7 Responses to Search Method Validation or eDiscovery Standards? What is Really Needed for eDiscovery Search and Retrieval to be Successful?

  1. Jennifer Mason says:

    These comments are well placed. However, I believe there are commonalities between the Baron article and your own. These similarities include the following: 1. Both of you agree that it is the wild west; 2. Both of you agree that validation of the process is required; 3. Both of you agree that identification of data through a “process” results in a better outcome. 4. This “process” of identification of data will likely will involve an experienced and knowledgeable practitioner obtaining information about data from the client representatives with knowledge of where potentially relevant data resides. (I believe the similarities go on but I will stop there.) The point is that standarization of the process can occur while permitting some variance. In fact, variance for a specific reason such as search methodology which will improve the quality of precision and recall is likely beneficial for the reasons you have stated and can be part of the standardized process itself. However, in my humble opinion, the need for variance does not negate the need for a standard.

  2. Jason R. Baron says:


    A very thoughtful rejoinder to my guest blog. The DESI IV standards-setting workshop should definitely incorporate your ideas on the need to employ proper search methods tailored to particular e-discovery domains, as part of what constitutes an overall quality search process. I think we’re definitely on the same page here, and of course, I encourage your participation in Pittsburgh on June 6th if you can make it (your blog is essentially the kind of position paper we’re asking for!). Note to Ralph: Thanks to you too for the further publicity surrounding the workshop!

  3. Nat says:

    I think the discussion of validation needs to include some clarity as to the purpose of validation. Do you want something that you can show a court? Or something you can show a customer? The searches that require validation to a court (or opposing counsel) seem to me to be overwhelmingly searches for “all” documents responsive to a particular request. Such validation will look very different than validation to a customer that some search turned up the helpful, or “hot” documents from a collection.

  4. […] Search Method Validation or eDiscovery Standards? What is Really … […]

  5. […] designed by lawyers. There seems to be a consensus emerging on this. Id. at para [7]. Sigler, S., Search Method Validation or eDiscovery Standards? What is Really Needed for eDiscovery Search and Re…, e-Discovery Team (3/27/2011); Baron, J., In Search of Quality: Is It Time for E-Discovery Search […]

%d bloggers like this: