Internal denied parties list - Records not SPL blocking despite 100% match

[corinne_stevens]

Hello experts,

We have started testing setting up our internal list of denied parties. So we set up a record with partner name "Alcatel-Lucent Bell NV".

Then generated and aggegated comparison terms and transferred to TREX.

To check the correct functioning I set up multiple new customer records with variations on the customer name.

Out of 6 records, as you can see only 2 got actually SPL blocked.

Only the records where is purposly changed the name (Luccent instead of Lucent, Bel instead of Bell, Alcate instead of Alcatel) blocked.

The other ones, where I used only part of the name, or mixed up the name do not block. Even the 100% copy of the name did not block the record.

My question is obviously: what can be done to fix this? We are on GTS 8.0 and these are the settings:

 

Thanks in advance for your help!

Corinne

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi Corinne,

What does the results says when you select the partners (either Blocked and Unblocked ones) and click on Sanctioned Party Screening Icon at the top of Blocked partners list. Do you find any difference?.

Regards,

Aman

[corinne_stevens · Accepted solution]

Hi,

For the ones that are not blocked, the system just comes back with a green checkmark.

The 3 that are blocked display the normal checking information.

Thanks!

[mouaz_benredjeb · Accepted solution]

Hello Corinne,

Your test cases are not similar in terms of the City used so a similar result cannot be expected if your screening logic uses the City :

Customer 1: Has address in city Antwerpen

Customer 2: Has address in city Aartselaar

If your screening logic uses the city (e.g. Name AND City screening logic) then this could be the explanation on why one customer is a hit (the one sitting in city Antwerpen) and the other one is not a hit (the one sitting in city Aartselaar).

Could you please check your screening logic and especially how the different elements are linked together (Name AND/OR City AND/OR Country, etc...)

Regards.

Mouaz BEN REDJEB

[corinne_stevens · Accepted solution]

Hi Mouaz,

I checked the settings, and indeed it's set to city and name and country.

So I changed the Aartselaar in the 3 records to Antwerpen.

And now they block.

Not sure whether that setting is the best idea then. Especially when I see how many of the standard SPL records (we buy them from MK Data) contain no addresses at all. Would you say that this is a "smart" set up?

[mouaz_benredjeb · Accepted solution]

Hello Corinne,

I am not sure that I am the right person to answer your question

You should ask and get the answer to your question from the business team as they are the ones that will have to use the solution at the end of the day. So the solution has to meet their needs and expectations.

In order for them to be able to choose the proper SPL screening logic, you will have to explain it to them, the pros and cons, etc...

Most probably, business will not be able to choose the SPL screening logic after you will explain them how it works, pros and cons, etc... as this too vague and theoretical...

So, from my experience, the best thing is to set up in GTS a screening logic agreed with business and then run the SPL screening against all the BPs in GTS. From there, the business will have some real life examples of BPs blocks and and he will be able to see how the system behaves and grasp a little bit of the screening logic.

Once the business is done with analyzing the results of this 1st SPL screening logic, gather from them their remarks, concerns, etc... and then propose a 2nd SPL screening logic according to their needs. Again run the SPL screening against all the BPs in GTS for the business to analyze the results of this 2nd logic and see if they are happy or not with that.

Unfortunately, there is no single answer to the best SPL screening logic as it depends on the existing BPs in the system, the quality of the data purchased, the expectations of the business, etc...

In a nutshell: it is a try and change logic untill you get to the best solution for your business.

Hope this helps.

Don't hesitate to come back should you have more questions.

Regards.

Mouaz BEN REDJEB

[corinne_stevens · Accepted solution]

Thank you Mouaz. Makes sense!