What's wrong with traditional eDiscovery?



The traditional approach to eDiscovery involves a linear, one-directional workflow with multiple software tools, many data movements and click charge costs all the way through. This leads to the following problems:

  • Too many different tools are used, each with a different licensing model and technology platform.
  • Moving data around from one software platform to another increases complexity, time, risk and cost.
  • Transaction fees at every step dramatically inflate costs.
  • There is a cart before the horse problem; You don’t have any real insight into your data before culling decisions are made so, inevitably, the criteria you use to exclude documents are based on assumptions that are not quite right, because the facts are not fully know and the issues are not yet clarified. So, it’s not surprising that keywords, date range, custodian and file type filters don’t deliver the expected results.
  • It’s complicated and costly to go back to ‘dip into the data well’ again once the review is underway to change your early culling criteria e.g. when new facts emerge, new issues come to light or lawyers change their minds about search terms.

The EDT approach

By comparison, with EDT you ingest your data once, and only once. Then it stays put, throughout the whole case. There's no need to move it. You can process, analyze, review, produce and present your data and you can do all these things in any sequence and at any time. We think that's a better approach because it supports real world scenarios, which are rarely linear.