Source: https://akholi.com/outsourcing-2026-agentic-ai-tier-1-banks/study-data/part-4-c087/
Author: Phil Hatch
Publisher: Akholi

My employer cares about me

Study Data · Part 4 · Indicator Deep-Dive Analysis

# My employer cares about me

Indicator C087 · By Phil Hatch · Akholi · October 9, 2026

← Study Data← Previous indicatorNext indicator →

## On this page

22 sectionsIndicator SpecificationSummary of FindingsDistribution of RatingsCoverage and Origin of Written ResponsesDistribution of Written SentimentDescriptive Statistics by SegmentTests of Difference Between SegmentsAssociation with Cancellation RateAssociation with Customer SatisfactionAssociation with the Engagement Indicator MeanAssociation with Intent to LeaveComparison of Associations Across the Four MeasuresClustering and Effective Sample SizeEquivalence Tests of Null ResultsRobustness ChecksMeasure Independence and Part-Whole CorrectionComparison with the Study NormCo-Occurring Indicators and ThemesInterpretation of the DataLimitationsDefinitionsSources and Provenance

## Indicator Specification

Table 1. Indicator specificationTable

| Field | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Indicator code | C087 |
| Question as asked | My employer cares about me. |
| Failure category | Not one of the 100 rated indicators |
| Place in the survey | Vendor Details > 4.3 Employer Relationship > Care |
| Indicator class | Respondent level |
| Indicator type | Rated, POS |
| Response scale | 1 to 10, higher is the better outcome |
| Answering base | 786 of 850 respondents, across 150 of 150 engagements |
| Non-answers | I do not know 0, I prefer to not answer 0, blank 64 |
| Written responses addressing the indicator | 6 responses from 6 respondents on 6 engagements (0 primary, 6 secondary) |

## 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 | −0.56 | −0.66 to −0.44 | < 0.001 |
| Customer satisfaction | Clean estimate | 94 engagements | 0.73 | 0.62 to 0.81 | < 0.001 |
| Engagement indicator mean | Full | 150 engagements | 0.76 | 0.68 to 0.82 | < 0.001 |
| Intent to leave | Respondent level, clustered | 740 respondents | −0.77 | −0.81 to −0.71 | < 0.001 |

The mean rating was 5.0 and the median 5.0 (n = 786 respondents). Ratings of 3 or below, the distressed range, made up 24.43% of the answers. The rating was associated with all four study measures. Higher ratings came with less cancellation (r = −0.56, 95% CI −0.66 to −0.44, p < 0.001, n = 150 engagements), higher customer satisfaction among active engagements (r = 0.73, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.81, p < 0.001, n = 94 engagements), a higher engagement indicator mean (r = 0.76, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.82, p < 0.001, n = 150 engagements) and lower intent to leave (r = −0.77, cluster bootstrap 95% CI −0.81 to −0.71, p < 0.001 with standard errors clustered by engagement, n = 740 respondents). After Holm correction, ratings differed by engagement status and lifecycle stage (Welch F 27.02, Holm p < 0.001, omega squared 0.307), respondent role (Welch F 11.76, Holm p < 0.001, omega squared 0.021) and vendor type (Welch F 3.11, Holm p = 0.049, omega squared 0.009).

Six written responses addressed the indicator, all from C135, the comment field on the employer. The four negative responses described respondents left alone: no training, no one who listened, no one above the lead who knew the respondent's name, and no one who checked in. The two positive responses said the employer treated the respondent decently and named a gap in training or staffing.

## Distribution of Ratings

Table 3. Distribution of ratings, respondent levelTable

| Answer | Respondents | Share of answered (base 786) | Cumulative share | Engagements with at least one | Share of 150 engagements | Distressed |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | 48 | 6.11% | 6.11% | 29 | 19.33% | Yes |
| 2 | 65 | 8.27% | 14.38% | 41 | 27.33% | Yes |
| 3 | 79 | 10.05% | 24.43% | 54 | 36.00% | Yes |
| 4 | 141 | 17.94% | 42.37% | 82 | 54.67% | No |
| 5 | 137 | 17.43% | 59.80% | 84 | 56.00% | No |
| 6 | 118 | 15.01% | 74.81% | 68 | 45.33% | No |
| 7 | 106 | 13.49% | 88.30% | 67 | 44.67% | No |
| 8 | 44 | 5.60% | 93.89% | 34 | 22.67% | No |
| 9 | 32 | 4.07% | 97.96% | 20 | 13.33% | No |
| 10 | 16 | 2.04% | 100.00% | 10 | 6.67% | No |
| 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 | 786 | 100.00% | | 150 | 100.00% | |

Table 4. Distribution of ratings, 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, goodness view | 150 | 5.0 | 1.8 | 1.3 | 4.8 | 9.8 | 25 | 16.67% |

Ratings of 3 or below, the distressed range, accounted for 192 of the 786 answers (24.43%). The engagement mean fell in the distressed range in 25 of 150 engagements.

## Coverage and Origin of Written Responses

Figure 1. Written responses addressing the indicator, by question answered and written score (n = 6 responses)ExhibitNote: The bar is C135, outside the indicator's survey section, so every response is secondary. Labels give counts. C135 asked: “Add any comments on your employer that the ratings in this section do not capture.”Table 5. Written responses by originTable

| Origin | Responses | Respondents | Engagements | Negative | Strongest negative (−10) | Positive | Mean written score |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Primary | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | None |
| Secondary | 6 | 6 | 6 | 4 of 6 | 3 of 6 | 2 of 6 | ‡ |
| All responses | 6 | 6 | 6 | 4 of 6 | 3 of 6 | 2 of 6 | ‡ |

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

Every response answered C135, “Add any comments on your employer that the ratings in this section do not capture.”, so every response was secondary. The four negative responses described respondents left alone with the work. One felt left alone with the tool and given no training. One said no one wanted to listen. One said no one above the lead knew the respondent's name and no career path had been discussed. One said no one checked in once in two months and that the respondent had stopped caring. The two positive responses said the employer treated the respondent well enough, and each named a gap: a tool learned by sitting with the lead for two weeks with no course, or a team left short after two people left and were not replaced.

## Distribution of Written Sentiment

Figure 2. Distribution of written sentiment (n = 6 responses)ExhibitNote: Column height is the number of responses at each score. With fewer than 10 responses, labels give counts and no shares.

Three responses carried the strongest negative score, one the next, and two were positive. With fewer than 10 responses, the distribution is reported as counts only.

