Great Value for the Features and Performance Provided
January 17, 2020
Great Value for the Features and Performance Provided
Score 7 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Overall Satisfaction with DISCO
It is being used across the entire organization for reviewing and tagging documents produced in discovery. It addresses the need to review and organize data in litigation.
Pros
- Quick customer service whenever issues arise
- Fairly intuitive to use the software and doesn't require a lot of teaching to use
- Good searching capabilities and quick tagging structures
Cons
- Missing functionality for being able to copy and paste text in the view function
- Not widespread usage so when trying to get buy-in from other attorneys they don't have experience with the platform
- Sometimes very slow and takes a long time for documents to load
- The financial cost to the firm has been high, especially as we've been paying overages.
- Easier to locate documents and make better decisions on selecting documents to use in the case.
- Tagging system - it's intuitive to use and makes for quick tagging during document review since you can type the start of the tag name then hit enter, and you can also just repeat the prior tagging structure.
- Ability to customize your view - I like that I can choose which headings are important to me and include only the relevant headings and/or sort the documents by alternative headings.
- Ability to export document lists to Excel - This is a useful feature when creating and comparing exhibit lists.
I don't have a sense of the total cost of e-discovery impact. However, I will say that DISCO is very competitively priced and there aren't any hidden fees. That is, you pay for a set about of data, and included is customer service help (unless they have to do a special project for you) and all other features. You know what you'll be paying at the start.
It is definitely quicker to search and view documents with the DISCO platform than it has been for other platforms. My one issue is not DISCO related per se, but when the document production files are a mess, you cannot search reliably for that metadata (but that is true of any platform). It is also quick to upload data and ingest it into a case. Finally, the quick customer service time is also appreciated.
I have only worked with basic customer service representatives - who help answer questions quickly and efficiently - and project managers. Project managers have helped us diagnose and solve problems with data that, when received from opposing counsel, was a mess (such as missing metadata and missing image overlays). They did a good job helping us with those problems although it took them more labor hours than I expected. We had to request that they bill in .10 of an hour instead of .25 of an hour increments.
We were using Logickull before we made the switch. We didn't consider more expensive alternatives such as Relativity. Logickull was clunky and had fewer features. As I stated, DISCO was very fast for tagging and reviewing documents with a very robust searching mechanism. It was also better to look at and more intuitive than Logickull. Not all our attorneys are willing to take extensive training courses to learn how to use software so it was nice that DISCO didn't require too much to learn how to use.
Comments
Please log in to join the conversation