DEFEATING LEARNED INEFFICIENCY
Tech Talk
DEFEATING LEARNED INEFFICIENCY
By Hunter Baker Paragon Legal Technology hbaker @ paragonafa. com
If“ I had more time, I would have written a shorter letter” • Use the right tool for the job. Although this seems to be( precise author unknown and too lengthy to guess who a simple idea, we find it hard for many lawyers to put really said it). For attorneys faced with mounting pressures into action. Aside from the fact of the overwhelming in an increasingly competitive market place, staying ahead number of tools on the market, there are also low levels of of the curve is more challenging than many outside the understanding about the true pros and cons of these tools profession might imagine. This time crunch has forced( software vendors don’ t help here as separating marketing many attorneys into a false choice between being too busy fluff from substantive information is increasingly difficult). and learning new methods for approaching their document review process. Unfortunately, many have assumed that the • Prioritize your review. A prioritized review simply moves known, albeit inefficient, path is preferred to lesser known, the most salient information to the forefront so more time but generally far more efficient, methods. This is particularly is spent reviewing documents that will actually matter. For problematic when it comes to discovery and dealing with all the advances in technology, one thing seems to remain large volumes of electronic information. consistent: litigation is still won and lost over a few dozen documents and a handful of witnesses. Our approach focuses on finding what matters first and spending your time on the merits of the case. No matter what solution you use, if it doesn’ t allow you to look at relevant information first, then it isn’ t the solution you need.
Many of the attorneys I consult with are very comfortable with their current review methods. Some of the methods may over rely on search terms, while others use imprecise search techniques that result in too much or too little information being culled from the data set to be reviewed. And despite the immense volume of literature about new and more efficient methods for review, many attorneys simply default to their comfort zone. Unfortunately for these lawyers who fail to take the time to learn to write a shorter letter, they often make poorer use of their time, and spend more time sifting the few gems of information from the endless sea of irrelevant data. It’ s no surprise that attorneys have come to despise the discovery process and document review as a whole.
My team and I work with litigators and in-house legal departments to streamline the discovery process for lawyers who are too busy to become technology experts, but not too busy to understand they must adapt their discovery processes. In our experience there are four key principles we stress as part of our approach.
• Begin with the end in mind. We stress this point above all others. Too many times we see reviews that went poorly simply because the stakeholders did not have a clear idea of where they wanted to go. What are the needs of the case? What are you trying to do? Are you the producing party or are you planning to receive large volumes of adverse party data? The answers to questions like this will affect your choice of technology solutions, workflows, etc. and it is the most important principle in our approach.
• Verify and validate. This principle is critical for lawyers as the concern of missing a critical document can keep even the most tech savvy lawyers up at night. No matter what workflows or technology solutions you selected, a sound validation methodology is critical to ensure quality results from your efforts.
These principles are the foundation of a review process that has allowed my clients to serve their clients better while reducing the economic trauma associated with litigation. If your litigation practice is looking for a way to differentiate and compete, then these principles can assist in that effort.
Hunter Baker is a Discovery Consultant with Paragon Legal Technology. Ms. Baker consults with Paragon clients on the best ways to tackle discovery so they have an effective and successful litigation process. Ms. Baker is not an attorney, but through her work with attorneys has developed a passion for assisting them to better serve their clients and helping them develop successful books of business. She also is the Memberships Director for Women in eDiscovery. To learn more about Ms. Baker’ s approach or to discuss this topic further you can contact her directly at hbaker @ paragonafa. com or follow her on Twitter @ hunterbakerHB.
22 THE ATLANTA LAWYER January 2016 The Official News Publication of the Atlanta Bar Association