As the tournament narrows in the NCAA Men’s Division I Basketball Tournament, the conversation changes. Early rounds reward momentum, speed, and a little unpredictability. The Final Four does not. At this stage, outcomes are driven by discipline, execution, and the ability to perform under scrutiny.
Generative AI in eDiscovery has reached a similar point of maturity.
A year ago, the conversation centered on possibility:
- What can Generative AI do?
- How fast can it get us there?
Today, the questions are sharper—and a lot more consequential:
- Are Generative AI outputs within the scope of discovery?
- How are prompts, responses, and related data being preserved?
- What data exposure risks exist across those interactions?
- Can our AI-assisted decisions be validated, reproduced, and defended?
The Early Rounds Were Fun. This Is Where It Gets Serious.
Not long ago, the focus was on what the technology could do—how quickly Generative AI could summarize, classify, and accelerate workflows. That curiosity pushed the legal industry forward, and rightfully so. But we’ve moved past the “highlight reel” phase.
Now we’re in game film territory.
It’s no longer enough to point to efficiency gains or faster turnaround times. Courts and counsel are increasingly focused on how AI was used, and what safeguards were in place to ensure accuracy, consistency, and information security.
Purpose-built platforms, like RelativityOne, play a critical role here. Not simply because they leverage Generative AI, but because they provide the framework to support it—through data security, auditability, integrated workflows, and transparent decision points. That’s what transforms AI from an impressive capability into something you can confidently stand behind.
Coaching Matters More Than Technology
Equally important is the experience of the team guiding the process.
There’s a meaningful difference between using Generative AI and operationalizing it. One is experimenting with a powerful tool. The other is building repeatable, defensible processes around it. Those processes require judgment—knowing where AI adds value, where it introduces risk, and how to balance the two. It requires intentional design, not just adoption.
At Page One, this isn’t a future-state philosophy—it’s how we operate today. We operate exclusively within RelativityOne, leading with AI by design rather than as an afterthought. With a 2026 AI Visionary—one of only 20 globally recognized by Relativity—and three Relativity Masters on our team, we bring the depth and experience required to guide these workflows with precision and consistency.
Because ultimately, Generative AI doesn’t replace human judgment—it depends on it. And at this stage—whether it’s March Madness or modern discovery—execution is everything.