Why Information Governance Professionals Still Struggle to Secure Buy-in
IG professionals must speak the C-Suite's language by presenting a value proposition that highlights how their program impacts the bottom line. The…
July 11, 2017 at 01:46 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
IG professionals must speak the C-Suite's language by presenting a value proposition that highlights how their program impacts the bottom line.
The costs and risk of e-discovery, the rise in cybersecurity attacks and the looming GDPR deadline are all driving a push for enhanced information governance (IG) in law departments and organizations.
However, a big percentage of IG professionals still struggle to secure senior level support, according to a survey conducted at last month's MER conference. The findings reaffirm the importance of being able to communicate effectively across business disciplines. So, to make their case, IG professionals must speak the C-Suite's language by presenting a value proposition that highlights how their program impacts the bottom line.
Inside Counsel recently sat down with Laurie Fischer, managing director at HBR Consulting, who conducted the survey. She shared how IG professionals can build political capital and secure executive buy-in for their initiatives.
Law departments are increasingly looking to control their expenses, and the cost of e-discovery is a prime target for cost-cutting. Enhancing IG should allow an organization to lower the volume of data it retains, thus, reducing the volume of data subject to e-discovery. An information governance program helps identify what information must be retained, and what can be disposed of, and define the strategies that allow an organization to start disposing of unnecessary data.
“The same is true for being able to reduce the potential risk and cost of cybersecurity attacks,” she said. “The less data an organization has, the less there is to breach, thereby reducing remediation costs. And good information governance – knowing what data you have, where it is and how it flows through an organization – can only help with GDPR compliance.”
So, why must IG professionals speak the C-Suite's language?
Although enhanced compliance and risk mitigation are obvious benefits of information governance, the IG professional should also stress the positive impact to the bottom line when presenting to the C-suite. For example, per Fischer, by being more efficient in its information management practices, an organization may be more productive in getting new products to the market – enhancing its competitive advantage.
Today, it is particularly important that the IG professional be able to communicate with legal, IT, RIM, privacy and compliance to be able to articulate and define the requirements for IG across all the disciplines within the organization that are interested in how information is governed and managed.
“For instance, legal, information security, compliance and RIM develop policies and procedures, provide training and employee communication, and are likely investing in IG-related technology, all for slightly different reasons,” she explained. “Bringing these disciplines together and establishing a holistic framework can facilitate leveraging resources (time, people, money) for IG initiatives.”
In order to build political capital and secure executive buy-in for their initiatives, IG professionals should consider building a formal business case for the information governance program, defining actual cost reductions and benefits related to reduced and controlled volumes of information.
Fischer added, “Identifying some 'low hanging fruit' with immediate impact can help the IG professional show a “quick win” that supports on-going, longer-term initiatives.”
Further reading:
- Zenefits GC Joshua Stein on Outside Counsel, Moving Past Regulatory Challenges
- How Significant Are SEC's Rule Changes for IPOs on Confidentiality?
- The Trump Justice Department's Aversion to Class Actions Will Have Wide Impact
- De-risking Your Next GC Appointment: The Five Key Personality Factors for Success in the Role
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 AllA Blueprint for Targeted Enhancements to Corporate Compliance Programs
7 minute readProf's Stinging Conclusion: Lawyers for Purdue Pharma Were 'Overzealous Accomplices in Corporate Misconduct'
6 minute readCan In-House Counsel Mitigate Emerging Technology's ESG Impact?
A New Approach for Protecting Confidential Information During an Employee Activist Campaign
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Trump's Return to the White House: The Legal Industry Reacts
- 3Election 2024: Nationwide Judicial Races and Ballot Measures to Watch
- 4Climate Disputes, International Arbitration, and State Court Limitations for Global Issues
- 5Judicial Face-Off: Navigating the Ethical and Efficient Use of AI in Legal Practice [CLE Pending]
- 6How Much Does the Frequency of Retirement Withdrawals Matter?
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