What is the customer’s approximate total asset size, in USD?

Respondents most often placed the financial institution’s total assets in the second-highest asset band (90 of 242 respondents, 37.19%) and least often in the highest band (35 of 242 respondents, 14.46%). Cancellation could not be compared across asset bands (fewer than two answer levels with at least 10 engagements). Customer satisfaction could not be compared either (fewer than two answer levels with at least 10 engagements). The engagement indicator mean comparison was also not computable (fewer than two answer levels with at least 10 engagements). Intent to leave could not be compared across asset bands either (fewer than two answer levels with at least 10 engagements). The answer mix differed after Holm control by vendor type only (chi-square 32.58, Holm p 0.027, Cramer’s V 0.21).

A categorical answer has no engagement mean. Each engagement took its respondents’ plurality answer, and tied engagements were left out. An answer was assigned to 115 of 150 engagements.

Distressed is not applicable, because the answer has no good or bad end on a scale.

Shares are of the answered respondents in each row, which is the base beside them. A row under 10 prints counts in place of shares.

Engagement families were tested on engagement answers, and respondent role and vendor type were tested on respondents. Vendor type differed in the answer mix after Holm control (chi-square 32.58, Holm p 0.027, Cramer’s V 0.21). No difference held after Holm control for outsourcing model, class of work, engagement status and lifecycle stage and respondent role.

The share of engagements canceled on the study date, measured at engagement level (base 150 engagements, 56 canceled). The association is a descriptive contrast, inflated because canceled engagements were rated after cancellation, and is not predictive.

The measure by the engagement’s assigned answer.

The test across answer levels, in the study set and inside each segment. Levels under 10 engagements were left out of each test.

The study set test could not be computed: fewer than two answer levels with at least 10 engagements.

The satisfaction score recorded against each engagement on a 100-point scale. The primary estimate uses the 94 active engagements. A descriptive contrast uses all 150 engagements.

The measure by the engagement’s assigned answer.

The test across answer levels, in the study set and inside each segment. Levels under 10 engagements were left out of each test.

The study set test could not be computed: fewer than two answer levels with at least 10 engagements.

The mean of an engagement’s 100 indicator ratings, measured at engagement level (base 150 engagements). Where this indicator is one of the 100, the mean is recomputed without it.

The measure by the engagement’s assigned answer.

The test across answer levels, in the study set and inside each segment. Levels under 10 engagements were left out of each test.

The study set test could not be computed: fewer than two answer levels with at least 10 engagements.

The respondent’s stated likelihood of leaving the current job within 12 months, rated 1 to 10 (C019). Measured at respondent level on up to 798 respondents, with the engagement-level form reported alongside.

The measure by the engagement’s assigned answer.

The test across answer levels, in the study set and inside each segment. Levels under 10 engagements were left out of each test.

The study set test could not be computed: fewer than two answer levels with at least 10 engagements.

Steiger’s z compares two correlations, and a categorical answer yields an effect size across levels rather than a correlation, so the pairs are not tested.

Clustering reduced the 576 respondent answers to about 429 independent answers. Respondent level intervals therefore used the cluster bootstrap, and respondent level tests on intent to leave used cluster-robust errors.

The bound is the ruled |r| < 0.30 expressed as variance explained (V15-R22). No equivalence test could be computed.

No check could be computed, as the table shows. A check holds when its test lands on the same side of 0.05 as the primary test.

Each of the four measures was computed from data this indicator does not contain, so each result is a finding rather than an arithmetic consequence.

Not applicable. A categorical item has no signed correlation, so it has no profile. Its per-level means carry the comparison.

Answers in the lowest asset band (55 of 242 respondents, 22.73%) and the band above it (62 of 242 respondents, 25.62%) were close in size. Asset size, as respondents reported it, could not be set against any of the four study measures.

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.

Tests across respondent role and vendor type were run at respondent level and treated respondents as independent. The section Clustering and Effective Sample Size states whether, and by how much, clustering within engagements reduced the information in respondent level figures.

The robustness checks on this item could not be computed, because too few asset bands held enough engagements (0 of 9 checks, 9 not computable). Plurality assignment placed an asset band on only part of the engagements (115 of 150 engagements).