Use case
Company research
Assembling a picture of an organisation — ownership, filings, news, sanctions exposure, key people — from public sources, with each statement traceable to the page it came from. Used for onboarding, due diligence and competitor tracking.
- Source
- Editorial ontology entry — no fetched document behind this page
- Evidence
- none on this page — it links to the pages that hold it
- Category
- Knowledge and search
- Typical risk
- medium
- Entry
- editorial · reviewed 25 Aug 2026
01What this is
Company research is web and registry retrieval with strict provenance. The system runs targeted searches, fetches primary records where they exist (company registries, regulator lists, filings), and composes a briefing where every line points at a document with a retrieval date.
A good deployment prefers registries and regulators over aggregators, marks what it could not verify, dates every claim, and repeats the run on a schedule so a stale briefing is visibly stale. Sanctions and adverse-media checks are treated as screening signals for a human, never as a decision.
The pitfalls are name collisions between similarly named entities, aggregator content presented as primary, and summaries that quietly drop the "as of" date. For regulated onboarding, the output is evidence for a human decision — the system does not approve or reject a counterparty.
- Typical data
- public filings, news articles, registry records, counterparty data
- Solution classes it admits
- Enterprise SaaS, Private cloud, Self-hosted
02Deployment options
- ASSESSMENT
On a neutral reading of this use case, Self-hosted is a strong alternative, Private cloud is a strong alternative and Enterprise SaaS is conditional.
- ASSESSMENT
Read as a generic reading of this page, not a recommendation: no organisation, size, jurisdiction, budget or technical capability has been supplied, so wherever an option depends on one of those, it says "unknown". Ask your own question to get a verdict that accounts for them.
Private cloud
STRONG ALTERNATIVEManaged model API or private model deployment in your cloud account
- ASSESSMENT
Two patterns fit inside one account in a region you name: call a managed foundation-model API such as Amazon Bedrock, Microsoft Foundry / Azure OpenAI, or Vertex AI; or deploy an open-weight model on GPU compute you control. Your application, retrieval layer, storage, identity and logs remain in your cloud boundary in both patterns.
- ASSESSMENT
The managed-API pattern can use closed-source frontier models without buying or operating GPUs. It is usually the fastest way to build a custom workflow, but prompts and retrieved context are processed by the managed service, so model availability, retention, abuse monitoring and regional routing must be checked for the exact feature and endpoint.
- ASSESSMENT
The private-model pattern gives more control over weights, serving and network paths, and can use managed endpoints or your own containers. It also makes your team responsible for capacity, patches, model upgrades, evaluation and failover.
- ASSESSMENT
The cloud provider becomes a data processor in either pattern: you need a DPA, a documented region, and an answer on cross-region routing and where support staff can access the environment from.
- RECOMMENDATION
Start with the managed-API pattern when the workflow is custom but model operations are not the source of competitive advantage; move to private model serving only if evaluation, volume, portability or the data boundary justifies the extra operations. Your stated technical capability is "unknown".
Self-hosted
STRONG ALTERNATIVEOpen-weight models on infrastructure you operate
- ASSESSMENT
Documents, queries and embeddings stay on machines you own, using an open-weight model whose licence you review. For a brief that involves personal data, that removes a model-API vendor from the data path rather than governing that transfer by contract.
- ASSESSMENT
It costs you the operational work instead: a GPU server, Docker, Linux, backups and a patching routine. Your stated technical capability is "unknown", which is the attribute this option most depends on.
- ASSESSMENT
No processor agreement, subprocessor list or cross-border transfer assessment is needed for the model itself, because no third party processes the content.
- RECOMMENDATION
Recommended where local processing is preferred (you did not say so) and the content is sensitive (personal data).
Enterprise SaaS
CONSIDER IFFinished closed-source cloud product with enterprise controls
- ASSESSMENT
This is a complete vendor application, not a model API: examples include an enterprise assistant, coding copilot or document product with the workflow, interface, connectors and administration already built. It can use closed-source cloud models while requiring no model hosting or application engineering from your team.
- RECOMMENDATION
Choose it when the product already performs the actual workflow and its controls meet your requirements. Do not choose it only because its underlying model is strong: a finished SaaS product is less flexible than building against a managed API when your process, integrations or review steps are organisation-specific.
- ASSESSMENT
Vendor commitments are treated as unverified until we have fetched the page that makes them. Until then this option carries questions to ask, not assurances: a signed data processing agreement covering the data you will actually put in; a documented data residency commitment naming the region, in the contract rather than a blog post; a written no-training commitment for your content, including uploads and connected sources; stated retention periods and a deletion path you can exercise; an administrative audit log you can export, and SSO with group-based access control.
- RECOMMENDATION
No jurisdiction was named, so this is the check rather than the conclusion: compare the vendor's stated processing locations and subprocessor list against the cross-border transfer rules wherever you operate before uploading anything.
03Deployment stacks
No deployment stack has been written up for this use case yet.
04Tools by hosting option
Private cloud1
Vendor cloud2
- SaaSGleanEnterprise search and assistant across company SaaS systems, with permission-aware indexing, a knowledge graph of people and content, and an agent-building layer.
- SaaSPerplexity EnterpriseSearch-first assistant that answers with web citations and can search connected internal files, sold with enterprise administration, SSO and a data-processing addendum.
05Compliance hot spots
This use case usually raises personal data, sector rules, transparency, auditability, terms-of-service restrictions, copyright.
- Personal data
- No published jurisdiction page names this topic yet
- Sector rules
- No published jurisdiction page names this topic yet
- Transparency
- No published jurisdiction page names this topic yet
- Auditability
- No published jurisdiction page names this topic yet
- Terms-of-service restrictions
- No published jurisdiction page names this topic yet
- Copyright
- No published jurisdiction page names this topic yet
06Example questions
Each of these opens the question box with the text already in it. The answer is researched for your organisation, not for this page.
07Related use cases
- Knowledge and searchSales researchPreparing for a sales conversation: what the account does, who the buyer is, what changed recently, what was said last time. Combines public web sources with the CRM record, and personalises outreach from both.
- Knowledge and searchLegal researchFinding the statute, case or precedent that answers a question, and showing the passage. Distinct from contract review: the corpus is law and commentary, the standard for citation accuracy is absolute, and a fabricated citation is a professional risk.
- Knowledge and searchKnowledge managementCapturing what the organisation knows — process notes, decisions, answers given once already — and keeping it findable and current. AI helps by drafting entries, spotting duplicates and flagging pages that contradict each other.
- Knowledge and searchInternal company searchOne search box over the documents a company already has — shared drives, wikis, ticket systems, email attachments — answered by a model that quotes the source. The value is finding the right paragraph in a corpus nobody has read end to end, not writing new text.
- Knowledge and searchDocument Q&AAsk questions of a specific document or a small set of them and get an answer with the passage it came from. Narrower than company-wide search: the user already knows which file matters and wants it read carefully.
Improve this page
Sign in to contribute
From the field
0 deployments · 0 questions
Nobody has reported deploying this here yet, and no question has been opened against this page. Both appear once a reviewer accepts them.