Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Title Month Year Electronic Discovery & Compliance: Meeting the Challenges - “Avoiding a Trial by Fire….” Timothy Wells Information Governance Specialist.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Title Month Year Electronic Discovery & Compliance: Meeting the Challenges - “Avoiding a Trial by Fire….” Timothy Wells Information Governance Specialist."— Presentation transcript:

1 Title Month Year Electronic Discovery & Compliance: Meeting the Challenges - “Avoiding a Trial by Fire….” Timothy Wells Information Governance Specialist EMC Corporation

2 Agenda Who Are We and How Did We Get Here?
Title Month Year Agenda Who Are We and How Did We Get Here? A Brief Background of e-Data, Compliance, the FRCP and eDiscovery What's Next and Why Should I Care? 2010 Drivers and Landscape Costs and Risks of e-Information What's An Enterprise To Do? Information Management ( , Archives, Records, etc.) eDiscovery Process and Infrastructure How Can We Justify Our Spend? The Road To ROI What's Our Next Step? Conclusions and Next Steps How About Some Free Advice? Q&A

3 EMC eDiscovery & Compliance Team
Title Month Year EMC eDiscovery & Compliance Team An Expert, Diverse Team of 90+ Professionals Industry-leader Kazeon & SourceOne Family Focused on eDiscovery Industry best, dedicated sales team Dedicated Legal / SME Team Product management and support Leading-Edge Activities The Sedona Conference Electronic Discovery Reference Model (EDRM) ARMA Webcasts, Podcasts, Articles, Speaking engagements CT TX CA NY CO GA MA

4 Title Month Year Digital Information Created, Captured, Replicated Worldwide Exabytes 2501 exabytes 5-fold Growth in 4 Years! DVD RFID Digital TV MP3 players Digital cameras Camera phones, VoIP Medical imaging, Laptops, Data center applications, Games Satellite images, GPS, ATMs, Scanners Sensors, Digital radio, DLP theaters, Telematics Peer-to-peer, , Instant messaging, Videoconferencing, CAD/CAM, Toys, Industrial machines, Security systems, Appliances 1,713 exabytes 487 exabytes 487 exabytes Source: IDC Digital Universe White Paper, Sponsored by EMC, May 2009

5 Perfect Storm Drives the Need for Efficiency
Title Month Year Title Month Year Perfect Storm Drives the Need for Efficiency Information explosion 70% of information is created by individuals but enterprises are responsible for the security, privacy, reliability, and compliance of 85% Your “digital shadow” is larger than the digital information you actively create about yourself More lawsuits and regulation Widespread belief that deregulation was a failure Food and drug safety Climate change, and environmental concerns and sustainability efforts Financial meltdown Workplace/unions No New Budget Do more with less Enterprise Information Management – How do you get started? “The shadow of the Wall Street meltdown will be longer than Enron, Sarbanes-Oxley, HIPAA, or any other regulation of modern times” Gartner Governance is the culture, policies, processes, laws, and institutions that define the structure by which companies are directed and managed Risk is the effect of uncertainty on business objectives; risk management is the coordinated activities to direct and control an organization to realize opportunities while managing negative events Compliance is the act of adhering to, and demonstrating adherence to, external laws and regulations as well as corporate policies and procedures There is a perfect storm leading towards more regulation: The financial meltdown, together with the climate changes, environmental concerns in general and sustainability efforts, and and other issues, build momentum toward more regulation 5

6 Years After FRCP Amendments…
Title Month Year Years After FRCP Amendments… State of Readiness: Unprepared 57% of law firms: Clients are not ready to find and produce information relevant to litigation 39% of In-house: Company is not prepared for e-discovery Errors Generate Sanctions and Headlines Scenario 1: Lawyers for a company produced a small batch of relevant s about 10 hours before trial. U.S. District Court Judge Marilyn Hall Patel declares “Heads will have to roll.” According to reports, the punished company had reviewed terabytes of information for this case. Scenario 2: Company hit with an $8.5 million penalty for mistakes with its own discovery of relevant to a patent lawsuit. As federal courts emphasize the responsibility of parties to conduct thorough discovery searches, more such mishaps are likely. “Companies Not Ready For E-Discovery”, companies_not_r.html, posted 9/23/08 (Andrew Conry-Murray, Information Week). Survey from Oce Business Services.

