Benefits of an ECM System
Last month this column focused on how complying with electronic data preservation and discovery requirements is a vital concern facing GCs today and how GCs can use technology planning as a way to prepare for e-discovery. This month, I am taking a step back and reviewing how an enterprise content...
May 13, 2007 at 08:00 PM
9 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Last month this column focused on how complying with electronic data preservation and discovery requirements is a vital concern facing GCs today and how GCs can use technology planning as a way to prepare for e-discovery. This month, I am taking a step back and reviewing how an enterprise content management (ECM) process and system can help GCs manage company data before being faced with litigation and the concomitant discovery burdens.
I have found that using an ECM system and process not only helps to access and preserve relevant records, but also organizes and manages content when preparing for litigation, ultimately saving significant amounts of lawyers' time preparing for litigation. A few of the main benefits of an internal ECM system include the following:
Improve Organization
With a comprehensive ECM system and strategy in place, a company is able to reduce the overall volume of content by as much as 50% according to some analyses. Reducing overall volumes greatly benefits a GC because it reduces the amount of potentially discoverable data an organization possesses and the cost and time to review that data. ECM systems also give the ability to manage all forms of content throughout their lifecycle while stored in one central location, ensuring easy access and retrieval.
As I have mentioned before, it is important to match your technology tools to your business and legal needs–technology can organize and streamline content but the basic organizational approach must come first. Once a company has a plan and strategy in place for addressing the organization of content, it can greatly improve a legal department's productivity by giving faster and easier retrieval of relevant information. It is important to establish and enforce policies upfront, including document retention policies and schedules to determine how long a record is kept based on either regulatory requirements or internal business practices. Educating employees on these policies provides them with the knowledge to ensure all content is consistently saved and deleted. Organizing company content creates many benefits, from reducing overall data to improving retrieval and preparation for litigation.
Reduce Costs
Not surprisingly, the initial investment in an ECM system can be costly, but the benefits can greatly outweigh the cost of not having a system in place. And the cost of not implementing a robust ECM system is often measured too late–after lengthy legal proceedings that include complicated discovery requests and force legal departments to search massive volumes of data in multiple locations. ECM tools can make a legal department more efficient and ultimately drive down the cost of litigation.
Having an ECM repository that's easy to access gives legal departments the ability to search data in many ways, from performing keyword searches to full text queries, drastically saving time in retrieving relevant company data. GCs also see enormous benefits in decreased risk of monetary or other sanctions for spoliation because all enterprise content is centrally stored and assigned a standardized retention and disposition schedule. This ensures information is retained only as long as appropriate and destroyed once that time has elapsed. The benefits of investing in a powerful ECM system are considerable when you compare the cost of searching for relevant data for a large discovery request and paying potentially hefty spoliation sanctions.
Increase Litigation Readiness
For most GCs, the main advantages of having a reliable ECM system are complying with regulations such as Sarbanes-Oxley and having immediate access to data to become prepared for foreseeable and unforeseeable litigation. Also, having the ability to apply legal holds to content inside an ECM system can significantly increase a GCs ability to prepare for litigation down the road.
One way to streamline a company's litigation readiness is to integrate a litigation support system into an existing ECM system. This approach allows the value of an ECM system to be extended with litigation support tools that seamlessly integrate preservation, review, coding, TIFFing, redaction and production of relevant data in-house, without ever moving records from the ECM environment. This approach helps GCs proactively handle litigation internally–not only for quick access to relevant information at reduced overall cost, but also for handling e-discovery from one ECM environment without having to hire additional third-party vendors. Legal holds can also be placed on relevant records, securing them from intentional or accidental deletion. Then non-responsive documents can be released back to the ECM system once a legal hold has been removed. Integrating litigation support systems with ECM systems allows GCs to prepare for litigation by applying legal holds to content inside an ECM system and handling various stages of e-discovery internally.
There are many benefits of using an integrated ECM process and system, from organizing company content to reducing overall costs to increasing litigation readiness. Taking proactive measures allows GCs to plan strategically for compliance as well as to prepare for litigation.
————-
Last month this column focused on how complying with electronic data preservation and discovery requirements is a vital concern facing GCs today and how GCs can use technology planning as a way to prepare for e-discovery. This month, I am taking a step back and reviewing how an enterprise content management (ECM) process and system can help GCs manage company data before being faced with litigation and the concomitant discovery burdens.
