by MICHELE LANGE on SEPTEMBER 9, 2013 in EDISCOVERY
Recently, Casey Flaherty, Corporate Counsel at Kia Motors, authored an article about how he approaches comparing costs in the current chaotic ediscovery pricing landscape. Flaherty boldly asserts: “Standardizing a method for comparing EDD vendor cost projections is long past due.” He continues by suggesting that such a cost-comparison spreadsheet is a necessary tool which should be developed and maintained by a group such as the Sedona Conference, the EDRM or the EDBP.
Flaherty’s article is evidence of the gyrations that corporations and law firms go through when analyzing ediscovery pricing. Per page. Per gigabyte. Per hour. Per day. Per month. Flat fee. Annual subscription. Kudos to Flaherty for bringing his method to light and encouraging everyone else in the industry to do the same.
It makes plain business sense to structure ediscovery pricing around transparency, and Kroll Ontrack is trying to help drive the market toward that rational ediscovery pricing panacea. Recently, Kroll Ontrack launched a new pricing model, containing a wave of pricing options including:
- Traditional a la carte (line-item comparisons) – traditional pricing based on different actions in the EDRM – keep the spreadsheets for those who want them
- Total project price – all of the bells and whistles for one bottom-line project price – for those sick of fashioning “order from chaos”
- Portfolio pricing – a monthly fee based on a revolving-door portfolio of matters limited only by capacity and duration – ediscovery pricing can really be as simple as X gigabytes for $Y/month
To be perfectly frank, in an industry where everything can change overnight, this problem has persisted for too long. That’s why allowing clients to price projects on their terms is a great first step in clarifying ediscovery pricing pains.
No comments:
Post a Comment