As indicated in my November 30, 2012 article titled, “Predictive Analytics across the Enterprise: From eDiscovery to DoJ Second Requests to Proactive Protection of Intellectual Property,” Predictive analytics has been trending up in the eDiscovery market with the promise to address the issue of how to manage the increasing amount of ESI in a legally defensible manner. Referred to as predictive coding, eDiscovery software vendors are providing different applications of predictive analytics throughout the entire eDiscovery lifecycle.
However, as is normally the case with the introduction of new technology, the market is still stuck “in first gear” trying to develop best practices and reference models around Technology Assisted Review (TAR) and Computer Assisted Review (CAR). The concept and efforts underway for developing best practices and reference models is absolutely the right course of action as the market matures. However, the current state of the predictive analytics market has dramatically expanded beyond just support document review.
As an example, the EDRM has established a working group to address Computer Assisted Review.
According to the EDRM webiste, the EDRM Search team has prepared a draft Computer Assisted Review Reference Model (CARRM) to document the steps of the process. This model represents joint efforts of the best known providers in Computer Assisted Review – Automony, an HP Company; Daegis; Exterro; Falcon Discovery; FTI Consulting; kCura; KPMG LLP; Kroll Ontrack; NightOwl Discovery; and Recommind – as well as leaders from Bowman & Brooke LLP; DLA Piper LLP (US); Littler Mendelson, PC; and Quarles & Brady LLP. Click here for a complete list of EDRM Search participants.
Like the EDRM framework, the CARRM framework should be a useful reference for e-discovery practitioners at corporations, law firms and elsewhere; e-discovery services and software providers; and organizations evaluating e-discovery tools.
In the process of talking to most of the members of the CARRM working group about the 2013 eDSG Computer Assisted eDiscovery Buyers Guide, it has become clear that some of them are already thinking way beyond the scope of the CARRm charter.
As indicated in my November 30, 2012 article titled, “Predictive Analytics across the Enterprise: From eDiscovery to DoJ Second Requests to Proactive Protection of Intellectual Property,” predictive technologies are already being used for DOJ Second Requests, proactive protection of Intellectual Property (IP) and many other tasks that enterprises require their knowledge workers to perform that are quickly reaching a point where they are physically will not be able to utilize traditional analytic techniques to keep up with the accelerating increase in the volume of ESI.
I have faith that as predictive technologies that started with support for document review move to the entire enterprise that the best and brightest that our IT market has to offer will set up and begin to develop best practices and process models for predictive technologies that address the entire Information Governance lifecycle.
- How to Engage Enterprise Buyers in Meaningful Conversations in 2016 February 28, 2016
- nVIDIA Driving Deep Learning to the Forefront – Literally February 22, 2016
- New Technologies Disrupting the Legal Business in the UK February 17, 2016
- Shares of Tableau plunge 36% after company posts $41M loss in Q4 February 5, 2016
- LexisNexis Unveils Lexis® DiscoveryIQ eDiscovery Platform Enhanced by Brainspace February 2, 2016