Migrated from eDJGroupInc.com. Author: Barry Murphy. Published: 2012-03-15 05:00:33Format, images and links may no longer function correctly. Thanks to all who attended our technology-assisted review (TAR) for eDiscovery webinar. There was a great turnout and our guests – Chuck Rothman of Wortzman Nickle and Thomas Gricks of Schnader, Harrison, Segal & Lewis – offered valuable insights on how to use TAR and get value from it. Chuck also contributed an article to eDiscoveryJournal this week on”what predictive coding really is”. Chuck’s article title points out the confusion in the market about what different terms actually mean.
Mikki Tomlinson recently ran a meeting of eDJ’s Peer Groups in which the TAR topic came up. The Peers believe that TAR is too broad of a term and that predictive coding is too narrow a term. The market needs one umbrella term that is pithy and descriptive. Jason Velasco had offered up PC-TAR as the term, while others have called it meaning-based coding, adaptive coding, predictive priority, transparent predictive coding, or automated document review. The bottom line is that, in the context of today’s advanced technological world, TAR is about using a combination of technology and people to actually speed, improve, and sometimes automate elements of the legal review process in such a way as to reduce costs and improve quality.
eDJ is working on a market overview report about technology-assisted review and we want your help in naming the category. Please answer the following poll question about which term you think best describes this category. By month’s end, we’ll see which term has the most votes and we will stick with that term in our research going forward.
[poll id=”11″]