Effective Records Management – Part 1

Digital information in today’s businesses is threatening to overflow the banks of the information rivers. The 2010 edition of IDC’s Digital Universe report shows that information overload is not some future catastrophe waiting around the corner – it is here now, staring us in the face.

This explosive growth translates not only into higher cost related to storage, and with higher workplace inefficiency when searching for information. To compound the problem, records managers and CIOs must cope with a diverse and decentralized collection of both legacy paper and digital information. For example, a company’s payroll records may exist concurrently as reports in paper form stored at some off site facility, as Excel spreadsheets stored on centralized servers, individual employees’ computers, and as attachments to emails, and within a third-party, cloud based payroll system.

Most organizations are basically treading water right now – while the information tidal wave is upon them, their efforts are focused on plugging holes, not stemming the tide. To move forward in a proactive way, organizations need to develop an enterprise records management program.

Within most organizations, individual groups tend to develop their own way of managing records. In some cases, this is even left to individual employees, usually with difficult consequences when an employee leaves and someone else takes over that position. Although information is information, it is common to see the management of digital records treated differently than paper records. Organizations with long-standing records management strategies are struggling, as they try to force terabytes of digital records to fit within an archaic and usually complicated system original designed to manage a few 100 boxes of paper.

Lack of consistency and simplicity, combined with the abundance and ever growing volume of digital records, makes it difficult for even the most proactive companies to achieve compliance. The answer to this dilemma is simple – organizations must adopt a single set of records management policies coupled to a simple plan that governs all information, regardless of the data format or location. By implementing standard, enterprise-wide practices for classifying, retaining and destroying records, a company lowers its risk of non-compliance and increases its efficiency, reducing costs. These policies form the backbone of any compliant records management program.

In practice, implementing these strategies can be fraught with potholes. In part 2 of this series, we’ll discuss the steps involved in developing a practical ERM program.

Information Overload

Recent studies and articles make the case for better information management:

• Information workers, who comprise about 63% of the U.S. work force, are bombarded each day with 1.6 gigabytes of information through emails, reports, blogs, text messages, calls and more.

• U.S. companies lose an estimated $900 billion a year in lost productivity because of information overload.

• The average knowledge worker — from computer programmers and rocket scientists to administrative assistants and accounting clerks — spends about 25% of the day searching for information, getting back to work after an interruption and dealing with other effects of information overload.

Information overload is escalating. While IT departments look for solutions, relatively few companies have policies and procedures in place deal with the issue or help their employees do so.

Here are some tips:

Take Control

Gaining control over the information can help ease the sense of overload.

Relying on interaction through the inbox takes away an individual’s control of the information that comes to them – they are at the mercy of information that other people deem important.

An alternative way to interact that gives an individual control over information that is most important to them is through the use of internal social-networking tools, such as shared web pages (known as wikis) and collaborative sites, such as those facilitated through SharePoint.

Another way to focus on what’s important is to set up alerts and feeds from disparate sources, based on keywords. Of course, this means more email, so it’s also important to set up rules to direct less important messages into specific folders that can be checked only when needed.

Control can also be achieved by assuming a proactive, rather than reactive, work ethic. Organize the day into blocks of time that are quiet, focused work, where email is not checked, and specific times when you check email. During the quiet times, post a do not disturb message for instant messages.

Prioritize and Organize

Plan how to manage the messages as they arrive. Messages that can be dealt with in less than two minutes should just be taken care of and then deleted immediately. If the message requires more time, delegate it or defer it. If the message is deferred, move it to an action folder or a to-do-list (Microsoft Outlook has the ability to easily flag emails for follow up in the future).

Send Less

It’s a well understood principle – the more email you send, the more you get. Here are some specific ways you can better manage the information flow:

• Reduce word count. Sending concise email messages with clear subject lines.
• Put necessary tasks at the beginning of the message, to avoid the recipient being unsure what to do.
• Don’t hit “reply all” unless absolutely necessary.
• Send “thank you” emails, and never “reply all” for those.
• To decrease interruptions, turn off “new email” alerts and cancel the “new mail” alert on your desktop.
• Sort your inbox by sender, or create a rule to mark messages from key contacts in different colors.

While individuals can take control on their own, organizations that have well written, established and enforced policies and procedures will find that information management has been streamlined. These organizations will be rewarded with increased productivity.

Wortzman Nickle’s Training Sessions – Now Accredited by LSUC

Over the past several years, the Susans have worked with a significant number of Canada’s top law firms. Several of these firms have invited us in-house, to speak to groups of litigators and business lawyers about the perils and opportunities inherent in e-discovery, and the benefits of proper records management. Each session is 90 minutes in length. These presentations have evolved over time to keep pace with the changes in technology and approach to discovery.

