Proactive Data Management Represents the Future of eDiscovery
The reliance that organizations have upon electronically stored information (ESI) is phenomenal. Not only is ESI the life-giving blood that courses through corporations, ESI is becoming more important in safeguarding and reducing risk as organizations deal with increased litigation. eDiscovery is the process of searching, locating, and securing ESI that is used as evidence in litigation. Any company not complying with a request to perform eDiscovery can incur costly and potentially disastrous side effects.
To help organizations and providers establish best practices around the eDiscovery process, the Electronic Discovery Reference Model (EDRM) was created to help outline the key processes involved for eDiscovery and provide users with a methodology that helps them reduce cost, time, and manual intervention.
The recent Socha-Gelbmann Electronic Discovery survey identified the need for standards as the number one issue affecting the industry of eDiscovery. The results from this survey acted as a catalyst in the creation of the EDRM and continue to drive the EDRM in the update and expansion of the processing model for eDiscovery. Ongoing developments within the EDRM is supported by a group of users, corporate legal teams, IT managers, law firms, consultants, service providers, and emerging software providers such as CommVault.
Over the last couple years, CommVault has emerged as a major player in the eDiscovery marketplace. CommVault focuses on advanced data management technologies that index and manage data as it is created which drives improved information access and search methodologies within organizations. CommVault's decision to participate in both the EDRM and The Sedona Conference RFP+ Vendor Panel is driven by what it sees as a need to clearly differentiate itself in the marketplace with its strategy of proactively indexing data while helping to educate the industry as a whole about new and improved methods to perform e-discoveries. The CommVault® Simpana® suite consists of a breadth of capabilities though its most notable features include:
- Content indexing all data that it touches.
Yet what is undoubtedly the biggest differentiator that CommVault brings to the table, and most notable reason for CommVault participating in the EDRM, is its emphasis on how companies should perform e-discoveries. eDiscovery is typically done forensically after a request for an eDiscovery is received by the company. This forces an organization to respond reactively by searching its archived data stores. This approach limits search speeds, increases costs, and reduces a company's effectiveness in accessing and data searched and then forces it to introduce new procedures to hold and manage the data after it is located. In contrast, CommVault's proactive implementation of building indexes as part of key processes within an organization, such as backup processing or archiving, shifts organizations from a reactive to a proactive mindset of data management by enabling them to perform e-discoveries if and when eDiscovery requests are received.
Attacking instead of responding to e-discoveries represents a fundamental shift in the way that most people think about eDiscovery. But to bring about this change in thinking will not happen by accident. It is only through providers like CommVault participating in the EDRM, educating end-users about these new eDiscovery methods and then end-users adopting products that manage data from cradle-to-grave in a risk-averse manner will such a change ever occur.
Jerome and James: Recent international scandals show that even non-US enterprises have legal incentive to be increasingly generous in their retention of employee e-mail and instant message records. This experience helps make the case for products like CommVault. What do you think?
--Ben
http://hack-igations.blogspot.com/2008/07/international-and-foreign-e-discovery-e.html
Ben,
I completely agree with you. Globally, we need to realize that it doesn't matter where we live. There is always the potential need to prove or disprove the transmission of electronic information. The U.S. might be ahead in some instances and other parts of the world might be ahead in others. Just look at the UK and the depth at which government is trying to monitor Internet traffic and file transmissions--with the U.S. not far behind. Ultimately it isn't about compliancy but just smart data management.
--James