Super Human Information Technology: What’s in a Name?

Everyone is struggling (well, maybe not struggling) with what name to use for Predictive Coding. Many have been flung at the wall to see which one would stick. Recommind’s Predictive Coding was the first and so far the one name which has mostly stuck.

Some of the other product names include enhanced search (ES), computer assisted review (CAR), technology assisted review (TAR), automated document review (ADR), adaptive coding (AC), predictive priority (PP – my grandson giggled at this one), meaning based coding (MBC), transparent Predictive Coding (TPC) and from Craig Ball via Sharon D. Nelson Esq. and John W. Simek’s humorous and informative article titled “Predictive Coding: A Rose by any Other Name”, Super Human Information Technology (SHIT).

I’m not sure why so many three letter acronyms have appeared; it might be the marketing nerd factor. Many marketing professionals (I count myself as one) seem to think a descriptive three word name, (shortened to three letters) shows how serious and knowledgeable the vendor is on the subject. I guess it’s better than a product number. I remember many years ago when I was managing the first CD-R drive launch for Hewlett Packard and wanted to give the new product a catchy name. HP corporate said that was against policy, that ALL products had to be known by a product number only such as the unforgettable D1141ABA. I politely reminded them that HP had been very successful with a little product named the “LaserJet”… they hung up on me. Nine months later we introduced the “CD-Writer”… but I digress.

Following up on the nerd theme I mentioned above, I would like to humbly suggest a truly nerdy name for this new class of technology such as Dexter, Rodney, Bennett, HAL or based on the constant TV re-runs of the “Big Bang Theory” – Sheldon.

Can you imagine the conversation between the parties at a meet and confer session?

Plaintiff’s counsel: Will you utilize any kind of computer automation to review documents?

Defendant’s Counsel: Yes, we will be using Sheldon to review and tag documents

Plaintiff’s counsel: So… you won’t be using computer automation?

Defendant’s Counsel: Yes, we will be using Sheldon to review and tag documents

Plaintiff’s counsel: Ok, so who’s this Sheldon?

Defendant’s Counsel: What do you mean, who’s Sheldon?

Or instructions from the Judge:

Judge: I would strongly suggest both sides utilize Sheldon to conduct the review of this potentially huge document set to speed response and to keep costs as low as possible.

Plaintiff’s counsel: Judge, I’m not sure I trust Sheldon…how do I know what his process is. Sheldon’s just a BlackBox – no transparency

Judge: Counsel, did you just say “his”?

Plaintiff’s counsel: Yes Your Honor

Judge: What the hell do you mean “his”?

And so on. So let’s vote on possible names: