There’s a lot of promotion around using analytics in eDiscovery. But, what exactly do they do? Today, as part of a two-part series, I’m breaking down the basics of Structured Analytics and how, when applied correctly, they can contribute towards an effective and efficient review. In our next Tuesday Tip, I will share the basics of Conceptual Analytics and how they differ.

When investing in a new eDiscovery solution, you might find yourself wondering whether you should engage with a service provider or go directly to a software vendor. The comparison between the two options does not come down to which option is ‘better’. Either option can be ideal given the right circumstances. Instead, ask yourself, “How much support does my team require?”

As the Director of Client Services at Ricoh eDiscovery, I consult with clients on the best method to manage their litigation databases. While each firm differs in how they operate (and with which tools), there is always one question that comes up: is it better to use a desktop or cloud solution?

For decades, firms have had to purchase the infrastructure and licenses for software to review their data and invested in robust software to process it. Smaller firms who were unable to purchase processing software would opt to outsource services such as the processing of electronic documents, unitizing and coding of documents. 

On-Demand eDiscovery is changing that.

Given our heavily technical world, most litigation cases result in an eDiscovery case. This means gathering any electronically stored information and extracting metadata (data about data) to gain insight and search documents. The traditional method of legal discoveries was to have a room filled with boxes of paper, in which people would review each single sheet and document and create a catalogue of any potentially relevant documents. As you can imagine, this was extremely time consuming and rather labour intensive. 

“Help! I received 1 TB of data from my client and I don’t know what’s in there and what’s relevant!”