## Descriptive Statistics by Segment

Table 6a. Descriptive statistics by segment, part 1 of 2Table

| Segment | Base | Answered | Answer rate | Engagements | Mean | 95% CI | SD |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Study set | 850 | 786 | 92.47% of 850 | 150 | 5.0 | 4.8 to 5.1 | 2.2 |
| Outsourcing model | | | | | | | |
| CXM | 232 | 213 | 91.81% of 232 | 42 | 5.4 | 5.1 to 5.6 | 2.1 |
| ITO | 244 | 228 | 93.44% of 244 | 40 | 4.8 | 4.5 to 5.0 | 2.0 |
| BPO | 209 | 195 | 93.30% of 209 | 37 | 4.9 | 4.6 to 5.2 | 2.4 |
| KPO | 165 | 150 | 90.91% of 165 | 31 | 4.9 | 4.5 to 5.2 | 2.1 |
| Institution type | | | | | | | |
| Asset management | 132 | 122 | 92.42% of 132 | 24 | 4.8 | 4.5 to 5.2 | 2.1 |
| Wealth management and private banking | 140 | 129 | 92.14% of 140 | 23 | 5.2 | 4.8 to 5.5 | 2.0 |
| Investment banking (advisory and capital-markets origination) | 105 | 98 | 93.33% of 105 | 19 | 4.3 | 3.8 to 4.7 | 2.1 |
| Insurance (life, property and casualty, health) | 78 | 74 | 94.87% of 78 | 14 | 4.7 | 4.2 to 5.2 | 2.1 |
| Commercial and business banking | 82 | 73 | 89.02% of 82 | 13 | 5.4 | 4.9 to 5.8 | 2.0 |
| Payments and merchant acquiring (networks, acquiring, processing) | 71 | 67 | 94.37% of 71 | 13 | 5.2 | 4.6 to 5.7 | 2.3 |
| Credit card and payments issuing | 73 | 71 | 97.26% of 73 | 12 | 4.9 | 4.2 to 5.5 | 2.6 |
| Retail and consumer banking | 73 | 64 | 87.67% of 73 | 12 | 5.9 | 5.4 to 6.4 | 2.0 |
| Markets and trading (sales and trading, global markets) | 57 | 53 | 92.98% of 57 | 11 | 5.1 | 4.6 to 5.6 | 1.8 |
| Private equity and private capital | 39 | 35 | 89.74% of 39 | 9 | 4.5 | 3.8 to 5.3 | 2.2 |
| Process family | | | | | | | |
| Corporate and back-office functions | 248 | 234 | 94.35% of 248 | 47 | 4.9 | 4.6 to 5.2 | 2.2 |
| Technology engineering and operations | 204 | 190 | 93.14% of 204 | 35 | 5.1 | 4.9 to 5.4 | 1.9 |
| Client servicing and communications | 94 | 85 | 90.43% of 94 | 16 | 5.0 | 4.6 to 5.5 | 2.0 |
| Trade, settlement and reconciliation | 80 | 75 | 93.75% of 80 | 15 | 4.4 | 3.9 to 4.9 | 2.1 |
| Payments, cards and disputes | 73 | 67 | 91.78% of 73 | 12 | 5.7 | 5.1 to 6.4 | 2.6 |
| Credit, underwriting and suitability | 57 | 51 | 89.47% of 57 | 9 | 5.0 | 4.4 to 5.6 | 2.2 |
| Regulatory, audit, tax and legal | 51 | 43 | 84.31% of 51 | 9 | 4.6 | 4.0 to 5.2 | 1.9 |
| Financial crime and client onboarding | 43 | 41 | 95.35% of 43 | 7 | 4.8 | 3.9 to 5.6 | 2.7 |
| Class of work | | | | | | | |
| LOB Operational | 451 | 413 | 91.57% of 451 | 76 | 5.0 | 4.7 to 5.2 | 2.2 |
| Corporate Functional | 399 | 373 | 93.48% of 399 | 74 | 5.0 | 4.8 to 5.2 | 2.1 |
| Engagement status and lifecycle stage | | | | | | | |
| Active, Build-Out | 175 | 162 | 92.57% of 175 | 31 | 5.9 | 5.6 to 6.2 | 2.1 |
| Active, Transition/Cut-Over | 250 | 235 | 94.00% of 250 | 43 | 5.6 | 5.4 to 5.9 | 1.9 |
| Active, Production | 103 | 94 | 91.26% of 103 | 20 | 6.0 | 5.6 to 6.4 | 2.1 |
| Canceled | 322 | 295 | 91.61% of 322 | 56 | 3.6 | 3.4 to 3.8 | 1.7 |
| Respondent role | | | | | | | |
| Individual Contributor | 667 | 604 | 90.55% of 667 | 150 | 4.8 | 4.7 to 5.0 | 2.2 |
| Engagement Manager | 150 | 150 | 100.00% of 150 | 150 | 5.3 | 4.9 to 5.6 | 2.1 |
| Portfolio Director | 31 | 30 | 96.77% of 31 | 30 | 6.4 | 5.7 to 7.0 | 1.8 |
| Customer Management Executive | 2 | 2 | 2 of 2 | 2 | ‡ | | |
| Vendor type | | | | | | | |
| IT services major | 316 | 287 | 90.82% of 316 | 59 | 5.1 | 4.9 to 5.4 | 2.1 |
| BPO specialist | 198 | 182 | 91.92% of 198 | 37 | 4.7 | 4.4 to 5.0 | 2.3 |
| Consulting firm | 117 | 111 | 94.87% of 117 | 23 | 5.0 | 4.6 to 5.4 | 2.2 |
| Boutique or specialist provider | 87 | 84 | 96.55% of 87 | 17 | 5.1 | 4.7 to 5.6 | 2.3 |
| Pure-play agentic AI firm | 75 | 71 | 94.67% of 75 | 14 | 5.3 | 4.8 to 5.9 | 2.4 |
| Not reported, recovered by engagement | 57 | 51 | 89.47% of 57 | 43 | 4.3 | 3.8 to 4.7 | 1.7 |

Note: ‡ Base under 10. No statistic is reported.Table 6b. Descriptive statistics by segment, part 2 of 2Table

| Segment | Min | Q1 | Median | Q3 | Max | Distressed n | Distressed % |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Study set | 1.0 | 4.0 | 5.0 | 7.0 | 10.0 | 192 | 24.43% |
| Outsourcing model | | | | | | | |
| CXM | 1.0 | 4.0 | 5.0 | 7.0 | 10.0 | 40 | 18.78% |
| ITO | 1.0 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 6.0 | 10.0 | 58 | 25.44% |
| BPO | 1.0 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 7.0 | 10.0 | 56 | 28.72% |
| KPO | 1.0 | 3.3 | 5.0 | 6.0 | 10.0 | 38 | 25.33% |
| Institution type | | | | | | | |
| Asset management | 1.0 | 3.3 | 5.0 | 6.0 | 10.0 | 31 | 25.41% |
| Wealth management and private banking | 1.0 | 4.0 | 5.0 | 6.0 | 10.0 | 21 | 16.28% |
| Investment banking (advisory and capital-markets origination) | 1.0 | 3.0 | 4.0 | 6.0 | 8.0 | 36 | 36.73% |
| Insurance (life, property and casualty, health) | 1.0 | 3.0 | 4.0 | 6.8 | 8.0 | 21 | 28.38% |
| Commercial and business banking | 1.0 | 4.0 | 5.0 | 7.0 | 9.0 | 11 | 15.07% |
| Payments and merchant acquiring (networks, acquiring, processing) | 1.0 | 4.0 | 5.0 | 7.0 | 10.0 | 14 | 20.90% |
| Credit card and payments issuing | 1.0 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 7.0 | 10.0 | 25 | 35.21% |
| Retail and consumer banking | 1.0 | 5.0 | 6.0 | 7.0 | 10.0 | 8 | 12.50% |
| Markets and trading (sales and trading, global markets) | 1.0 | 4.0 | 5.0 | 6.0 | 9.0 | 13 | 24.53% |
| Private equity and private capital | 1.0 | 3.0 | 4.0 | 6.0 | 9.0 | 12 | 34.29% |
| Process family | | | | | | | |
| Corporate and back-office functions | 1.0 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 6.8 | 10.0 | 60 | 25.64% |
| Technology engineering and operations | 1.0 | 4.0 | 5.0 | 6.0 | 10.0 | 35 | 18.42% |
| Client servicing and communications | 1.0 | 4.0 | 5.0 | 6.0 | 10.0 | 16 | 18.82% |
| Trade, settlement and reconciliation | 1.0 | 3.0 | 4.0 | 6.0 | 10.0 | 26 | 34.67% |
| Payments, cards and disputes | 1.0 | 4.0 | 6.0 | 8.0 | 10.0 | 14 | 20.90% |
| Credit, underwriting and suitability | 1.0 | 3.5 | 5.0 | 7.0 | 9.0 | 13 | 25.49% |
| Regulatory, audit, tax and legal | 1.0 | 3.5 | 4.0 | 6.0 | 9.0 | 11 | 25.58% |
| Financial crime and client onboarding | 1.0 | 2.0 | 5.0 | 7.0 | 9.0 | 17 | 41.46% |
| Class of work | | | | | | | |
| LOB Operational | 1.0 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 7.0 | 10.0 | 110 | 26.63% |
| Corporate Functional | 1.0 | 4.0 | 5.0 | 6.0 | 10.0 | 82 | 21.98% |
| Engagement status and lifecycle stage | | | | | | | |
| Active, Build-Out | 1.0 | 4.0 | 6.0 | 7.0 | 10.0 | 15 | 9.26% |
| Active, Transition/Cut-Over | 1.0 | 4.0 | 6.0 | 7.0 | 10.0 | 32 | 13.62% |
| Active, Production | 1.0 | 5.0 | 6.0 | 7.0 | 10.0 | 13 | 13.83% |
| Canceled | 1.0 | 2.0 | 4.0 | 5.0 | 9.0 | 132 | 44.75% |
| Respondent role | | | | | | | |
| Individual Contributor | 1.0 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 6.0 | 10.0 | 157 | 25.99% |
| Engagement Manager | 1.0 | 4.0 | 5.0 | 7.0 | 10.0 | 34 | 22.67% |
| Portfolio Director | 4.0 | 5.0 | 6.5 | 7.0 | 10.0 | 0 | 0.00% |
| Customer Management Executive | ‡ n = 2 | | | | | | |
| Vendor type | | | | | | | |
| IT services major | 1.0 | 4.0 | 5.0 | 7.0 | 10.0 | 58 | 20.21% |
| BPO specialist | 1.0 | 3.0 | 4.5 | 6.0 | 10.0 | 56 | 30.77% |
| Consulting firm | 1.0 | 4.0 | 5.0 | 7.0 | 10.0 | 27 | 24.32% |
| Boutique or specialist provider | 1.0 | 4.0 | 5.0 | 7.0 | 10.0 | 18 | 21.43% |
| Pure-play agentic AI firm | 1.0 | 4.0 | 6.0 | 7.0 | 10.0 | 16 | 22.54% |
| Not reported, recovered by engagement | 1.0 | 3.0 | 4.0 | 5.0 | 8.0 | 17 | 33.33% |

