Study Data · Part 4 · Indicator Deep-Dive Analysis

How many years of experience do you have with agentic AI?

Indicator C008 · By Phil Hatch · Akholi · October 9, 2026

← Study Data ← Previous indicator Next indicator →

Indicator Specification Summary of Findings Distribution of Responses Descriptive Statistics by Segment Tests of Difference Between Segments Association with Cancellation Rate Association with Customer Satisfaction Association with the Engagement Indicator Mean Association with Intent to Leave Comparison of Associations Across the Four Measures Clustering and Effective Sample Size Equivalence Tests of Null Results Robustness Checks Measure Independence and Part-Whole Correction Comparison with the Study Norm Interpretation of the Data Limitations Definitions Sources and Provenance

Indicator Specification

Table 1. Indicator specificationTable

Field	Value
Indicator code	C008
Question as asked	How many years of experience do you have with agentic AI?
Failure category	Not one of the 100 rated indicators
Place in the survey	Respondent Demographics > 1.2 Experience and Expertise > Tenure
Indicator class	Respondent level
Indicator type	Typed number
Response scale	A number, as typed or recorded
Answering base	793 of 850 respondents, across 150 of 150 engagements
Non-answers	I do not know 0, I prefer to not answer 0, blank 57

Summary of Findings

Table 2. Key results: association of the indicator with the four study measuresTable

Measure	Form	n	r	95% CI	p
Cancellation rate	Descriptive contrast	150 engagements	0.00	−0.16 to 0.16	0.993
Customer satisfaction	Clean estimate	94 engagements	0.13	−0.08 to 0.32	0.220
Engagement indicator mean	Full	150 engagements	0.02	−0.14 to 0.18	0.829
Intent to leave	Respondent level, clustered	746 respondents	−0.04	−0.11 to 0.03	0.232

Respondents typed the number of years of experience they had with agentic AI. Of the 793 who answered, 467 (58.89%) typed zero, recorded as under one year, and 326 (41.11%) typed one year. No respondent typed more than one year.

The engagement mean of agentic AI experience was not associated with cancellation (r = 0.00, 95% CI −0.16 to 0.16, p = 0.993, n = 150 engagements), customer satisfaction among active engagements (r = 0.13, 95% CI −0.08 to 0.32, p = 0.220, n = 94 engagements) or the engagement indicator mean (r = 0.02, 95% CI −0.14 to 0.18, p = 0.829, n = 150 engagements). At respondent level it was not associated with intent to leave (r = −0.04, cluster bootstrap 95% CI −0.11 to 0.03, p = 0.232 with standard errors clustered by engagement, n = 746 respondents). Each association was equivalent to zero, every robustness check held, and agentic AI experience did not differ by role or by any other segment family.

Distribution of Responses

Table 3. Distribution of responses, respondent levelTable

Answer	Respondents	Share of answered (base 793)	Cumulative share	Engagements with at least one	Share of 150 engagements	Distressed
0.0 to 0.1	467	58.89%	58.89%	147	98.00%	Not applicable
0.1 to 0.2	0	0.00%	58.89%	0	0.00%	Not applicable
0.2 to 0.3	0	0.00%	58.89%	0	0.00%	Not applicable
0.3 to 0.4	0	0.00%	58.89%	0	0.00%	Not applicable
0.4 to 0.5	0	0.00%	58.89%	0	0.00%	Not applicable
0.5 to 0.6	0	0.00%	58.89%	0	0.00%	Not applicable
0.6 to 0.7	0	0.00%	58.89%	0	0.00%	Not applicable
0.7 to 0.8	0	0.00%	58.89%	0	0.00%	Not applicable
0.8 to 0.9	0	0.00%	58.89%	0	0.00%	Not applicable
0.9 to 1.0	326	41.11%	100.00%	139	92.67%	Not applicable
I do not know	0	Not in base	Not in base	0	0.00%	Not applicable
I prefer to not answer	0	Not in base	Not in base	0	0.00%	Not applicable
Answered, total	793	100.00%		150	100.00%

Table 4. Distribution of responses, engagement levelTable

Engagement level summary	Engagements	Mean of engagement means	SD	Min	Median	Max	Engagements with a distressed mean	Share of engagements distressed
Engagement means, as recorded	150	0.4	0.2	0.0	0.4	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable

Agentic AI experience is a typed count of years and not a rating, so no distressed range applies. The table groups values in bands of one tenth, so only the lowest band, holding the value zero, and the highest, holding the value one, contain answers. No respondent answered I do not know or I prefer to not answer. The engagement mean of agentic AI experience, the share of an engagement's respondents with one year, ran from 0.0 to 1.0, and an answer of one year came from respondents on 139 of the 150 engagements.

