The Most Popular Providers? An eDiscovery Aggregation from Fourteen ALM Surveys

The purpose of the aggregation is to highlight leading providers in the realm of eDiscovery as determined by online voting in fourteen ALM “Best Of” surveys.

Extract from fourteen ALM “Best Of” Surveys

The “Best Of” surveys were developed by ALM, an information and intelligence company, to help lawyers to identify the finest legal products and service providers and to showcase the top selections in an annual edition of one of fourteen surveys. (1) Each survey has multiple categories of products and services presented for consideration, with a subset of categories (survey questions) from each survey that directly or indirectly pertain to the eDiscovery ecosystem.

Provided below is an aggregation of results from fourteen surveys from leading ALM magazines ranging from Corporate Counsel to Texas Lawyer administered to online audiences and published as special supplements between September 2017 and October 2018.

The purpose of the aggregation is to highlight leading providers in the realm of eDiscovery as determined by online voting in these ALM “Best Of” Surveys.

“Best Of” Surveys considered and time frame for results publication. (2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13)

  • New Jersey Law Journal – September 2017
  • Legal Times – November 2017
  • Daily Business Review – November 2017
  • National Law Journal – February 2018
  • Corporate Counsel – April 2018
  • Daily Report – May 2018
  • Midwest – June 2018
  • The Recorder – July 2018
  • Legal Intelligencer – August 2018
  • Connecticut Law Tribune – August 2018
  • Texas Lawyer (Austin, Dallas, and Houston) – September 2018 (Three Surveys)
  • New York Law Journal – September 2018

An overview of seventeen key eDiscovery-centric survey categories.

  • Computer Forensics
  • Corporate Investigations
  • Data and Technology Management eDiscovery Provider
  • Document Review Staffing Agency
  • eDiscovery Company/Provider
  • eDiscovery Mobile Application
  • End-To-End eDiscovery Provider
  • End-To-End Litigation Consulting Firm/Services
  • Information Governance Solution
  • Legal and Litigation Support Staffing Agency
  • Legal Hold Solution
  • Legal Process Outsourcing
  • Managed Document Review Services
  • Managed eDiscovery and Litigation Support Provider
  • Online Review Platform
  • Predictive Coding eDiscovery Solution
  • Technology-Assisted Review E-Discovery Solution

Alphabetical listing of providers receiving a top three finish based on survey voting in at least one key eDiscovery-centric survey category.

  1. Accenture
  2. AccessData
  3. Advanced Discovery (Consilio)
  4. Alliance Legal Staffing
  5. Atlanta Legal Services
  6. Attorney Resource
  7. BCG Search
  8. BDO Consulting
  9. Bederson LLP
  10. Berkeley Research Group
  11. BlumShapiro
  12. Business Intelligence Associates (BIA)
  13. BVA Group
  14. Cambridge Professional Group
  15. Casepoint
  16. Citrin Cooperman Valuation and Forensic Services
  17. CloudNine Discovery
  18. Complete Discovery Source
  19. Complete Legal
  20. Consilio
  21. Corodata
  22. Cornerstone Discovery
  23. Corporate Investigations, Inc.
  24. D4
  25. Daegis (OpenText)
  26. Deloitte Discovery
  27. Digital Verdict
  28. Discovery Litigation Services
  29. Discovia
  30. Diversified Legal Services
  31. Diversified Risk Managment
  32. Doar Litigation Consulting
  33. DTI
  34. Eisner Amper LLP
  35. Elite Document Technology
  36. Epiq
  37. Ernst & Young LLP
  38. Forensic Data Services
  39. FTI Consulting/Technology
  40. GlassRatner Advisory & Capital Group LLC
  41. Gibson Arnold & Associates
  42. Guidepost Solutions LLC
  43. Hancock Firm
  44. HaystackID
  45. Haley Stuart, LLC
  46. Hire Counsel
  47. HR Legal Search
  48. HSSK
  49. Huron Consulting
  50. IBM
  51. IMS Expert Services
  52. Inspired Review
  53. Integreon
  54. JND eDiscovery
  55. K2 Intelligence
  56. KLDiscovery
  57. KLR Staffing
  58. KPMG
  59. Kroll
  60. Legal Hold Pro by Zapproved
  61. Legal Search Solutions
  62. LexisNexis CounselLink Legal Hold
  63. LexisNexis Legal Process Outsourcing
  64. LexisNexis Litigation Solutions
  65. Lighthouse
  66. Liquid Litigation Management
  68. Magna Legal Services
  69. Major Lindsey & Africa
  70. Marcum
  71. Merrill Corp.
  72. Mindcrest
  73. Momentum Search Partners
  74. Novus Law
  75. New Jersy Legal
  76. OpenText
  77. Pangea3 (Thomson Reuters Legal Managed Services)
  78. Pathway Forensics
  79. Precise Inc.
  80. PwC
  81. Pye Legal Group
  82. QuisLex
  83. R3 Digitial Forensics
  84. Relativity (kCura)
  85. Ricoh Legal
  86. Ringtail (FTI Technology)
  87. Robert Half Legal
  88. RVM
  89. Special Counsel
  90. Sterling Legal Search, Inc
  91. Symantec eDiscovery Exchange
  92. The Chaflin Group, Inc.
  93. Thomson Reuters eDiscovery Point
  94. Tower Legal Staffing
  95. TransPerfect Legal Solutions
  96. Trask Consulting
  97. TR Grace
  98. Troutman Sanders eMerge
  99. TRU Staffing Partners
  100. U.S. Legal Support
  101. Wegman Partners

