Comments on: Document Review - Resource Considerations

By: Texas Hunting

Texas Hunting — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 22:28:24 +0000

I was just browsing for cool articles to read when I came across your blogsite. I enjoyed reading and learning from your article.

By: SmoknGun

SmoknGun — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 19:36:49 +0000

Generally, I feel the advantages of having the review team in one central area are mostly realized in the first couple of weeks of a new project. As everyone is getting up to speed, learning how to use the tools, asking lots of questions, identifying any weaknesses or inconsistencies in the review protocols, the communication and orientation process is greatly enhanced by being able to overhear what is being said around the room. After that time, however, when everyone settles into a routine and less and less new information is being disseminated, there is a point of diminishing returns to having everyone clustered together in one big area. Noise from routine chit chat can become a productivity reducing irritant. The “throat clearer” (there’s always at least one) will start to wear on some people’s nerves. The morning’s banana peels become the afternoon’s toxic fumes, etc.
The three “BIG C’s” of document review are really the underlying justifications for a centralized facility: Communication, Control and Consistency. The longer a project continues, however, the more options become available to achieve these goals without mandating a central location for the review.

By: admin

admin — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 13:32:13 +0000

DVW - I think that remotely here meant at a central location in the firm, but I agree that remotely has to include the possible option of working from home or somewhere else to add the benefit of reduced commuting, laundry, etc. It is possible to do, and I’ve worked a few at home reviews. They’re great with the right group of reviewers. The communication and oversight has to be on a different level, though. We’ve used weekly in person meetings and mail-lists for substantive discussions among the reviewers. Thanks, DVW.

Also, Tenessee Traveller, I agree that Respect towards the reviewers needs to be built into the process in a variety of ways. One way is direct communication like you mention, others include lighting, workspaces with windows, access to internet and putting one of those fancy pieces of art the firm cares so much about in the room.

By: DVW

DVW — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 07:19:42 +0000

The excerpt you quoted included this:

“It is equally acceptable for the review team to work remotely or within their individual offices although this may require a greater need for internal communication protocols.”

What exactly does “remotely” mean here? Is this just “remote” within a law firm’s building, or does it include people working from their own homes or offices in various cities? Are there “internal communication protocols” that would allow the latter to be done with adequate security?

By: Tennessee Traveler

Tennessee Traveler — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 00:27:08 +0000

If the optimal conditions cannot be maintained, please brief those persons sharing the workspace to show respect for the workspace and the workers. That is, any necessary lawyers/paralegals sharing that space, through need for files, copiers, etc., should respect the professionalism of the document reviewers and their need for concentration.