Study Data · Part 1 · Indicator Deep-Dive Analysis

The three remaining measures among the engagements not canceled: 94 active engagements

Indicator ANALYSIS:active_engagements · By Phil Hatch · Akholi · October 9, 2026

Indicator Specification

Table 1. Indicator specificationTable
FieldValue
Indicator codeNone, a derived analysis
Question as askedThe three remaining measures among the engagements not canceled: 94 active engagements
Failure categoryNot one of the 100 rated indicators
Place in the surveyNot a survey item
Indicator classDerived from other indicators
Indicator typeDerived analysis
Response scaleNot applicable, a derived analysis
Answering baseAs stated in Analysis Results
Non-answersNot applicable

Summary of Findings

The three remaining measures moved together on the 94 active engagements. Higher customer satisfaction came with a higher engagement indicator mean (r = 0.84, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.89). Customer satisfaction fell as intent to leave rose (r = −0.73, 95% CI −0.81 to −0.62). A higher engagement indicator mean came with lower intent to leave (r = −0.69, 95% CI −0.78 to −0.57). Cancellation likelihood, as respondents rated it, rose as customer satisfaction fell (r = −0.66, 95% CI −0.76 to −0.52). Of the 94 rated active engagements, 19 were at high and 39 at moderate cancellation likelihood.

Analysis Results

The figures in this section were computed for the study and placed by code from the statistics record.

Table 2. Analysis resultsTable
ItemValue
Unit of analysisEngagement
Active engagements94

Pairs of measures.

Table 3a. Analysis results: pairs of measures, part 1 of 2Table
MeasuresnrR squared95% CI
Customer satisfaction and engagement indicator mean940.840.710.77 to 0.89
Customer satisfaction and intent to leave94−0.730.54−0.81 to −0.62
Engagement indicator mean and intent to leave94−0.690.48−0.78 to −0.57
Cancellation likelihood (C039) and customer satisfaction94−0.660.43−0.76 to −0.52
Table 3b. Analysis results: pairs of measures, part 2 of 2Table
MeasurestdfpTOST pEquivalent to zeroPower at the observed effectSmallest detectable r (MDE)
Customer satisfaction and engagement indicator mean14.9592< 0.0011.000No1.000.29
Customer satisfaction and intent to leave−10.3292< 0.0011.000No1.000.29
Engagement indicator mean and intent to leave−9.1392< 0.0011.000No1.000.29
Cancellation likelihood (C039) and customer satisfaction−8.3592< 0.0011.000No1.000.29

Cancellation likelihood among active engagements (C039).

Table 4. Analysis results: cancellation likelihood among active engagements (C039)Table
ItemValue
Rulea
Active engagements rated94
High risk19
Moderate risk39
Low risk36
Active engagements not rated0
Canceled or at risk114
Canceled or at risk, share76.00% of 150
Note: a WS-09: engagement mean of C039 among active engagements, high 7 or above, moderate 5 to below 7.

Distribution of Recorded Values

This block is a derived analysis. Its own results are in Analysis Results. The blocks of its input indicators carry the response distribution of each input.

Descriptive Statistics by Segment

This block is a derived analysis. Its own results are in Analysis Results. The blocks of its input indicators carry the segment breakdown of each input.

Tests of Difference Between Segments

This block is a derived analysis. Its own results are in Analysis Results. The blocks of its input indicators carry the tests across segments for each input.

Association with Cancellation Rate

This block is a derived analysis. Its own results are in Analysis Results. The blocks of its input indicators carry each input’s association with this measure.

Association with Customer Satisfaction

This block is a derived analysis. Its own results are in Analysis Results. The blocks of its input indicators carry each input’s association with this measure.

Association with the Engagement Indicator Mean

This block is a derived analysis. Its own results are in Analysis Results. The blocks of its input indicators carry each input’s association with this measure.

Association with Intent to Leave

This block is a derived analysis. Its own results are in Analysis Results. The blocks of its input indicators carry each input’s association with this measure.

Comparison of Associations Across the Four Measures

This block is a derived analysis. Its own results are in Analysis Results. The blocks of its input indicators carry each input’s comparison across the four measures.

Clustering and Effective Sample Size

This block is a derived analysis. Its own results are in Analysis Results. The blocks of its input indicators carry the clustering of each input.

Equivalence Tests of Null Results

This block is a derived analysis. Its own results are in Analysis Results. The blocks of its input indicators carry each input’s equivalence test.

Robustness Checks

This block is a derived analysis. Its own results are in Analysis Results. The blocks of its input indicators carry each input’s robustness checks.

Measure Independence and Part-Whole Correction

This block is a derived analysis. Its own results are in Analysis Results. The blocks of its input indicators carry each input’s identity check.

Comparison with the Study Norm

This block is a derived analysis. Its own results are in Analysis Results. The blocks of its input indicators carry each input’s profile.

Interpretation of the Data

Canceled or at risk engagements numbered 114 in all (76.00% of 150). Customer satisfaction and the engagement indicator mean overlapped most among the active engagements (R squared 0.71).

Limitations

The evidence is reported experience: what the delivery team said about its own engagement, gathered in one cross-section. The figures showed associations, not causes. Indicators about the financial institution were reported at second hand by vendor staff. Cancellation is a descriptive contrast, because canceled engagements were rated after they ended.

Cancellation likelihood on active engagements came from respondents’ ratings on C039 under the rule printed in Analysis Results, so the at-risk count reflected what vendor staff expected rather than cancellations that occurred.

Definitions

Table 5. DefinitionsTable
TermDefinition
Indicator classDerived from other indicators: computed by the study from other recorded fields, as Analysis Results sets out.
Failure categoryOne of the five failure categories of the Study Taxonomy, section 3. Only the 100 rated indicators carry one, and the indicator is not among them.
DirectionEach result is read in the direction of the measure it reports.
Engagement indicator meanThe mean of an engagement’s 100 indicator ratings.

Sources and Provenance

Table 6. Sources and provenanceTable
ItemValue
Study dataStudy Data.xlsx, sha256 219eba0457274d04
Statistics enginecompute_statistics.py, sha256 738319eef764602b
Statistics recordComputed Statistics.json, record ANALYSIS:active_engagements, sha256 e405f65a43e37a6e
ComputedOctober 8, 2026, 01:38 UTC
TemplateIndicator Statistical Analysis Template, version 1.1 of 2026-10-06
Figures placed by script72 of 72

Continue the report

Executive summary →
Overview

Executive Summary

Four findings from 150 engagements

Read →
Introduction

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

Appendices

Definitions, indicator inventory, method, and disclosures

Read →
Data

Study Data

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

Read →