3 practical uses of corporate data mapping
Data mapping can help companies to manage their risk
June 01, 2012 at 02:00 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Inside counsel probably spend very little time thinking about where e-mails and documents are saved, how many have accumulated over time or whether they really need to keep them or not. When employees leave the company, their e-mail accounts and files may be marked inactive, but their e-mails and data still remain stored somewhere and are forgottent. That's IT's job (and problem), right?
However, if the corporation gets hit with a lawsuit, guess what? Poor data management unwittingly becomes the legal department's problem. All the existing electronic files, including those residing on backup tapes in that off-site storage facility that contains the only existing copy of critical evidence, may become discoverable.
And since the lawyers often have no idea where their data is, when litigation strikes, they have to scramble because their proverbial stores are not in order. In short, if corporate counsel turn a blind eye to data storage locations and content, they are exposing their companies to risk, and that's a fact.
So what's the solution to thorny issue? Work with your IT department to create a data map of your organization. Consider a data map the equivalent of the card catalog at the Library of Congress: the one location that gives you a view into all your user content based on specific criteria, such as who owns what, when it was last modified or even accessed, where it is located and more. This corporate data map will provide a view into user desktops, servers, e-mail and even legacy backup tapes. This will allow you to make proactive decisions about what is sensitive and needs to be placed on legal hold and what can be purged since it no longer provides business value.
Once equipped with an accurate data map, legal and IT can collaborate to determine policy for defensible deletion of some content, archiving of intellectual property and compliance regulations that govern the process. Data maps also control the cost of e-discovery by delivering instant access to the responsive data to support litigation. A data map can tell you the location of custodian mailboxes and sensitive documents, and even uncover unknown data you didn't know existed, in support of early case assessments.
What are the practical use cases of a corporate data map?
- Ex-Employee Data: When employees leave the organization, their files and email typically live on forever, on networks and even legacy backup tape archives. Data mapping will allow you to understand where this data is located and make a decision about what should be kept—as it is required for legal and regulatory purposes—and what can be purged.
- Email personal storage tables (.PST): PSTs are mini e-mail archives that individual users create and store. The average organization can have thousands of PSTs hidden on its networks and servers. A data map simplifies the process of finding and managing PSTs. In fact you can quickly find PSTs that have not been accessed or modified in more than five years. Assuming they are not required for legal purposes, purging these .pst files will eliminate the hidden liability of the email that the organization unknowingly archived and stored.
- Controlling e-discovery expenses: Identifying and collecting user data in support of litigation can be extremely expensive, especially if the data is old and scattered about the network. Data mapping provides instant access to responsive data and streamlines the process of placing the content on legal hold.
This is the essence of corporate responsibility and is the proactive way to create a culture of structure and clear expectations.Without detailed knowledge of the content, creating a sound policy is overwhelming, and executing it is impossible.
By assuming shared responsibility for the firm's electronic data, rather than blindly abdicating to IT, inside counsel can protect the organizations they represent and also greatly reduce headaches and expenses stemming from e-discovery requests and old files coming back to haunt them.
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 AllLawyers Drowning in Cases Are Embracing AI Fastest—and Say It's Yielding Better Outcomes for Clients
GC Conference Takeaways: Picking AI Vendors 'a Bit of a Crap Shoot,' Beware of Internal Investigation 'Scope Creep'
8 minute readWhy ACLU's New Legal Director Says It's a 'Good Time to Take the Reins'
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
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