7 Pension Committee Case Guidance from the Bench
Pension Committee provides guidance related to litigation holds, preservation and search methods, and appropriate behavior by organizations charged with delivering relevant data as part of a civil litigation matter. Some insight from Judge Scheindlin: Courts cannot expect perfection. They do expect that litigants and counsel take necessary steps to ensure that relevant records are preserved when litigation is reasonably anticipated. One requirement noted by the judge is written hold notifications be issued to and acknowledged by all potential custodians. Failure to preserve evidence, electronic or paper, resulting in the loss or destruction of relevant information is "surely negligent" and depending on the circumstances, may be "grossly negligent" or "willful." Preservation of backup tapes can be required if they are the sole source of relevant information related to the matter.

8 Investigation Audit Litigation
Title Month Year What is eDiscovery? Electronic discovery (eDiscovery) is the process in which electronically stored information (“ESI”) is searched, collected, preserved, analyzed, and reviewed for legal and regulatory proceedings. State and federal regulators, IRS, OSHA, SEC, NASD, FINRA, HIPAA, Data Privacy & Protection Investigation Internal and external audits of books and records, Defense Contractor Audit, Govt Contract Audits,etc. Audit Current and reasonably anticipated state and federal litigation Litigation Public Disclosure Federal, State and Local - Freedom of Information Act, Open/Public Records Acts Context: In lawsuits and government investigations, the parties are allowed to conduct “discovery” to obtain information that could become evidence in the case. Traditionally, discovery of paper documents was a contained process that lawyers handled. However, the discovery of electronically stored information (“ESI”) can impact any source of information, from across the enterprise, if it is potentially relevant to the case. eDiscovery is the obligation and supporting process to identify, collect, preserve, review and produce electronic information from anywhere in the enterprise because that information is, or may be, relevant to a lawsuit or investigation. The eDiscovery process impacts virtually all organizations. Whether it be to respond to a regulatory investigation, an internal investigation or a case of litigation, the eDiscovery process is effectively the same. Therefore, eDiscovery response should be a repeatable business process. Organizations that do not develop a standardized process incur significantly more cost and risk as they have to “recreate the wheel” for every matter. 8

9 Agenda Who Are You and How Did We Get Here?
Title Month Year Agenda Who Are You and How Did We Get Here? A Brief History What's Next and Why Should I Care? 2010 Drivers and Landscape Costs and Risks of e-Information What's An Enterprise To Do? Recommendations and Initiatives eDiscovery Process and Infrastructure How Do We Justify That? The Road To ROI What's Our Next Step? Conclusions and Next Steps How About Some Free Advice? Q&A

10 2009 Outlook Hint: It hasn’t changed much for 2010….
Title Month Year 2009 Outlook Hint: It hasn’t changed much for 2010…. Forrester: “As one outcome of the current macro-economic environment… expect more litigation and regulation in 2009.” Regulatory investigations Fallout from the financial crisis = enhanced regulation Employee Litigation Layoffs generate lawsuits and investigations Shareholder derivative actions Reporting, drop in stock, financial crisis Aggressive IP Practices Seeking additional revenue sources CFO Oversight Weaker economy results in pressure on expenses - including legal "A tidal wave of wrongful termination lawsuits is expected in the coming months..." Los Angeles Times Sources: Forrester: “Trends 2009: eDiscovery”, Brian Hill, 1/15/2009 “As companies increase layoffs, lawsuits are likely to follow”, Carol Williams, Los Angeles Times, 12/28/08

11 The Costs of eDiscovery
Title Month Year The Costs of eDiscovery $1.5M Average Cost Per Incident 89% Of Companies Face Litigation 10x Increased Costs To Outsource $34M Average Annual Legal Costs $18M+ Cost to Review 1 TB of Info

12 Title Month Year Is Most Requested Content in Legal Proceedings and Regulatory Investigations… But Not the Only Electronic Information requested To the best of your knowledge, which of the following record types has your organization been asked to produce in a legal proceeding or regulatory inquiry? Source: ESG Research Report: Archiving Survey, November 2007; based on 107 respondents and attachments General office productivity Database records Invoices and other customer records Financial statements Phone call recordings and other Digital images Instant messages Video files Other residing on: File servers Desktops servers Laptops 80% 60% 49% 41% 25% 21% 16% 5% 36% 29% 70% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 90% 0% According to the analyst ESG Research, 80 percent of requests for electronic discovery include . So it’s pretty clear that the requirement to search and retrieve is becoming a routine part of doing business. This can be simplified with the help of archiving. Note that is not the only content type. This chart shows that companies increasingly need to produce many types of content. EMC provides eDiscovery products and solutions that address both and many other types of content found throughout the enterprise.