Descriptive Statistics by Segment

Table 5a. Descriptive statistics by segment, part 1 of 2Table

Segment	Base	Answered	Answer rate	Engagements	Mean	95% CI	SD
Study set	850	793	93.29% of 850	150	0.4	0.4 to 0.4	0.5
Outsourcing model
CXM	232	212	91.38% of 232	42	0.4	0.3 to 0.5	0.5
ITO	244	233	95.49% of 244	40	0.4	0.3 to 0.4	0.5
BPO	209	196	93.78% of 209	37	0.5	0.4 to 0.6	0.5
KPO	165	152	92.12% of 165	31	0.4	0.3 to 0.4	0.5
Institution type
Asset management	132	120	90.91% of 132	24	0.4	0.4 to 0.5	0.5
Wealth management and private banking	140	132	94.29% of 140	23	0.4	0.3 to 0.5	0.5
Investment banking (advisory and capital-markets origination)	105	99	94.29% of 105	19	0.4	0.3 to 0.5	0.5
Insurance (life, property and casualty, health)	78	68	87.18% of 78	14	0.4	0.3 to 0.5	0.5
Commercial and business banking	82	79	96.34% of 82	13	0.4	0.3 to 0.5	0.5
Payments and merchant acquiring (networks, acquiring, processing)	71	68	95.77% of 71	13	0.3	0.2 to 0.4	0.5
Credit card and payments issuing	73	70	95.89% of 73	12	0.5	0.4 to 0.6	0.5
Retail and consumer banking	73	66	90.41% of 73	12	0.3	0.2 to 0.5	0.5
Markets and trading (sales and trading, global markets)	57	54	94.74% of 57	11	0.4	0.2 to 0.5	0.5
Private equity and private capital	39	37	94.87% of 39	9	0.5	0.3 to 0.7	0.5
Process family
Corporate and back-office functions	248	229	92.34% of 248	47	0.4	0.4 to 0.5	0.5
Technology engineering and operations	204	196	96.08% of 204	35	0.4	0.3 to 0.5	0.5
Client servicing and communications	94	86	91.49% of 94	16	0.4	0.3 to 0.5	0.5
Trade, settlement and reconciliation	80	74	92.50% of 80	15	0.5	0.4 to 0.6	0.5
Payments, cards and disputes	73	70	95.89% of 73	12	0.4	0.3 to 0.5	0.5
Credit, underwriting and suitability	57	51	89.47% of 57	9	0.4	0.3 to 0.5	0.5
Regulatory, audit, tax and legal	51	45	88.24% of 51	9	0.4	0.2 to 0.5	0.5
Financial crime and client onboarding	43	42	97.67% of 43	7	0.4	0.2 to 0.5	0.5
Class of work
LOB Operational	451	417	92.46% of 451	76	0.4	0.4 to 0.5	0.5
Corporate Functional	399	376	94.24% of 399	74	0.4	0.4 to 0.5	0.5
Engagement status and lifecycle stage
Active, Build-Out	175	159	90.86% of 175	31	0.4	0.3 to 0.5	0.5
Active, Transition/Cut-Over	250	236	94.40% of 250	43	0.4	0.4 to 0.5	0.5
Active, Production	103	96	93.20% of 103	20	0.4	0.3 to 0.5	0.5
Canceled	322	302	93.79% of 322	56	0.4	0.3 to 0.5	0.5
Respondent role
Individual Contributor	667	611	91.60% of 667	150	0.4	0.4 to 0.4	0.5
Engagement Manager	150	150	100.00% of 150	150	0.5	0.4 to 0.5	0.5
Portfolio Director	31	30	96.77% of 31	30	0.3	0.2 to 0.5	0.5
Customer Management Executive	2	2	2 of 2	2	‡
Vendor type
IT services major	316	294	93.04% of 316	59	0.4	0.3 to 0.4	0.5
BPO specialist	198	187	94.44% of 198	37	0.4	0.3 to 0.5	0.5
Consulting firm	117	111	94.87% of 117	23	0.4	0.3 to 0.5	0.5
Boutique or specialist provider	87	81	93.10% of 87	17	0.4	0.3 to 0.5	0.5
Pure-play agentic AI firm	75	69	92.00% of 75	14	0.6	0.4 to 0.7	0.5
Not reported, recovered by engagement	57	51	89.47% of 57	43	0.5	0.3 to 0.6	0.5

Note: ‡ Base under 10. No statistic is reported.

Table 5b. Descriptive statistics by segment, part 2 of 2Table

Segment	Min	Q1	Median	Q3	Max	Distressed n	Distressed %
Study set	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Outsourcing model
CXM	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
ITO	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
BPO	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
KPO	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Institution type
Asset management	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Wealth management and private banking	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Investment banking (advisory and capital-markets origination)	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Insurance (life, property and casualty, health)	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Commercial and business banking	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Payments and merchant acquiring (networks, acquiring, processing)	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Credit card and payments issuing	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Retail and consumer banking	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Markets and trading (sales and trading, global markets)	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Private equity and private capital	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Process family
Corporate and back-office functions	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Technology engineering and operations	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Client servicing and communications	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Trade, settlement and reconciliation	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Payments, cards and disputes	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Credit, underwriting and suitability	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Regulatory, audit, tax and legal	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Financial crime and client onboarding	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Class of work
LOB Operational	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Corporate Functional	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Engagement status and lifecycle stage
Active, Build-Out	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Active, Transition/Cut-Over	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Active, Production	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Canceled	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Respondent role
Individual Contributor	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Engagement Manager	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Portfolio Director	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Customer Management Executive	‡ n = 2
Vendor type
IT services major	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
BPO specialist	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Consulting firm	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Boutique or specialist provider	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Pure-play agentic AI firm	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Not reported, recovered by engagement	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable

Note: ‡ Base under 10. No statistic is reported.

Every figure in the segment tables is at respondent level, and the mean is the share of respondents who typed one year. Segments with fewer than 30 respondents carry no interval. Segments with fewer than 10 report counts only.

Tests of Difference Between Segments

Table 6a. Tests of difference between segments, part 1 of 2Table

Segment family	Welch F	df	p	Holm p	Omega squared	90% CI
Outsourcing model	1.69	3, 78.3	0.176	1.000	0.017	0.000 to 0.082
Institution type	0.90	8, 49.4	0.523	1.000	−0.010	0.000 to 0.059
Process family	1.42	4, 38.9	0.245	1.000	0.026	0.000 to 0.108
Class of work	0.16	1, 147.9	0.690	1.000	−0.006	0.000 to 0.025
Engagement status and lifecycle stage	0.14	3, 60.9	0.936	1.000	−0.017	0.000 to 0.007
Respondent role	1.40	2, 73.4	0.254	1.000	0.001	0.000 to 0.012
Vendor type	1.69	5, 227.7	0.137	0.961	0.005	0.000 to 0.020

Table 6b. Tests of difference between segments, part 2 of 2Table

Segment family	Kruskal-Wallis H	p	Distressed chi-square	df	p	Cramer's V	Levels excluded
Outsourcing model	4.26	0.235	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	None
Institution type	6.29	0.615	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	Private equity and private capital, n = 9
Process family	4.96	0.291	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	Credit, underwriting and suitability, n = 9, Regulatory, audit, tax and legal, n = 9, Financial crime and client onboarding, n = 7
Class of work	0.09	0.758	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	None
Engagement status and lifecycle stage	0.42	0.937	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	None
Respondent role	2.83	0.242	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	Customer Management Executive, n = 2
Vendor type	8.73	0.120	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	None

Segment families recorded at engagement level were tested on engagement means. Respondent role and vendor type were tested on respondents. After Holm correction, agentic AI experience differed in no segment family. Individual contributors typed one year in about the same share as engagement managers and portfolio directors (40.26% of 611 individual contributors, 46.67% of 150 engagement managers and 33.33% of 30 portfolio directors).

Association with Cancellation Rate

Cancellation rate is the share of engagements canceled by the study date, measured at engagement level (150 engagements, 56 canceled). Canceled engagements were described after cancellation. The association is therefore a descriptive contrast and not a forecast of cancellation.

