Migrated from eDJGroupInc.com. Author: Barry Murphy. Published: 2011-03-29 05:07:59Format, images and links may no longer function correctly. Lately, it seems like predictive coding is all over the eDiscovery blogosphere.  The most recent example is Ben Kerschberg’s entry at Forbes.com law and technology blog.  When we wrote about the topic last fall, a majority of readers believed that predictive coding was not defensible.  I took a new look at the data on our poll question and found that attitudes are evolving.

As the data shows, there is still not clear acceptance of predictive coding as a defensible review mechanism.  Other pundits have done a good job of pointing out that any organization using predictive coding should be careful to state the reasons for using it (e.g. more efficient review) and to be transparent about how sampling is conducted.  Essentially, any organization using predictive coding should make sure they are comfortable defending it in court.

What I find more interesting is simply that more people voted that predictive coding is defensible than voted that it is not defensible.  In an industry that has traditionally been slower to adopt innovation than most, this is a significant shift.  Perhaps people are realizing that predictive coding does not necessarily mean completely automating review.  Rather, it is about using more sophisticated techniques to make review more efficient and less costly.

Let’s hope the results keep trending in this positive direction.  It’s good to see innovation in our market.

0 0 votes
Article Rating