Electronic Discovery Market Takes Leap

e-Discovery services have come a long way in just a couple of years as a technological medium and a legal service, according to a recent comprehensive and authoritative survey of the genre.

The 2005 Socha-Gelbmann Electronic Discovery Survey, produced by legal-technology consultants George J. Socha Jr. and Tom Gelbmann, estimates that domestic electronic-discovery market revenues for 2005 will be about $1.3 billion.

Socha and Gelbmann put last year's e-discovery market share “in the range of” $833 million — a 94% jump from 2003.

The 2005 Socha-Gelbmann survey calls for a slowing, but still sizable, e-discovery market-share increase of 50% to 60% through 2007, with the market hitting an estimated $2.7 billion by the end of 2007.

Socha and Gelbmann break the electronic-discovery market down this way:

• Tier 1 providers – those that furnish the most comprehensive services, accounted for about 54% of the estimated 2004 market revenue, approximately $450 million.
• Tier 2 providers — the next-step down on the services ladder, acc-ounted for roughly 39% of the 2004 market, at $325 million.
• Do-it-yourselfers — tech-savvy or outright brave practitioners who purchase their own software and install their own services accounted for $57.5 million, or 7% of the estimated market total.

The consultants queried consumers and e-discovery firms for their survey. They stress that some firms not represented in their rankings qualify for the Top 20 listings, but don't appear because the firms didn't respond to the survey.

To rank top providers, the survey considered these criteria:

• Experience and reputation;
• Capacity;
• Types of services offered;
• Consumer ranking; and
• Revenue estimates.

“To arrive at our ranking, we gathered information for each of the criteria, rated the information, and weighted the results,” the consultants say on the Socha Web site.

They blended criteria, and weighted them, to provide an even, fair assessment of providers instead of a possibly skewed glimpse that might have resulted from analyzing a single category, such as revenue.

Biggest growth areas? Survey results from consumers and providers said: online review, processing and hosting. Declines? Apparently, in forensics, consulting and restoration, according to survey feedback, which also notes that native file review is a hot topic with vendors but apparently not with consumers, though an abstract of the survey's finding on the Socha Web site doesn't explain those figures.

Subscriptions to the 2005 survey can be purchased at www.sochaconsulting.com.

e-Discovery services have come a long way in just a couple of years as a technological medium and a legal service, according to a recent comprehensive and authoritative survey of the genre.

The 2005 Socha-Gelbmann Electronic Discovery Survey, produced by legal-technology consultants George J. Socha Jr. and Tom Gelbmann, estimates that domestic electronic-discovery market revenues for 2005 will be about $1.3 billion.

Socha and Gelbmann put last year's e-discovery market share “in the range of” $833 million — a 94% jump from 2003.

The 2005 Socha-Gelbmann survey calls for a slowing, but still sizable, e-discovery market-share increase of 50% to 60% through 2007, with the market hitting an estimated $2.7 billion by the end of 2007.

Socha and Gelbmann break the electronic-discovery market down this way:

• Tier 1 providers – those that furnish the most comprehensive services, accounted for about 54% of the estimated 2004 market revenue, approximately $450 million.
• Tier 2 providers — the next-step down on the services ladder, acc-ounted for roughly 39% of the 2004 market, at $325 million.
• Do-it-yourselfers — tech-savvy or outright brave practitioners who purchase their own software and install their own services accounted for $57.5 million, or 7% of the estimated market total.

The consultants queried consumers and e-discovery firms for their survey. They stress that some firms not represented in their rankings qualify for the Top 20 listings, but don't appear because the firms didn't respond to the survey.

To rank top providers, the survey considered these criteria:

• Experience and reputation;
• Capacity;
• Types of services offered;
• Consumer ranking; and
• Revenue estimates.

“To arrive at our ranking, we gathered information for each of the criteria, rated the information, and weighted the results,” the consultants say on the Socha Web site.

They blended criteria, and weighted them, to provide an even, fair assessment of providers instead of a possibly skewed glimpse that might have resulted from analyzing a single category, such as revenue.

Biggest growth areas? Survey results from consumers and providers said: online review, processing and hosting. Declines? Apparently, in forensics, consulting and restoration, according to survey feedback, which also notes that native file review is a hot topic with vendors but apparently not with consumers, though an abstract of the survey's finding on the Socha Web site doesn't explain those figures.

Subscriptions to the 2005 survey can be purchased at www.sochaconsulting.com.