Table 7a. Association with cancellation rate by segment, part 1 of 2Table

Segment	Engagements	Canceled	Cancellation rate	Point-biserial r	95% CI	p	Holm p
Study set	150	56	37.33% of 150	0.00	−0.16 to 0.16	0.993	1.000
Outsourcing model
CXM	42	15	35.71% of 42	0.03	−0.28 to 0.33	0.874	1.000
ITO	40	15	37.50% of 40	0.03	−0.28 to 0.34	0.853	1.000
BPO	37	14	37.84% of 37	−0.05	−0.37 to 0.28	0.765	1.000
KPO	31	12	38.71% of 31	−0.01	−0.36 to 0.35	0.957	1.000
Institution type
Asset management	24	13	54.17% of 24	0.00	†	0.997	1.000
Wealth management and private banking	23	8	34.78% of 23	−0.13	†	0.546	1.000
Investment banking (advisory and capital-markets origination)	19	9	47.37% of 19	0.08	†	0.734	1.000
Insurance (life, property and casualty, health)	14	5	35.71% of 14	−0.07	†	0.804	1.000
Commercial and business banking	13	4	30.77% of 13	−0.21	†	0.489	1.000
Payments and merchant acquiring (networks, acquiring, processing)	13	3	23.08% of 13	0.21	†	0.485	1.000
Credit card and payments issuing	12	5	41.67% of 12	−0.17	†	0.593	1.000
Retail and consumer banking	12	4	33.33% of 12	−0.02	†	0.955	1.000
Markets and trading (sales and trading, global markets)	11	3	27.27% of 11	−0.05	†	0.877	1.000
Private equity and private capital	9	2	2 of 9	‡
Process family
Corporate and back-office functions	47	19	40.43% of 47	0.16	−0.14 to 0.43	0.289	1.000
Technology engineering and operations	35	10	28.57% of 35	−0.11	−0.43 to 0.23	0.537	1.000
Client servicing and communications	16	9	56.25% of 16	0.19	†	0.491	1.000
Trade, settlement and reconciliation	15	8	53.33% of 15	−0.23	†	0.406	1.000
Payments, cards and disputes	12	2	16.67% of 12	0.03	†	0.922	1.000
Credit, underwriting and suitability	9	1	1 of 9	‡
Regulatory, audit, tax and legal	9	4	4 of 9	‡
Financial crime and client onboarding	7	3	3 of 7	‡
Class of work
LOB Operational	76	30	39.47% of 76	0.07	−0.16 to 0.29	0.535	1.000
Corporate Functional	74	26	35.14% of 74	−0.07	−0.30 to 0.16	0.528	1.000
Engagement status and lifecycle stage
Active, Build-Out	31	0	0.00% of 31	a
Active, Transition/Cut-Over	43	0	0.00% of 43	a
Active, Production	20	0	0.00% of 20	a
Canceled	56	56	100.00% of 56	a

Note: † Base under 30. No interval is reported. ‡ Base under 10. No statistic is reported. a Not tested: no variation in cancellation.

Table 7b. Association with cancellation rate by segment, part 2 of 2Table

Segment	Odds ratio per point	95% CI	AUC	Rate, distressed engagements	Rate, other engagements	Fisher p	TOST p
Study set	0.99	0.22 to 4.57	0.51	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	< 0.001
Outsourcing model
CXM	1.29	0.06 to 27.89	0.53	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.038
ITO	1.37	0.06 to 33.40	0.51	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.045
BPO	0.62	0.03 to 13.01	0.53	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.066
KPO	0.91	0.04 to 21.56	0.55	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.057
Institution type
Asset management	1.01	† n = 24	0.54	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.079
Wealth management and private banking	0.19	† n = 23	0.58	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.215
Investment banking (advisory and capital-markets origination)	2.08	† n = 19	0.57	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.183
Insurance (life, property and casualty, health)	0.44	† n = 14	0.51	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.217
Commercial and business banking	0.11	† n = 13	0.67	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.382
Payments and merchant acquiring (networks, acquiring, processing)	7.39	† n = 13	0.65	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.384
Credit card and payments issuing	0.17	† n = 12	0.71	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.342
Retail and consumer banking	0.75	† n = 12	0.64	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.191
Markets and trading (sales and trading, global markets)	0.57	† n = 11	0.52	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.234
Private equity and private capital	‡ n = 9
Process family
Corporate and back-office functions	4.63	0.28 to 76.68	0.59	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.160
Technology engineering and operations	0.31	0.01 to 11.73	0.59	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.128
Client servicing and communications	6.81	† n = 16	0.59	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.330
Trade, settlement and reconciliation	0.15	† n = 15	0.63	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.399
Payments, cards and disputes	1.54	† n = 12	0.55	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.202
Credit, underwriting and suitability	‡ n = 9
Regulatory, audit, tax and legal	‡ n = 9
Financial crime and client onboarding	‡ n = 7
Class of work
LOB Operational	1.98	0.23 to 16.76	0.52	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.021
Corporate Functional	0.48	0.05 to 4.52	0.53	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.024
Engagement status and lifecycle stage
Active, Build-Out	a
Active, Transition/Cut-Over	a
Active, Production	a
Canceled	a

Note: † Base under 30. No interval is reported. ‡ Base under 10. No statistic is reported. a Not tested: no variation in cancellation.

Across the study set, the engagement mean of agentic AI experience was not associated with cancellation (r = 0.00, 95% CI −0.16 to 0.16, Holm p = 1.000, n = 150 engagements). The association held after Holm correction in none of the 20 segment levels tested.

Association with Customer Satisfaction

Customer satisfaction is the percentage recorded against each engagement. The primary estimate uses the 94 active engagements. A descriptive contrast uses all 150 engagements.

