Migrated from eDJGroupInc.com. Author: Barry Murphy. Published: 2013-04-10 05:51:17Format, images and links may no longer function correctly. After analyzing some of the preliminary results of eDJ’s Predictive Coding survey, I hypothesized that Predictive Coding (PC) would likely gain mainstream adoption in 2013.  To date, more than half of respondents have tried PC and are doing so in a systematic way (versus in a purely experimental way).  Since just over half of respondents have used PC, there is still a significant minority that have yet to embrace this new approach to eDiscovery and information governance.

Our survey data reveals some of the reasons that eDiscovery professionals have not yet adopted PC.  While there is not one dominant reason, some of the top factors that keep users away from PC include:

  • Lack of cases that have justified using PC
  • Lack of comfort with PC technology
  • Cost


All of those reasons can be justified in some fashion, but they can also be addressed in certain circumstances.  It is true that some smaller matters will not justify the use of PC, at least not the way PC is priced in some cases.  But, for a corporation that buys an all-you-can-eat software license for PC, there should not be any issues with running even the smallest cases through a PC workflow in an effort to best assess a case.

The lack of comfort with PC technology is a valid concern, and one that is to be expected in an immature market.  Given the backlash against “black box” technology and the need for transparency and proof of defensibility, most vendors are opening up about what makes their software applications tick.  Often, though, users are simply uncomfortable with PC processes and validation, versus truly uncomfortable with the technology.  To address that, there are a number of educational opportunities to learn how PC processes work and how to validate those processes.  eDJ’s Boot Camps are one of those educational options.  These CLE accredited Camps will feature in-depth education around the topic of Predictive Coding.  There are several unique attributes that will assist in educating its participants:

  • Access to judicial thought leaders and their perspectives on why PC makes sense for lawyers to consider using.
  • Targeted survey data on the use of PC and other document review techniques.  Much of this data is only available by subscription through eDJ, but portions of it will be included in the materials for attendees. This is a great way to find out what the industry seems to be doing and benchmark your workflow to these results.  No other CLE programs cover this type of material.
  • Experienced PC users leading the workshops.  Hear from the pioneers who are using these tools, why they use them, and how they win their fights over validation on what the black box says is responsive.
  • Live testing on key concepts will be presented, providing feedback on what was learned by the attendee.

Currently, there are four regional Boot Camps – you can register for them at the links below:

Finally, the issue of cost will always be there.  How to deal with cost will depend on the type of PC user.  Some law firms are bringing PC technology in-house to achieve cost stability while other leverage managed service providers.  The same goes for corporate legal departments.  From a corporate perspective, the economies of scale may come from using PC technology further upstream in the IG lifecycle in addition to using it for early case assessment and review.  In that context, the cost issue might be muted.

What do you think?  Are there other reasons to not use PC?  Please comment here and keep the discussion going.

eDiscoveryJournal Contributor and Lead Analyst – Barry Murphy

Don’t miss Barry Murphy’s upcoming Predictive Coding Boot Camps in Washington, DC, Chicago, Philadelphia and Boston. To learn more, click here!


0 0 votes
Article Rating