More poll results from the 10th annual UF Law eDiscovery Conference! These polls were from the Inbound Productions session!
As discussed in the first post, the conference had huge attendance and several of the terrific educational sessions conducted polls. So, I will be covering poll results over the next couple of weeks, thanks to Maribel Rivera who provided me the raw anonymized results from all the polls. So, here are the Inbound Productions session poll results!
The Making Sense of the Noise: Analyzing and Understanding Inbound Productions session included Rebekah Bailey, Partner, Nichols Kaster, PLLP; Stephanie Clerkin, Director of Litigation Support, Korein Tillery, LLC; Scott Milner, Partner, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP.
There were four polls during that session, each of which had more than 550 responses (range between 553 and 892 respondents). Pretty darn good! Here are the results of each of the poll questions:
Specific to the scope of production, as a receiving party, do you prefer:
Not surprisingly, more than half of 892 respondents want a focused production. Perhaps even less surprisingly, the second choice among a legal crowd was “It Depends”! Only 6 percent want a data dump, so they’re either really good in managing large amounts of data or they’re masochists. 😉
Recognizing all matters are different, which analytics tool do you use as your primary “go to” tool for analyzing inbound productions?
Email thread analysis and “Other” were the top two vote getters here – combined, they were selected by more than 60 percent of 849 respondents. TAR was a distant third and Clustering was fourth. A whopping two people selected Sentiment Analysis, but that doesn’t mean that more people don’t use it – it may simply mean it’s not their “go to” tool.
Do you have a checklist for QC’ing productions?
The good news is that close to half of 869 respondents said “Yes”. The bad news is that those who don’t wasn’t that far behind. It’s not surprising that 16 percent of respondents said “Not Sure” as they may not be involved in the production phase at their organizations.
How are you providing documents to reviewers?
Not sure why we had so much fewer respondents on this one, but 553 is still a good number. Essentially, it’s about an even split between numbered batches (i.e., 1 – 500, 501 – 1000, etc.), By category and “Other”, with “Other” slightly ahead. Only 8 percent do it by concept.
With “Other” leading in two of the polls, it may be worth providing some additional options if we ask these questions again next year.
Still creating graphs for other polls, so expect to see a few more posts over the next couple of weeks. Hey, you’ve waited this long!
BTW, what better reason to start getting people ready for next year’s conference? The dates for it are in the graphic at the top of the post!
So, what do you think? Do any of these poll results surprise you? Please share any comments you might have or if you’d like to know more about a particular topic.
Disclaimer: The views represented herein are exclusively the views of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views held by my employer, my partners or my clients. eDiscovery Today is made available solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general eDiscovery principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. eDiscovery Today should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.