A listing of the top twenty-five providers based on the number of times mentioned as a top three provider in the aggregate of all survey results. All top twenty-five providers received at least six mentions in the sixteen eDiscovery-centric questions posed in the fourteen ALM Best Of surveys.

  1. CloudNine Discovery
  2. KLDiscovery
  3. Epiq
  4. FTI Consulting/Technology
  5. Thomson Reuters eDiscovery Point
  6. Relativity
  7. Robert Half Legal
  8. Special Counsel
  9. Inspired Review
  10. KPMG
  11. Pathway Forensics
  12. Pangea3
  13. Ernst & Young LLP
  14. Casepoint
  15. Elite Document Technology
  16. Symantec
  17. LexisNexis Litigation Solutions
  18. LexisNexis Legal Process Outsourcing
  19. Kroll
  20. IBM
  21. HaystackID
  22. Deloitte
  23. BVA Group
  24. Pye Legal Group

Based on changes in provider business status between November 2017 and October 2018, some providers/offerings may be noted with legacy names/organizations. Additionally, as organizations may have been referred to differently in different surveys, results are shared based on the names shared in the surveys. Also, there are eDiscovery organizations mentioned in the surveys, yet not highlighted in the sixteen eDiscovery-centric questions used for this aggregation. 

Survey Resources:

(1) Best Of | (2018). Retrieved from

(2) Connecticut Law Tribune Best of 2018. (2018). Connecticut Law Tribune, (Special Supplement). Retrieved from

(3) Corporate Counsel Best of 2018. (2018). Corporate Counsel, (Special Supplement). Retrieved from

(4) Daily Business Review Best of 2017. (2017). Daily Business Review, (Special Supplement). Retrieved from

(5) Daily Report Best of 2018. (2018). Daily Report, (Special Supplement). Retrieved from

(6) Legal Times Best of 2017. (2017). Legal Times, (Special Supplement). Retrieved from

(7) New Jersey Law Journal Best of 2017. (2017). New Jersey Law Journal, (Special Supplement). Retrieved from

(8) New York Law Journal Best of 2018. (2018). New York Law Journal, (Special Supplement). Retrieved from

(9) Texas Lawyer Best of 2018. (2018). Texas Lawyer, (Special Supplement). Retrieved from

(10) The Legal Intelligencer Best of 2018. (2018). The Legal Intelligencer, (Special Supplement). Retrieved from

(11) The National Law Journal Best of 2018. (2018). The National Law Journal, (Special Supplement). Retrieved from

(12) The National Law Journal Midwest Best of 2018. (2018). The National Law Journal – Midwest, (Special Supplement). Retrieved from

(13) The Recorder Best of 2018. (2018). The Recorder, (Special Supplement). Retrieved from

Additional Reading:

ComplexDiscovery combines original industry research with curated expert articles to create an informational resource that helps legal, business, and information technology professionals better understand the business and practice of data discovery and legal discovery.

All contributions are invested to support the development and distribution of ComplexDiscovery content. Contributors can make as many article contributions as they like, but will not be asked to register and pay until their contribution reaches $5.