We are pleased to announce that these Wortzman Nickle education programs have now been accredited by the Law Society of Upper Canada as follows:

• Our e-Discovery program has been accredited for 1 hour toward the New Member Requirement and 0.5 hours toward the Professionalism Requirement for ongoing members.
• Our 90 minute Records Management program has been accredited for 1.5 hours toward the New Member Requirement and 1 hour toward the Professionalism Requirement for ongoing members.

These time-effective and interactive sessions are ideal for a lunch meeting or firm retreat. Call us to discuss bringing these sessions to your team.

Sophisticated software can help lawyers, not replace them

On March 5^th, the New York Times published an article entitled “Armies of Expensive Lawyers, Replaced by Cheaper Software” which discussed the “new e-discovery software that can analyze millions of documents in a fraction of the time, and at a fraction of the cost consumed by human lawyers, even deducing patterns of behaviour”.   It discussed the explosion of electronically stored information, the technology used to analyze that data and how all this has disrupted the legal job market.

The article provided a clear and concise overview of the new systems available to assist legal teams.  However, the conclusion that these technologies will replace “expensive lawyers” misses the mark. All of the technologies mentioned in the article require a combination of machine and human interaction in order to operate. Humans have to “teach” the computer to identify relevant information. As with any educational process, the more highly skilled the teacher, the better the lesson will be. What the technologies will replace are lawyers working at very basic levels without a strong understanding of the case.

Although the new technologies will force lawyers to learn new ways to approach document discovery, the technologies are just one cog in the legal machine. Lawyers still need to understand the content of the documents to build their case. The new systems will help lawyers to zero in on the documents containing the relevant content.

No matter how sophisticated a computer system gets, it can’t make subjective evaluations. The legal process is not black and white – it’s ultimately based on judgement and inference. As a result, it will always require highly skilled talent.

Live From Applied Discovery’s “Understanding Proportionality”

Tuesday morning, Lexis Nexis sponsored a panel discussion on proportionality, discovery plans, and the effects that the new Ontario rules are having on the way litigation is being carried out. The panel consisted of Master Calum Macleod, Kelly Freidman of Ogilvy Renault, and our very own Susan Nickle.

Proportionality was described as one component of a set of rules designed to encourage a cultural change in the legal community. It is no longer acceptable to proceed unilaterally – parties must come together sooner and communicate more often, in order establish a real dialog and focus on the issues at the beginning of the matter, not at the end.

The new rules, and particularly the requirement for a discovery plan, are leading lawyers to develop a better understanding of technology. To be sure, most lawyers will not become techno-geeks, but it is important for lawyers to understand how electronic information is stored and where it likely resides. It is equally important for lawyers to appreciate that discovery has not changed just because documents are stored electronically – in the end, the case will hinge on same handful of documents. The only difference is that those documents will fit on a CD rather than in a banker’s box.

There were many questions from the approximately 90 people in attendance, including dialogue about  the concept of proportionality forcing litigants to think of alternative forms of proof, as some traditional forms of proof may be too cost-prohibitive.

The seminar clearly illustrated that the new rules are having an influence, and will continue to shape litigation into a more manageable, cost effective tool to resolve disputes.

Wortzman on early case assessment..

I have just finished a cross-country conference tour.  I started on September 16^th at the Sedona Conference, Getting Ahead of the e-Discovery Curve: Strategies to Reduce Costs & Meet Judicial Expectations in Vancouver.  Moving east, I then participated in the Canadian Institute: Class Actions Litigation conference on September 23^rd in Toronto discussing e-discovery issues.  The last part of my travels took me yet further east to Halifax on September 30^th to an Insight conference, E-Discovery and E-Documents.  I can now safely say that I have heard from external counsel, in-house counsel, vendors, records management and IT participants on their latest issues and concerns surrounding e-discovery in Canada. 

The buzz at all three conferences seems to be “early case assessment”.  While the never ending issues of preservation and proportionality were discussed, there was a tremendous focus now on costs and how to reduce the costs of e-discovery.  Peg Duncan and I prepared a paper for the Sedona Conference called e-Discovery: Bringing Down the Costs which garnered much interest at the conference.  I have since had several calls and questions from lawyers and in-house counsel wanting to discuss early case assessment tools.

In practice, I have recently been involved with two cases where we have very successfully used early case assessment tools to quickly identify key electronic records in massive collections of data.  Although this is not the end of the e-discovery review, it has allowed counsel to inexpensively and very efficiently identify key documents for their cases.  It is the inexpensive part that our clients are most interested in achieving.

Wortzman and Nickle continue to look at early case assessment tools to provide our clients with advice on the best way to assess and analyze their electronic records and their case, early in the lifespan of a matter.