After 10 years in the area of eDiscovery and document review, I can tell you that there are two things that you need to avoid when doing eDiscovery: 1) Overseas document reviewers and 2) Inexperienced document reviewers. On the front end, it may seem like the way to go. But don’t make this mistake.
I have been on multiple re-reviews that have come back from overseas companies only to have to be re-reviewed at a far higher cost. The errors are widespread. The document review is less than successful because US law is complex and overseas attorneys just aren’t trained in the nuisance of legal language or in US law. Many of the documents reviewed are full of acronyms that even savvy US lawyers struggle with. If the law was all the same, attorneys would take one bar exam and be licensed in every state. Regardless of whether there’s a US licensed attorney in charge of the project, only so much can be done. The attorney in charge of the project just can’t review and fix every tagged document that is wrong. Directions can be given to the foreign attorneys, but sometimes this is lost in translation. This is an area where if you try to cut costs, you end up paying more overall or having documents produced that may contain privilege.
Depending on the eDiscovery document review company, the US reviewer results can sometimes be just as bad. Ask the company how much they are paying their reviewers. Ask how many years of experience each document review attorney has in reviewing documents. The US has many companies that will charge low-cost fees for document review attorneys to tag documents and search for evidence. However, consider that most of the reviewers aren’t getting paid well ($21-$25/hour), are temporary employees, and lack the training, experience, and knowledge necessary. Law firms need competent and efficient review attorneys. Attorneys who have reviewed hundreds of documents and care about the results are difficult to find. Let’s talk about what is really going on behind the scenes of a review.
The company needs to staff a document review. To maximize profit, they hire their reviewers at around $21 per hour. For reference, I don’t need a law license or law degree to work at Chick-fil-A for $21/hour. eDiscovery companies have trouble staffing projects due to the low rate of pay. New reviewers are constantly hired and experienced reviewers are constantly leaving. The project starts and the team leader begins quality control of the documents. Sometimes as much as 60% of the documents are not correctly done. Time is paid for someone to go back through the documents and correct them. You just paid twice the amount for it to be fixed because of the quality of the attorney reviewers. Some of the quality control reviewers have only done a few reviews and are also prone to mistakes. They were chosen because the company can’t get anyone else due to poor pay.
The attorneys do receive feedback on the items they are doing incorrectly. Sometimes this results in a better review. Sometimes it does not. I have heard many attorneys say, “I don’t really care because they are not paying me enough.” I’ve seen reviewers play on their phones and still bill the time. I’ve seen reviewers watch videos while trying to understand documents. I’m just sick when I see other attorneys do this. I believe that if you are hired to do a job, you do it 100%. If the pay is too low, don’t take the position! I am firm on my values and honesty in my business practices.
Efficiency, accuracy, and honesty.
A reviewer who cares about the product, has years of experience, and is paid a reasonable fee can review sometimes 3-4 times the amount of documents with extremely high accuracy. This saves the client time and money because no one needs to fix all the incorrect tagging. It also saves the client from inadvertently disclosing privileged information.
If you are considering hiring for document review services, please consider contacting Affordable eDiscovery for a free 1-hour consultation.
Disclaimer: This information is my personal opinion only and based on 10 years of experience in the industry.
Comments