Published on Jun 4, 2014 << Read Part 1: Top 5 e-Discovery Bad Habits You Should Break
If you’re using your document review tool just to view and code documents, consider reevaluating your tool or your process. Cutting edge discovery platforms offer tools to holistically manage many aspects of discovery. There are tools to efficiently cull and search documents, implement defensible quality controls, manage multiple workflows, organize case docket files, create dynamic fact outlines and trial prep kits, and predict ultimate discovery costs.
In the heat of discovery, many of these options go unused. Attorneys are comfortable with “old” ways of managing their cases, and often feel they do not have time to learn a new process in the middle of a case. Because saving time does require an initial time investment up front, attorneys should assess their case management and discovery protocols when they are not in the middle of dealing with a new case. Workflow plans should be periodically updated as new, efficiency-driving technologies become available.
It’s well known that in-house counsel have become vocal about the inefficiencies –and therefore higher costs– of outside counsel services. Corporate counsel Casey Flaherty of Kia Motors regularly speaks on the time wasted by firm attorneys who are untrained in how to do basic tasks in commonly used applications. He requires his outside counsel to pass audit demonstrating basic technological skills, such as searching for a term in several pdf documents (which can be done with a single search and does not require opening each document).[1] Just as inefficiencies from failure to exploit features of Adobe Acrobat can raise costs, so can failure to use features of your document review platform.
For example, many attorneys are accustomed to creating evidence outlines by using Microsoft Word after the document review is complete. They then re-review documents that they have tagged in the tool for the outline. They toggle back and forth between the review platform and the Word outline, type the document id into the outline, and write a description that includes writing the data and author. Different work product by different attorneys is then cobbled together into a master outline. Later, that evidence outline is again redeveloped and reorganized to create the work product required: issues outline, custodian outlines, chronological outlines, etc. Once a new outline is finalized, the documents are looked up again by document id and assembled into a binder that corresponds to the new outline. All of this takes many, many hours.
Almost all of these steps can be eliminated, and the hours saved, if attorneys instead rely on organizational tools during their reviews. Senior attorneys can directly enter significant documents into the platform outlining tool during their review. The tool attaches entries directly to the document, so the attorney only needs to write real substantive work product and select the issues. The document id, custodian, recipients and date are already present. The tool then automatically assembles documents into a dynamic outline that can be easily sorted into different types of issue or custodian outlines and timelines. Exhibit binders can be automatically printed. While it may take a small amount of additional time to integrate the tool into your review workflow and learn to use it, it will save many more hours over the course of the case.
This is just one example of why understanding features of your review platform, and any other technologies you use regularly, is essential to meeting attorney professional responsibility obligations of competence.[2] Just as attorneys need to be efficient in other aspects of their work, they need to be efficient in discovery by taking advantage of the tools available to them.
Other Articles in this Series:
Top 5 e-Discovery Bad Habits You Should Break, Part 1
Top 5 e-Discovery Bad Habits You Should Break, Part 3
Top 5 e-Discovery Bad Habits You Should Break, Part 4
Top 5 e-Discovery Bad Habits You Should Break, Part 5
