Quick answer
For a smaller established company, the useful starting point is an accurate team definition and a clear operating record. Apply any published threshold narrowly, then investigate unresolved routes without assuming that silence means acceptance.
Count the people the criterion actually names
Full-time employees, total staff, contractors and public associated profiles can produce different numbers. Preserve the measure and date with the answer. A business with a small current team may have long historical records, but the archive does not change its current employee count.
Do not inflate a count to reach a threshold. Doing so weakens later comparisons because providers no longer receive the same description.
Use published criteria without making a market-wide rule
Handshake states a full-time employee minimum. Telegraph’s direct-applicant FAQ uses record usefulness across sizes, while its referral pages use separate criteria. Use the criteria for the route you intend to take.
Sources: Handshake · Telegraph Lab
Build a fictional small-company packet
A fictional 16-person consultancy has operated for eleven years. It retains five years of project records and two years of email. The packet records all four facts separately. A published employee rule can produce a mismatch; a route without a researched numeric rule produces an open question.
The consultancy’s useful description is the actual process represented by the project archive: instructions, revisions, internal decisions and delivered work. It should ask whether that collection is relevant rather than arguing that long operation automatically compensates for a company-size mismatch.
| Fact | Fictional answer | Selection use |
|---|---|---|
| Current full-time team | 16 | Compare exact headcount criteria |
| Operating age | 11 years | Compare company-age criteria |
| Project history | 5 years | Describe available collection |
| Email history | 2 years | Avoid implying full overlap |
Prioritize questions that prevent wasted work
Before preparing a full export, ask whether the route will consider the particular company description, whether its employee measure includes the people you counted, and which record category would be worth assessing.
Ask about unclear criteria, record the answer and compare it with your company profile.
Make a small shortlist with meaningful contrasts
Choose routes that test different explanations: explicit criteria, individually assessed record scope or an introduction to a relevant partner. Keep a reason and source for each. If every route has the same unresolved issue, prioritize resolving that issue rather than filling in more forms.
A smaller business can prepare well without predicting acceptance. The practical output is a consistent company profile, a focused collection description and questions that let a provider make a useful next decision.
Questions about this comparison
Can years of history replace a stated employee minimum?
Not unless the provider explicitly says so. Keep the measures separate and ask about the particular scope.
Should I exclude every provider without small-company wording?
Ask the provider to clarify the criterion.
Sources
- Data Partnerships | Handshake AI (license / interest form page)Handshake · Checked 2026-10-10
- License Your Business Data | Telegraph LabTelegraph Lab · Checked 2026-10-06