Table 8a. Association with customer satisfaction by segment, part 1 of 2Table

Segment	Active engagements	Clean r	95% CI	p	Holm p	Spearman rho	p
Study set	94	0.13	−0.08 to 0.32	0.220	1.000	0.11	0.303
Outsourcing model
CXM	27	0.04	†	0.851	1.000	0.02	0.906
ITO	25	0.57	†	0.003	0.049	0.64	< 0.001
BPO	23	−0.06	†	0.802	1.000	−0.09	0.669
KPO	19	−0.19	†	0.437	1.000	−0.13	0.595
Institution type
Asset management	11	0.28	†	0.411	1.000	0.28	0.406
Wealth management and private banking	15	0.24	†	0.398	1.000	0.18	0.515
Investment banking (advisory and capital-markets origination)	10	0.63	†	0.052	0.773	0.44	0.206
Insurance (life, property and casualty, health)	9	‡
Commercial and business banking	9	‡
Payments and merchant acquiring (networks, acquiring, processing)	10	0.25	†	0.486	1.000	0.41	0.235
Credit card and payments issuing	7	‡
Retail and consumer banking	8	‡
Markets and trading (sales and trading, global markets)	8	‡
Private equity and private capital	7	‡
Process family
Corporate and back-office functions	28	−0.18	†	0.365	1.000	−0.24	0.224
Technology engineering and operations	25	0.42	†	0.036	0.573	0.45	0.023
Client servicing and communications	7	‡
Trade, settlement and reconciliation	7	‡
Payments, cards and disputes	10	0.34	†	0.341	1.000	0.47	0.173
Credit, underwriting and suitability	8	‡
Regulatory, audit, tax and legal	5	‡
Financial crime and client onboarding	4	‡
Class of work
LOB Operational	46	0.09	−0.20 to 0.37	0.540	1.000	0.10	0.507
Corporate Functional	48	0.17	−0.12 to 0.43	0.257	1.000	0.15	0.318
Engagement status and lifecycle stage
Active, Build-Out	31	0.30	−0.06 to 0.59	0.098	1.000	0.18	0.323
Active, Transition/Cut-Over	43	0.00	−0.30 to 0.30	0.999	1.000	−0.02	0.901
Active, Production	20	0.25	†	0.281	1.000	0.20	0.392
Canceled	0	a

Note: † Base under 30. No interval is reported. ‡ Base under 10. No statistic is reported. a Not tested: canceled engagements fall outside the active population.

Table 8b. Association with customer satisfaction by segment, part 2 of 2Table

Segment	Slope, points per rating point	95% CI	R squared	TOST p	All engagements	Descriptive r	p
Study set	6.47	−3.92 to 16.86	0.02	0.042	150	0.04	0.638
Outsourcing model
CXM	2.06	† n = 27	0.00	0.092	42	−0.01	0.955
ITO	23.94	† n = 25	0.33	0.945	40	0.14	0.389
BPO	−2.62	† n = 23	0.00	0.128	37	0.01	0.961
KPO	−11.99	† n = 19	0.04	0.319	31	−0.02	0.920
Institution type
Asset management	10.56	† n = 11	0.08	0.470	24	0.06	0.796
Wealth management and private banking	12.73	† n = 15	0.06	0.405	23	0.18	0.399
Investment banking (advisory and capital-markets origination)	25.44	† n = 10	0.40	0.872	19	0.09	0.724
Insurance (life, property and casualty, health)	‡ n = 9
Commercial and business banking	‡ n = 9
Payments and merchant acquiring (networks, acquiring, processing)	13.89	† n = 10	0.06	0.443	13	−0.11	0.711
Credit card and payments issuing	‡ n = 7
Retail and consumer banking	‡ n = 8
Markets and trading (sales and trading, global markets)	‡ n = 8
Private equity and private capital	‡ n = 7
Process family
Corporate and back-office functions	−10.00	† n = 28	0.03	0.259	47	−0.18	0.222
Technology engineering and operations	19.19	† n = 25	0.18	0.744	35	0.26	0.137
Client servicing and communications	‡ n = 7
Trade, settlement and reconciliation	‡ n = 7
Payments, cards and disputes	16.92	† n = 10	0.11	0.543	12	0.11	0.727
Credit, underwriting and suitability	‡ n = 8
Regulatory, audit, tax and legal	‡ n = 5
Financial crime and client onboarding	‡ n = 4
Class of work
LOB Operational	5.57	−12.60 to 23.74	0.01	0.078	76	−0.05	0.695
Corporate Functional	7.07	−5.33 to 19.46	0.03	0.172	74	0.13	0.287
Engagement status and lifecycle stage
Active, Build-Out	13.11	−2.59 to 28.81	0.09	0.505	31	0.30	0.098
Active, Transition/Cut-Over	−0.01	−17.01 to 16.99	0.00	0.025	43	0.00	0.999
Active, Production	13.03	†	0.06	0.417	20	0.25	0.281
Canceled	a

Note: † Base under 30. No interval is reported. ‡ Base under 10. No statistic is reported. a Not tested: canceled engagements fall outside the active population.

Across the active engagements, the engagement mean of agentic AI experience was not associated with customer satisfaction (r = 0.13, 95% CI −0.08 to 0.32, Holm p = 1.000, n = 94 engagements). The association held after Holm correction in one of the 16 segment levels tested, the ITO engagements (r = 0.57, Holm p = 0.049, n = 25 active engagements), a base under 30 among many tests.

Association with the Engagement Indicator Mean

The engagement indicator mean is the mean of an engagement's ratings across the rated indicators, measured at engagement level (150 engagements). Agentic AI experience is not a rated indicator and does not enter the mean.

Table 9a. Association with the engagement indicator mean by segment, part 1 of 2Table

