money circles

The price of deploying the biggest and most expensive e-discovery software now runs up against clients seeking the best outcomes while minimizing costs. In this decade alone, technology experts forecast a 50-fold increase in the size of the digital information universe between 2010 and 2020. The temptation to throw money at an ESI tsunami may be a tempting course. Clients' increasing attention to budgets makes it untenable to throw technology at the problem without regard to cost, however.

Already, broad industry forecasts project that e-discovery spending, estimated at $8.25 billion in 2016, will rise about 13.5 percent annually through 2020, to about $13.6 billon. Software spending alone totaled $2.2 billion last year and is forecast to grow about 14.5 percent annually, reaching about $3.9 billion by 2020.

Firms can take several measures to immediately reduce, and then take long-term control of e-discovery costs. Here's a few tips:

Determine your typical case load, assess case needs and consider third-party providers: It is important to understand each case so you know what data you want to collect. From an e-discovery perspective the goal of the matter will lead the collection efforts. Identify the pros and cons of performing work in-house and measure them against the pros and cons of work performed by a third-party provider.

Firms frequently outsource e-discovery services because of burdensome IT requirements for some of the larger platforms; these platforms are expensive to keep in-house and outsourcing spreads out those costs. However, outsourcing can mean project management red tape if your firm lacks that experience. Some firms are now recovering costs for in-house services, so this has changed the game on the expense side. Consider what will be a better value for your clients.

Avoid overcollection, understand your data, and cull it down to potentially responsive results: Overcollection almost always leads to exorbitant processing and review costs. This often stems from misinterpretations of judicial standards, fear of evidence spoliation and subsequent sanctions, or failure to make the best use of collection tools. Sometimes reviewers understand e-discovery but don't know IT. A good reviewer will know what system files can be ignored. Like a skilled mechanic, they can look at a hard drive with a terabyte of data and determine what isn't relevant.

Perform after rigorous early case assessment. While some lawyers may push for everything to be collected, budgetary realities must be considered. Focus on quickly defining what constitutes a realistic, favorable resolution to the case. From a forensic perspective, make sure the data collected is court-ready.

Buy for the lowest common denominator on your team: Your firm's litigation support professionals and paralegals should have an important role selecting the e-discovery tool. They are in the best position to consider the range of needs in the firm's typical case load, and have a different understanding of what the firm needs than the CIO. Assess training requirements and consider how quickly several people in the firm can become expert users, reducing the total cost of ownership of your software.

Ask the reviewers questions and consider how the answers address case requirements: Do we need predictive coding? Do we need technology assisted review? If so, for what percentage of our cases—and does it make sense for us to own this technology? Have we tried this technology on real data? The focus must be on the data and not on the tool. The best tools keep training hurdles low and in balance with your case load needs—99 percent of which might not require highly complex tools.

Compare pricing models: The tool selected should make e-discovery cheaper, not more expensive. Pricing models vary by vendor and service provider. Some e-discovery vendors charge per gigabyte, others may charge per hour, per month, or per page. Price comparisons can be difficult, so get a proposal and take advantage of any free trial offers.

Whether your firm does its e-discovery in-house, or works with a third-party company, treat your service and tools providers as trusted advisors. The complex ESI environment is only getting harder to navigate, and it's easy to let investigations overreach and drive up costs. Proper support is as important as accurate initial scoping. If something goes wrong with the data, your vendor should be able to provide reliable, accurate advice. In many cases, about 80 percent of the data will process without a problem, and about 20 percent might not. You need to ensure your vendor will work with you until the job is complete.

Peter Mercer is the founder of Vound, a global software development company focusing on forensics and e-discovery, and serves as its managing director.

money circles

The price of deploying the biggest and most expensive e-discovery software now runs up against clients seeking the best outcomes while minimizing costs. In this decade alone, technology experts forecast a 50-fold increase in the size of the digital information universe between 2010 and 2020. The temptation to throw money at an ESI tsunami may be a tempting course. Clients' increasing attention to budgets makes it untenable to throw technology at the problem without regard to cost, however.

Already, broad industry forecasts project that e-discovery spending, estimated at $8.25 billion in 2016, will rise about 13.5 percent annually through 2020, to about $13.6 billon. Software spending alone totaled $2.2 billion last year and is forecast to grow about 14.5 percent annually, reaching about $3.9 billion by 2020.

Firms can take several measures to immediately reduce, and then take long-term control of e-discovery costs. Here's a few tips:

Determine your typical case load, assess case needs and consider third-party providers: It is important to understand each case so you know what data you want to collect. From an e-discovery perspective the goal of the matter will lead the collection efforts. Identify the pros and cons of performing work in-house and measure them against the pros and cons of work performed by a third-party provider.

Firms frequently outsource e-discovery services because of burdensome IT requirements for some of the larger platforms; these platforms are expensive to keep in-house and outsourcing spreads out those costs. However, outsourcing can mean project management red tape if your firm lacks that experience. Some firms are now recovering costs for in-house services, so this has changed the game on the expense side. Consider what will be a better value for your clients.

Avoid overcollection, understand your data, and cull it down to potentially responsive results: Overcollection almost always leads to exorbitant processing and review costs. This often stems from misinterpretations of judicial standards, fear of evidence spoliation and subsequent sanctions, or failure to make the best use of collection tools. Sometimes reviewers understand e-discovery but don't know IT. A good reviewer will know what system files can be ignored. Like a skilled mechanic, they can look at a hard drive with a terabyte of data and determine what isn't relevant.

Perform after rigorous early case assessment. While some lawyers may push for everything to be collected, budgetary realities must be considered. Focus on quickly defining what constitutes a realistic, favorable resolution to the case. From a forensic perspective, make sure the data collected is court-ready.

Buy for the lowest common denominator on your team: Your firm's litigation support professionals and paralegals should have an important role selecting the e-discovery tool. They are in the best position to consider the range of needs in the firm's typical case load, and have a different understanding of what the firm needs than the CIO. Assess training requirements and consider how quickly several people in the firm can become expert users, reducing the total cost of ownership of your software.

Ask the reviewers questions and consider how the answers address case requirements: Do we need predictive coding? Do we need technology assisted review? If so, for what percentage of our cases—and does it make sense for us to own this technology? Have we tried this technology on real data? The focus must be on the data and not on the tool. The best tools keep training hurdles low and in balance with your case load needs—99 percent of which might not require highly complex tools.

Compare pricing models: The tool selected should make e-discovery cheaper, not more expensive. Pricing models vary by vendor and service provider. Some e-discovery vendors charge per gigabyte, others may charge per hour, per month, or per page. Price comparisons can be difficult, so get a proposal and take advantage of any free trial offers.

Whether your firm does its e-discovery in-house, or works with a third-party company, treat your service and tools providers as trusted advisors. The complex ESI environment is only getting harder to navigate, and it's easy to let investigations overreach and drive up costs. Proper support is as important as accurate initial scoping. If something goes wrong with the data, your vendor should be able to provide reliable, accurate advice. In many cases, about 80 percent of the data will process without a problem, and about 20 percent might not. You need to ensure your vendor will work with you until the job is complete.

Peter Mercer is the founder of Vound, a global software development company focusing on forensics and e-discovery, and serves as its managing director.