Ask 100 general counsel whether their law firms “get it” and you’ll likely get 100 answers, not all of which will be positive. In dealing with electronic discovery, in-house counsel, law firms and ESI service providers find that a large portion of their litigation spend seems to be less manageable and less predictable when it comes to the area of electronic discovery. As a result, they continue to explore new ways to achieve efficiency and predictability, to align their processes with their clients’ goals and to provide the best product at the right price when it comes to managing electronic discovery.
Some of these process changes come in the form of how technology is used (e.g., predictive coding, near duplication, extracted text review); others are experimented through different pricing models (e.g., per-document pricing, per-GB pricing options, flat fees); and others try different allocations of workflow (e.g., in-house versus law firm versus ESI service providers). While these approaches are not necessarily exclusive, each of them provides certain benefits if used properly, but each carries certain risks in terms of cost and impact on achieving the client’s ultimate goals. Throw into the mix the inherent uncertainty of courts, arbitrators and mediators, and effectively and efficiently managing the electronic discovery process becomes even more important.
