1. Project Management Tools for E-Discovery and Litigation Support Two Firms Share Their Experience Designing and Implementing Project Management Tools For E-Discovery and Litigation Support

2. Panelists  Steven Clark, Director of Litigation Support, Lathrop & Gage  Guy Wiggins, Director of Practice Management, Kelley Drye & Warren

3. Background  Initial Objectives  Track and document client-related work  Gain better visibility into firm needs & staff workload  Creation of centralized “knowledge bank”  Lay foundation for increased scalability  Selection of Platform  Criteria  Web-based  (Truly) Customizable  Few obstacles to “buy in”  Cost  Options  “Lit Support” specific tools  Create your own market

4. Background  Getting Started  Identified goal(s) and what was important  Sketched out what the tool should do  Detailed the points/fields that needed to be captured

5. Overview of Current System  Functionality of the Current System  Mechanism to capture complete record of client-based work MattersTasksActivity Case Team MembersType/NameApplication/Tool Utilized Office Date Requested/Due/CompleteDetails of Work Performed Notes/Description DescriptionReference Files/Documents Data Storage Reference Files/DocumentsTime Spent Media Deliveries/Details Assigned To Status  Track other department responsibilities (assets, applications, lit holds)  Benefits  Transparency of workload/service levels  Full reporting/administrative dashboard  Permanent (and published) record  Collaboration & accountability

6. Lathrop & Gage Overview Track Matters Track Tasks Track Activity Other Concerns

7. Lathrop & Gage Overview Complete “Lifecycle” of a Matter… Matter Info. Case Team Members Tasks Activity Media Deliveries Data Storage

8. Vision for Future  Plans for Additional Functionality  Integration with other firm applications  Email (MS Outlook)  Time Capture (Elite)  Increased exposure and interaction with non-Lit Support members of the firm  Embedded forms/reports for “public” consumption  Developed workflows to increase efficiencies  Expansion of User Base  Dashboard and tailored reporting created for Firm management (Chair of Lit., COO, CIO)  Possible for Dept./Practice leaders

9. Kelley Drye & Warren Overview  System Started with a Simple Form to Manage Productions  Expanded to Track all Document Load Requests  Two Different Forms/Lists in SharePoint  Would be nice to have one integrated database

10. Background  Initial Objectives  Reduce risk and errors around productions  Create a central database of production specs  Educate attorneys on production specs  Gain better visibility into firm needs & staff workload  Creation of centralized “knowledge bank”  Improve workflow communications  Selection of Platform - SharePoint  No cost – we were already using it  Almost no programming required  Very quick and easy to build basic “workflow lite” tool

11. Functionality of Production Form  Form captures all information required for a production, Project Manager assigns tasks, attorney and analyst are notified MattersTasksActivity DatabaseType/NameAttorney certifies QC Office Date Requested/Due/CompleteAlerts notify attorney Notes/Description DescriptionReference Files/Documents Reference Files/Documents Media Deliveries/Details Assigned To Status  Benefits  Form educates attorneys on all production specs  Certification requirement by attorney improves QC and reduces risk  Transparency of workload/service levels  Permanent (and published) record  Collaboration & accountability

12. Kelley Drye & Warren Overview

14. Example of a simple OOTB SharePoint Alert

15. Data Loading Form  Initial Objectives  Make more user friendly – goal is to have attorneys fill this out  Reduce risk and errors around data loads  Educate attorneys on e-discovery specs  Gain better visibility into firm needs & staff workload  Creation of centralized “knowledge bank”  Improve workflow communications  Development Effort – not as OOTB  More programming to build web form (could be done with InfoPath – we used aspx)  More sophisticated alerts also required programming

16. Functionality of Document Loading Form  Form Captures All Requests to Add Data to Any of Our Systems, Including Concordance, CaseMap, TextMap  Designed to be Client Facing – Attorneys Fill Out the Form  Information From Form Kicks Off Alerts and Workflow  MattersTasksActivity Client/Matter Status DatabaseType/NameAnalyst is notified Office Date Requested/Due/CompleteAlerts notify attorney of status Notes/Description DescriptionReference Files/Documents Data size Reference Files/Documents Media Deliveries/Details Assigned To  Benefits  Form educates attorneys on all loading requirements specs  Transparency of workload/service levels  Permanent (and published) record  Collaboration & accountability – workflow lite

17. Loading Request Form

18. Loading Request Form Details

19. Loading Request Alert

20. Vision for Future  Plans for Additional Functionality  Integration with other firm applications  Email (MS Outlook)  Time Capture (Aderant)  Create reports to capture and analyze metrics  Integrate the different lists into one system  Will wait until SharePoint 2010 – MOSS is not very relational  Create KPI’s and a better dashboard for Lit Support Managers

21. Tips for Getting Started  Start Small – Solve a Pressing Problem  Define the Problem You are Trying to Address  Prioritize Your Needs  Seek Staff Input/Wish Lists  Relax…

22. Q&A