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

Every figure in the segment tables is at respondent level. Segments with fewer than 30 respondents carry no interval. Segments with fewer than 10 report counts only.

## Tests of Difference Between Segments

Table 7a. Tests of difference between segments, part 1 of 2Table

| Segment family | Welch F | df | p | Holm p | Omega squared | 90% CI |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Outsourcing model | 0.81 | 3, 78.6 | 0.490 | 1.000 | −0.005 | 0.000 to 0.044 |
| Institution type | 0.98 | 8, 49.4 | 0.460 | 1.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 to 0.074 |
| Process family | 0.68 | 4, 38.5 | 0.610 | 1.000 | −0.004 | 0.000 to 0.061 |
| Class of work | 0.08 | 1, 148.0 | 0.784 | 1.000 | −0.006 | 0.000 to 0.020 |
| Engagement status and lifecycle stage | 27.02 | 3, 56.9 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | 0.307 | 0.212 to 0.402 |
| Respondent role | 11.76 | 2, 75.6 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | 0.021 | 0.008 to 0.042 |
| Vendor type | 3.11 | 5, 234.5 | 0.010 | 0.049 | 0.009 | 0.001 to 0.027 |

Table 7b. 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 | 2.55 | 0.467 | 2.54 | 3 | 0.468 | 0.13 | None |
| Institution type | 7.64 | 0.469 | 7.42 | 8 | 0.504, simulated | 0.23 | Private equity and private capital, n = 9 |
| Process family | 2.91 | 0.573 | 4.65 | 4 | 0.330, simulated | 0.19 | Credit, underwriting and suitability, n = 9, Regulatory, audit, tax and legal, n = 9, Financial crime and client onboarding, n = 7 |
| Class of work | 0.04 | 0.846 | 0.34 | 1 | 0.559 | 0.05 | None |
| Engagement status and lifecycle stage | 51.95 | < 0.001 | 19.69 | 3 | < 0.001, simulated | 0.36 | None |
| Respondent role | 17.51 | < 0.001 | 10.77 | 2 | 0.005 | 0.12 | Customer Management Executive, n = 2 |
| Vendor type | 13.46 | 0.019 | 9.47 | 5 | 0.092 | 0.11 | None |

Segment families recorded at engagement level were tested on engagement means. Respondent role and vendor type were tested on respondents. Where an expected count fell below 5, the test of the distressed share used Fisher's exact test for a two-by-two table, marked exact, or a Monte Carlo test, marked simulated. After Holm correction, ratings differed by engagement status and lifecycle stage (Welch F 27.02, Holm p < 0.001, omega squared 0.307). Active engagements in Production rated highest (mean 6.0, n = 94 respondents) and canceled engagements lowest (mean 3.6, n = 295 respondents). Ratings also differed by respondent role (Welch F 11.76, Holm p < 0.001, omega squared 0.021). Portfolio directors rated highest (mean 6.4, n = 30 respondents) and individual contributors lowest (mean 4.8, n = 604 respondents). Ratings also differed by vendor type (Welch F 3.11, Holm p = 0.049, omega squared 0.009). Pure-play agentic AI firms rated highest (mean 5.3, n = 71 respondents) and BPO specialists lowest (mean 4.7, n = 182 respondents). Outsourcing model, institution type, process family and class of work showed no difference.

## 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 rated after cancellation. The association is therefore a descriptive contrast and not a forecast of cancellation.

Table 8a. 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 | −0.56 | −0.66 to −0.44 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Outsourcing model | | | | | | | |
| CXM | 42 | 15 | 35.71% of 42 | −0.66 | −0.80 to −0.44 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| ITO | 40 | 15 | 37.50% of 40 | −0.41 | −0.64 to −0.11 | 0.009 | 0.071 |
| BPO | 37 | 14 | 37.84% of 37 | −0.66 | −0.81 to −0.42 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| KPO | 31 | 12 | 38.71% of 31 | −0.51 | −0.73 to −0.19 | 0.004 | 0.040 |
| Institution type | | | | | | | |
| Asset management | 24 | 13 | 54.17% of 24 | −0.65 | † | < 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Wealth management and private banking | 23 | 8 | 34.78% of 23 | −0.62 | † | 0.002 | 0.021 |
| Investment banking (advisory and capital-markets origination) | 19 | 9 | 47.37% of 19 | −0.63 | † | 0.004 | 0.040 |
| Insurance (life, property and casualty, health) | 14 | 5 | 35.71% of 14 | −0.54 | † | 0.044 | 0.178 |
| Commercial and business banking | 13 | 4 | 30.77% of 13 | −0.41 | † | 0.168 | 0.337 |
| Payments and merchant acquiring (networks, acquiring, processing) | 13 | 3 | 23.08% of 13 | −0.32 | † | 0.281 | 0.337 |
| Credit card and payments issuing | 12 | 5 | 41.67% of 12 | −0.78 | † | 0.003 | 0.034 |
| Retail and consumer banking | 12 | 4 | 33.33% of 12 | −0.67 | † | 0.018 | 0.107 |
| Markets and trading (sales and trading, global markets) | 11 | 3 | 27.27% of 11 | −0.64 | † | 0.033 | 0.165 |
| Private equity and private capital | 9 | 2 | 2 of 9 | ‡ | | | |
| Process family | | | | | | | |
| Corporate and back-office functions | 47 | 19 | 40.43% of 47 | −0.62 | −0.77 to −0.40 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Technology engineering and operations | 35 | 10 | 28.57% of 35 | −0.42 | −0.66 to −0.10 | 0.013 | 0.090 |
| Client servicing and communications | 16 | 9 | 56.25% of 16 | −0.67 | † | 0.005 | 0.042 |
| Trade, settlement and reconciliation | 15 | 8 | 53.33% of 15 | −0.75 | † | 0.001 | 0.018 |
| Payments, cards and disputes | 12 | 2 | 16.67% of 12 | −0.50 | † | 0.101 | 0.304 |
| 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 | −0.50 | −0.65 to −0.31 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Corporate Functional | 74 | 26 | 35.14% of 74 | −0.63 | −0.75 to −0.47 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| 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 8b. 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 | 0.36 | 0.26 to 0.51 | 0.85 | 76.00% of 25 | 29.60% of 125 | < 0.001 | 1.000 |
| Outsourcing model | | | | | | | |
| CXM | 0.20 | 0.07 to 0.56 | 0.91 | 6 of 6 | 25.00% of 36 | < 0.001 | 0.999 |
| ITO | 0.50 | 0.28 to 0.89 | 0.77 | 3 of 5 | 34.29% of 35 | 0.345 | 0.775 |
| BPO | 0.28 | 0.13 to 0.65 | 0.89 | 5 of 6 | 29.03% of 31 | 0.021 | 0.997 |
| KPO | 0.43 | 0.23 to 0.82 | 0.81 | 5 of 8 | 30.43% of 23 | 0.206 | 0.906 |
| Institution type | | | | | | | |
| Asset management | 0.18 | † n = 24 | 0.87 | 4 of 4 | 45.00% of 20 | 0.098 | 0.982 |
| Wealth management and private banking | 0.12 | † n = 23 | 0.91 | 2 of 2 | 28.57% of 21 | 0.111 | 0.968 |
| Investment banking (advisory and capital-markets origination) | 0.36 | † n = 19 | 0.84 | 5 of 5 | 28.57% of 14 | 0.011 | 0.958 |
| Insurance (life, property and casualty, health) | 0.38 | † n = 14 | 0.80 | 2 of 3 | 27.27% of 11 | 0.505 | 0.840 |
| Commercial and business banking | 0.48 | † n = 13 | 0.81 | 0 of 1 | 33.33% of 12 | 1.000 | 0.650 |
| Payments and merchant acquiring (networks, acquiring, processing) | 0.67 | † n = 13 | 0.80 | 1 of 3 | 20.00% of 10 | 1.000 | 0.533 |
| Credit card and payments issuing | 0.09 | † n = 12 | 1.00 | 3 of 3 | 2 of 9 | 0.045 | 0.986 |
| Retail and consumer banking | 0.21 | † n = 12 | 0.91 | a | 33.33% of 12 | | 0.932 |
| Markets and trading (sales and trading, global markets) | 0.21 | † n = 11 | 0.92 | 1 of 1 | 20.00% of 10 | 0.273 | 0.900 |
| Private equity and private capital | ‡ n = 9 | | | | | | |
| Process family | | | | | | | |
| Corporate and back-office functions | 0.31 | 0.16 to 0.60 | 0.88 | 8 of 9 | 28.95% of 38 | 0.002 | 0.997 |
| Technology engineering and operations | 0.41 | 0.19 to 0.89 | 0.79 | 1 of 2 | 27.27% of 33 | 0.496 | 0.776 |
| Client servicing and communications | 0.12 | † n = 16 | 0.92 | 2 of 2 | 50.00% of 14 | 0.475 | 0.964 |
| Trade, settlement and reconciliation | 0.00 | † n = 15 | 0.94 | 4 of 4 | 36.36% of 11 | 0.077 | 0.989 |
| Payments, cards and disputes | 0.51 | † n = 12 | 0.90 | 1 of 2 | 10.00% of 10 | 0.318 | 0.759 |
| 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 | 0.48 | 0.33 to 0.70 | 0.80 | 57.14% of 14 | 35.48% of 62 | 0.225 | 0.980 |
| Corporate Functional | 0.21 | 0.10 to 0.43 | 0.90 | 100.00% of 11 | 23.81% of 63 | < 0.001 | 1.000 |
| Engagement status and lifecycle stage | | | | | | | |
| Active, Build-Out | b | | | | | | |
| Active, Transition/Cut-Over | b | | | | | | |
| Active, Production | b | | | | | | |
| Canceled | b | | | | | | |

Note: † Base under 30. No interval is reported. ‡ Base under 10. No statistic is reported. a None in this row. b Not tested: no variation in cancellation.

Across the study set, higher ratings came with less cancellation (r = −0.56, 95% CI −0.66 to −0.44, Holm p < 0.001, n = 150 engagements). The association held after Holm correction in twelve 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 9a. 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 | 0.73 | 0.62 to 0.81 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | 0.74 | < 0.001 |
| Outsourcing model | | | | | | | |
| CXM | 27 | 0.72 | † | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | 0.72 | < 0.001 |
| ITO | 25 | 0.79 | † | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | 0.84 | < 0.001 |
| BPO | 23 | 0.82 | † | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | 0.80 | < 0.001 |
| KPO | 19 | 0.72 | † | < 0.001 | 0.003 | 0.66 | 0.002 |
| Institution type | | | | | | | |
| Asset management | 11 | 0.71 | † | 0.013 | 0.040 | 0.77 | 0.005 |
| Wealth management and private banking | 15 | 0.77 | † | < 0.001 | 0.004 | 0.81 | < 0.001 |
| Investment banking (advisory and capital-markets origination) | 10 | 0.31 | † | 0.382 | 0.382 | 0.21 | 0.555 |
| Insurance (life, property and casualty, health) | 9 | ‡ | | | | | |
| Commercial and business banking | 9 | ‡ | | | | | |
| Payments and merchant acquiring (networks, acquiring, processing) | 10 | 0.80 | † | 0.005 | 0.022 | 0.83 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.79 | † | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | 0.86 | < 0.001 |
| Technology engineering and operations | 25 | 0.74 | † | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | 0.77 | < 0.001 |
| Client servicing and communications | 7 | ‡ | | | | | |
| Trade, settlement and reconciliation | 7 | ‡ | | | | | |
| Payments, cards and disputes | 10 | 0.67 | † | 0.035 | 0.071 | 0.67 | 0.032 |
| Credit, underwriting and suitability | 8 | ‡ | | | | | |
| Regulatory, audit, tax and legal | 5 | ‡ | | | | | |
| Financial crime and client onboarding | 4 | ‡ | | | | | |
| Class of work | | | | | | | |
| LOB Operational | 46 | 0.75 | 0.58 to 0.85 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | 0.75 | < 0.001 |
| Corporate Functional | 48 | 0.71 | 0.54 to 0.83 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | 0.76 | < 0.001 |
| Engagement status and lifecycle stage | | | | | | | |
| Active, Build-Out | 31 | 0.67 | 0.41 to 0.83 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | 0.60 | < 0.001 |
| Active, Transition/Cut-Over | 43 | 0.81 | 0.67 to 0.89 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | 0.82 | < 0.001 |
| Active, Production | 20 | 0.72 | † | < 0.001 | 0.002 | 0.68 | 0.001 |
| 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 9b. 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 | 5.10 | 4.12 to 6.08 | 0.54 | 1.000 | 150 | 0.71 | < 0.001 |
| Outsourcing model | | | | | | | |
| CXM | 6.52 | † n = 27 | 0.51 | 0.998 | 42 | 0.79 | < 0.001 |
| ITO | 4.78 | † n = 25 | 0.63 | 1.000 | 40 | 0.58 | < 0.001 |
| BPO | 4.82 | † n = 23 | 0.68 | 1.000 | 37 | 0.78 | < 0.001 |
| KPO | 5.32 | † n = 19 | 0.52 | 0.992 | 31 | 0.68 | < 0.001 |
| Institution type | | | | | | | |
| Asset management | 3.86 | † n = 11 | 0.51 | 0.952 | 24 | 0.73 | < 0.001 |
| Wealth management and private banking | 5.18 | † n = 15 | 0.59 | 0.992 | 23 | 0.74 | < 0.001 |
| Investment banking (advisory and capital-markets origination) | 3.45 | † n = 10 | 0.10 | 0.512 | 19 | 0.67 | 0.002 |
| Insurance (life, property and casualty, health) | ‡ n = 9 | | | | | | |
| Commercial and business banking | ‡ n = 9 | | | | | | |
| Payments and merchant acquiring (networks, acquiring, processing) | 5.35 | † n = 10 | 0.64 | 0.981 | 13 | 0.62 | 0.024 |
| 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 | 5.71 | † n = 28 | 0.63 | 1.000 | 47 | 0.77 | < 0.001 |
| Technology engineering and operations | 5.38 | † n = 25 | 0.55 | 0.999 | 35 | 0.62 | < 0.001 |
| Client servicing and communications | ‡ n = 7 | | | | | | |
| Trade, settlement and reconciliation | ‡ n = 7 | | | | | | |
| Payments, cards and disputes | 3.35 | † n = 10 | 0.44 | 0.905 | 12 | 0.69 | 0.013 |
| 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 | 5.29 | 3.86 to 6.72 | 0.56 | 1.000 | 76 | 0.66 | < 0.001 |
| Corporate Functional | 4.84 | 3.43 to 6.26 | 0.51 | 1.000 | 74 | 0.76 | < 0.001 |
| Engagement status and lifecycle stage | | | | | | | |
| Active, Build-Out | 3.63 | 2.09 to 5.17 | 0.44 | 0.996 | 31 | 0.67 | < 0.001 |
| Active, Transition/Cut-Over | 6.73 | 5.19 to 8.26 | 0.66 | 1.000 | 43 | 0.81 | < 0.001 |
| Active, Production | 4.72 | † | 0.52 | 0.993 | 20 | 0.72 | < 0.001 |
| 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, higher ratings came with higher customer satisfaction (r = 0.73, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.81, Holm p < 0.001, n = 94 engagements). The association held after Holm correction in fourteen of the 16 segment levels tested.

