EDRM has announced that EDRM has released the EDRM 2.0 Model for public comment. Here’s what you need to know to provide feedback.

Announced today, this is the first substantive update to the Electronic Discovery Reference Model since EDRM incorporated the full Information Governance Reference Model (IGRM). Developed by approximately 150 multidisciplinary practitioners across the global EDRM community, the updated model reflects how electronic discovery is practiced today and where that practice is heading. Here’s a larger view of it:

Here is that same image, full sized.

As many of you know, the Electronic Discovery Reference Model, first stewarded by Tom Gelbmann and George Socha, has served as the foundational visual reference for discovery practice since 2005, giving courts, corporate legal teams, government agencies, law firms, service providers, technology professionals, and academics a shared framework and common language for how electronic evidence moves from creation through use at trial. EDRM 2.0 is modernizing that framework to reflect two decades of evolution in technology, data volumes, rule changes, regulatory expectations, cross-functional practice and considered court decisions.

Key updates in the EDRM 2.0 Model include:

• Information governance foundation. The Information Governance Reference Model (IGRM) now grounds the discovery lifecycle as a foundational layer, reflecting how governance principles shape every downstream discovery activity.
• Data Acquisition framework. Identification, Preservation, Collection, and Processing are grouped within a unified Data Acquisition framework, recognizing that these activities increasingly operate together rather than as strictly sequential steps in the move toward increased emphasis upstream.
• Disposition as a core phase. Disposition is now represented as a discrete phase, acknowledging the practical, legal and ethical responsibility to address data after it is no longer required at the end of the lifecycle.
• Continuous Analysis. Analysis is now represented as an activity spanning every phase of discovery, reflecting the growing role of legal judgment, analytics, data science, and AI throughout and becoming the connective tissue between and among iterative phases.

As I noted, EDRM 2.0 was developed by approximately 150 contributors from across the global EDRM community, including in-house counsel, law firm practitioners, service providers, technologists, academics, and members of the judiciary. The project was led by EDRM 2.0 co-project trustees Shannon Lex Bales, Rian Kennedy, Stephanie Clerkin, and Brett Burney, with leadership support from Dave Cohen and guidance from the EDRM global advisory council chaired by Robert Keeling. Megan McKeirnan provided graphic support and Holley Robinson provided operational support.

EDRM also acknowledges Charisma Starr, charter co-trustee, and the late Kaylee Walstad, EDRM chief strategy officer and project champion, for their contributions. EDRM honors Tom Gelbmann and George Socha for their creation and stewardship of the original model.

The process of creating the EDRM 2.0 Model occurred over many months of meetings led by the EDRM 2.0 co-project trustees (who did a terrific job), with thoughtful discussion and commentary from the 150 contributors (including me). From my experience, the discussions were open and honest and all viewpoints were considered, which led to a result that was well considered and thought out. The model truly reflects the viewpoints of the entire team, in my opinion. Well done to EDRM and its members!

Public comment on EDRM 2.0 opened today and runs through July 30, 2026. Practitioners and other stakeholders are invited to review the updated model and submit feedback at https://edrm.net/edrm-projects/edrm-2-0/. Project trustees will review every submission and determine whether additional committee review or revisions are warranted before final publication.

So, what do you think of the EDRM 2.0 Model? 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.