Should Relativity prioritize expanding its e-discovery capabilities in RelativityOne or focus on enhancing its legal hold and early case assessment tools?

Introduction

The trade-off we're examining today is whether Relativity should prioritize expanding e-discovery capabilities in RelativityOne or focus on enhancing legal hold and early case assessment tools. This decision involves balancing the core functionality of RelativityOne with complementary features that could potentially broaden our market reach. I'll analyze this trade-off by examining product understanding, metrics, experimentation, and decision frameworks to arrive at a strategic recommendation.

Step 1

Clarifying Questions (3 minutes)

• Based on recent market trends, I'm thinking e-discovery might be our primary revenue driver. Could you confirm if e-discovery currently accounts for the majority of our revenue?

Why it matters: Helps prioritize investment based on current business performance Expected answer: Yes, e-discovery is our main revenue source Impact on approach: Would lean towards expanding e-discovery capabilities if true

• Considering user adoption rates, I'm assuming legal hold and early case assessment tools might be underutilized. Can you share any data on the usage of these features compared to e-discovery?

Why it matters: Identifies potential growth areas and user pain points Expected answer: Lower usage of legal hold and early case assessment tools Impact on approach: Might suggest focusing on improving these tools to drive adoption

• Given the competitive landscape, I'm thinking our e-discovery capabilities might be at parity with competitors. How do our e-discovery features currently compare to major competitors?

Why it matters: Helps assess the urgency of expanding e-discovery vs. other areas Expected answer: We're slightly behind in some advanced e-discovery features Impact on approach: Could justify prioritizing e-discovery expansion if we're lagging

• Considering our development resources, I'm assuming we have limited capacity to pursue both options simultaneously. Can you give me an idea of our current team capacity and any budget constraints?

Why it matters: Determines the feasibility of pursuing multiple initiatives Expected answer: Resources are constrained, requiring prioritization Impact on approach: Would necessitate a more focused strategy on one area

• Looking at our product roadmap, I'm thinking there might be upcoming releases or dependencies related to these features. Are there any critical timelines or dependencies we need to consider?

Why it matters: Aligns decision with existing commitments and technical constraints Expected answer: Legal hold improvements planned for Q4 Impact on approach: Might influence timing and prioritization of initiatives