Segment	Engagements	Leave-one-out r	95% CI	p	Holm p	Spearman rho	p
Study set	150	0.02	−0.14 to 0.18	0.829	1.000	0.01	0.901
Outsourcing model
CXM	42	−0.03	−0.33 to 0.27	0.832	1.000	−0.06	0.707
ITO	40	0.30	−0.01 to 0.56	0.058	1.000	0.28	0.083
BPO	37	0.03	−0.30 to 0.35	0.865	1.000	0.02	0.896
KPO	31	−0.10	−0.44 to 0.27	0.603	1.000	−0.04	0.818
Institution type
Asset management	24	0.13	†	0.558	1.000	0.13	0.543
Wealth management and private banking	23	0.21	†	0.331	1.000	0.31	0.144
Investment banking (advisory and capital-markets origination)	19	0.20	†	0.408	1.000	0.14	0.565
Insurance (life, property and casualty, health)	14	−0.03	†	0.927	1.000	−0.14	0.622
Commercial and business banking	13	0.35	†	0.244	1.000	0.18	0.549
Payments and merchant acquiring (networks, acquiring, processing)	13	−0.04	†	0.908	1.000	−0.08	0.794
Credit card and payments issuing	12	0.06	†	0.849	1.000	0.16	0.615
Retail and consumer banking	12	0.12	†	0.717	1.000	0.00	1.000
Markets and trading (sales and trading, global markets)	11	−0.11	†	0.747	1.000	−0.42	0.199
Private equity and private capital	9	‡
Process family
Corporate and back-office functions	47	−0.25	−0.50 to 0.04	0.086	1.000	−0.26	0.072
Technology engineering and operations	35	0.34	0.00 to 0.60	0.048	1.000	0.35	0.042
Client servicing and communications	16	0.12	†	0.671	1.000	0.18	0.493
Trade, settlement and reconciliation	15	0.17	†	0.553	1.000	0.09	0.754
Payments, cards and disputes	12	0.16	†	0.627	1.000	0.18	0.568
Credit, underwriting and suitability	9	‡
Regulatory, audit, tax and legal	9	‡
Financial crime and client onboarding	7	‡
Class of work
LOB Operational	76	−0.04	−0.26 to 0.19	0.731	1.000	−0.03	0.788
Corporate Functional	74	0.08	−0.15 to 0.30	0.512	1.000	0.05	0.681
Engagement status and lifecycle stage
Active, Build-Out	31	0.08	−0.29 to 0.42	0.681	1.000	0.07	0.702
Active, Transition/Cut-Over	43	−0.08	−0.37 to 0.22	0.604	1.000	−0.10	0.504
Active, Production	20	0.18	†	0.454	1.000	0.12	0.607
Canceled	56	0.02	−0.25 to 0.28	0.901	1.000	0.05	0.688

Note: † Base under 30. No interval is reported. ‡ Base under 10. No statistic is reported.

Table 9b. Association with the engagement indicator mean by segment, part 2 of 2Table

Segment	r with indicator included	Slope	95% CI	R squared	TOST p	Equivalent
Study set	Not a component	0.12	−0.98 to 1.22	0.00	< 0.001	Yes
Outsourcing model
CXM	Not a component	−0.27	−2.79 to 2.25	0.00	0.043	Yes
ITO	Not a component	1.90	−0.07 to 3.87	0.09	0.507	No
BPO	Not a component	0.17	−1.87 to 2.22	0.00	0.051	No
KPO	Not a component	−0.69	−3.37 to 1.99	0.01	0.131	No
Institution type
Asset management	Not a component	0.83	† n = 24	0.02	0.201	No
Wealth management and private banking	Not a component	1.75	† n = 23	0.05	0.337	No
Investment banking (advisory and capital-markets origination)	Not a component	0.94	† n = 19	0.04	0.337	No
Insurance (life, property and casualty, health)	Not a component	−0.22	† n = 14	0.00	0.174	No
Commercial and business banking	Not a component	2.10	† n = 13	0.12	0.567	No
Payments and merchant acquiring (networks, acquiring, processing)	Not a component	−0.22	† n = 13	0.00	0.193	No
Credit card and payments issuing	Not a component	0.37	† n = 12	0.00	0.229	No
Retail and consumer banking	Not a component	1.35	† n = 12	0.01	0.283	No
Markets and trading (sales and trading, global markets)	Not a component	−0.73	† n = 11	0.01	0.287	No
Private equity and private capital	‡ n = 9
Process family
Corporate and back-office functions	Not a component	−1.88	−4.04 to 0.28	0.06	0.367	No
Technology engineering and operations	Not a component	2.14	0.02 to 4.26	0.11	0.590	No
Client servicing and communications	Not a component	0.91	† n = 16	0.01	0.242	No
Trade, settlement and reconciliation	Not a component	0.86	† n = 15	0.03	0.312	No
Payments, cards and disputes	Not a component	1.00	† n = 12	0.02	0.325	No
Credit, underwriting and suitability	‡ n = 9
Regulatory, audit, tax and legal	‡ n = 9
Financial crime and client onboarding	‡ n = 7
Class of work
LOB Operational	Not a component	−0.28	−1.87 to 1.32	0.00	0.011	Yes
Corporate Functional	Not a component	0.52	−1.05 to 2.08	0.01	0.025	Yes
Engagement status and lifecycle stage
Active, Build-Out	Not a component	0.37	−1.44 to 2.17	0.01	0.109	No
Active, Transition/Cut-Over	Not a component	−0.42	−2.03 to 1.19	0.01	0.075	No
Active, Production	Not a component	1.08	† n = 20	0.03	0.296	No
Canceled	Not a component	0.05	−0.81 to 0.92	0.00	0.017	Yes

Note: † Base under 30. No interval is reported. ‡ Base under 10. No statistic is reported.

The engagement mean of agentic AI experience was not associated with the engagement indicator mean (r = 0.02, 95% CI −0.14 to 0.18, Holm p = 1.000, n = 150 engagements). The association held after Holm correction in none of the 24 segment levels tested. At respondent level, with standard errors clustered by engagement, the respondents' own ratings showed no association either (r = 0.00, p = 0.925, n = 793 respondents).

Association with Intent to Leave

Intent to leave is the answer to C019, “How likely are you to leave your current job in the next 12 months?”, rated 1 to 10. It is measured at respondent level on up to 798 respondents, with the engagement-level form reported alongside.

