Comments for Aphelion Insider http://aphelionlegal.com/blog News and Notes on eDiscovery, Managed Document Review, Legal Staffing, and Legal Process Outsourcing Wed, 08 Sep 2010 02:49:04 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 Comment on LPOs Must Prove Themselves Through Excellence by jwaterman http://aphelionlegal.com/blog/?p=13#comment-5 jwaterman Wed, 27 Aug 2008 18:22:23 +0000 http://aphelionlegal.com/blog/?p=13#comment-5 Who would have thought 'completing the task' is not the same thing as 'getting the job done.' From the outside looking in I'd imagine a lot of clients perceive working with a LPO firm as some sort of trade off between cost and quality. To the extent a LPO firm sees their operation in this light, their prospects are dim. Most client projects are too important to rest upon such a low standard, regardless of any cost-savings. The only option for an LPO firm is to commit to deliver the same quality of work a client could expect from a domestic firm managing the same project. The calculus for the potential client then becomes high quality vs. efficiency and high quality. Who would have thought ‘completing the task’ is not the same thing as ‘getting the job done.’

From the outside looking in I’d imagine a lot of clients perceive working with a LPO firm as some sort of trade off between cost and quality. To the extent a LPO firm sees their operation in this light, their prospects are dim. Most client projects are too important to rest upon such a low standard, regardless of any cost-savings.

The only option for an LPO firm is to commit to deliver the same quality of work a client could expect from a domestic firm managing the same project. The calculus for the potential client then becomes high quality vs. efficiency and high quality.

]]> Comment on “Halting the Line” Improves Quality by jwaterman http://aphelionlegal.com/blog/?p=11#comment-4 jwaterman Wed, 27 Aug 2008 18:03:17 +0000 http://aphelionlegal.com/blog/?p=11#comment-4 Excellent piece, Hiren. The amount of ambiguity and inconsistency on the average doc review is considerable. Most of the information flow is downstream. And as you nicely summarize, the little feedback making its way back upstream does not get circulated back down as it should. In my experience, most reviewers try very hard to be consistent and accurate in their work. Consistency between reviewers, then, becomes the bigger problem for all the reasons you outline above. Excellent piece, Hiren. The amount of ambiguity and inconsistency on the average doc review is considerable. Most of the information flow is downstream. And as you nicely summarize, the little feedback making its way back upstream does not get circulated back down as it should. In my experience, most reviewers try very hard to be consistent and accurate in their work. Consistency between reviewers, then, becomes the bigger problem for all the reasons you outline above.

]]>