In my experience over the past 10 years starting data analysis projects from the data increases the time of the project by at least 400% and in the case of larger data warehouse projects the time approaches infinity as they are only rarely completed successfully regardless of extentions to budget or time.

E-Discovery project approaches mirror data warehouse projects eerily;

  • Projects are driven by an IT persepctive
  • A focus on capturing ALL data before determining what is useful
  • Forcing data into databases or data warehouses before permitting analysis
  • A disproportionate amount of project resources are consumed before analysis occurs
  • Lawyers and participants in the action that motivated the E-Discovery project are not happy with their ROI

Ground Hog Day

In the movie Ground Hog day Bill Murray is forced to relive the same day again and again until he percieves that his behaviour has trapped him in the loop.  Once he acheives this realization he is able to change the result of the day and move on. 

Oddly enough the EDRM, while it is a good guideline for those without a concept of E-Discovery, replicates the conditioning that was delivered to data warehouse and business intelligence clients.  The same clients that now choose common tools, accelerated deployments and often by-pass data warehouses by taking valid transactional data from transactional sources and processing it overnight on servers that may be as small as a high powered laptop computer.

EDRM or Electronic Discovery Reference Model

We have complemented the image of the EDRM below to indicate in red potential opportunities to reduce costs or E-Discovery project time buy up to 80% by using existing client tools and common technologies applied in a focused way.

The EDRM is used by vendors to guide clients in their E-Discovery projects

EDRM favours vendors but rarely yields results liked by clients

The red star with the “0” indicates where the E-Discovery process might begin to yield better, faster and cheaper results, at the end.

Understanding the range of possible outcomes and associated behaviours, content and people associated to those results allows us to focus and prioritize where E-Discovery resources might be directed first and stopping when the results are good enough.

For those situations where the risk of ‘good enough’ is just too high, starting from the end is still better and complements the usual method of capturing and analyzing everything as it allows negototiations related to the scope of the action to occur and possible mediation while the processes proceeds.

E-Discoverry Factories

Some law firms have ‘locked-in’ E-Discovery costs by contracting or outsourcing all of their projects fixing their costs while avoiding the potential cost savings possible by using common tools and approaching the E-Discovery process differenly.

Contact us for more detail on a different way to deliver E-Discovery results to your clients by working with your vendors to use simple and common tools.  Don’t forget to ask us about our SpeedSynch Resonance Maps to speed up E-Discovery even more.


Nick Trendov @SpeedSynch nick@scenario2.com


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: