Is Canceled?

The cancellation flag recorded a study set mean (mean 0.4, median 0.0, n = 150 engagements). This block is cancellation itself, so its cancellation cell was an identity by construction (r = 1.00). The clean estimate for customer satisfaction could not be computed, because it ran inside active engagements and no active engagement was canceled. Canceled engagements carried a lower engagement indicator mean (r = −0.72, 95% CI −0.79 to −0.63, p < 0.001, n = 150 engagements). Respondents on canceled engagements reported higher intent to leave (r = 0.76, cluster bootstrap 95% CI 0.70 to 0.81, p < 0.001, n = 798 respondents). Cancellation did not differ after Holm control by outsourcing model, institution type, process family, or class of work (Holm p 0.449 or higher in every family).

The value was recorded once per engagement, so every figure in this section counts out of 150 engagements. The mean was 0.4 and the median was 0.0, on 150 engagements.

Figures are engagement level. Means are on the scale as recorded. A level under 30 prints no interval and a level under 10 prints counts only.

Engagement families were tested on engagement means, and respondent role and vendor type were tested on respondents. A distressed p marked exact is a Fisher exact test for a two by two table, and one marked simulated is a Monte Carlo test run until its p is stable to the third decimal, both used where an expected count is under 5. No difference held after Holm control for outsourcing model, institution type, process family and class of work.

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.

This block is the measure itself, so its association with the measure is an identity, 1.00 by construction, in every segment, and not a finding.

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 study set association could not be computed: one side is constant across the paired values.

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 study set r was −0.72 (95% CI −0.79 to −0.63, Holm p < 0.001, n = 150 engagements). Of the 20 tested segment levels, 17 held after Holm control.

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 study set r was 0.76 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.79, Holm p < 0.001, n = 798 respondents). Of the 24 tested segment levels, 24 held after Holm control.

Pairs were compared on the engagement level form of every measure, each turned so that a higher value was the better outcome, on the 150 engagements where the indicator and all four measures existed. Of the 3 pairs, 3 differed after Holm control.

Not applicable. The field was recorded once per engagement, so every respondent in an engagement shared one value.

No measure showed a tested null. No result was inconclusive. The detection floor column is the study floor at 150 engagements.

Each change was computed before rounding, so it can differ by 0.01 from the difference of the two printed values.

Rows for cancellation rate are left out because this indicator is that measure (V15-R21). Every computable check held. 2 checks could not be computed, as the table shows. A check holds when its test lands on the same side of 0.05 as the primary test and, where the primary test is below 0.05, its r keeps the primary sign. Thin-base rule: engagements in any level under 30 engagements of outsourcing model or process family removed. Institution type is not used, because every one of its levels is under 30.

The measure against itself is 1 by construction and is not a finding. The other three were computed from other data.

Not applicable. A measure has no profile against itself.

Every robustness check that could be computed held on this measure (9 of 11 checks, 2 not computable). Cancellation came with a lower engagement indicator mean (r = −0.72, 95% CI −0.79 to −0.63, p < 0.001, n = 150 engagements) and higher intent to leave (r = 0.76, cluster bootstrap 95% CI 0.70 to 0.81, p < 0.001, n = 798 respondents).

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.

Segment levels at anecdote strength were Private equity and private capital, Credit, underwriting and suitability, Regulatory, audit, tax and legal, and Financial crime and client onboarding (n = 9, n = 9, n = 9, n = 7). Part of the robustness checks could not be computed on this measure (9 of 11 checks, 2 not computable).