Analysis: Enhancing Review
Analysis techniques can be helpful to individual reviewers. Depending on the level and nature of reviewers used, they may be able to perform the equivalent of an initial case assessment on the specific review folders they are assigned to. All of the same techniques are used, just limited to the particular subcollection contained within a review folder. This approach allows a more senior person to do a bulk organization of the materials into review folders, and then have individual reviewers organize their folders by priority and topic prior to starting the sequential review of documents and messages.
If the analysis software has organized documents and messages into context groups, reviewing entire context groups can be more effective than reviewing individual items. The emails and documents pertaining to larger conversations can all be read in the context in which they were originally authored, which improves how quickly and accurately they can be comprehended.
Frequently, the items in a conversation are highly redundant. One common example of this is email threads, where later messages may contain entire copies, or large portions, of earlier messages. By reviewing entire threads as a group, appropriate technology can be used to ensure that redundant content need never be re-read. Seeing an entire thread of email allows the reviewer to quickly decide if all the messages are relevant and bulk tag them appropriately.
Initial reviewers may be charged with making only simple decisions, like responsive, non-responsive or potentially privileged. On the other hand, initial reviewers or later reviewers may be charged with developing issue lists and time lines, and identifying key people. Analysis, combined with collaboration tools, can facilitate this task. As important documents, messages, search queries, people, topics, context groups, etc., are identified, they can be placed into shared issue folders that all reviewers have immediate access to. This can help reviewers stay abreast of issues they see in their materials that are also being found by other reviewers. This kind of collaboration improves the effectiveness of the entire review team.