## 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). The indicator does not enter the mean.

Table 10a. 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 | 0.76 | 0.68 to 0.82 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | 0.76 | < 0.001 |
| Outsourcing model | | | | | | | |
| CXM | 42 | 0.79 | 0.64 to 0.88 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | 0.76 | < 0.001 |
| ITO | 40 | 0.66 | 0.45 to 0.81 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | 0.69 | < 0.001 |
| BPO | 37 | 0.85 | 0.72 to 0.92 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | 0.80 | < 0.001 |
| KPO | 31 | 0.75 | 0.53 to 0.87 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | 0.74 | < 0.001 |
| Institution type | | | | | | | |
| Asset management | 24 | 0.77 | † | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | 0.61 | 0.002 |
| Wealth management and private banking | 23 | 0.75 | † | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | 0.81 | < 0.001 |
| Investment banking (advisory and capital-markets origination) | 19 | 0.62 | † | 0.005 | 0.023 | 0.64 | 0.003 |
| Insurance (life, property and casualty, health) | 14 | 0.84 | † | < 0.001 | 0.002 | 0.79 | < 0.001 |
| Commercial and business banking | 13 | 0.78 | † | 0.002 | 0.010 | 0.82 | < 0.001 |
| Payments and merchant acquiring (networks, acquiring, processing) | 13 | 0.82 | † | < 0.001 | 0.005 | 0.88 | < 0.001 |
| Credit card and payments issuing | 12 | 0.88 | † | < 0.001 | 0.002 | 0.80 | 0.002 |
| Retail and consumer banking | 12 | 0.70 | † | 0.011 | 0.032 | 0.75 | 0.005 |
| Markets and trading (sales and trading, global markets) | 11 | 0.84 | † | 0.001 | 0.009 | 0.75 | 0.008 |
| Private equity and private capital | 9 | ‡ | | | | | |
| Process family | | | | | | | |
| Corporate and back-office functions | 47 | 0.82 | 0.70 to 0.90 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | 0.81 | < 0.001 |
| Technology engineering and operations | 35 | 0.71 | 0.50 to 0.85 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | 0.73 | < 0.001 |
| Client servicing and communications | 16 | 0.82 | † | < 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.70 | 0.002 |
| Trade, settlement and reconciliation | 15 | 0.66 | † | 0.007 | 0.028 | 0.56 | 0.030 |
| Payments, cards and disputes | 12 | 0.69 | † | 0.012 | 0.032 | 0.66 | 0.018 |
| Credit, underwriting and suitability | 9 | ‡ | | | | | |
| Regulatory, audit, tax and legal | 9 | ‡ | | | | | |
| Financial crime and client onboarding | 7 | ‡ | | | | | |
| Class of work | | | | | | | |
| LOB Operational | 76 | 0.70 | 0.56 to 0.80 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | 0.69 | < 0.001 |
| Corporate Functional | 74 | 0.82 | 0.73 to 0.88 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | 0.83 | < 0.001 |
| Engagement status and lifecycle stage | | | | | | | |
| Active, Build-Out | 31 | 0.68 | 0.43 to 0.83 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | 0.65 | < 0.001 |
| Active, Transition/Cut-Over | 43 | 0.69 | 0.50 to 0.82 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | 0.71 | < 0.001 |
| Active, Production | 20 | 0.67 | † | 0.001 | 0.009 | 0.67 | 0.001 |
| Canceled | 56 | 0.32 | 0.06 to 0.54 | 0.017 | 0.032 | 0.28 | 0.035 |

Note: † Base under 30. No interval is reported. ‡ Base under 10. No statistic is reported.Table 10b. Association with the engagement indicator mean by segment, part 2 of 2Table

| Segment | r with indicator included | Change in r | Slope | 95% CI | R squared | TOST p | Equivalent |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Study set | Not a component | | 0.62 | 0.53 to 0.71 | 0.57 | 1.000 | No |
| Outsourcing model | | | | | | | |
| CXM | Not a component | | 0.72 | 0.54 to 0.90 | 0.62 | 1.000 | No |
| ITO | Not a component | | 0.53 | 0.34 to 0.73 | 0.44 | 0.999 | No |
| BPO | Not a component | | 0.55 | 0.43 to 0.67 | 0.72 | 1.000 | No |
| KPO | Not a component | | 0.69 | 0.46 to 0.93 | 0.56 | 1.000 | No |
| Institution type | | | | | | | |
| Asset management | Not a component | | 0.65 | † n = 24 | 0.59 | 0.999 | No |
| Wealth management and private banking | Not a component | | 0.68 | † n = 23 | 0.56 | 0.998 | No |
| Investment banking (advisory and capital-markets origination) | Not a component | | 0.40 | † n = 19 | 0.38 | 0.951 | No |
| Insurance (life, property and casualty, health) | Not a component | | 0.70 | † n = 14 | 0.70 | 0.999 | No |
| Commercial and business banking | Not a component | | 0.79 | † n = 13 | 0.61 | 0.990 | No |
| Payments and merchant acquiring (networks, acquiring, processing) | Not a component | | 0.65 | † n = 13 | 0.67 | 0.996 | No |
| Credit card and payments issuing | Not a component | | 0.49 | † n = 12 | 0.77 | 0.999 | No |
| Retail and consumer banking | Not a component | | 0.66 | † n = 12 | 0.50 | 0.955 | No |
| Markets and trading (sales and trading, global markets) | Not a component | | 0.88 | † n = 11 | 0.71 | 0.995 | No |
| Private equity and private capital | ‡ n = 9 | | | | | | |
| Process family | | | | | | | |
| Corporate and back-office functions | Not a component | | 0.67 | 0.53 to 0.81 | 0.67 | 1.000 | No |
| Technology engineering and operations | Not a component | | 0.64 | 0.42 to 0.87 | 0.51 | 1.000 | No |
| Client servicing and communications | Not a component | | 0.81 | † n = 16 | 0.67 | 0.999 | No |
| Trade, settlement and reconciliation | Not a component | | 0.51 | † n = 15 | 0.44 | 0.956 | No |
| Payments, cards and disputes | Not a component | | 0.39 | † n = 12 | 0.48 | 0.950 | 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 | | 0.57 | 0.43 to 0.70 | 0.48 | 1.000 | No |
| Corporate Functional | Not a component | | 0.67 | 0.56 to 0.78 | 0.68 | 1.000 | No |
| Engagement status and lifecycle stage | | | | | | | |
| Active, Build-Out | Not a component | | 0.41 | 0.24 to 0.57 | 0.46 | 0.997 | No |
| Active, Transition/Cut-Over | Not a component | | 0.55 | 0.37 to 0.73 | 0.48 | 1.000 | No |
| Active, Production | Not a component | | 0.52 | † n = 20 | 0.46 | 0.982 | No |
| Canceled | Not a component | | 0.18 | 0.03 to 0.32 | 0.10 | 0.559 | No |

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

Higher ratings came with a higher engagement indicator mean (r = 0.76, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.82, Holm p < 0.001, n = 150 engagements). The association held after Holm correction in twenty-four of the 24 segment levels tested.

