Transcript Document

Electronic Mail Management A-Z
Email Storage Management
The Personal Nature of Email
 E-mail is a personal productivity tool
 E-mail is most effective when an attorney can
customize the environment to his or her own
personal needs, including setting up folders
 Policies that restrict an attorney’s ability to
customize the e-mail environment seriously
reduce the usefulness of this technology
Email is a growing problem!
 Number of e-mails per day will grow from 9.7
billion in 2000 to 35 billion by 2005 (IDC).
 E-mail has been growing at a compound
annual growth rate of 300% (IDC).
 By the end of 2004, e-mail data will require
230 petabytes of storage (IDC).
 60% of business-critical data is now carried
via e-mail (Gartner)
Porter Wright’s Environment
 Primarily a regional law firm (Ohio) with 6




offices, 300 attorneys, 600 end-users
One Exchange 2000 server in each office
Columbus is our largest office with
approximately 350 users
Single store, over 150 GB
Largest mailbox is over 10 GB
Porter Wright’s Environment
 Inbox, Sent Items and Deleted Items folders
groomed monthly

Messages older then the first day of the previous
month deleted
 Messages in other folders are not deleted
 Attorneys folder messages in user-created
folders that are usually matter-based
Why are Attorneys Holding onto
this Stuff?
 General knowledge
 Matter-specific information
 Proof of a transaction (by definition, a record)
 Business critical information
The Attorneys Point of View:
 They have a legitimate need for holding onto
these messages
 They need a place to store these messages
 They need unfettered access to these
messages while the matter is open
 Printing these messages out and storing them
in the file is not an option

(Gartner indicates that people already spend up to
90 minutes per day managing their email).
I.T.’s Point of View:
 E-mail storage requirements are growing
exponentially
 Backup, Recovery and Maintenance windows
are growing
 Very large message stores could lead to
corruption resulting in extended periods of
downtime
Firm’s Point of View:
 Electronic records, including email, not being
managed
 Growing threat of costly litigation and
discovery requests
 Standard policies, consistently applied needed
with respect to retention and disposition of
electronic records.
So What Problem are We Trying
to Solve?
 Tactical solution for system health? (Storage
Management)
 Records management solution for Regulatory
and Business Policy Compliance? (Records
Management)
 Collaborative solution for sharing information?
(Knowledge Management)
So What Problem are We Trying
to Solve?
Answer:
For law firms which are generally not under
regulatory or legal constraints, the problem is
largely tactical and the solution deployed
should provide a means for maximizing
system health. However, the records
management implications should not be
ignored.
The Ideal Solution:
 Allows attorneys to folder messages in
Outlook while the matter is open
 Moves messages to a non-critical system
after the matter is closed
 Allows users to retrieve archived e-mails
without assistance from a system
administrator
 Allows the Firm to apply consistent retention
policies
The Ideal Solution:
Our Conclusion:
The ideal solution integrates the e-mail system
with a Records Management System (RMS)
so that messages can be easily moved from
e-mail to the RMS after a matter has closed,
where they can be subjected to retention
policies specific to areas-of-law or even
clients.
A Word about Managing Records
95% of all records are never accessed (ARMA,
International 2003 Conference)
 Direct implications for “mission criticality” of
the RM systems (RMS)
• Views messages as dead letters
 Shifts perspective with respect to
performance requirements

May not have to be good, just good enough
Regulatory Compliance
Forrester: E-mail archiving for regulatory and
business policy compliance should be
addressed by a broader group of stakeholders
(not by messaging system infrastructure
managers) ... end users should not be able to
archive e-mail because they could delete or
fail to archive messages that the organization
is required to keep.
In other words, it is no longer an I.T. problem.
Options for Managing E-mail
 Do nothing
 Apply severe mailbox restrictions
 PST Files
 None of the above
Improvements in server, backup, storage and
software have allowed us to put this problem
off, but the issue needs to be addressed.
Options for Managing E-mail
 Document management systems (DMS)
 Email archiving systems (EAS)
 Records management systems (RMS)
Presentation of Options:
 Features
 Players
 Example
 Trigger Events
 Pros
 Cons
 Bottom Line
DMS Features
 Integration with email client
 Drag-and-drop functionality
 Auto-profiling of messages
 Server-based rules for auto-archiving
 Email addressable folders (carbon copy)
DMS Players
 Hummingbird (DM5)
 Interwoven (MailSite)
 Most DMs have some level of Outlook
integration (WorldDox, NetDocuments)
DMS Example:
DMS Trigger Events
 At or close to the time the message is
created or received
 After the matter has closed (but you
lose most of the “collaborative”
benefits)
DMS: Pros
 Familiar interface
 Powerful search capabilities
 Create and manage an “electronic
matter file” (collaborative benefits)
DMS: Cons
 Business processes may be lacking
 May “pollute” the DM
 As long as attorneys can create folders
in Outlook there will be little incentive
for them to use the DM
 You may be shifting the problem from
one mission critical system to another
DMS: Cons
 Messages may not be available off-line
(laptop users)
 Messages may not be available via OWA
 Features may have “undesirable” effects
on the DMS
Porter Wright’s Environment
 DOCS Open 3.9.6 (moving to 4.0 later
this year)
 Stable!
 Overall, our attorneys are satisfied with
the current DMS
 Don’t want to mess with the DMS!
DMS: Bottom Line
While at first glance a good solution for
email management, on closer inspection
it is not likely going to solve the
problem and may in fact shift it to
another critical system. The
collaborative features have merit but
this is not the problem we are trying to
solve!
DMS: Future Trends
 Hummingbird has acquired Legal Key
 Interwoven has purchased LegalTrax
 DMs may evolve into enterprise content
management systems with integrated
RM and DM functions, but when?
 Question is whether firms will be better
positioned by moving messages to the
DMS or RMS now.
EAS: Features
 Automatically archive messages based
on a combination of parameters
 Access to archive from web-browser or
e-mail client via shortcut or “stub”
 Multiple storage options (disk, optical,
tape, WORM, emerging devices) –
compressed storage
EAS: Features
 Automate the capture and archive of e-
mail messages entering and leaving the
enterprise (including legal and
regulatory retention)
 Enterprise scalability
 Support for secure storage
EAS: Features
 Offer migration tools for PST files
 Temporary offline local options (local
“vaults” for laptop users)
 Extensions for OWA
EAS: Features
 Package or integrate with tools to
manage the discovery process,
narrowing the search and managing the
steps needed to deliver records
 Include basic records management
features or integrate with a robust
records management solution to
manage the life cycle
EAS: Example
EAS: Example - KVS Explorer
EAS: Players
 KVS, Inc.
 Zantaz EAS (formerly Educom)
 C2C
 EMC Legato
 Others …
EAS: Gartner Magic Quadrant
EAS: Trigger Events
 Most likely date-based: Messages older
then n number of days automatically
archived and replaced with a shortcut
 May be used to automatically capture
messages on send and receive.
EAS: Pros
 Robust and feature-rich technology
designed specifically for e-mail archiving
 Virtually seamless to end users
 Provides a solid foundation for most
regulatory compliance requirements
EAS: Cons
 Message stubs may be larger then
messages they replaced!
 Using stubs does not reduce the total
number of messages on the server.
 Messages are not categorized by client
and matter. This solution may not
conform to present or future records
retention policies.
EAS: Bottom Line
Proven, scalable technology that solves
the problem but may complicate future
records management policies.
RMS: Features
 Integration with e-mail client
 Messages are declared to the RM
system by the end-user
 Messages can be filed in batch and
saved directly to the client/matter
record
 Can be part of a larger electronic
records management program
RMS: Example
RMS: Players
 LegalKey (Hummingbird)
 Filesurf (MDY)
Others:
 Accutrac
 Tower Software?
RMS: Trigger Events
 When the matter is closed
 When the user’s mailbox reaches a
threshold limit
RMS: Pros
 Messages are retained in the e-mail
client during the life of the matter
 Messages are categorized by client,
matter and possibly document type,
allowing for granular retention policies
 Messages are moved to a non-mission
critical system
RMS: Pros
 Vendors continuing development
 Filesurf has a solution that combines
with KVS and other technologies to
provide a D.o.D certified solution for
electronic records management.
RMS: Cons
 Firm records management programs
may not be well developed enough to
support this solution
 May not meet standards for formal
Records Management program
 Attorney resistance possible, even
probable
RMS: Cons
 Vendors may not be able to deliver a
workable solution in time to address
this problem


Industry characterized by a number of
small companies, consolidation is
anticipated (Forrester)
E-mail archiving only part of a larger
electronic records management system
(ERMS)
RMS: Example Problem
RMS: Bottom Line
When addressing the issue of email
storage management, record
management issues should not be
ignored. To the extent that solutions
come up short, “good enough” may be
ok. Acquisitions in the industry suggest
extensive future development.
Email Archiving: Future Trends
Forrester: As e-mail archiving becomes
more commonly implemented as part of
a broader records management
initiative and software implementation,
the onus for managing it will expand to
include administrators from the content
management group.
Email Archiving: Future Trends
 The I.T. and Records Department are
going to have to team up on this one
 Firms that have not already done so
should consider having the Records
Department report to the C.I.O.
 Strongly encourage you to join the new
LawNet Records Management Peer
Group!