In legal data work, the natural impulse is often to move quickly. The race is on to preserve the data, begin collections, process the files, and get documents in front of reviewers.

But speed without direction can create problems. 

At TCDI, our experience supporting legal teams has reinforced that the most effective legal data workflows begin with listening. Asking the right questions throughout the process helps build solutions with the core question of “What problem are we are trying to solve?”

Understanding the Objective

Every matter has a different legal and business objective. A regulatory inquiry, internal investigation, employment dispute, data breach, and complex commercial litigation may involve similar data sources, but they rarely require the same workflow.

Before technical decisions are made, the team should understand:

  • What questions must the evidence answer?
  • Which claims, defenses, or investigative issues matter most?
  • What deadlines are driving the work?
  • Which facts are already known, and where are the gaps?
  • What level of risk is the organization prepared to accept?
  • Are there jurisdictional, privacy, or regulatory requirements affecting the data?

These questions establish the purpose behind the work. Without that context, teams may begin by collecting too broadly. The lack of initial information could also lead to processing unnecessary information or designing review protocols that do not align with the matter’s actual needs.

TCDI works with legal teams to understand what they are trying to accomplish and build a practical, defensible workflow around those objectives. We see our role as more than moving data through a series of technical steps.

Discovering More About the Relevant Data

Potentially relevant information now extends well beyond email and shared drives. It may be located in:

  • Collaboration tools
  • Mobile devices
  • Cloud applications
  • Proprietary business systems

Simply asking where the data is located is not enough. Legal teams must also understand how the information was created, used, stored, and maintained. To understand how that information functions in practice, ask:

  • Who communicated through the system?
  • What do specific fields or abbreviations mean?
  • Are timestamps reliable?
  • Does the platform retain edits, reactions, attachments, or deleted content?
  • Is the information duplicated elsewhere?
  • Can it be collected proportionally without disrupting business operations?

The people closest to the data often provide context that no technical tool can supply. Listening to custodians, IT personnel, business stakeholders, and counsel can reveal which sources are likely to be valuable and which may add volume without contributing meaningful evidence.

Preventing Overcollection

Overcollection is one of the most common and expensive sources of inefficiency in discovery.

When teams collect first and ask questions later, irrelevant data quickly moves downstream. It must be transferred, processed, hosted, searched, reviewed, managed, and potentially produced. Each step adds cost and complexity.

A better front-end conversation can help define:

  • Which custodians are likely to have relevant information?
  • What date range aligns with the facts?
  • Which sources should be prioritized?
  • What can reasonably be deferred or excluded?
  • How will the team validate those decisions?

This does not mean narrowing the scope so aggressively that important evidence is missed. It means making informed, defensible decisions based on the needs of the matter rather than collecting everything simply because it is technically accessible.

TCDI applies Lean Six Sigma principles to help identify unnecessary effort, reduce process variation, and create repeatable workflows. The goal is to eliminate waste while preserving the quality and defensibility the legal process demands.

Building a Smarter Review Population

The quality of a review population is shaped long before review begins. If the team has not identified the relevant words or processes related to the documents, even sophisticated technology may help optimize the wrong dataset.

Before selecting the document review approach, ask:

  • What terminology do the people closest to the matter use?
  • Which communication patterns or relationships may point to relevant material?
  • Who is likely to hold key information?
  • Which business processes give the documents meaning?

See How TCDI Managed Shared Data Across Investigation and Litigation Workflows

The answers provide a stronger basis for search and coding decisions. They also help the team determine what to prioritize, when an issue needs escalation, and how to check the work.

The technology decision should follow the same discipline:

  • What does the team need the technology to accomplish?
  • Which platform best fits the data and review approach?
  • Where is human judgment or validation required?

Those answers should guide the choice of platform and review tools. TCDI works across Relativity, its proprietary CVLynx platform, and other AI-enabled tools, pairing the appropriate selected technology with experienced project management and disciplined processes. The objective comes first, and the platform should support it.

Accounting for Risk and Practical Constraints

Once the review population is defined, the team still has to make trade-offs. There is rarely one correct workflow for a legal matter. The right approach depends on the matter’s timing, risk tolerance, available resources, and the likely value of the information.

Before committing to an approach, ask:

  • Which deadline has the greatest effect on sequencing?
  • Would a phased approach reduce delay or unnecessary cost?
  • What level of validation fits the matter’s risk?
  • Could privacy, cross-border, preservation, or production requirements limit the options?
  • What resources are available, and where will they be most useful?

The answers will vary by matter. An imminent regulatory deadline may favor rapid access and phased review. In contrast, a high-stakes investigation may require broader preservation and more extensive validation. These considerations belong at the beginning of the workflow, not after work is underway.

TCDI works with clients to balance legal risk with technical requirements, cost, and timing so the workflow decisions are explainable and defensible.

Avoiding Workflow Drift

Even well-designed workflows can drift when assumptions are not documented or communication breaks down. The plan may change because of a new custodian or data source. It may also need to change when a deadline moves or review findings alter the team’s view of what matters.

An effective workflow should accommodate those changes without losing sight of the matter’s objective. That requires continued listening and regular checkpoints with the people responsible for the legal strategy and the technical work.

At each checkpoint, ask:

  • Are we finding the information we expected?
  • Has the scope changed?
  • Are new risks emerging?
  • Is the review population appropriately focused?
  • Are the current workflows still supporting the legal strategy?
  • Can any part of the process be refined or simplified?

This continuous feedback helps prevent unnecessary work and keeps the technical process connected to the legal objective. It also reflects the continuous-improvement mindset at the center of TCDI’s Lean Six Sigma approach.

Better Questions Lead to Better Outcomes

The strongest legal data teams do more than execute a process. They listen closely enough to understand the work before choosing how to perform it.

TCDI’s long history supporting legal teams has shown us that successful outcomes depend on understanding all of the practical realities surrounding the data. Every collection decision affects what is processed. Processing decisions affect what reviewers see. And what reviewers find can change the legal team’s next decision.

Questions add value when they uncover assumptions early enough to guide the next decision. Returning to those questions as the matter develops keeps the work connected to the legal objective.

Before anyone presses a button, remember to start with the most important question:
What problem are we trying to solve?

Ned Adams

Ned Adams

Author

Share article:

Ned has been fostering partnerships and helping clients tackle complex legal matters with TCDI for over two decades. He is passionate about building personal connections with clients to better understand their challenges and develop innovative eDiscovery solutions.

Regardless of the size, complexity, or duration of a matter, Ned leverages his project management experience to help clients navigate a successful solution. He guides organizations and law firms through every step of the EDRM, ensuring their matters are handled as smoothly as possible. As a Lean Six Sigma Green Belt, he thrives on developing workflows and processes that maximize efficiency, reducing time and cost for our clients.  Learn more about Ned.