13 Web 2.0 On the Horizon Blogs: 48% for industry, 33% in government
Title Month Year Web 2.0 On the Horizon Blogs: 48% for industry, 33% in government Wikis: 44% industry; 38% in government. Facebook: 44% industry; 28% government YouTube: 26% of government responders; 25% of industry Virtual World / Second Life (typically used for recruitment or web conferences): 13% of industry responders and 10% of government responders. IDC, Survey Shows Glimmers of Hope for Government Web 2.0, Adelaide O'Brien, August 26, 2009

14 Agenda Who Are You and How Did We Get Here?
Title Month Year Agenda Who Are You and How Did We Get Here? A Brief History What's Next and Why Should I Care? 2009 Drivers and Landscape Costs and Risks of e-Information What's An Enterprise To Do? Recommendations and Initiatives eDiscovery Process and Infrastructure How Do We Justify That? The Road To ROI What's Our Next Step? Conclusions and Next Steps How About Some Free Advice? Q&A

15 Establish Boundaries Around Information Management… Use the appropriate process for cost & risk management Title Month Year Using eDiscovery to Streamline the Compliance Opportunity Unstructured Content Enterprise Content Subject to Compliance Control Unmanaged Unstructured Content Managed Unstructured Content Systems Content Management Network File Shares Collaboration Desktops & Laptops Common Services Classify/Archive Custom eDiscovery Structured Content Policy Enforcement Page-Oriented Data Legacy Systems Disposition Database Content Physical Records Line-oriented Data Archive Structured Content Manage In-place Fixed Content 15

16 Electronic Discovery Reference Model (EDRM)
Title Month Year Electronic Discovery Reference Model (EDRM) “IT organizations that have an electronic information inventory, active policy management and archiving solutions, and a repeatable process in place for e-discovery will spend up to 50% less on e-discovery … than those that do not.” ~ Gartner Information Management Retain or delete based on value eDiscovery Process Bring eDiscovery in-house Let’s start our eDiscovery discussion with the EDRM Model. The Electronic Discovery Reference Model was developed by a consortium of companies and eDiscovery vendors as part of a project launched in May The EDRM project was created to address the lack of standards and guidelines in the electronic discovery market. The model highlights eDiscovery as an end-to-end business process, comprised of multiple steps—all focused on identifying all the appropriate materials subject to a eDiscovery request and effectively reducing the volume to produce just the relevant, defensible results. Information management refers to how organizations manage their information on a day-to-day basis. What are their policies? Are they enforced? Here, leveraging good information management best practices—such as separating the backup process from the archiving process, or having defensible and enforceable retention and disposition policies—are key. Identification—During this phase, sources of ESI must be identified—along with custodians (people or companies, etc.)—that will be searched as part of the discovery process because they may be relevant to the matter or investigation. Preservation and collection—This information must then be collected and put on “litigation hold.” This means that the information must be preserved to ensure that it is not changed, altered, or disposed of until the matter or investigation is resolved. Processing, review, and analysis—In this stage, information is culled (or reduced) to a much smaller set of more highly relevant information. Techniques such as deduplication, thread recreation, and sophisticated analysis take place, as do initial review capabilities such as “tagging.” Tagging means that investigators or attorneys can “tag” information indicating whether or not the information is relevant to the case or whether the information is “privileged,” that is confidential. Once this is done internally, it is sent to outside counsel for final review. Production and presentation: Finally, information is produced in the required format and shared with opposing counsel prior to being presented in court, at a hearing, etc. Processing Preservation Information Management Identification Review Production Presentation Collection Analysis

17 Segment Data by Business Value
Title Month Year Segment Data by Business Value Compliance Archive Official business record Long-term retention Note to Presenter: This chart is an illustration of the type of segmentation approach that a customer might use to segment messages and then store them in the repository that best suits the s’ business value. EMC has found that the most sensible approach for most companies is to use both the native archive packaged with the EMC SourceOne Management product and the Compliance Archive, depending on the ’s business value. In most organizations, all is not created equal. The vast majority of in organizations needs to be maintained in bulk for a prescribed period of time, which is exactly what the native archive in SourceOne Management is designed to do. The Compliance Archive can then be used to manage the 10 to 30 percent of an organization’s that is typically affected by business processes or some aspect of governance. Compliance or Native Archive Referential Modest retention Required for discovery Native Archive Non-record Compliance-driven Enforced deletion

