should. Keeping all data is obviously no longer a strategy; the liability is too costly and risky. By establishing and maintaining a robust information governance program, including a defensible deletion strategy that reduces the size of the organization's overall information universe, the expense and time associated with finding and collecting responsive data when litigation occurs will be dramatically reduced.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllBig Tech Is Cozying Up to President Trump. Here's Why Their Lawyers Are Cautiously Optimistic
Starbucks Hands New CLO Hefty Raise, Says He Fosters 'Environment of Courage and Joy'
Internal Whistleblowing Surged Globally in 2024, So Why Were US Numbers Flat?
6 minute readMeta Workers Aren't of One Mind on Company's Retreat From DEI, Fact-Checking
Trending Stories
- 1Uber Files RICO Suit Against Plaintiff-Side Firms Alleging Fraudulent Injury Claims
- 2The Law Firm Disrupted: Scrutinizing the Elephant More Than the Mouse
- 3Inherent Diminished Value Damages Unavailable to 3rd-Party Claimants, Court Says
- 4Pa. Defense Firm Sued by Client Over Ex-Eagles Player's $43.5M Med Mal Win
- 5Losses Mount at Morris Manning, but Departing Ex-Chair Stays Bullish About His Old Firm's Future
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250