## 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 11a. 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 | 740 | −0.77 | −0.79 to −0.73 | −0.81 to −0.71 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Outsourcing model | | | | | | |
| CXM | 198 | −0.74 | −0.79 to −0.66 | −0.82 to −0.62 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| ITO | 218 | −0.71 | −0.77 to −0.63 | −0.80 to −0.56 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| BPO | 182 | −0.85 | −0.88 to −0.80 | −0.90 to −0.78 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| KPO | 142 | −0.75 | −0.81 to −0.66 | −0.85 to −0.59 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Institution type | | | | | | |
| Asset management | 113 | −0.78 | −0.84 to −0.70 | −0.87 to −0.57 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Wealth management and private banking | 122 | −0.73 | −0.80 to −0.63 | −0.84 to −0.54 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Investment banking (advisory and capital-markets origination) | 92 | −0.68 | −0.78 to −0.55 | −0.85 to −0.44 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Insurance (life, property and casualty, health) | 68 | −0.78 | −0.86 to −0.66 | −0.87 to −0.60 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Commercial and business banking | 68 | −0.65 | −0.77 to −0.49 | −0.82 to −0.42 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Payments and merchant acquiring (networks, acquiring, processing) | 65 | −0.77 | −0.86 to −0.65 | −0.87 to −0.63 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Credit card and payments issuing | 68 | −0.83 | −0.89 to −0.74 | −0.90 to −0.65 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Retail and consumer banking | 59 | −0.81 | −0.88 to −0.69 | −0.90 to −0.61 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Markets and trading (sales and trading, global markets) | 51 | −0.74 | −0.84 to −0.58 | −0.90 to −0.45 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Private equity and private capital | 34 | −0.88 | −0.94 to −0.77 | § n = 9 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Process family | | | | | | |
| Corporate and back-office functions | 213 | −0.79 | −0.84 to −0.74 | −0.86 to −0.68 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Technology engineering and operations | 181 | −0.73 | −0.79 to −0.65 | −0.82 to −0.58 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Client servicing and communications | 81 | −0.71 | −0.80 to −0.58 | −0.84 to −0.41 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Trade, settlement and reconciliation | 70 | −0.78 | −0.86 to −0.67 | −0.88 to −0.63 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Payments, cards and disputes | 64 | −0.86 | −0.91 to −0.78 | −0.91 to −0.74 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Credit, underwriting and suitability | 49 | −0.82 | −0.90 to −0.70 | § n = 9 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Regulatory, audit, tax and legal | 42 | −0.74 | −0.86 to −0.57 | § n = 9 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Financial crime and client onboarding | 40 | −0.67 | −0.81 to −0.46 | § n = 7 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Class of work | | | | | | |
| LOB Operational | 390 | −0.75 | −0.79 to −0.70 | −0.81 to −0.67 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Corporate Functional | 350 | −0.79 | −0.82 to −0.74 | −0.84 to −0.71 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Engagement status and lifecycle stage | | | | | | |
| Active, Build-Out | 156 | −0.81 | −0.86 to −0.75 | −0.87 to −0.72 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Active, Transition/Cut-Over | 223 | −0.80 | −0.84 to −0.75 | −0.86 to −0.71 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Active, Production | 87 | −0.85 | −0.90 to −0.77 | −0.91 to −0.71 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Canceled | 274 | −0.27 | −0.38 to −0.16 | −0.39 to −0.15 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Respondent role | | | | | | |
| Individual Contributor | 559 | −0.77 | −0.80 to −0.73 | −0.81 to −0.71 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Engagement Manager | 150 | −0.78 | −0.84 to −0.71 | −0.84 to −0.72 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Portfolio Director | 30 | −0.70 | −0.85 to −0.46 | −0.87 to −0.44 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Customer Management Executive | 1 | ‡ | | | | |
| Vendor type | | | | | | |
| IT services major | 276 | −0.75 | −0.80 to −0.70 | −0.82 to −0.66 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| BPO specialist | 168 | −0.77 | −0.83 to −0.70 | −0.85 to −0.64 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Consulting firm | 103 | −0.75 | −0.82 to −0.65 | −0.87 to −0.54 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Boutique or specialist provider | 77 | −0.78 | −0.85 to −0.67 | −0.88 to −0.58 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Pure-play agentic AI firm | 68 | −0.84 | −0.90 to −0.75 | −0.91 to −0.71 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Not reported, recovered by engagement | 48 | −0.64 | −0.78 to −0.43 | −0.83 to −0.34 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |

Note: § Too few engagements for a cluster bootstrap interval. ‡ Base under 10. No statistic is reported.Table 11b. 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 | −0.75 | < 0.001 | 97.77% of 179 | 38.50% of 561 | 150 | −0.88 | −0.91 to −0.83 | 1.000 |
| Outsourcing model | | | | | | | | |
| CXM | −0.74 | < 0.001 | 94.44% of 36 | 31.48% of 162 | 42 | −0.85 | −0.92 to −0.74 | 1.000 |
| ITO | −0.67 | < 0.001 | 100.00% of 55 | 44.79% of 163 | 40 | −0.85 | −0.92 to −0.73 | 1.000 |
| BPO | −0.85 | < 0.001 | 98.08% of 52 | 36.92% of 130 | 37 | −0.94 | −0.97 to −0.89 | 1.000 |
| KPO | −0.71 | < 0.001 | 97.22% of 36 | 41.51% of 106 | 31 | −0.83 | −0.92 to −0.68 | 1.000 |
| Institution type | | | | | | | | |
| Asset management | −0.71 | < 0.001 | 96.43% of 28 | 54.12% of 85 | 24 | −0.86 | † | 1.000 |
| Wealth management and private banking | −0.71 | < 0.001 | 95.24% of 21 | 36.63% of 101 | 23 | −0.87 | † | 1.000 |
| Investment banking (advisory and capital-markets origination) | −0.68 | < 0.001 | 100.00% of 32 | 46.67% of 60 | 19 | −0.73 | † | 0.993 |
| Insurance (life, property and casualty, health) | −0.78 | < 0.001 | 94.44% of 18 | 38.00% of 50 | 14 | −0.91 | † | 1.000 |
| Commercial and business banking | −0.67 | < 0.001 | 100.00% of 10 | 36.21% of 58 | 13 | −0.87 | † | 0.999 |
| Payments and merchant acquiring (networks, acquiring, processing) | −0.78 | < 0.001 | 100.00% of 14 | 37.25% of 51 | 13 | −0.89 | † | 1.000 |
| Credit card and payments issuing | −0.80 | < 0.001 | 95.83% of 24 | 34.09% of 44 | 12 | −0.96 | † | 1.000 |
| Retail and consumer banking | −0.83 | < 0.001 | ‡ n = 8 | 25.49% of 51 | 12 | −0.89 | † | 1.000 |
| Markets and trading (sales and trading, global markets) | −0.73 | < 0.001 | 100.00% of 13 | 23.68% of 38 | 11 | −0.91 | † | 1.000 |
| Private equity and private capital | −0.87 | < 0.001 | 100.00% of 11 | 39.13% of 23 | 9 | ‡ | ‡ | |
| Process family | | | | | | | | |
| Corporate and back-office functions | −0.76 | < 0.001 | 94.44% of 54 | 41.51% of 159 | 47 | −0.87 | −0.93 to −0.78 | 1.000 |
| Technology engineering and operations | −0.71 | < 0.001 | 100.00% of 33 | 35.14% of 148 | 35 | −0.85 | −0.92 to −0.72 | 1.000 |
| Client servicing and communications | −0.64 | < 0.001 | 100.00% of 14 | 55.22% of 67 | 16 | −0.85 | † | 1.000 |
| Trade, settlement and reconciliation | −0.80 | < 0.001 | 100.00% of 24 | 52.17% of 46 | 15 | −0.90 | † | 1.000 |
| Payments, cards and disputes | −0.85 | < 0.001 | 100.00% of 14 | 10.00% of 50 | 12 | −0.95 | † | 1.000 |
| Credit, underwriting and suitability | −0.81 | < 0.001 | 91.67% of 12 | 21.62% of 37 | 9 | ‡ | ‡ | |
| Regulatory, audit, tax and legal | −0.75 | < 0.001 | 100.00% of 11 | 48.39% of 31 | 9 | ‡ | ‡ | |
| Financial crime and client onboarding | −0.63 | < 0.001 | 100.00% of 17 | 39.13% of 23 | 7 | ‡ | ‡ | |
| Class of work | | | | | | | | |
| LOB Operational | −0.74 | < 0.001 | 99.03% of 103 | 38.68% of 287 | 76 | −0.87 | −0.92 to −0.80 | 1.000 |
| Corporate Functional | −0.77 | < 0.001 | 96.05% of 76 | 38.32% of 274 | 74 | −0.88 | −0.92 to −0.82 | 1.000 |
| Engagement status and lifecycle stage | | | | | | | | |
| Active, Build-Out | −0.80 | < 0.001 | 92.31% of 13 | 18.88% of 143 | 31 | −0.95 | −0.97 to −0.89 | 1.000 |
| Active, Transition/Cut-Over | −0.78 | < 0.001 | 93.55% of 31 | 17.19% of 192 | 43 | −0.96 | −0.98 to −0.92 | 1.000 |
| Active, Production | −0.80 | < 0.001 | 91.67% of 12 | 6.67% of 75 | 20 | −0.96 | † | 1.000 |
| Canceled | −0.28 | < 0.001 | 100.00% of 123 | 100.00% of 151 | 56 | −0.33 | −0.55 to −0.07 | 0.597 |
| Respondent role | | | | | | | | |
| Individual Contributor | −0.75 | < 0.001 | 97.93% of 145 | 39.13% of 414 | 150 | −0.86 | −0.90 to −0.82 | 1.000 |
| Engagement Manager | −0.77 | < 0.001 | 97.06% of 34 | 36.21% of 116 | 150 | −0.78 | −0.84 to −0.71 | 1.000 |
| Portfolio Director | −0.71 | < 0.001 | ‡ n = 0 | 40.00% of 30 | 30 | −0.70 | −0.85 to −0.46 | 0.998 |
| Customer Management Executive | ‡ n = 1 | | | | | | | |
| Vendor type | | | | | | | | |
| IT services major | −0.73 | < 0.001 | 98.18% of 55 | 40.72% of 221 | 59 | −0.88 | −0.93 to −0.81 | 1.000 |
| BPO specialist | −0.76 | < 0.001 | 96.15% of 52 | 42.24% of 116 | 37 | −0.87 | −0.93 to −0.76 | 1.000 |
| Consulting firm | −0.73 | < 0.001 | 96.00% of 25 | 30.77% of 78 | 23 | −0.83 | † | 1.000 |
| Boutique or specialist provider | −0.77 | < 0.001 | 100.00% of 17 | 41.67% of 60 | 17 | −0.90 | † | 1.000 |
| Pure-play agentic AI firm | −0.84 | < 0.001 | 100.00% of 14 | 27.78% of 54 | 14 | −0.96 | † | 1.000 |
| Not reported, recovered by engagement | −0.68 | < 0.001 | 100.00% of 16 | 40.63% of 32 | 40 | −0.64 | −0.79 to −0.41 | 0.997 |

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

Respondents who gave higher ratings reported lower intent to leave (r = −0.77, 95% CI −0.79 to −0.73, Holm p < 0.001, n = 740 respondents). The association held after Holm correction in thirty-seven of the 37 segment levels tested.

## Comparison of Associations Across the Four Measures

Table 12. 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 | −0.56 | −0.66 to −0.44 | < 0.001 | No | 4 |
| Customer satisfaction | Clean estimate | Engagement | 94 | 0.73 | 0.62 to 0.81 | < 0.001 | No | 3 |
| Engagement indicator mean | Full | Engagement | 150 | 0.76 | 0.68 to 0.82 | < 0.001 | No | 2 |
| Intent to leave | Respondent level, clustered | Respondent | 740 | −0.77 | −0.81 to −0.71 | < 0.001 | No | 1 |

Table 13. Pairwise comparison of associationsTable

| Pair compared | Difference in r | Steiger z | p | Holm p | Reading |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Cancellation rate and customer satisfaction | −0.15 | −6.68 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | Differed |
| Cancellation rate and engagement indicator mean | −0.19 | −4.50 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | Differed |
| Cancellation rate and intent to leave | −0.32 | −10.44 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | Differed |
| Customer satisfaction and engagement indicator mean | −0.05 | −1.62 | 0.106 | 0.106 | Did not differ |
| Customer satisfaction and intent to leave | −0.17 | −8.33 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | Differed |
| Engagement indicator mean and intent to leave | −0.12 | −5.20 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | Differed |

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, five of the six pairs differed. The association with intent to leave was the strongest and the association with cancellation the weakest. The associations with customer satisfaction and the engagement indicator mean did not differ (Holm p = 0.106).

## Clustering and Effective Sample Size

Table 14. Clustering and effective sample sizeTable

| Statistic | Value | Reading |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Clusters (engagements) | 150 | Engagements with one or more answers. |
| Mean respondents per engagement | 5.2 | Answers per engagement, among engagements with one or more answers. |
| ICC(1) | 0.61 | Share of the variance that lies between engagements. |
| Design effect | 3.58 | One plus the product of the ICC and the mean cluster size less one. |
| Nominal respondent n | 786 | Respondents who answered. |
| Effective n | 220 | Nominal n divided by the design effect. |
| Cluster bootstrap applied | Yes | Applied to every respondent-level interval where the ICC is 0.05 or above. |

Answers clustered within engagements (ICC 0.61). Clustering reduced the 786 respondent answers to the equivalent of about 220 independent answers. Respondent-level intervals therefore used the cluster bootstrap. Respondent-level tests of intent to leave used standard errors that allow for clustering by engagement.

## Equivalence Tests of Null Results

Table 15. 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 | −0.56 | \|r\| < 0.30 | 1.000 | < 0.001 | No | 0.96 | 0.23 | 0.23 |
| Customer satisfaction | 94 | 0.73 | \|r\| < 0.30 | < 0.001 | 1.000 | No | 0.84 | 0.29 | 0.23 |
| Engagement indicator mean | 150 | 0.76 | \|r\| < 0.30 | < 0.001 | 1.000 | No | 0.96 | 0.23 | 0.23 |
| Intent to leave | 740, effective 206 | −0.77 | \|r\| < 0.30 | 1.000 | < 0.001 | No | 0.99 | 0.19 | 0.23 |

No association was equivalent to zero. Each of the four differed from zero. The detection floor shown is the study floor at 150 engagements. Intent to leave was tested on its effective sample size.