18 Potential ESI Enterprise Email Server(s)
Title Month Year Potential ESI Enterprise Server(s) Local stores (pst, etc.) Relational databases CRM Accounting / Financial Data Fileshares Content Management Instant Messaging Video and voice captures Backup / DR tapes Wikis & Blogs Legacy data User desktops CDs, DVDs PDAs / Wireless phones Flash drives Home offices Legacy / stray tapes Decommissioned servers Computer graveyard Stray drives Archives

19 Common Questions for IT Infrastructure
Title Month Year Common Questions for IT Infrastructure What content do I have on my storage? Microsoft SharePoint, file shares, laptops? Is it appropriate? Is it where it should be? What kind of resources is unmanaged content consuming? What does it cost me? Is it on the right tier? Should I archive it? What business records are out there that I don’t know about? What kind of risk are we carrying? What if there is confidential or private content or content subject to regulation out there? How can I clean up my storage? Can I safely delete content that doesn’t have business value? What information do I need to archive and retain? Unmanaged file content lives throughout organizations—on laptops, desktops, file shares, and in third-party repositories like Microsoft SharePoint. Are you confident that you know what you have in your organization, how much of it exists, and where it is located? For most organizations, doing more with less is the order of the day. In an era of shrinking IT budgets and smaller IT staffs, every resource must be allocated correctly and accounted for. Do you know what kind of resources that unmanaged file content is consuming in your organization? In this high-volume content lives potentially high-value or vital business records. Do you know what risk your organization is potentially carrying? Another question for organizations to answer before engaging in high-profile IT projects such as a storage change, vendor swap-out/refresh, or archiving is this: How will you clean up your environment before you engage in those activities, so you don’t bring along unnecessary and/or unwanted content?

20 File Remediation / Classification
Title Month Year File Remediation / Classification Contracts, Invoices, PII, etc Move to RM System Mkt. PowerPoint, Meeting Notices, etc. Short Retention Referential Record Attributes Action Classification Lunch, Gym, s, MP3s, etc Delete Non Record Record Infrastructure

21 Intelligent Information Governance with EMC
Title Month Year Intelligent Information Governance with EMC EMC SourceOne File Intelligence Enables educated decision-making and policy creation EMC Celerra, Data Domain, Centera Copy/move to archive storage File systems servers Laptops and desktops Documentum Microsoft SharePoint Third-party archives SourceOne File Intelligence provides greater insight into the business value and risk of file-based content while allowing organizations to maximize the efficiency and utilization of existing infrastructure investments. SourceOne File Intelligence is the only file management solution that not only offers full-text information about the contents of unmanaged files, but also provides deep-level, rich reporting capabilities that provide actionable intelligence about the activities and resource consumption associated with targeted file content. As a result, organizations have the ability to make valuable, informed decisions about handling unmanaged content and dramatically reduce operational costs and risk across a number of possible scenarios. As we can see here, the first step is identifying where unmanaged files reside—whether in laptops/desktops, file servers, repositories like EMC Documentum or Microsoft SharePoint, or third-party archives—is to take action. After identifying content and providing deep concise reporting, SourceOne File Intelligence can take action by copying or moving information to archive-ready storage platforms such as EMC Celerra, Data Domain, or Centera; enabling records management with Documentum Records Manager; or migrating content to Microsoft SharePoint 2007. In addition, support for copying and moving information to the cloud with Atmos is expected in Q Documentum Copy/move to enable records Microsoft SharePoint Identify content to migrate to The cloud Copy/move to cloud storage

