How the Gap in EDiscovery Understanding Is Driving Legal Costs

EDiscovery is one of the most expensive and consequential processes in modern legal operations. Yet according to an Exterro article on the EDRM website, only 40% of legal professionals can define it. This gap in eDiscovery understanding, revealed by data from a recent Exterro survey on data management technology, is creating operational risk that few organizations can afford to ignore.

Legal, IT, security, and privacy teams all use the same terminology but interpret it differently. Depending on the team, eDiscovery may be viewed as email collection, legal holds, document review, or simply “anything involving data.” When these differing interpretations collide during a live matter, the result is predictable: delays, rework, inconsistent scoping, and mounting costs that feel inevitable but are largely preventable.

This gap in eDiscovery understanding is especially perilous in regulated industries where unclear ownership and fragmented understanding can compromise defensibility. When these teams are not operating from a shared definition, what begins as a semantic problem quickly becomes a regulatory and litigation risk. 

The financial impact is most visible in review, where upstream misunderstandings crystallize into downstream invoices. Over-preservation, unclear scoping, and excessive collection inflate data volumes, locking organizations into spend they can no longer control. Less visible, but just as damaging, are the silent costs of workflow friction: recollections, late-stage privacy reviews, duplicated processing, and internal frustration that erodes trust across departments.

The path forward requires building shared literacy, strengthening data governance before disputes arise, operationalizing playbooks, and creating repeatable workflows. As data volumes grow and scrutiny intensifies, understanding eDiscovery is no longer optional. It is the foundation of a defensible, cost-controlled legal response.