Source: https://akholi.com/outsourcing-2026-agentic-ai-tier-1-banks/part-2-five-failure-categories/
Author: Phil Hatch
Publisher: Akholi

The Five Failure Categories

The 2026 Report · Part 2

# The Five Failure Categories

Separate indicator analysis across the five failure categories

By Phil Hatch · Akholi · Version 1.8.2

Complete study · PDFPart 2 · PDFStudy overview / Part 2

Financial institution readiness, co-management, and vendor capability received less favorable ratings than AI technology and the third-party ecosystem. The written accounts distinguish the delivery constraints behind these assessments without establishing independent causes of engagement outcomes. The survey asked each respondent to rate 100 indicators of the engagement, 20 in each of five failure categories. Financial institution readiness covers the financial institution's data, systems, processes, staff, management of the engagement, and business case. Co-management covers the structures through which the two firms governed the engagement together. Vendor capability covers the vendor's leadership, commercial model, methods, knowledge, and talent. AI technology covers the reliability, control, and observability of the agentic AI tools. The third-party ecosystem covers the outside providers, interfaces, and data feeds on which the agents depended.

A distressed rating in this Part is 3 or below on the favorable-direction 10-point scale. The section “Comparative Standing of the Five Failure Categories” compares their means and distressed shares. The sections “Financial Institution Readiness” through “Third-Party Ecosystem” distinguish the underlying constructs and written evidence.

The 100 indicators also shared a broad pattern of outcome associations. Section 2 of “Comparative Standing of the Five Failure Categories” reports the coefficient ranges and sensitivity results. This consistency must be interpreted alongside their substantial shared variance.

None of the 300 indicator-specific partial tests remained significant after multiplicity adjustment (Part 1). The indicator evidence distinguishes reported practices without assigning an independent causal effect to an indicator or ranking its importance from an unadjusted coefficient.

Governance indicators remain in their respective categories. Part 3 synthesizes their implications for control design and oversight, with cross-references to the detailed results here.

> These questions assume there were two firms managing something jointly. There was my team, and there was a document-control group that changed its contact three times in four months. Being asked to score how well we did it together does not fit what actually happened here.” ENGAGEMENT MANAGER · BPO, Corporate and back-office functions

## In this paper

01Comparative Standing of the Five Failure Categories02Financial Institution Readiness03Co-Management04Vendor Capability05AI Technology06Third-Party Ecosystem


## Links to related study evidence

- [Financial institution readiness](https://akholi.com/outsourcing-2026-agentic-ai-tier-1-banks/part-2-five-failure-categories/financial-institution-readiness/)
- [co-management](https://akholi.com/outsourcing-2026-agentic-ai-tier-1-banks/part-2-five-failure-categories/co-management/)
- [vendor capability](https://akholi.com/outsourcing-2026-agentic-ai-tier-1-banks/part-2-five-failure-categories/vendor-capability/)
- [AI technology](https://akholi.com/outsourcing-2026-agentic-ai-tier-1-banks/part-2-five-failure-categories/ai-technology/)
- [third-party ecosystem](https://akholi.com/outsourcing-2026-agentic-ai-tier-1-banks/part-2-five-failure-categories/third-party-ecosystem/)
- [Part 1](https://akholi.com/outsourcing-2026-agentic-ai-tier-1-banks/part-1-engagement-outcomes/)
- [Part 3](https://akholi.com/outsourcing-2026-agentic-ai-tier-1-banks/part-3-governance-oversight-control/)