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