Jump to content

Advanced Coding Layout


Recommended Posts


I currently have a matter, where the client has a tagging structure where they are applying subtags for relevance and privilege. See structure below:

Parent Tag - Relevance

Sub Tags - Relevant, Not Relevant, Unsure

Parent Tag - Privilege

Sub Tags - Not Privileged, Privileged, Unsure

The coding layout out is set to ensure that all users must tag an item with a subtag of relevance and privilege this is done by using the Required Option on the hierarchy of relevance and privilege However, if the document is said to be not relevant then the users are finding it can be a bit of pain applying the privileged tag too, as this is not required if the item is not relevant. 

Is there any way to apply a rule where if an Item is tagged with Not Relevant then a privileged tag is not required. However, if an item is tagged with any other relevance sub tag then a tag on privilege is required. 

Thank you in advance for your time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Intella doesn't have any rules-based features to accommodate exactly what you're asking.  However, if I'm understanding you correctly, the simplest solution is to revise the coding palette to make the Privilege parent tag as not required.  That way, if the doc is non-responsive (aka Not Relevant), they can apply that tag, then move on.  It IS a good idea to make that tag required.  Another good practice is to make that tag with radio buttons so that multiple selections are not possible.  It never ceases to amaze us how many documents are coded as both responsive and non-responsive at the completion of a review.

An example of what I'm talking about is shown below.

In my experience, mandatory tags should be used very sparingly, as they quickly frustrate reviewers, which appears to be the case here.  Conversely, it's up to reviewers to code documents accurately.  Thus, if a document is tagged as non-responsive, no additional effort is warranted, and they move on to the next document.  If they happen to see that the document also contains privileged content, even if non-responsive, they could tag it.  However, for sake of efficiency, the presumption has to be made that a document, if not explicitly tagged as privileged, is inherently understood to be not privileged.  Thus, there is no need to require the addition of a tag that states the obvious.  Unsure would be the only exception in this scenario.

Again, it's a primary responsibility of the reviewer to code documents accurately, and there is no substitute for their attention to detail.  


Also, since it sound like this is a review for a legal proceeding, you might want to take the privilege tag a step further and provide two options (assuming that the standard categories for ediscovery would apply here):  Privileged - attorney-client, and Privileged - work product.  That way, if they are required to create a privilege log down the road, they will have captured their specific assessment of the privilege type at the time it was clear in their mind.  The can then be included in a tag group as part of a CSV export of the metadata, and provide a giant head start in the creation of their future privilege log.

Hopefully that explanation will be somewhat helpful for you!   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...