Table 10a. Association with intent to leave by segment, part 1 of 2Table

Segment	Respondents	r	95% CI	Cluster bootstrap 95% CI	p	Holm p
Study set	746	−0.04	−0.11 to 0.03	−0.10 to 0.03	0.275	1.000
Outsourcing model
CXM	198	0.01	−0.13 to 0.15	−0.09 to 0.12	0.839	1.000
ITO	222	−0.11	−0.24 to 0.02	−0.23 to 0.01	0.105	1.000
BPO	184	−0.04	−0.19 to 0.10	−0.18 to 0.10	0.559	1.000
KPO	142	0.01	−0.15 to 0.17	−0.13 to 0.16	0.905	1.000
Institution type
Asset management	110	−0.14	−0.32 to 0.05	−0.29 to 0.04	0.151	1.000
Wealth management and private banking	124	−0.12	−0.29 to 0.06	−0.26 to 0.05	0.179	1.000
Investment banking (advisory and capital-markets origination)	93	−0.11	−0.30 to 0.10	−0.28 to 0.08	0.314	1.000
Insurance (life, property and casualty, health)	63	−0.02	−0.27 to 0.23	−0.22 to 0.15	0.854	1.000
Commercial and business banking	73	−0.09	−0.32 to 0.14	−0.27 to 0.09	0.425	1.000
Payments and merchant acquiring (networks, acquiring, processing)	67	0.13	−0.11 to 0.36	−0.18 to 0.44	0.296	1.000
Credit card and payments issuing	67	−0.08	−0.31 to 0.16	−0.23 to 0.09	0.523	1.000
Retail and consumer banking	61	0.00	−0.25 to 0.25	−0.20 to 0.20	0.997	1.000
Markets and trading (sales and trading, global markets)	52	−0.06	−0.33 to 0.21	−0.30 to 0.15	0.652	1.000
Private equity and private capital	36	0.25	−0.09 to 0.53	§ n = 9	0.143	1.000
Process family
Corporate and back-office functions	210	0.03	−0.10 to 0.17	−0.07 to 0.14	0.617	1.000
Technology engineering and operations	186	−0.18	−0.31 to −0.03	−0.28 to −0.07	0.016	0.590
Client servicing and communications	82	0.02	−0.20 to 0.24	−0.18 to 0.25	0.854	1.000
Trade, settlement and reconciliation	69	−0.19	−0.41 to 0.04	−0.43 to 0.04	0.109	1.000
Payments, cards and disputes	67	−0.09	−0.32 to 0.16	−0.32 to 0.18	0.489	1.000
Credit, underwriting and suitability	47	−0.06	−0.34 to 0.24	§ n = 9	0.709	1.000
Regulatory, audit, tax and legal	44	−0.09	−0.38 to 0.21	§ n = 9	0.544	1.000
Financial crime and client onboarding	41	0.15	−0.17 to 0.44	§ n = 7	0.349	1.000
Class of work
LOB Operational	392	−0.02	−0.12 to 0.08	−0.12 to 0.08	0.717	1.000
Corporate Functional	354	−0.06	−0.17 to 0.04	−0.15 to 0.02	0.228	1.000
Engagement status and lifecycle stage
Active, Build-Out	152	−0.04	−0.19 to 0.12	−0.15 to 0.07	0.653	1.000
Active, Transition/Cut-Over	224	0.01	−0.12 to 0.14	−0.11 to 0.13	0.905	1.000
Active, Production	88	−0.10	−0.31 to 0.11	−0.34 to 0.20	0.342	1.000
Canceled	282	−0.02	−0.14 to 0.09	−0.13 to 0.08	0.680	1.000
Respondent role
Individual Contributor	565	−0.04	−0.12 to 0.05	−0.11 to 0.04	0.382	1.000
Engagement Manager	150	−0.14	−0.29 to 0.02	−0.30 to 0.02	0.085	1.000
Portfolio Director	30	0.38	0.03 to 0.65	0.04 to 0.70	0.036	1.000
Customer Management Executive	1	‡
Vendor type
IT services major	281	−0.02	−0.14 to 0.09	−0.13 to 0.08	0.696	1.000
BPO specialist	173	−0.06	−0.21 to 0.09	−0.19 to 0.06	0.442	1.000
Consulting firm	103	−0.02	−0.21 to 0.18	−0.17 to 0.15	0.875	1.000
Boutique or specialist provider	74	−0.06	−0.28 to 0.17	−0.25 to 0.16	0.623	1.000
Pure-play agentic AI firm	67	−0.21	−0.43 to 0.03	−0.40 to 0.01	0.087	1.000
Not reported, recovered by engagement	48	0.22	−0.06 to 0.48	−0.07 to 0.50	0.125	1.000

Note: § Too few engagements for a cluster bootstrap interval. ‡ Base under 10. No statistic is reported.

Table 10b. Association with intent to leave by segment, part 2 of 2Table

Segment	Spearman rho	p	Share at 7 or above, distressed	Share at 7 or above, other	Engagements	Engagement level r	95% CI	TOST p
Study set	−0.04	0.264	Not applicable	Not applicable	150	−0.08	−0.24 to 0.08	0.003
Outsourcing model
CXM	0.02	0.770	Not applicable	Not applicable	42	−0.03	−0.33 to 0.28	0.039
ITO	−0.12	0.082	Not applicable	Not applicable	40	−0.27	−0.54 to 0.04	0.432
BPO	−0.04	0.546	Not applicable	Not applicable	37	−0.09	−0.40 to 0.24	0.096
KPO	0.00	0.954	Not applicable	Not applicable	31	0.09	−0.27 to 0.43	0.123
Institution type
Asset management	−0.11	0.243	Not applicable	Not applicable	24	−0.21	†	0.337
Wealth management and private banking	−0.11	0.223	Not applicable	Not applicable	23	−0.30	†	0.508
Investment banking (advisory and capital-markets origination)	−0.11	0.274	Not applicable	Not applicable	19	−0.12	†	0.225
Insurance (life, property and casualty, health)	−0.02	0.881	Not applicable	Not applicable	14	−0.11	†	0.255
Commercial and business banking	−0.10	0.401	Not applicable	Not applicable	13	−0.26	†	0.442
Payments and merchant acquiring (networks, acquiring, processing)	0.12	0.330	Not applicable	Not applicable	13	0.08	†	0.235
Credit card and payments issuing	−0.09	0.455	Not applicable	Not applicable	12	−0.10	†	0.261
Retail and consumer banking	0.00	0.994	Not applicable	Not applicable	12	−0.11	†	0.279
Markets and trading (sales and trading, global markets)	−0.05	0.742	Not applicable	Not applicable	11	−0.10	†	0.274
Private equity and private capital	0.23	0.182	Not applicable	Not applicable	9	‡	‡
Process family
Corporate and back-office functions	0.04	0.593	Not applicable	Not applicable	47	0.16	−0.13 to 0.43	0.171
Technology engineering and operations	−0.19	0.008	Not applicable	Not applicable	35	−0.44	−0.67 to −0.12	0.813
Client servicing and communications	0.09	0.427	Not applicable	Not applicable	16	−0.15	†	0.284
Trade, settlement and reconciliation	−0.18	0.144	Not applicable	Not applicable	15	−0.26	†	0.435
Payments, cards and disputes	−0.07	0.582	Not applicable	Not applicable	12	−0.35	†	0.565
Credit, underwriting and suitability	−0.06	0.695	Not applicable	Not applicable	9	‡	‡
Regulatory, audit, tax and legal	−0.14	0.353	Not applicable	Not applicable	9	‡	‡
Financial crime and client onboarding	0.16	0.333	Not applicable	Not applicable	7	‡	‡
Class of work
LOB Operational	−0.01	0.833	Not applicable	Not applicable	76	−0.05	−0.27 to 0.18	0.014
Corporate Functional	−0.07	0.185	Not applicable	Not applicable	74	−0.11	−0.33 to 0.12	0.051
Engagement status and lifecycle stage
Active, Build-Out	−0.05	0.551	Not applicable	Not applicable	31	−0.11	−0.44 to 0.26	0.143
Active, Transition/Cut-Over	0.01	0.878	Not applicable	Not applicable	43	−0.09	−0.38 to 0.22	0.083
Active, Production	−0.06	0.600	Not applicable	Not applicable	20	−0.27	†	0.442
Canceled	−0.02	0.786	Not applicable	Not applicable	56	0.26	0.00 to 0.49	0.378
Respondent role
Individual Contributor	−0.04	0.397	Not applicable	Not applicable	150	0.01	−0.15 to 0.17	< 0.001
Engagement Manager	−0.15	0.059	Not applicable	Not applicable	150	−0.14	−0.29 to 0.02	0.021
Portfolio Director	0.39	0.032	Not applicable	Not applicable	30	0.38	0.03 to 0.65	0.691
Customer Management Executive	‡ n = 1
Vendor type
IT services major	−0.03	0.614	Not applicable	Not applicable	59	−0.09	−0.34 to 0.17	0.052
BPO specialist	−0.08	0.312	Not applicable	Not applicable	37	−0.12	−0.43 to 0.21	0.137
Consulting firm	−0.02	0.852	Not applicable	Not applicable	23	0.03	†	0.107
Boutique or specialist provider	−0.04	0.742	Not applicable	Not applicable	17	−0.42	†	0.699
Pure-play agentic AI firm	−0.20	0.107	Not applicable	Not applicable	14	−0.30	†	0.507
Not reported, recovered by engagement	0.23	0.113	Not applicable	Not applicable	40	0.24	−0.07 to 0.52	0.354

