Are you a Data Hygienist?

By |2021-03-11T16:37:41+00:00March 11th, 2021|Categories: Data, eDiscovery, Information Governance, Knowledge, Privacy, Productivity|Tags: , , , , |

The first real job in my formative years was as a line cook at a Big Boy family restaurant in north-central Indiana.  I learned many lessons about working with people, teamwork, customer service, inventory management, and managing a business. In the kitchen, I remember the grizzled cook that had been there for many years telling me when there was a break in the dinner rush: “If you've got time to lean, you’ve got time to clean”.  That mantra stuck with me for the rest of my career.  In a conversation today with my partners, Jason Thompson and Michael Epstein, we were discussing the dusty data landscape of Microsoft Teams and other collaboration sites.  Every organization, including Kindato, struggles daily with ensuring their team members accidently don’t use erroneous chats and meeting notes. Naturally, the conversation then led towards how to manage SharePoint and shared folders across a myriad of cloud platforms.    My career in technology allows me to play with terabytes (and sometime petabytes) of unstructured data. Now I’m spending quite a bit of time in Microsoft Teams, Slack, Trello, and a few other collaboration technologies across the different projects we are engaged. These tools are amazing at providing the foundation for remote teams to continue working together especially in the middle of a pandemic.    The challenge is that collaboration technologies often become a “data dumping ground” for all sorts of data such as meeting notes, files, meeting recordings, and chats. This makes it very difficult to manage on a day-to-day basis as well as raises the risk of retaining large volumes of unknown data.    Building data hygiene and data management into the culture of your organization is a healthy way to manage the exploding volume of data that is stored across these [...]

Identification in eDiscovery and Information Governance

By |2021-03-04T16:27:39+00:00March 1st, 2021|Categories: Data, eDiscovery, Events, Information Governance|Tags: , , , , , , , |

Last week the Los Angeles Chapter of Women in eDiscovery invited me to moderate a discussion with some amazing women leaders in the Information Governance space about the challenges & solutions related in identifying users and data as part of the eDiscovery process.  In our conversation with Susan Bennett of Information Governance ANZ and Justine Phillips of Sheppard Mullin we covered topics around:  Securing and locating data with personally identifiable information (PII) for eDiscovery identification stage in relation to cross borders (e.g. tokenization and legal approaches)  Compliance and benchmarking within an organization for identifying relevant data  Using identity management for acceptable risk and understanding risk profiles  As part of this discussion, Justine and Susan provided materials to share with our broader audience.   Justine shared with us some great insight on the California Consumer Privacy Acct (CCPA) and California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA) as organizations continue to understand the different types of “Personal Information” (PI) required to be protected. She shared what is considered to be Personal Information by the CCPA and CPRA.    Susan supplied us with her knowledge related to data privacy in Australia and around the globe with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) as the gold standard privacy protection regulation. Susan has written an article explaining the InfoGovANZ Information Governance model and framework that I suggest people review as part of their IG learnings:   Information Governance: optimising the lifeblood of organisations - InfoGovANZ  There is also a section on law and eDiscovery in the recently released InfoGovANZ Hindsights and Insights Report - Information governance reflections on 2020 and insights for 2021.  Thank you to the wonderful Women in eDiscovery — Los Angeles Chapter for the opportunity to learn and facilitate an interesting conversation with Justine and Susan. It can be overwhelming with the [...]

Taking an Agnostic Approach to Legal Technology

By |2021-02-03T20:01:24+00:00February 3rd, 2021|Categories: Data, eDiscovery, Information Governance, Intelligence, Technology|

Early on in my career as a consultant in the eDiscovery space, I felt it important to have an agnostic approach and be independent with my recommendations for solutions, technologies, and providers. Even in my earliest days running the advisory practice at Renew Data where we had our own technology and service offering, there were many situations where I advised clients to go another direction because of the specific scope of a project. As much as this frustrated our salespeople, I understood that there is plenty of business out there and it was good karma.   In 2010 Barry Murphy, Greg Buckles, and I founded the eDJ Group, a boutique analyst firm covering the electronic discovery and information governance space. The eDJ Group stayed above the fray at all cost looking at what was really in the best interest of a client based on their specific scenarios. We tried our best as analysts to take an agnostic approach.  I founded the eDiscovery Advisory practice on the same agnostic approach to technology and providers. That means passing up the lucrative referral or sales relationships with technology and service providers that pervade our market. Maintaining the integrity to advise clients based on their needs is key to the eDiscovery Teams strategic vision and achieving our desired state of KinDato (Knowledge and Intelligence through Data).  As the eDiscovery Advisory team continues to build on this agnostic approach, I had the opportunity to reunite with my previous business partner and very independent consultant, Greg Buckles.  Greg still runs the eDiscovery Journal as well as the eDJ Group consulting practice.    JV: You and I have spoken many times over our careers about really taking more of an agnostic approach to looking at legal technology and legal service providers. Maybe we could start at the beginning by sharing why you chose to be independent and your experiences working independently.  GB: In my role as a corporate buyer of eDiscovery technology and services at El Paso Corp., I started finding conflicts inherent within the relationships between my service and tech providers. I would find out they would get points off a deal or if I chose a piece of technology, the sales rep would get 7.5%.    When I went from there to being a product manager, everybody around me was selling technology except for me. I was the person who owned the development of the technology, [...]