Anne Kershaw’s LinkedIn post definitely provides some food for thought. Personally, I would agree that, eventually, this approach should be the recommended one:
As is obvious, the huge change with the In Situ model is that by and large the corporate data doesn’t move. It stays in place as different analytical capabilities are applied to it.
But, as I said, for all of the benefits of leaving data where it is, limiting the movement and copies of data that exist, and being able to get to it quicker, there is one big “IF” that I’m not so confident about.
That is, this model works IF you have good information governance tools and policies in place, and have the proper tools to deal with eDiscovery in-house. My experience tells me that the organizations who can do that are few and far between. Yes, there are many places that have document management systems, and other IG tools in place, but are they being used consistently? Do you have talent on hand to not just install it and keep it running, but also make use of the analytical tools that help you get to the correct data in-house?
As I mentioned earlier, eventually, this is where we should be heading. It only makes sense for IG, data security, privacy and eDiscovery. But are we truly there yet with most enterprise organizations? I don’t know. Color me skeptical on that question.
How about you, are you a skeptic, or do you think we’re ready for eDiscovery in-place to be common?