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
© 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 AllFrom Reluctant Lawyer to Legal Trailblazer: Agiloft's GC on Redefining In-House Counsel With Innovation and Tech
7 minute readLegal Tech's Predictions for Legal Ops & In-House in 2025
Lawyers Drowning in Cases Are Embracing AI Fastest—and Say It's Yielding Better Outcomes for Clients
Trending Stories
- 1The Law Firm Disrupted: Scrutinizing the Elephant More Than the Mouse
- 2Inherent Diminished Value Damages Unavailable to 3rd-Party Claimants, Court Says
- 3Pa. Defense Firm Sued by Client Over Ex-Eagles Player's $43.5M Med Mal Win
- 4Losses Mount at Morris Manning, but Departing Ex-Chair Stays Bullish About His Old Firm's Future
- 5Zoom Faces Intellectual Property Suit Over AI-Based Augmented Video Conferencing
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