Tools for Evaluating and Selecting E-Discovery Vendors
Helpful, effective guidance on evaluating and selecting e-discovery vendors is rare. For one, the constant development of technology makes it difficult to keep up with the latest vendor offerings. Not to mention that more vendors pop up on almost a daily basis. Court rulings also play a role in changing the e-discovery landscape and therefore the tools needed to keep up with it.
On the scholarly end, The Sedona Conference® published a white paper on e-discovery vendor selection (June 2007), and Gartner, Inc. offered a similar guide for attorneys and litigation support professionals (Dec. 2009). Gartner's guide also provided a market rating on 18 of the biggest players in the e-discovery industry. Some of the important evaluation criteria considered in both reports include:
- Project identification (scope of work)
- Vendor's viability (business organization, office locations, sub-contracting, staffing, technical expertise, conflicts, financials)
- Vendor's market understanding and sales strategies
- Vendor's experience or work quality
- Customer feedbacks or client references
- Products and services
- Products support and maintenance (document repositories, media type, project/data security, recovery, forensics, project/records management, internal/external IT infrastructure integration)
- Pricing
- Delivery (deadlines, project scope changes)
The The Sedona Conference® 2007 includes a sample decision matrix to weigh various factors that are critical to project success. The 2009 Gartner report provides a rating summary for reviewed vendors.
But despite these available, helpful guides and road maps, it is still a time-consuming process to conduct internal audits, compile RFI (Request for Information) and RFPs (Request for Proposals), evaluate responses, and utlimately select the appropriate vendor(s) to handle the project.
One possible solution? Enter Apersee.
Continue Reading....png){kind=avatar}
In a highly-anticipated showdown, the IBM-created computer “Watson” prevailed against two human champions on the television game show "Jeopardy!". In a world where machines have already replaced humans in manufacturing and human labor tasks, this sneak peak into a future where humans might also be replaced by machines in intellectual pursuits, was somewhat daunting.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f) requires parties in litigation to "…confer as soon as practicable … [and to]…state the parties’ views and proposals on …any issues about disclosure or discovery of electronically stored information….." Proper handling of these "meet and confer" sessions about electronically stored information (ESI) and e-discovery is crucial to a winning litigation strategy. Don't think of the session as a procedural formality and just go through the motions. STOP!! Take a deep breath and think. The Rule 26(f) conference is where you begin the management of the opposition, and sets the structure of a case's e-discovery process. Your goal is to minimize your e-discovery costs and risks and to make sure you will be able to get the data you need from the opposition. 