In a federal criminal investigation, prosecutors classify those involved in three ways, and the label decides strategy entirely.
A witness has information but is not believed to have engaged in wrongdoing. A subject is someone whose conduct is within the scope of the investigation. A target is someone the prosecutor has substantial evidence linking to a crime and who is, in the prosecutor’s judgement, a putative defendant.
The distinctions are not always disclosed, but they can often be established by counsel asking. A formal target letter may be sent, typically inviting the recipient to testify before the grand jury — an invitation that is almost never accepted, because the risks of testifying without immunity are severe.
The classification is fluid. A witness can become a subject and a subject a target as evidence develops, and the reverse also happens. What matters is that the approach differs at each level: a witness may cooperate straightforwardly, a subject needs to understand the exposure before saying anything, and a target generally should not be speaking to investigators at all except through counsel and on defined terms.
For a company, the same question applies at the entity level, and it determines whether the posture is cooperation, defence, or both at once for different people.