I have found that using an ECM system and process not only helps to access and preserve relevant records, but also organizes and manages content when preparing for litigation, ultimately saving significant amounts of lawyers' time preparing for litigation. A few of the main benefits of an internal ECM system include the following:
Improve Organization
With a comprehensive ECM system and strategy in place, a company is able to reduce the overall volume of content by as much as 50% according to some analyses. Reducing overall volumes greatly benefits a GC because it reduces the amount of potentially discoverable data an organization possesses and the cost and time to review that data. ECM systems also give the ability to manage all forms of content throughout their lifecycle while stored in one central location, ensuring easy access and retrieval.
As I have mentioned before, it is important to match your technology tools to your business and legal needs–technology can organize and streamline content but the basic organizational approach must come first. Once a company has a plan and strategy in place for addressing the organization of content, it can greatly improve a legal department's productivity by giving faster and easier retrieval of relevant information. It is important to establish and enforce policies upfront, including document retention policies and schedules to determine how long a record is kept based on either regulatory requirements or internal business practices. Educating employees on these policies provides them with the knowledge to ensure all content is consistently saved and deleted. Organizing company content creates many benefits, from reducing overall data to improving retrieval and preparation for litigation.
Reduce Costs
Not surprisingly, the initial investment in an ECM system can be costly, but the benefits can greatly outweigh the cost of not having a system in place. And the cost of not implementing a robust ECM system is often measured too late–after lengthy legal proceedings that include complicated discovery requests and force legal departments to search massive volumes of data in multiple locations. ECM tools can make a legal department more efficient and ultimately drive down the cost of litigation.
Having an ECM repository that's easy to access gives legal departments the ability to search data in many ways, from performing keyword searches to full text queries, drastically saving time in retrieving relevant company data. GCs also see enormous benefits in decreased risk of monetary or other sanctions for spoliation because all enterprise content is centrally stored and assigned a standardized retention and disposition schedule. This ensures information is retained only as long as appropriate and destroyed once that time has elapsed. The benefits of investing in a powerful ECM system are considerable when you compare the cost of searching for relevant data for a large discovery request and paying potentially hefty spoliation sanctions.
Increase Litigation Readiness
For most GCs, the main advantages of having a reliable ECM system are complying with regulations such as Sarbanes-Oxley and having immediate access to data to become prepared for foreseeable and unforeseeable litigation. Also, having the ability to apply legal holds to content inside an ECM system can significantly increase a GCs ability to prepare for litigation down the road.
One way to streamline a company's litigation readiness is to integrate a litigation support system into an existing ECM system. This approach allows the value of an ECM system to be extended with litigation support tools that seamlessly integrate preservation, review, coding, TIFFing, redaction and production of relevant data in-house, without ever moving records from the ECM environment. This approach helps GCs proactively handle litigation internally–not only for quick access to relevant information at reduced overall cost, but also for handling e-discovery from one ECM environment without having to hire additional third-party vendors. Legal holds can also be placed on relevant records, securing them from intentional or accidental deletion. Then non-responsive documents can be released back to the ECM system once a legal hold has been removed. Integrating litigation support systems with ECM systems allows GCs to prepare for litigation by applying legal holds to content inside an ECM system and handling various stages of e-discovery internally.
There are many benefits of using an integrated ECM process and system, from organizing company content to reducing overall costs to increasing litigation readiness. Taking proactive measures allows GCs to plan strategically for compliance as well as to prepare for litigation.
————-
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 AllSemiconductor Component Maker Accused of Deceiving Investors About Market Downturn, Export Curbs
3 minute readRecent FTC Cases Against Auto Dealers Suggest Regulators Are Keeping Foot on Accelerator
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1'Largest Retail Data Breach in History'? Hot Topic and Affiliated Brands Sued for Alleged Failure to Prevent Data Breach Linked to Snowflake Software
- 2Former President of New York State Bar, and the New York Bar Foundation, Dies As He Entered 70th Year as Attorney
- 3Legal Advocates in Uproar Upon Release of Footage Showing CO's Beat Black Inmate Before His Death
- 4Longtime Baker & Hostetler Partner, Former White House Counsel David Rivkin Dies at 68
- 5Court System Seeks Public Comment on E-Filing for Annual Report
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