E-discovery: Choosing the right vendor for e-discovery projects
Few corporations have the internal resources or IT infrastructure to adequately assume responsibility for all potential services involved in an e-discovery project.
October 30, 2012 at 03:00 AM
10 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Few corporations have the internal resources or IT infrastructure to adequately assume responsibility for all potential services involved in an e-discovery project. Companies facing litigation will likely need to evaluate and eventually enlist service providers—or vendors—to facilitate their e-discovery obligations.
Some vendors consult on document identification and preservation issues, and others perform collections. Others process documents by taking the raw data and converting them into reviewable files. Vendors can manage document reviews and productions and even provide technology services and equipment for trials.
Although many service providers claim to be experts in e-discovery, not all of them are. It is therefore vital to find a competent and trustworthy vendor. Choosing a vendor should be approached in much the same way as selecting outside counsel. The temptation to find one “do-it-all” vendor may be strong, but it should be resisted. George Socha, president of Socha Consulting, cautions those seeking vendors to “recognize that we still live in a world of bespoke suits, not off-the-rack clothing.” In this industry, “one size definitely does not fit all, and the right fit matters tremendously,” says Socha. Therefore, before engaging a vendor, an organization, along with its counsel, should map out the scope and budget for the project.
How to find and get to know vendors
Among the ways to connect with vendors and learn about their products is to attend trade shows and conferences. Word of mouth is another method for identifying reliable vendors—a colleague with experience in e-discovery, and who has used a particular vendor, may be able to give a recommendation. It may be helpful to visit a vendor's website, invite the vendor in for an interview or ask for a demonstration to get to know the vendor better. During these meetings, consider describing the specific problem or task and asking how the vendor would solve it. This puts the onus on the vendor to demonstrate how it stands out compared to the competition. In organizations with full procurement staff, it may be wise to solicit requests for proposal from a variety of vendors.
Evaluating vendors
Having a knowledgeable evaluator greatly facilitates the vendor selection process. There are several important factors to examine when deciding on a vendor:
- Company stability/personnel: Is the company in sound financial condition? Is the vendor staffed with properly trained project management and sales personnel? If a company is in financial trouble or has a high turnover rate in its project management and sales groups, it might be best to look elsewhere.
- Security: Does the vendor have safeguards in place to ensure the physical security and integrity of its clients' data? The last thing you want to encounter is a breach of security or damage to any of the company's data.
- Infrastructure: Does the vendor have sufficient equipment and capacity to meet the needs and deadlines of the project? Good vendors will turn away work if they cannot handle it. You do not want to find your project out of scope, beyond deadlines and above budget.
- Process/methodology: Are there documented standardized practices in place to assess and report on a project's scope, time and cost? Can the vendor measure and validate the quality of its services, processes and procedures? Are they using contemporary technologies? It is important that the vendor's processes are organized, systematic and defensible.
- Geography: Where is your data kept? Some organizations may prefer that their data is (or is not) stored in a particular location.
A few best practices
After choosing a vendor, it is good practice to enter into a nondisclosure agreement before the vendor performs any services. This protects the organization as well as the confidentiality of its documents and data.
Also, consider signing a master services agreement with the vendor, which defines the nature of the relationship between the organization and the vendor and outlines the general services to be provided. Such an agreement may also include pricing models, billing terms and reporting frequency. For individual projects, however, it is best to document the work to be performed in a detailed statement of work, which includes the tasks or services to be provided and a cost estimate for the project.
One thing to look out for is vendors who contract work out to third parties. Subcontractors generally do not sign and are not subject to the nondisclosure or master service agreements. Therefore, it is imperative to inquire whether the vendor engages in this practice and to clearly define the relationship to ensure that those agreements adequately safeguard the company.
Lastly, most top-tier vendors will have a conflict-check procedure in place. But even if the vendor you've selected does not, provide the case caption or names of the parties and firms involved to the vendor for a conflict check as soon as possible after signing the nondisclosure agreement. Knowing whether the vendor you've chosen is also working with a company or law firm that is adverse to your interests is critical.
Conclusion
Choosing the right service provider can mean the difference between the success or failure of your project. These tips will hopefully help guide your selection.