22 SourceOne File Intelligence: How It Works
Title Month Year SourceOne File Intelligence: How It Works Catalog Analyze Act Key features of SourceOne File Intelligence are: Powerful indexing: Discover and classify unmanaged files in-place before any archiving through deep crawling, and powerful and scalable full-text indexing using full or incremental scans. These capabilities can help identify valuable or confidential data such as Social Security or credit card numbers. Flexible search: Target only relevant content based on key data requirements and implement saved searches to easily return to desired search sets. Robust, actionable reporting: With summary or more detailed levels of reporting, users can understand and make informed decisions based on file information such as owner, resource consumption, age, and level of duplication. Copy, move, and delete: Once relevant files have been identified, take actions such as copying files for file migrations or moving valuable file content for records preservation to secure, protected repositories like EMC Documentum. Utilize tiered archiving storage such as EMC Centera, Celerra and Data Domain for lower-cost, compliant, long-term storage. If file content is not aligned with company policy or has no business value, safely delete it. Simplified installation and deployment: SourceOne File Intelligence can be delivered as an appliance, resulting in lower solution complexity and rapid deployment. Classify Search Report Crawl data sources Build index Metadata basic Metadata with document type Metadata with hash Deep crawl full text Deep crawl with classification Classify files based on metadata, keyword content, and pattern matching Age, owner, location, file type, etc. Business value, security risk, intellectual property, PII, PCI Analyze data with search and report tools Semantic search with Boolean, proximity, stemming, phrase support More than 30 pre-built reports out of the box Custom reports as needed Robust action set Move, copy, delete, retain, export, tag Policy-based actions One-time Scheduled Recurring

23 Rich Data Classification
Title Month Year Rich Data Classification Classify files by attributes High business value Files created or modified in the last 30 days Files owned by company executives Medium business value Files not accessed in the last 90 days and not modified in the last 180 days .PST files Low business value Files not accessed in the last 180 days MP3/MP4, JPEG, MOV files Classify selected files based on file content and metadata Files with “Confidential” content e.g., source code files, patents, product manuals, contracts, etc. Files containing non-public information e.g., Social Security numbers, credit card numbers etc. Classify files based on IT or business input Administrator tags Line-of-business tags User tags SourceOne File Intelligence can: Classify files by attributes High business value Files created or modified in the last 30 days Files owned by company executives Medium business value Files not accessed in the last 90 days and not modified in the last 180 days .PST files Low business value Files not accessed in the last 180 days MP3/MP4, JPEG, and MOV files Classify selected files based on file content and metadata Files with “Confidential” in the content e.g., source code files, patents, product manuals, contracts, etc. Files containing non-public information e.g., Social Security numbers, credit card numbers, etc. Classify files based on IT or business input Administrator tags Line-of-business tags User tags

24 File Visibility and Remediation
Title Month Year File Visibility and Remediation Reduce risk, lower costs, and improve efficiency Gain insight into unmanaged file content through granular file-level visibility and reporting Identify opportunities to optimize storage environments where static data is consuming valuable IT resources Locate and safely delete content to reduce risk, reduce data volume, and improve operational performance Reduce risk by migrating content to a secure archive or repository for ongoing policy management Migrate content to virtualized, deduplicated, and cloud platforms to improve performance and reduce costs We have covered a great deal of material today. Here are some final points on the benefits of SourceOne File Intelligence to your organization: Gain insight into unmanaged file content through granular file-level visibility and reporting. Identify opportunities to optimize storage environments where static data is consuming valuable IT resources. Locate and safely delete content to reduce risk, reduce data volume, and improve operational performance. Reduce risk by migrating content to a secure archive or repository for ongoing policy management. Migrate content to virtualized, deduplicated, and cloud platforms to improve performance and reduce costs.

25 Litigation Hold / Collection Spectrum
Title Month Year Litigation Hold / Collection Spectrum Tape Last resort Forensics Custodian–Driven Holds & Collection Moderate risk / low ESI Complexity Custodians do hold/collection of own items Cheap, simple Shifts burden of work Risk of “Faux eDiscovery” Can be difficult to do correctly(e.g. Cache La Poudre) Loss of metadata Enterprise / Automation Best practice System-based collection of main repositories Fast, efficient Great ECA Justify initial investment Pull daily / weekly monthly tapes Deceptively easy and simple (it’s not!) Cons: (Not enough room) Take images of all targeted devices Very complete Expensive Significant over-collection Scalability Good tool to have – not in all cases Focused Use As Needed 25

26 EMC eDiscovery - Data Flow
Title Month Year EMC eDiscovery - Data Flow Desktops Fileshares Exchange Server @ Here we see a step-by-step view of how data flows through a typical eDiscovery process using the EMC Solution for eDiscovery Collection. Knowledge workers create electronically stored information on data sources as usual. This solution requires no changes to data creation processes and no agents to be deployed on data sources. The solution indexes (harvests) the ESI on the data sources to gather intelligence about the stored data. Investigative users search the indexes to determine what ESI is relevant. Relevant ESI is secured and placed on legal hold on immutable storage. Investigator culls through held data and generates production sets for use in legal review, either by outside counsel or by a hosted review vendor. EMC Documentum Microsoft SharePoint Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Knowledge workers create electronically stored information (ESI) on data sources as usual; this solution requires no changes to data creation processes and no agents to be deployed on data sources The solution indexes (harvests) the ESI on the data sources to gather intelligence about the stored data Investigative users search the indexes to determine what ESI is relevant Relevant ESI is secured and placed on legal hold on immutable storage Investigator culls through held data and generates production sets for use in legal review by outside counsel or hosted review vendor

