events Archives - ComplexDiscovery

An Early Start: A Working List of 2019 eDiscovery Events

An early, working list of eDiscovery-related industry events and conferences for 2019. The non-comprehensive planning list is based on research and tracking by ComplexDiscovery.

October 17, 2018
1 minute read

A Running Start: The Short List of 2018 eDiscovery Events

A short list of eDiscovery-related industry events for 2018. The non-comprehensive planning list is based on research and tracking by ComplexDiscovery.

December 2, 2017
1 minute read

A Short List of 2017 eDiscovery Related Events

A short list of planned eDiscovery-related industry events for 2017. The non-comprehensive and is based on research and tracking by ComplexDiscovery.

December 16, 2016
1 minute read

Objectifying the Subjective: Evaluating eDiscovery Vendor Viability

This updated article highlights one approach to evaluating the selection of eDiscovery vendors that may help decision makers by providing an objective framework useful for the competitive comparison and contrasting of subjective evaluation elements. While the components and ratings used in the approach may be adjusted and weighted based on the experiences and preference of evaluators, the framework is beneficial for ensuring a holistic evaluation process for determining vendor viability.

Drunks, DNA and Data Transfer Risk in eDiscovery

Just as there are many tasks in electronic discovery, many times there are multiple technologies and platforms involved in the complete electronic discovery process. When there are multiple technologies and platforms involved, data must be transferred from disparate technologies and platforms to other disparate technologies and platforms. This data transfer can be considered a risk factor that impacts the overall electronic discovery process.

Automating eDiscovery: A Strategic Framework

The Concise Framework for Discovery Automation takes the overall process of discovery, breaks it down into a data discovery component and a legal discovery component, aligns these components with insight and intelligence, and then highlights four key processes and eight key tasks that appear to be important in the discovery process across the lifecycle of information and litigation.

Slowly But Surely: Eighteen Observations on eDiscovery Business Confidence in the Spring of 2019

Just under 94% (93.3%) of eDiscovery Business Confidence Survey respondents feel the current business conditions are good or normal in the spring of 2019. This combined confidence level represents a solid increase in these same feelings when compared to the winter of 2019 where 89.3% felt the conditions were good or normal. However, respondents rating the current business conditions as good dropped to 41.1%, the lowest rating in this area since the inception of the survey. This drop appears to represent a solid, yet slowly diminishing optimism in the current general business climate for eDiscovery.

The Issue That Currently Concerns eDiscovery Professionals The Most: Increasing Volumes of Data (Spring 2019)

In the Spring 2019 eDiscovery Business Confidence Survey, 25% of respondents viewed increasing volumes of data as potentially having the greatest impact on their business in the next six months. This percentage is the highest of all concerns represented in the survey. Budgetary constraints were also viewed as a considerable issue with 20.6% of survey respondents noting it as their greatest business concern.

Is Business Blooming? eDiscovery Business Confidence Survey Results – Spring 2019

This is the fourteenth quarterly eDiscovery Business Confidence Survey conducted by ComplexDiscovery. More than 1,448 individual responses have been received from legal, business, and technology professionals across the eDiscovery ecosystem since the inception of the survey and 180 respondents shared their opinions as part of the spring 2019 survey.

TAR vs. Keyword Search Challenge, Round 6 (Instant Feedback)

Even with a large pool of participants, ample time, and the ability to hone search queries based on instant feedback, nobody was able to generate a better production than Technology-Assisted Review (TAR) when the same amount of review effort was expended. It seems fair to say that keyword search often requires twice as much document review to achieve a production that is as good as what you would get TAR.

Actively Learning? Predictive Coding Technologies and Protocols Survey – Spring 2019 Results

The Predictive Coding Technologies and Protocols Survey is a non-scientific survey designed to help provide a general understanding of the use of predictive coding technologies, protocols, and workflows by data discovery and legal discovery professionals within the eDiscovery ecosystem.