Few corporations have the internal resources or IT infrastructure to adequately assume responsibility for all potential services involved in an e-discovery project. Companies facing litigation will likely need to evaluate and eventually enlist service providers—or vendors—to facilitate their e-discovery obligations.
Some vendors consult on document identification and preservation issues, and others perform collections. Others process documents by taking the raw data and converting them into reviewable files. Vendors can manage document reviews and productions and even provide technology services and equipment for trials.
Although many service providers claim to be experts in e-discovery, not all of them are. It is therefore vital to find a competent and trustworthy vendor. Choosing a vendor should be approached in much the same way as selecting outside counsel. The temptation to find one “do-it-all” vendor may be strong, but it should be resisted. George Socha, president of Socha Consulting, cautions those seeking vendors to “recognize that we still live in a world of bespoke suits, not off-the-rack clothing.” In this industry, “one size definitely does not fit all, and the right fit matters tremendously,” says Socha. Therefore, before engaging a vendor, an organization, along with its counsel, should map out the scope and budget for the project.
How to find and get to know vendors
Among the ways to connect with vendors and learn about their products is to attend trade shows and conferences. Word of mouth is another method for identifying reliable vendors—a colleague with experience in e-discovery, and who has used a particular vendor, may be able to give a recommendation. It may be helpful to visit a vendor's website, invite the vendor in for an interview or ask for a demonstration to get to know the vendor better. During these meetings, consider describing the specific problem or task and asking how the vendor would solve it. This puts the onus on the vendor to demonstrate how it stands out compared to the competition. In organizations with full procurement staff, it may be wise to solicit requests for proposal from a variety of vendors.
Evaluating vendors
Having a knowledgeable evaluator greatly facilitates the vendor selection process. There are several important factors to examine when deciding on a vendor:
- Company stability/personnel: Is the company in sound financial condition? Is the vendor staffed with properly trained project management and sales personnel? If a company is in financial trouble or has a high turnover rate in its project management and sales groups, it might be best to look elsewhere.
- Security: Does the vendor have safeguards in place to ensure the physical security and integrity of its clients' data? The last thing you want to encounter is a breach of security or damage to any of the company's data.
- Infrastructure: Does the vendor have sufficient equipment and capacity to meet the needs and deadlines of the project? Good vendors will turn away work if they cannot handle it. You do not want to find your project out of scope, beyond deadlines and above budget.
- Process/methodology: Are there documented standardized practices in place to assess and report on a project's scope, time and cost? Can the vendor measure and validate the quality of its services, processes and procedures? Are they using contemporary technologies? It is important that the vendor's processes are organized, systematic and defensible.
- Geography: Where is your data kept? Some organizations may prefer that their data is (or is not) stored in a particular location.
A few best practices
After choosing a vendor, it is good practice to enter into a nondisclosure agreement before the vendor performs any services. This protects the organization as well as the confidentiality of its documents and data.
Also, consider signing a master services agreement with the vendor, which defines the nature of the relationship between the organization and the vendor and outlines the general services to be provided. Such an agreement may also include pricing models, billing terms and reporting frequency. For individual projects, however, it is best to document the work to be performed in a detailed statement of work, which includes the tasks or services to be provided and a cost estimate for the project.
One thing to look out for is vendors who contract work out to third parties. Subcontractors generally do not sign and are not subject to the nondisclosure or master service agreements. Therefore, it is imperative to inquire whether the vendor engages in this practice and to clearly define the relationship to ensure that those agreements adequately safeguard the company.
Lastly, most top-tier vendors will have a conflict-check procedure in place. But even if the vendor you've selected does not, provide the case caption or names of the parties and firms involved to the vendor for a conflict check as soon as possible after signing the nondisclosure agreement. Knowing whether the vendor you've chosen is also working with a company or law firm that is adverse to your interests is critical.
Conclusion
Choosing the right service provider can mean the difference between the success or failure of your project. These tips will hopefully help guide your selection.
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
© 2024 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 AllRepublican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
4 minute readSo You Want to Be a Tech Lawyer? Consider Product Counseling
FTC Lauds Withdrawal of Proposed Indiana Hospitals Merger After Leaning on State Regulators
4 minute readHow Qualcomm’s General Counsel Is Championing Diversity in Innovation
6 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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