Note: † Base under 30. No interval is reported. ‡ Base under 10. No statistic is reported.

Agentic AI experience was not associated with intent to leave (r = −0.04, cluster bootstrap 95% CI −0.11 to 0.03, p = 0.232 with standard errors clustered by engagement, n = 746 respondents), nor was its engagement-level form (r = −0.08, 95% CI −0.24 to 0.08, n = 150 engagements). The association held after Holm correction in none of the 37 segment levels tested.

Comparison of Associations Across the Four Measures

Table 11. Associations across the four measuresTable

Measure	Form	Unit	n	r	95% CI	p	Equivalent to zero	Rank among the four
Cancellation rate	Descriptive contrast	Engagement	150	0.00	−0.16 to 0.16	0.993	Yes	4
Customer satisfaction	Clean estimate	Engagement	94	0.13	−0.08 to 0.32	0.220	Yes	1
Engagement indicator mean	Full	Engagement	150	0.02	−0.14 to 0.18	0.829	Yes	3
Intent to leave	Respondent level, clustered	Respondent	746	−0.04	−0.11 to 0.03	0.232	Yes	2

Table 12. Pairwise comparison of associationsTable

Pair compared	Difference in r	Steiger z	p	Holm p	Reading
Cancellation rate and customer satisfaction	−0.04	−1.32	0.188	1.000	Did not differ
Cancellation rate and engagement indicator mean	−0.02	−0.28	0.783	1.000	Did not differ
Cancellation rate and intent to leave	−0.04	−0.72	0.472	1.000	Did not differ
Customer satisfaction and engagement indicator mean	0.02	0.47	0.639	1.000	Did not differ
Customer satisfaction and intent to leave	0.00	0.02	0.984	1.000	Did not differ
Engagement indicator mean and intent to leave	−0.02	−0.43	0.668	1.000	Did not differ

The four associations were compared in pairs on their engagement-level forms, each oriented so that a higher value is the better outcome, across the 150 engagements with all four measures. After Holm correction, none of the six pairs differed. Every association was near zero.

Clustering and Effective Sample Size

Table 13. Clustering and effective sample sizeTable

Statistic	Value	Reading
Clusters (engagements)	150	Engagements with one or more answers.
Mean respondents per engagement	5.3	Answers per engagement, among engagements with one or more answers.
ICC(1)	−0.01	Share of the variance that lies between engagements.
Design effect	1.00	One plus the product of the ICC and the mean cluster size less one.
Nominal respondent n	793	Respondents who answered.
Effective n	793	Nominal n divided by the design effect.
Cluster bootstrap applied	No	Applied to every respondent-level interval where the ICC is 0.05 or above.

Agentic AI experience did not cluster within engagements (ICC −0.01): respondents on the same engagement were no more alike than respondents chosen at random. The design effect was 1.00, and the effective n equaled the 793 answers. Respondent-level tests still used standard errors clustered by engagement.

Equivalence Tests of Null Results

Table 14. Equivalence tests of null resultsTable

Measure	n	r	Equivalence bound	TOST p, lower	TOST p, upper	Equivalent to zero	Achieved power	MDE at power 0.80	Detection floor for this n
Cancellation rate	150	0.00	\|r\| < 0.30	< 0.001	< 0.001	Yes	0.96	0.23	0.23
Customer satisfaction	94	0.13	\|r\| < 0.30	< 0.001	0.042	Yes	0.84	0.29	0.23
Engagement indicator mean	150	0.02	\|r\| < 0.30	< 0.001	< 0.001	Yes	0.96	0.23	0.23
Intent to leave	746, effective 746	−0.04	\|r\| < 0.30	< 0.001	< 0.001	Yes	1.00	0.10	0.23

All four associations were equivalent to zero. No result was inconclusive. The detection floor shown is the study floor at 150 engagements.

