A warning about skipped documents signals that key items may require quick review.

Title: When the Warning Lights Flash: What a Skipped Document Warning Really Means in Relativity

Let me ask you a simple question: you’re reviewing a mountain of documents, and suddenly the system flags some items as skipped. What does that warning really mean for your project? If you’ve ever wrestled with data reviews in Relativity, you know the warning can feel like a tiny alarm bell. It’s not just noise. It’s a signal that those skipped documents may need immediate attention. The right response keeps your findings honest, your timeline intact, and your team confident.

Here’s the thing about skipped-doc warnings

In Relativity, automated processes and reviewer setups help speed up big data reviews. They filter, deduplicate, and classify documents so the team can zero in on what matters. Sometimes the system marks certain documents as skipped or flagged for review. A warning about those skipped items isn’t a verdict that they’re irrelevant or useless. More often, it’s a reminder: these documents could hold relevant information or crucial context that was not assessed in the initial pass.

If you’re managing a project that relies on solid, defensible results, you don’t want to let skipped documents drift into a gray area. The warning is a nudge toward due diligence, not a dismissal of importance. Think of it as a safety check that helps you avoid inadvertently missing key evidence.

Why skipping happens—and why it matters

Skipped documents can come from a few practical sources:

• Filters and rules: If the review workflow uses specific criteria (date ranges, custodians, or keywords), some docs may be automatically bypassed. The warning flags that this bypass happened and may need a second look.

• OCR or processing gaps: If a document didn’t render text properly or failed a processing step, it might be skipped to avoid false positives or misclassifications.

• Near-duplicates or repeats: When the system flags a document as a near-duplicate, it might skip it in one pass to reduce redundancy. The warning draws attention so you can confirm nothing important was dropped.

• TAR-based workflows: In technology-assisted review, a training set may lead to certain documents being deprioritized or skipped in early passes. A warning tells you to verify whether the skipped items contain unique or critical information.

All these scenarios share a core idea: the warning is a prompt to check whether something valuable slipped through. If ignored, you risk gaps in your analysis, gaps in your conclusions, and, in the worst case, challenges to your project’s integrity.

How to respond when you see a skipped-document warning

Treat the warning as a structured checklist, not a mystery to solving. Here’s a practical route you can follow, one step at a time:

1. Acknowledge and triage

• Log the warning in your project tracking tool and note the exact scope (which set of documents, which phase, which workflow rule caused the skip).

• Quick triage: are the skipped docs concentrated in a particular custodian, date range, or file type? If yes, that’s a pattern you’ll want to map.

2. Quick audit to gauge potential impact

• Spot-scan a representative sample of skipped documents. Do they appear to be anything like the material you already flagged as relevant? If you see red flags, that’s a sign they deserve deeper review.

• Check metadata and processing logs. Sometimes the reason for skipping is technical rather than substantive (e.g., poor OCR, file corruption). Knowing why helps you decide what to do.

3. Decide the level of reprocessing

• If the skipped items look potentially relevant, re-run the workflow with adjusted parameters. You might expand filters, reprocess with a different OCR setting, or run a targeted search that includes the skipped range.

• If you determine the content is genuinely irrelevant or duplicate, document the rationale and move on. Clear documentation keeps questions from piling up later.

4. Allocate a focused review

• Assign a small, dedicated subset to review. This keeps the velocity of the project up while ensuring you don’t miss critical insights.

• Set a concrete deadline for this review to prevent drift. A short SLA for re-review helps the team stay aligned.

5. Document decisions and rationale

• Record why you reprocessed or why you left items as skipped. Include notes on any new findings and how they affect the conclusions.

• Create a traceable trail so someone future-proofing this project can understand the path you took.

6. Integrate into quality control

• Add skipped-document checks to your standard quality control plan. Include a rule that if a warning appears, it triggers a secondary review step.

• Build dashboards or reports that flag these warnings and the actions taken. Visibility matters, especially for stakeholders who want assurance that nothing slipped through the cracks.

7. Reflect on the process, not just the data

• After you close the loop on a warning, take a moment to review the workflow that led to the skip. Is there a tweak that could reduce future warnings without compromising speed? Small adjustments can make a big difference down the road.

A few practical tips from the field

• Don’t assume “skipped” equals “irrelevant.” It’s the single most common misinterpretation. Always verify with a targeted check.

• Use a two-pass approach where feasible: a fast initial pass to identify gaps, followed by a focused, thorough review of flagged items.

• Keep a running log of all skipped documents and the decisions around them. This log becomes a valuable reference for project teammates and auditors.

• Leverage Relativity’s analytics tools thoughtfully. TAR 2.0, threading, and clustering can help you spot whether skipped items cluster around topics you care about.

A story you might relate to

Imagine you’re assembling a massive jigsaw puzzle. Most of the pieces click into place quickly, but a handful don’t seem to fit. Some look like edges of the same picture, others look oddly different. If you ignore those peculiar pieces, you might miss parts of the landscape the picture is trying to reveal. The skipped-document warning in Relativity is that peculiar corner piece. It’s not a verdict on the whole image, but it’s a signal that you should try fitting it in again, just to be sure the full picture is accurate.

The balance between precision and pace

The project world thrives on momentum. We want decisions fast, actions decisive, and reports timely. Yet precision matters just as much. The skipped-document warning sits squarely at that crossroads. It nudges you to verify without dragging you into paralysis. The key is to treat it with respectful urgency: a prompt check, a measured reprocess if needed, and documentation that preserves the story of how you arrived at your conclusions.

What to avoid when you see a warning

• Don’t rush to label the skipped docs as irrelevant just to keep the clock running. Quick checks are fine, but snap judgments lead to gaps.

• Don’t ignore the metadata. Sometimes the why (filters, processing) is as telling as the content itself.

• Don’t let the warning become a bottleneck. Use a small, efficient protocol you can repeat across warnings.

• Don’t blame technology alone. People and processes shape outcomes just as much as the software does.

Connecting the dots: warnings, outcomes, and trust

Here’s a simple thread to pull through: a warning about skipped documents is a quality checkpoint. It’s a moment to pause, confirm, and recalibrate. When teams respond consistently, you build trust with stakeholders because the findings carry a traceable, defendable path. The final report remains credible, the conclusions stay solid, and you’ve shown the discipline to chase potential misses rather than sweeping them under the rug.

A closing thought

If you’re navigating large-scale document reviews on the Relativity platform, the skipped-document warning isn’t a nuisance; it’s a friend in disguise. It’s a sign that the project is alive, that data can surprise you, and that you have a clear, repeatable way to handle surprises. By treating the warning as a prompt to review, you protect the integrity of your findings and keep the project moving forward with confidence.

If you’d like a quick recap you can share with your team, here it is in a nutshell:

• A skipped-document warning signals the need for potential review, not guaranteed irrelevance.

• Start with a quick triage, audit a sample, and check processing logs.

• Decide if reprocessing is warranted; if so, adjust parameters and re-run.

• Review and document every decision for transparency.

• Integrate the practice into your quality control workflow and dashboards.

• Stay mindful: the goal is accuracy with efficiency, not perfection at the cost of momentum.

Relativity users know the platform can handle massive data with grace, but the human touch matters most. A careful, thoughtful response to skipped-document warnings keeps the project honest, the outcomes robust, and the team confident that nothing important has been left behind.