More benefits of in-house e-discovery
As a secondary benefit, by taking control of the e-discovery process, organizations are in a better position to aggressively reduce the volumes of data being sent to outside counsel for privilege and relevancy review. At an average rate of $3 to $5 per document reviewed, even modest data culling techniques can save hundreds of thousands of dollars on a single matter.
Despite these clear advantages, there is often reticence to make the transition because the use of service providers has created significant inertia. However, in these economic times, such luxuries can no longer be rationalized. Assuming that an entity decides to explore insourcing, it's important to determine whether the move makes good economic and legal sense for their unique scenario. What works well for one company may not work well for another. A myriad of factors must first be considered, including: litigation volumes, deadlines and time frames, regulatory requirements, corporate culture and so on.
Discovery is a multifaceted, multiphased process that requires significant cross-functional coordination internally. In most instances, legal teams should expect to work more closely with IT, records managers, information security and affected business units as they begin researching and becoming familiar with the technology solutions that could simplify their workload and make their jobs more productive.
A good place to start is by examining the framework promulgated by the Electronic Discovery Reference Model (EDRM). The EDRM is an industry group that was created to develop and establish practical guidelines and standards for e-discovery. The EDRM model breaks e-discovery into the following five phases stages: Identification, Preservation/Collection, Processing/Analysis/Review, Production and Presentation. This process-oriented treatment helps break down the various stages into silos that can be more effectively evaluated for potential insourcing.