## Robustness Checks

Table 16. Robustness checksTable

| Check | Measure | Primary r | Check r | 95% CI | Change | Conclusion holds |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Rank correlation in place of Pearson | Cancellation rate | −0.56 | −0.59 | a | −0.02 | Yes |
| Rank correlation in place of Pearson | Customer satisfaction | 0.73 | 0.74 | a | 0.01 | Yes |
| Rank correlation in place of Pearson | Engagement indicator mean | 0.76 | 0.76 | a | 0.00 | Yes |
| Rank correlation in place of Pearson | Intent to leave | −0.77 | −0.75 | a | 0.01 | Yes |
| Non-answers excluded, then imputed at the engagement mean | Intent to leave | −0.77 | −0.76 | a | 0.00 | Yes |
| Active engagements only | Engagement indicator mean | 0.76 | 0.67 | 0.55 to 0.77 | −0.08 | Yes |
| Active engagements only | Intent to leave | −0.77 | −0.81 | −0.84 to −0.78 | −0.05 | Yes |
| Most influential engagement removed (largest Cook's distance) | Cancellation rate | −0.56 | −0.58 | −0.68 to −0.47 | −0.02 | Yes |
| Most influential engagement removed (largest Cook's distance) | Customer satisfaction | 0.73 | 0.76 | 0.65 to 0.83 | 0.02 | Yes |
| Most influential engagement removed (largest Cook's distance) | Engagement indicator mean | 0.76 | 0.76 | 0.69 to 0.82 | 0.01 | Yes |
| Most influential engagement removed (largest Cook's distance) | Intent to leave | −0.77 | −0.76 | −0.79 to −0.73 | 0.00 | Yes |
| Engagements weighted by respondent count | Cancellation rate | −0.56 | −0.56 | a | 0.00 | Yes |
| Engagements weighted by respondent count | Customer satisfaction | 0.73 | 0.73 | a | 0.00 | Yes |
| Engagements weighted by respondent count | Engagement indicator mean | 0.76 | 0.75 | a | 0.00 | Yes |
| Bootstrap of engagements | Cancellation rate | −0.56 | −0.56 | −0.65 to −0.46 | 0.00 | Yes |
| Bootstrap of engagements | Customer satisfaction | 0.73 | 0.73 | 0.64 to 0.81 | 0.00 | Yes |
| Bootstrap of engagements | Engagement indicator mean | 0.76 | 0.76 | 0.69 to 0.82 | 0.00 | Yes |
| Bootstrap of engagements | Intent to leave | −0.77 | −0.76 | −0.81 to −0.71 | 0.00 | Yes |
| Thin-base segments removed | Cancellation rate | −0.56 | −0.55 | −0.68 to −0.38 | 0.02 | Yes |
| Thin-base segments removed | Customer satisfaction | 0.73 | 0.76 | 0.61 to 0.85 | 0.02 | Yes |
| Thin-base segments removed | Engagement indicator mean | 0.76 | 0.78 | 0.68 to 0.86 | 0.03 | Yes |
| Thin-base segments removed | Intent to leave | −0.77 | −0.77 | −0.80 to −0.72 | 0.00 | 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. Where the primary test falls below 0.05, the check must also keep the sign of the primary correlation. The thin-base check removes the engagements in any level of outsourcing model or process family with fewer than 30 engagements. Institution type is not used for that check, because every one of its levels has fewer than 30 engagements.

## 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 17. Comparison with the study normTable

| Measure | The indicator, oriented r | Study median, oriented r | Deviation | Fisher z | p | Holm p |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Cancellation rate | 0.56 | 0.60 | −0.03 | −0.62 | 0.534 | 1.000 |
| Customer satisfaction | 0.71 | 0.72 | −0.01 | −0.26 | 0.798 | 1.000 |
| Engagement indicator mean | 0.76 | 0.84 | −0.08 | −2.70 | 0.007 | 0.021 |
| Intent to leave | 0.88 | 0.71 | 0.17 | 5.88 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Spread of deviations | | | 0.25 | | | |
| 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 the engagement indicator mean and intent to leave. Its association was stronger than the norm on intent to leave. Its association was weaker than the norm on the engagement indicator mean.

## Co-Occurring Indicators and Themes

Figure 3. Other indicators and themes in the same written responses (n = 6 responses)ExhibitNote: Themes carry no score. Labels give counts. C018: “How happy are you with your current job?” C123: “Rate the adequacy of your employer's investment in training its workforce.” C021: “How likely are members of your current team to leave their jobs in the next 12 months?” C040: “How many people are on the vendor team for this engagement today?” C084: “My manager cares about the larger team.” C125: “Rate how well your employer's training programs build financial industry knowledge.”

The responses also addressed C018, on job happiness, and C123, on the employer's investment in training, twice each, and C021, C040, C084 and C125 once each. Three themes appeared once each, among them “Raised it, nothing came back”.

## Interpretation of the Data

About a quarter of all ratings of whether the employer cares about the respondent fell in the distressed range (192 of 786 answers, 24.43%). The rating was associated with all four study measures, and every association held under each of the 22 robustness checks. Canceled engagements rated well below the three active stages (mean 3.6, n = 295 respondents).

The written responses are anecdotes. They describe care by the employer as attention: training, someone who listens, a known name and a discussed career path, and its absence as being left alone with the work.

## 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.

Tests by respondent role and by vendor type treated respondents as independent. The section on clustering reports how far clustering within engagements reduced the information in respondent-level figures.

Customer management executives gave 2 answers, a base of anecdote strength.

Counts of written responses describe the respondents who wrote and not the study set of respondents. With six responses, the written evidence supports counts only and no statistic.

## Definitions

Table 18. DefinitionsTable

| Term | Definition |
| --- | --- |
| Response scale | Ratings run from 1 to 10, from the worst outcome a respondent can report to the best. |
| Distressed | A rating of 3 or below. At engagement level, an engagement mean of 3 or below. |
| Answering base | Respondents who gave a rating from 1 to 10. |
| Non-answers | “I do not know” and “I prefer to not answer” are counted separately and excluded from the mean. |
| Indicator class | Respondent level: a value recorded for each respondent and computed across the respondents who answered. |
| Failure category | The five failure categories of the Study Taxonomy apply only to the rated indicators. The indicator is not a rated indicator and carries none. |
| Engagement indicator mean | The mean of an engagement's ratings across the rated indicators. The indicator does not enter it. |
| Written response | A written answer about the respondent's own engagement that addresses the indicator. Non-answers and answers about another engagement are excluded. |
| Primary and secondary | A primary response answered the written-answer question of the indicator's survey section. A secondary response answered a question in another section and addressed the indicator in its content. |
| Written sentiment score | Each written response carries one of five scores: −10, −5, neutral, +5 or +10. The sign records whether the response described the state of the indicator as harmful or helpful to the engagement. The magnitude records its strength. A score of −10 marks a statement of totality, constancy or serious harm. |
| Cluster bootstrap | An interval computed by resampling engagements rather than responses, so that the responses from one engagement stay together. |
| Anecdote strength | A base under 10, reported as counts only. |

## Sources and Provenance

Table 19. Sources and provenanceTable

| Source | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Study data | Study Data.xlsx, Data sheet, column C087, sha256 219eba0457274d04 |
| Statistics engine | compute_statistics.py, sha256 738319eef764602b |
| Statistics record | Computed Statistics.json, record C087, sha256 1ae50a3637fc9370 |
| Computed | October 13, 2026, 04:57 UTC |
| Template | Indicator Template v2, version 2.0 of 10 October 2026 |
| Figures placed by script | 2,798 |
| Written responses | Quotes Master.jsonl, sha256 27da38085e2b13fd |
| Written sentiment scores | Quote Coding Rulebook, version 0.6, with section 21 |
| Written-response computation | qa_stats.py, sha256 74a61f3a96169da9. wfacts.py, sha256 b85fae20adf812a1. build_indicator.py, sha256 a97ad6e74627e11e |
| Written-response records | C087.qa.json, sha256 ac925e7cabf38d23. C087.wfacts.json, sha256 bdbd71edff0321d8. Hand-written text handcraft/C087.json, sha256 239a7ab37dde15fc |