Does the customer operate its own global capability centers?

A majority of respondents reported that the financial institution operated its own global capability centers (190 of 349 respondents, 54.44%), and the rest reported that it did not (159 of 349 respondents, 45.56%). Cancellation did not differ between Yes and No answers (chi-square 0.60, p 0.439, Cramer’s V 0.09, n = 78 engagements), with I do not know left out of the test (n = 40 engagements). Customer satisfaction on active engagements did not differ between Yes and No answers (Welch F 2.15, p 0.148, omega squared 0.020, n = 53 engagements), with I do not know left out (n = 22 engagements). The engagement indicator mean did not differ between Yes and No answers (Welch F 0.14, p 0.711, omega squared −0.011, n = 78 engagements), with I do not know left out (n = 40 engagements). Intent to leave did not differ between Yes and No answers (Welch F 0.02, p 0.892, omega squared −0.013, n = 78 engagements), with I do not know left out (n = 40 engagements). The answer mix did not differ after Holm control by any segment family (Holm p 1.000 in every family).

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 118 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. No difference held after Holm control for outsourcing model, institution type, process family, class of work, engagement status and lifecycle stage, respondent role and vendor type.

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.

Cancellation in the study set did not differ across answer levels (chi-square 0.60, p 0.439, n = 78 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 measure in the study set did not differ across answer levels (Welch F 2.15, p 0.148, n = 53 engagements). The clean estimate ran inside active engagements only.

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 measure in the study set did not differ across answer levels (Welch F 0.14, p 0.711, n = 78 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 measure in the study set did not differ across answer levels (Welch F 0.02, p 0.892, n = 78 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 596 respondent answers to about 372 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). Equivalent to zero: cancellation rate, engagement indicator mean and intent to leave.

Every check held. 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.

Engagements answering Yes were canceled at a share (35.56% canceled, n = 45 engagements) close to engagements answering No (27.27% canceled, n = 33 engagements). Engagement indicator means for Yes (mean 4.1, n = 45 engagements) and No (mean 4.0, n = 33 engagements) were nearly level. The results held under every robustness check run on this item (9 of 9 checks).

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.

Each engagement took its answer from the plurality answer of its respondents, with ties left out (118 of 150 engagements).