Home / E2M Research / Expert review network
RESEARCH GOVERNANCE

Expert review network

Expert review is a control, not a prestige badge.

E2M uses specialist review when a decision depends on regulated, technical or fast-changing Brazil-specific knowledge. A reviewer is matched to a defined scope, works from inspectable evidence and is disclosed only for the material they actually reviewed.

Operating standard · named reviewers appear only after completed review
REQUIRED COVERAGE

Seven core specialties. No generalist substitute.

The core network is designed around the risk domains that most often change a foreign company’s Brazil decision. E2M targets one primary reviewer plus one backup per core specialty; names are published only after onboarding, consent and a completed review.

CORE REVIEWER

Corporate & legal

Corporate structure, shareholder/representative requirements, contracts and legal-risk claims.

Selection gate: Verify Brazil-specific legal practice and the professional registration relevant to the claim; regulated legal conclusions stay with qualified counsel.

Company Setup · Market Entry · contracts
CORE REVIEWER

Labor & employment

CLT/PJ classification, hiring terms, termination, collective rules and employment-risk claims.

Selection gate: Current Brazil labor practice. Legal conclusions require appropriately qualified counsel; payroll mechanics may involve a labor/payroll specialist.

Hiring · Employer Cost · HR operations
CORE REVIEWER

Tax

Corporate tax, withholding, tax reform, cross-border tax, transfer pricing and profit repatriation.

Selection gate: Current Brazil tax practice, ability to trace conclusions to law/official guidance and clear separation of tax fact from planning judgment.

Tax & Finance · GTM pricing · cross-border
CORE REVIEWER

Accounting & reporting

Bookkeeping, fiscal documents, payroll finance, reporting cadence and accounting treatment.

Selection gate: Current Brazil accounting practice; verify applicable professional registration where required and keep accounting conclusions distinct from tax/legal advice.

Tax & Finance · Entity operations
CORE REVIEWER

Recruiting & talent

Role design, salary-market interpretation, sourcing, interview process and candidate-market realities.

Selection gate: Recent Brazil recruiting or talent leadership experience with evidence of actual placements or team-building work.

Hiring · Salary Benchmark · First Team
CORE REVIEWER

Trade & customs

Import/export structure, Siscomex/DUIMP, customs workflow, NCM process and provider roles.

Selection gate: Recent Brazil foreign-trade/customs execution experience; classification or regulated conclusions must be reviewed at the appropriate specialist level.

Sourcing & Trade · Import/Export
CORE REVIEWER

Real estate & workspace

Office/housing market execution, leases, workspace sourcing and local transaction realities.

Selection gate: Recent São Paulo/Brazil transaction or advisory experience; legal lease conclusions route to legal review.

Office & Housing · São Paulo

Extension specialists

Privacy/data, immigration and product regulation are activated when the content requires them. They do not replace the seven core seats.

Privacy & data

LGPD, data-processing roles, privacy notices and data-transfer issues.

Immigration

Visas, residence/work authorization and executive mobility.

Product regulation

ANVISA, ANATEL, INMETRO, MAPA or industry-specific authorization when a product is regulated.

Authors & editorial responsibility

E2M currently publishes its institutional author and internal editorial owner. Named external expert reviewers appear only after onboarding and a completed scoped review; no external reviewer is implied by an empty seat in the network.

SELECTION STANDARD

A reviewer must pass the scope gate before credentials matter.

Hard gates

  • Demonstrable, recent Brazil-specific practice in the exact review scope.
  • Identity, current role and regulated credential verified where the claim requires one.
  • Comfort working from primary sources and marking uncertainty instead of filling gaps.
  • Conflict-of-interest disclosure before assignment, including commercial interests in the conclusion.
  • Agreement that E2M may publish the exact review scope, date and approved credential wording.
  • Ability to review the final corrected version, not only an early draft.

Preferred signals

  • Recent casework, transactions, filings, placements or operational execution in the topic.
  • Ability to work in Portuguese plus English or Spanish when cross-border context matters.
  • Evidence of teaching, publishing or explaining the domain clearly without overselling certainty.
  • Responsiveness compatible with content refreshes and material regulatory-change triggers.

Disqualifiers

  • Credentials or employment claims that cannot be verified.
  • A prestige signal used as a substitute for subject-matter scope.
  • Refusal to disclose a material conflict or a commercial stake in the conclusion.
  • Compensation contingent on a positive conclusion, sales outcome or CTA.
  • A generalist reviewing regulated conclusions outside their actual practice.
  • Requests to remove valid caveats or primary-source contradictions for marketing reasons.
COLLABORATION MODEL

Pay for expertise and time — never for a favorable conclusion.

Asset-by-asset review

Default model. Fixed scope, fixed fee when compensated, one content asset and one final confirmation.

Recurring domain reviewer

For high-volatility areas such as tax, labor or trade/customs. Retainer or pre-agreed review blocks; scope is still documented per asset.

Joint research collaborator

Used when the expert materially shapes methodology, analysis or conclusions. Credit should reflect contribution and may become co-authorship under the later authorship standard.

Expert quote / interview

A quote, interview or source conversation does not make someone the reviewer. It is attributed only to the statement they supplied.

REVIEW WORKFLOW

Eight steps from risk triage to published disclosure.

Risk triage: classify the page and identify consequential claims.

Scope: define exactly what the reviewer is and is not being asked to review.

Match: assign a specialist whose current practice fits that scope.

Evidence pack: provide draft, primary sources, assumptions and disputed points.

Review: reviewer annotates errors, caveats, missing evidence and decision risk.

Resolve: E2M answers comments, corrects the draft and records disposition.

Final confirmation: reviewer checks the corrected material within the agreed scope.

Publish & refresh: record scope/date/disclosure and set a change trigger or review cadence.

REVIEW LEVELS

Three labels, three different meanings.

Source-checked

Editorial verification that citations resolve and claims match the cited evidence. No expert byline.

Technical review — scoped

A specialist reviewed a defined section or issue. Display the scope; do not imply whole-page review.

Expert reviewed

The specialist reviewed all material claims within the agreed page-level scope and confirmed the corrected final version. This is the only level that earns a whole-page “Reviewed by” label.

PUBLIC DISCLOSURE

“Reviewed by” is earned at page level, not borrowed from someone’s résumé.

DISPLAY PATTERN — EXAMPLE ONLY
[Reviewer name][Current role / relevant credential]Scope: [material reviewed]Reviewed: [date]Independent technical review commissioned by E2M, when applicable.

Credential and disclosure rules

  • Use the reviewer’s current title and only credentials relevant to the review scope.
  • State the scope and review date. If only one section was reviewed, say so.
  • Do not imply the reviewer is an E2M employee, partner or firm endorser unless that relationship is true and disclosed.
  • Do not use employer logos or imply employer endorsement without permission.
  • Former employers or prestige brands appear only when verified, relevant and explicitly approved by the reviewer.
  • Never use “approved”, “certified” or “verified by” when the person only performed editorial/technical review.
  • Paid review may be disclosed as “independent technical review commissioned by E2M”; compensation cannot depend on the conclusion.
  • A reviewer may require a caveat, narrow the scope, or decline attribution. E2M retains editorial responsibility for the published page.
REVIEWER NETWORK

Interested in reviewing E2M Research?

Potential reviewers can contact E2M with their specialty, current role or professional registration where applicable, Brazil-specific experience, languages, conflicts and examples of relevant work. Participation is non-exclusive and scoped per review.

Contact E2M →