Enforce legal holds across all retrieval surfaces
Some knowledge must remain discoverable while becoming unusable in ordinary work flows.
Legal preservation and broad productivity can demand different boundaries over the same content.
“I need custodians to find preserved material, but I can’t have it quietly feeding everyday workflows.”
Paraskevi Martins · Deputy General Counsel for eDiscovery
Owns defensible legal-hold processes for a regulated enterprise preparing to migrate its internal knowledge systems.
What pulls against what
- legal preservation vs. ordinary workflow exclusion
- migration speed vs. release proof
- automated findings vs. human-verifiable evidence
- uniform policy vs. inconsistent source metadata
- custodian access vs. least privilege
What is at stake
A production migration depends on proving that preserved content remains available only through approved paths. A false negative or false positive carries material consequences
Why Glean
At Glean, this often matters when secure knowledge access must carry enterprise policy into search and downstream actions.
Written for
This is the setup. The work is inside.
Running it puts you in the room: the full situation and its constraints, stakeholders who push back in their own words, and the decisions that are yours to make. What you produce becomes a Day One Plan — work you can show someone instead of describing.