27 EMC SourceOne eDiscovery Kazeon
Title Month Year EMC SourceOne eDiscovery Kazeon Case Management Legal Hold reporting dashboard Legal Hold workflow management Segregate data and cases by role Built-in and custom reports Agent-based & agent-less collection Full and incremental collections Laptop / Desktop Collection Single-step targeted collection Multiple target repositories Preservation and Collection Analysis and Review Distributed and collaborative review analytics and threading Concept search and analysis Interactive tagging and review Highly scalable for multiple case support Discovery Collector’s eDiscovery solution is designed to enable organizations legal and IT organizations with an eDiscovery workflow platform that helps manage the lifecycle from collection of information -- all the way thru to in- house review and analysis of legal information. There are four common use cases for the Discovery Collector eDiscovery solution. Our unique legal hold workflow capability allows an organization to place a litigation hold where the data resides (at it’s original location) or at a target destination designated by the customer such as within an archive repository like Symantec Enterprise Vault or on a secured file system. This allows you to take immediate action without having to deal with often unnecessary collection and risking spoliation. Our solution gives you the tools to quickly and easily locate potentially responsive information necessary for early case assessment and accomplish first-pass review – and you can do this without having to collect information, by performing the analysis and review tasks while the information is in it’s original place. When collection is required, we have a simple single-step targeted collection process that has helped organizations significantly reduce the amount of data that get’s sent out for hosted review resulting in significant cost savings. For corporations that have in-house staff to do review and analysis, our solution has very rich analytical capabilities that gives corporations very good visibility into the data and then perform in-house document review. Discovery Collector provides the industry’s lowest cost eDiscovery solution while mitigating overall organizational risk. 27

28 Enterprise Information Governance Solution
Title Month Year Enterprise Information Governance Solution S1 Supervisor Regulatory Compliance Review Sampled Messages MS Exchange 2003 / 2007 / 2010 Lotus Notes / Domino Messaging Servers S1 eDiscovery – Kazeon Includes Connectors for: File Shares Home Drives (laptops & desktops) Exchange & Notes / PSTs & NSFs Documentum SharePoint S1 Archive SourceOne Archive Other Content Repositories Currently two step collection and unified matter management for: FileNet, Content Manager, GroupWise and other sources Enforcement: In implementing Legal Hold Manager, Kazeon offers in-place legal hold and legal hold to a secure target repository. In-place delivers the capability to quickly hold the potentially relevant information in-place (on the laptop, desktop or server) for near instant compliance until determination of relevance or the ESI is copied to a secure repository. Legal hold to secure target repository enables the legal professional to perform a copy or move with ESI integrity verification to a secure storage system for long-term retention of relevant documents. & IM MS SharePoint File Archiving In-place Legal Hold Target Legal Hold File Shares Avamar Backups Snapshots Document Repositories SharePoint Documentum PST Collect Legal Store Preservation Server Desktops, Remote Offices, and Laptops Legal Hold / Legal Store or Preservation Store – Celerra, Centera, Data Domain & others

29 Agenda Who Are You and How Did We Get Here?
Title Month Year Agenda Who Are You and How Did We Get Here? A Brief History What's Next and Why Should I Care? 2009 Drivers and Landscape Costs and Risks of e-Information What's An Enterprise To Do? Recommendations and Initiatives eDiscovery Process and Infrastructure How Do We Justify Purchases in 2010? The Road To ROI What's Our Next Step? Conclusions and Next Steps How About Some Free Advice? Q&A

30 In 2010 IT Budgets are flat or declining *,
Title Month Year Title Month Year Challenges In 2010 IT Budgets are flat or declining *, but eDiscovery is not discretionary and the money is already being spent IT FTEs spending time on restores of historic data based on vague requests by Legal No ability to delete because of a lack of insight into data, and unrealistic policies from Legal Legal Massive over-collection (“screw drivers and wheel barrels”), leads to huge legal review and processing costs by outsourcers (1 gig = 50,000 files for review) Risk of sanctions for deleting the wrong thing leads to over-preservation (“save everything”) We’ve all seen the IDC study on the exploding digital universe. Information growth is massive – close to 2 zetabytes by 2011 – growing at about 60% per year. As the amount of information grows, it becomes harder to insure information is available to the users who need it. In these difficult economic climate, IT budgets are declining – by 3% in The challenge for CIOs and IT managers is how do I manage this growth? … while insuring that users have access to information… all the while mitigating risks that have to do with regulatory requirements and the threat of litigation or internal investigations. *“Global purchases of IT goods and services … will equal $1.66 trillion in 2009, declining by 3% after an 8% rise in 2008.” Global IT Market Outlook: 2009, Forrester Research, 1/12/2009 30

31 One terabyte of data can result in $18.75M in legal review costs
Title Month Year eDiscovery and RIM ROI “Organizations unprepared for e-discovery in 2009 will be at a disadvantage … open to potential sanctions from an increasingly technically literate U.S. judiciary. As defendants, organizations need to respond quickly and effectively ... As plaintiffs, organizations must have their ESI house in order and be prepared for reciprocal discovery requests…” Gartner, “Reduce the Cost and Risk of E-Discovery in 2009”, D.Logan & J. Bace, 1/9/09 “Between 10% and 90% of what [clients] have does not need to be retained for any reason.” Budget roughly $500,000 on IT support for cases involving 10 or more custodians and/or more than three different systems One terabyte of data can result in $18.75M in legal review costs Unprepared companies will spend 1/3 more on e-discovery than those with content archiv-ing solutions. ROI Factors

32 28% 20% 35% 17% The Cost of eDiscovery Notice Collection Hold
Title Month Year The Cost of eDiscovery Produce Notice Collection Hold Inspect/Review Cost of holding massive volumes Unanticipated legal risk Spoliation risk Percentage of discovery costs when proceedings or investigations involve the discovery of ESI:* 28% 20% 35% 17% Costs associated with document collection from inaccessible locations Cost directly related to number of documents to review Cost of delivering ESI to various recipients on various media (e.g., CD, DVD, or paper) * Source: Enterprise Strategy Group, 2007

33 Title Month Year Straightforward ROI “T]he payback period for an e-discovery investment is very short, on the order of three to six months after implementation takes place.” [1] On slide #5, would you please make the font consistent throughout our quote?  That is, please do not make some words bold or otherwise emphasized if we ourselves did not emphasize those words.  Also please change Gartner Group to Gartner, Inc. in the citation.  With these changes made, slide #5 if also approved. [1] “MarketScope for E-Discovery Software Product Vendors”, Gartner, Inc., 12/17/08.

34 Agenda Who Are You and How Did We Get Here?
Title Month Year Agenda Who Are You and How Did We Get Here? A Brief History What's Next and Why Should I Care? 2009 Drivers and Landscape Costs and Risks of e-Information What's An Enterprise To Do? Recommendations and Initiatives eDiscovery Process and Infrastructure How Do We Justify That? The Road To ROI What's Our Next Step? Conclusions and Next Steps How About Some Free Advice? Q&A

35 Next Steps Get Cross-Functional Assemble Your Case Top-Down
Title Month Year Next Steps Get Cross-Functional IT Meet Legal; Legal Meet IT Assemble Your Case Collect data, anecdotes, research Top-Down Focus initial work on high impact areas Let EMC Help We know your information Our team can facilitate next steps Knowledge Is Power EMC eDiscovery and Compliance (www.emc.com/ediscovery) Bringing eDiscovery In-House (For Dummies): (www.emc.com/ediscovery4dummies) The Sedona Conference (www.SedonaConference.net) EDRM (www.edrm.net)

36 Agenda Who Are You and How Did We Get Here?
Title Month Year Agenda Who Are You and How Did We Get Here? A Brief History What's Next and Why Should I Care? 2009 Drivers and Landscape Costs and Risks of e-Information What's An Enterprise To Do? Recommendations and Initiatives eDiscovery Process and Infrastructure How Do We Justify That? The Road To ROI What's Our Next Step? Conclusions and Next Steps How About Some Free Advice? Q&A

37 Title Month Year


Download ppt "Title Month Year Electronic Discovery & Compliance: Meeting the Challenges - “Avoiding a Trial by Fire….” Timothy Wells Information Governance Specialist."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google