Thinking Analytically

On the Freakonmics blog, Justin Wolfers discusses some of the progress made related to the adoption of prediction markets in the US. Like many innovative ideas, progress can be stalled through legal hurdles. Wolfers’ asks:

Are prediction markets legitimate business tools, an alternative set of securities markets requiring SEC regulation, illegal betting markets, allowable games of skill, or something else altogether?

That’s a meaty question if there ever was one. Wolfers’ goes on to describe actions taken by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to help sort it out including determining whether or not the markets fall into their jurisdiction.

What could be better than paying lawyers less money for more work? (Sorry Pat.)

In today’s world, litigation typically involves the review of thousands, if not millions, of e-docs. Though shredders can permanently destroy a paper document, past e-mails and e-docs hide in all types of digital nooks and crannies. Unfortunately, many companies have not kept up with the proliferation of e-documents. But that’s no excuse when in the middle of litigation. If there’s a chance that a relevant e-doc exists, it typically must be found, reviewed and deemed relevant or not.

Sean McNee describes a recent case where a small legal team representing a small time inventor was able to use visual analytics to review and analyze the contents of 50 million pages of electronic documentation in just a few months. (Yes, 50 million pages.) He states,

“Visual analytics tools identify nouns and noun phrases in a series of messages, then visually cluster the documents together according to similarities in subject matter”

Apparently some Fortune 1000 companies have seen three-fold productivity increases using visual tools. According to the article, “U.S. corporations spend nearly $5 billion a year analyzing emails for litigation, regulatory requests and investigations.” A three-fold increase in productivity yields signficant benefits!

Read more at BI Review Online.