Robustness Checks

Table 15. Robustness checksTable

Check	Measure	Primary r	Check r	95% CI	Change	Conclusion holds
Rank correlation in place of Pearson	Cancellation rate	0.00	−0.01	a	−0.01	Yes
Rank correlation in place of Pearson	Customer satisfaction	0.13	0.11	a	−0.02	Yes
Rank correlation in place of Pearson	Engagement indicator mean	0.02	0.01	a	−0.01	Yes
Rank correlation in place of Pearson	Intent to leave	−0.04	−0.04	a	0.00	Yes
Non-answers excluded, then imputed at the engagement mean	Intent to leave	−0.04	−0.04	a	0.00	Yes
Active engagements only	Engagement indicator mean	0.02	0.03	−0.18 to 0.23	0.01	Yes
Active engagements only	Intent to leave	−0.04	−0.03	−0.12 to 0.07	0.01	Yes
Most influential engagement removed (largest Cook's distance)	Cancellation rate	0.00	−0.03	−0.19 to 0.14	−0.02	Yes
Most influential engagement removed (largest Cook's distance)	Customer satisfaction	0.13	0.17	−0.03 to 0.36	0.04	Yes
Most influential engagement removed (largest Cook's distance)	Engagement indicator mean	0.02	−0.01	−0.17 to 0.15	−0.03	Yes
Most influential engagement removed (largest Cook's distance)	Intent to leave	−0.04	−0.03	−0.10 to 0.04	0.01	Yes
Engagements weighted by respondent count	Cancellation rate	0.00	−0.03	a	−0.02	Yes
Engagements weighted by respondent count	Customer satisfaction	0.13	0.14	a	0.02	Yes
Engagements weighted by respondent count	Engagement indicator mean	0.02	0.05	a	0.03	Yes
Bootstrap of engagements	Cancellation rate	0.00	0.00	−0.16 to 0.16	0.00	Yes
Bootstrap of engagements	Customer satisfaction	0.13	0.13	−0.08 to 0.33	0.00	Yes
Bootstrap of engagements	Engagement indicator mean	0.02	0.02	−0.15 to 0.18	0.00	Yes
Bootstrap of engagements	Intent to leave	−0.04	−0.04	−0.11 to 0.03	0.00	Yes
Thin-base segments removed	Cancellation rate	0.00	0.05	−0.17 to 0.27	0.05	Yes
Thin-base segments removed	Customer satisfaction	0.13	0.10	−0.17 to 0.36	−0.03	Yes
Thin-base segments removed	Engagement indicator mean	0.02	−0.03	−0.25 to 0.19	−0.05	Yes
Thin-base segments removed	Intent to leave	−0.04	−0.05	−0.15 to 0.05	−0.01	Yes

Note: a No interval for this check.

Each change was computed before rounding and may differ by 0.01 from the difference between the two printed values.

All 22 checks held. A check holds when its test falls on the same side of 0.05 as the primary test.

Measure Independence and Part-Whole Correction

Each of the four measures was computed from data the indicator does not contain. Each result is therefore a finding and not an arithmetic consequence.

Comparison with the Study Norm

Table 16. Comparison with the study normTable

Measure	The indicator, oriented r	Study median, oriented r	Deviation	Fisher z	p	Holm p
Cancellation rate	0.00	0.60	−0.60	−8.35	< 0.001	< 0.001
Customer satisfaction	0.04	0.72	−0.68	−10.52	< 0.001	< 0.001
Engagement indicator mean	0.02	0.84	−0.82	−14.44	< 0.001	< 0.001
Intent to leave	0.04	0.71	−0.67	−10.33	< 0.001	< 0.001
Spread of deviations			0.22
Verdict	Divergent

Each deviation was computed before rounding and may differ by 0.01 from the difference between the two printed values.

The comparison covered 150 engagements. The indicator departed from the study's typical pattern on all four measures. The typical indicator is a rating with a strong association with each measure, with study medians from 0.60 to 0.84. Agentic AI experience is not a rating, and its associations were near zero.

Interpretation of the Data

Every respondent who answered reported at most one year of experience with agentic AI, and most reported less than one. The share with one year was about the same in every role, so agentic AI experience, unlike career experience, does not track seniority. It was not associated with any of the four study measures.

Limitations

The evidence is the reported experience of the vendor's delivery teams, collected in a single cross-section. The associations reported here are not causal. Canceled engagements were described after cancellation.

Agentic AI experience is the respondents' typed report and not a record. An answer of zero is counted as under one year, and the answers take only two values.

Definitions

Table 17. DefinitionsTable

Term	Definition
Response scale	A number of years, as typed by the respondent. An answer of zero is counted as under one year. Every answer was zero or one.
Non-answers	“I do not know” and “I prefer to not answer” are counted separately. They are excluded from the answering base and from the mean.
Indicator class	Respondent level: a property of the respondent rather than of the engagement.
Failure category	The five failure categories of the Study Taxonomy apply only to the rated indicators. The indicator carries none.
Engagement mean of agentic AI experience	The mean of the answers of an engagement's respondents, used in every engagement-level test.
Cluster bootstrap	An interval computed by resampling engagements rather than respondents, so that the answers from one engagement stay together.
Clustered test	A test whose standard error allows for the answers of respondents on the same engagement to be alike.

Sources and Provenance

Table 18. Sources and provenanceTable

Source	Value
Study data	Study Data.xlsx, Data sheet, column C008, sha256 219eba0457274d04
Statistics engine	compute_statistics.py, sha256 738319eef764602b
Statistics record	Computed Statistics.json, record C008, sha256 1ae50a3637fc9370
Computed	October 13, 2026, 04:57 UTC
Template	Indicator Template v2, version 2.0 of 10 October 2026
Figures placed by script	2,388

Continue the report

Executive summary →

Overview

Executive Summary

Four findings from 150 engagements

Read →

Introduction

Scope, evidence, and how the report is organized

Read →

Part 1

Engagement Outcomes

Poor results on every measure, and what separates them

Read →

Part 2

The Five Failure Categories

Where failure concentrates, category by category

Read →

Part 3

Governance, Oversight, and Control

Controls that existed in name only

Read →

Part 4

The Delivery Workforce

Early in their careers, dissatisfied, and many intending to leave

Read →

Part 5

Manual Alteration

How the delivery team altered the work to sustain it

Read →

Part 6

Executive Action Plan

Seven immediate actions and a first-year plan

Read →

Appendices

Definitions, indicator inventory, method, and disclosures

Read →

Data

Study Data

Deep-dive analyses of the study indicators, published in stages

Read →

How many years of experience do you have with agentic AI?

On this page

Indicator Specification

Summary of Findings

Distribution of Responses

Descriptive Statistics by Segment

Tests of Difference Between Segments

Association with Cancellation Rate

Association with Customer Satisfaction

Association with the Engagement Indicator Mean

Association with Intent to Leave

Comparison of Associations Across the Four Measures

Clustering and Effective Sample Size

Equivalence Tests of Null Results

Robustness Checks

Measure Independence and Part-Whole Correction

Comparison with the Study Norm

Interpretation of the Data

Limitations

Definitions

Sources and Provenance

Continue the report