WEHRON / RESEARCH DEPTHS
RESEARCH DEPTHS
Three defined formats.
01 List and identity matching
02 Ownership, control and red flags
03 Enhanced integrity due diligence
RESEARCH DEPTHS COMPARED
01
List and identity matching
For a specific database alert or a tightly defined initial question concerning identity and list exposure. Inputs: alert text, list version, known name form, jurisdiction and reference date.
Includes: preserving the original alert · reviewing source script, aliases and documented transliterations · comparing available identity attributes · recording the list version, search parameters and access date.
Deliverable: a concise match file with a variant matrix, sources used, research trail, finding status and expressly identified open points.
Stop or escalation: the work ends once the identity is reliably matched or distinguished. It is deepened where identity, ownership, control or indirect exposure links remain open.
02
Ownership, control and red flags
For entering into, continuing or approving a business relationship. Inputs: company or individual, jurisdiction, known structural lead, decision context and relevant reference date.
Includes: identity and list matching · ownership and control structure from available primary registers · relevant roles and key individuals · regional notices and media for evidentially supported warning signs.
Deliverable: a structured report with the ownership and control trail, source log, evidence status, documented no-match results and research limitations.
Stop or escalation: the work ends when the agreed structural question has been answered transparently. It is deepened where there are multi-tier chains, contradictions, unclear control or relevant integrity indicators.
03
Enhanced integrity due diligence
For complex cross-border structures, elevated integrity risks or an inconclusive match requiring further research.
Includes: multi-tier ownership and control chains from available primary sources · time-specific registry positions and changes · original-language adverse media · evidence status linked to the relevant proceedings and sources. Exclusively passive, lawfully accessible sources; no source inquiries, interviews or contact with research subjects.
Deliverable: an enhanced integrity dossier with a source and search log, finding status, contradictions, open points and explicit limitations as the factual basis for further assessment.
Stop or escalation: the work ends at the written scope boundary or a transparently documented source limitation. Any extension follows only after the additional research question has been newly defined.
DOCUMENTATION STANDARD
01
Triangulate sources where substantively possible.
Material findings are supported by independent sources wherever substantively possible. Single-source findings remain clearly identified as such.
02
Evidence status clearly labelled.
Each item is classified as an evidenced fact, corroborated information, an allegation according to the source or an indicator; contradictions and open points remain visible.
03
No-match results documented.
A no-match result is documented only for the list or source version actually reviewed, together with the date and variants used; it is not a general assurance of no risk.
04
Clear division of responsibilities.
Wehron provides a factual basis that receives final human review. Legal, tax and commercial assessment remains with the client and its advisers.
When the case does not fit one level.
Particular jurisdictions, historical depth, ongoing proceedings or combined research subjects may require a tailored scope. The question, inputs, source framework, deliverable and stopping point are then defined in writing before work begins.
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
Which research depth do I need?
The determining factors are not a product name or generic risk class, but the specific question, available starting data, jurisdiction, reference date and required deliverable. The initial assessment is made without names, documents or case files.
How are scope and effort defined?
Before work begins, the research subject, jurisdictions, research depth, source framework and deliverable are defined in writing. This determines the effort required. Any proposal applies only to that defined scope.
Can the research be extended?
Yes. If one level produces a relevant open point, the additional question is defined first. Sources and research steps already documented are carried forward; the extension starts only after a deliberate scope decision.
NEXT STEP
For the initial assessment, the problem cluster, jurisdiction, decision context, desired timing and available starting information are sufficient. Please do not send names, documents or case files at this stage.
Discuss a research case