The push to develop an information governance (IG) program is often stonewalled by the great interrogative “why.” Questions like “why are we budgeting money to solve a problem that does not exist?” can derail promising programs, even when justified by a proper use case. The problem is that this line of inquiry frequently ignores the crucial needs associated with IG. The fact is that most companies do have problems with IG, even if many do not recognize them.

So far in 2016, the hot IG trends have focused on problems created by data security weaknesses, employee use of personal cloud applications, and the Internet of Things (IoT). While these issues should be addressed, companies must not overlook the importance of both developing and then integrating information retention policies and litigation readiness measures. Doing so under the direction of counsel can help an organization be prepared for legal actions. Taking no action in this regard leaves enterprises vulnerable to litigation hazards. The Sell v. Country Life Insurance case from earlier this month is particularly instructive on these issues.

The IG Debacle in Sell v. Country Life Insurance

This content has been archived.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 Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]