Editor’s Note: This post is the second in our multi-part series on the Summer 2025 eDiscovery Pricing Survey, conducted by ComplexDiscovery OÜ in partnership with the EDRM (Electronic Discovery Reference Model).
This survey series is dedicated in memory of Kaylee Walstad, whose recent passing has been deeply felt across the eDiscovery and legal technology communities. Kaylee was a champion of connection, collaboration, and community-building. Her Sisu — the Finnish spirit of strength, determination, and resilience — was evident in all she did, including her tireless support of initiatives like this one.
By continuing to share and reflect on these insights, we honor her legacy and her passion for advancing understanding across the eDiscovery ecosystem.
Content Assessment: The People Behind the Pricing: Respondents to the Summer 2025 eDiscovery Pricing Survey
Information - 93%
Insight - 94%
Relevance - 92%
Objectivity - 94%
Authority - 94%
93%
Excellent
A short percentage-based assessment of the qualitative benefit expressed as a percentage of positive reception of the recent article from ComplexDiscovery OÜ titled, "The People Behind the Pricing: Respondents to the Summer 2025 eDiscovery Pricing Survey."
Industry Research
The People Behind the Pricing: Respondents to the Summer 2025 eDiscovery Pricing Survey
ComplexDiscovery Staff
In our first post, we examined the geographic profile of survey participants, noting that 90% of respondents conduct their eDiscovery business primarily in the United States. That U.S.-centric lens provides important context for the results that follow.
Equally important is understanding the types of organizations represented in the survey and the functional roles of the professionals who shared their perspectives. Together, these details frame how we interpret pricing insights across the 25 questions of the survey, and reveal important market dynamics that may influence pricing strategies.
Respondent Business Segments: A Tale of Two Perspectives
The largest groups represented in the survey were Law Firms (43%) and Software/Services Providers (36%), together accounting for nearly four out of five participants. Consultancies made up 10%, while Media/Research/Education organizations represented 7%. Smaller contributions came from Corporations (3%) and Government entities (1%).
Survey Respondents by Organizational Segment - Summer 2025
What This Mix Reveals About Market Dynamics
This distribution reflects the two dominant forces shaping pricing conversations in eDiscovery today, but it also creates an interesting tension. Law firms influence buying decisions and client-facing strategies from the demand side, while service providers drive delivery models and pricing frameworks from the supply side. This near-equal representation suggests our pricing insights capture both perspectives of the negotiating table.
However, the overwhelming dominance of these two segments — combined with minimal corporate representation (3%) — creates potential blind spots. Corporate legal departments, as the ultimate buyers of eDiscovery services, may have different cost sensitivities and pricing preferences than their outside counsel. The limited corporate voice in this survey means we’re primarily hearing from intermediaries rather than end clients.
The small government presence (1%) is also notable, given that government entities often operate under different procurement constraints and pricing models than private sector organizations. This suggests our findings may not fully reflect the public sector eDiscovery market.
Primary Functional Roles: The Legal Lens Dominates
When asked about their primary function, more than two-thirds (69%) of respondents identified with Legal/Litigation Support. Another 29% reported working in Business/Business Support roles, while only 3% were aligned with IT/Product Development.
Survey Respondents by Primary Function - Summer 2025
The Implications of Legal-Heavy Perspectives
This functional skew reveals that pricing perspectives in this survey are shaped most strongly by legal and litigation professionals — those closest to the day-to-day realities of managing discovery. This grounding in practical experience lends credibility to the pricing insights, as these professionals are those who negotiate rates, manage budgets, and explain costs to clients.
However, the minimal representation from IT and product development roles (3%) highlights a potential disconnect between pricing decisions and technical implementation. While legal professionals understand the business value of eDiscovery services, technology professionals often have deeper insights into the actual costs of delivery, infrastructure requirements, and operational efficiencies that should inform pricing models.
This distribution also suggests that pricing discussions in eDiscovery may be more influenced by precedent, client expectations, and competitive positioning than by technical cost analysis or innovation-driven value propositions.
The Missing Voices: Understanding Survey Limitations
While the survey provides valuable insights from its respondents, it’s important to acknowledge who’s not well-represented in this data:
- Corporate buyers: With only 3% corporate representation, we’re missing perspectives from the organizations that ultimately pay for most eDiscovery services. Corporate legal departments may prioritize different pricing factors — such as predictability, transparency, and total cost of ownership — compared to law firms, which focus on client billing and competitive positioning.
- Technical decision-makers: The minimal IT/product development representation means we’re hearing little from those who understand the technical costs and capabilities underlying pricing models. This could result in pricing insights that don’t fully account for technology trends, automation opportunities, or operational efficiencies.
- International perspectives: Combining the geographic concentration noted in Part 1 with the business segment distribution, the analysis suggests limited insight into how global organizations approach eDiscovery pricing across different jurisdictions and regulatory environments.
Why These Demographics Matter for Pricing Analysis
Understanding respondent characteristics is crucial because different stakeholders approach pricing from fundamentally different perspectives. Law firms may focus on competitive rates and client value perception, while service providers balance operational costs with market positioning. Legal professionals prioritize predictability and defensibility, while technical teams might emphasize efficiency and scalability.
The survey’s demographic profile — U.S.-centric, law firm- and service–provider–dominated, and rooted in legal/litigation support functions — means our pricing insights reflect the perspectives of professionals who negotiate, implement, and live eDiscovery pricing decisions daily. This grounds the data in practical reality but may not capture all the factors that could or should influence pricing strategies.
As we examine specific pricing trends in the upcoming parts of this series, these demographic insights will help us understand not only what the numbers show, but also why certain pricing patterns exist and which market segments they may not fully represent.
Looking Ahead
Next in this series, we will examine forensic collection and examination costs — including hourly, per-device, and expert witness pricing trends. These services remain among the most visible and debated in eDiscovery, and the survey results highlight both consistency and variability worth exploring.
“As eDiscovery adapts to rapid technological shifts and mounting regulatory demands, benchmarking pricing is essential,” said Kaylee Walstad, Chief Strategy Officer of EDRM. “ComplexDiscovery’s survey provides the data we need to understand current costs and prepare for the future. EDRM is proud to support this important resource.” – July 9, 2025
Assisted by GAI and LLM Technologies
Additional Reading
- Summer 2025 eDiscovery Pricing Trends: Setting the Stage
- ComplexDiscovery OÜ – Winter 2025 eDiscovery Pricing Report: A Market in Transition
- eDiscovery Surveys Archives – ComplexDiscovery
Source: ComplexDiscovery OÜ


























