Study Data · Part 4 · Indicator Deep-Dive Analysis

PD Respondent Count

Indicator ENG:PD_Respondent_Count · By Phil Hatch · Akholi · October 9, 2026

← Study Data ← Previous indicator Next indicator →

Indicator Specification Summary of Findings Distribution of Recorded Values Descriptive Statistics by Segment Tests of Difference Between Segments Association with Cancellation Rate Association with Customer Satisfaction Association with the Engagement Indicator Mean Association with Intent to Leave Comparison of Associations Across the Four Measures Clustering and Effective Sample Size Equivalence Tests of Null Results Robustness Checks Measure Independence and Part-Whole Correction Comparison with the Study Norm Interpretation of the Data Limitations Definitions Sources and Provenance

Indicator Specification

Table 1. Indicator specificationTable

Field	Value
Indicator code	None, an engagement field
Question as asked	PD Respondent Count
Failure category	Not one of the 100 rated indicators
Place in the survey	Not a survey item
Indicator class	Engagement attribute
Indicator type	Engagement attribute, typed number
Response scale	A number, as typed or recorded
Answering base	150 engagements
Non-answers	None, the value is recorded for every engagement

Summary of Findings

Table 2. Key results: association of the indicator with the four study measuresTable

Measure	Form	n	r	95% CI	p
Cancellation rate	Descriptive contrast	150 engagements	−0.09	−0.24 to 0.07	0.286
Customer satisfaction	Clean estimate	94 engagements	−0.05	−0.25 to 0.16	0.661
Engagement indicator mean	Full	150 engagements	0.06	−0.10 to 0.22	0.471
Intent to leave	Respondent level, clustered	798 respondents	−0.06	−0.22 to 0.10	0.466

The Engagements sheet records, for each engagement, the number of its respondents who were portfolio directors. The count was one on 31 of the 150 engagements (20.67%) and zero on the other 119 (n = 150 engagements). No engagement had more than one portfolio director among its respondents.

The count was not associated with any of the four study measures, and each association was equivalent to zero: cancellation (r = −0.09, 95% CI −0.24 to 0.07, p = 0.286, n = 150 engagements), customer satisfaction among active engagements (r = −0.05, 95% CI −0.25 to 0.16, p = 0.661, n = 94 engagements), the engagement indicator mean (r = 0.06, 95% CI −0.10 to 0.22, p = 0.471, n = 150 engagements) and intent to leave (r = −0.06, cluster bootstrap 95% CI −0.22 to 0.10, p = 0.466 with standard errors clustered by engagement, n = 798 respondents). No segment family differed after Holm correction, and every robustness check held.

Distribution of Recorded Values

Table 3. Distribution of recorded valuesTable

Value	Engagements	Share of engagements (base 150)	Cumulative share
0.0 to 0.1	119	79.33%	79.33%
0.1 to 0.2	0	0.00%	79.33%
0.2 to 0.3	0	0.00%	79.33%
0.3 to 0.4	0	0.00%	79.33%
0.4 to 0.5	0	0.00%	79.33%
0.5 to 0.6	0	0.00%	79.33%
0.6 to 0.7	0	0.00%	79.33%
0.7 to 0.8	0	0.00%	79.33%
0.8 to 0.9	0	0.00%	79.33%
0.9 to 1.0	31	20.67%	100.00%
Total	150	100.00%

Table 4. Recorded values, engagement level summaryTable

Engagement level summary	Engagements	Mean	SD	Min	Median	Max
Values as recorded	150	0.2	0.4	0.0	0.0	1.0

The count is a whole number recorded once for each engagement, and no distressed range applies. The table groups values in bands of one tenth, so only the lowest band, holding the value zero, and the highest, holding the value one, contain engagements. The count therefore divides the engagements into those with a portfolio director among the respondents and those without.

Descriptive Statistics by Segment

Table 5a. Descriptive statistics by segment, part 1 of 2Table

Segment	Base	Answered	Answer rate	Engagements	Mean	95% CI	SD
Study set	150	150	100.00% of 150	150	0.2	0.1 to 0.3	0.4
Outsourcing model
CXM	42	42	100.00% of 42	42	0.2	0.1 to 0.4	0.4
ITO	40	40	100.00% of 40	40	0.2	0.1 to 0.4	0.4
BPO	37	37	100.00% of 37	37	0.2	0.1 to 0.3	0.4
KPO	31	31	100.00% of 31	31	0.2	0.0 to 0.3	0.4
Institution type
Asset management	24	24	100.00% of 24	24	0.2	†	0.4
Wealth management and private banking	23	23	100.00% of 23	23	0.3	†	0.4
Investment banking (advisory and capital-markets origination)	19	19	100.00% of 19	19	0.1	†	0.3
Insurance (life, property and casualty, health)	14	14	100.00% of 14	14	0.0	†	0.0
Commercial and business banking	13	13	100.00% of 13	13	0.2	†	0.4
Payments and merchant acquiring (networks, acquiring, processing)	13	13	100.00% of 13	13	0.3	†	0.5
Credit card and payments issuing	12	12	100.00% of 12	12	0.4	†	0.5
Retail and consumer banking	12	12	100.00% of 12	12	0.3	†	0.5
Markets and trading (sales and trading, global markets)	11	11	100.00% of 11	11	0.1	†	0.3
Private equity and private capital	9	9	9 of 9	9	‡
Process family
Corporate and back-office functions	47	47	100.00% of 47	47	0.2	0.1 to 0.3	0.4
Technology engineering and operations	35	35	100.00% of 35	35	0.2	0.1 to 0.4	0.4
Client servicing and communications	16	16	100.00% of 16	16	0.1	†	0.3
Trade, settlement and reconciliation	15	15	100.00% of 15	15	0.1	†	0.3
Payments, cards and disputes	12	12	100.00% of 12	12	0.4	†	0.5
Credit, underwriting and suitability	9	9	9 of 9	9	‡
Regulatory, audit, tax and legal	9	9	9 of 9	9	‡
Financial crime and client onboarding	7	7	7 of 7	7	‡
Class of work
LOB Operational	76	76	100.00% of 76	76	0.2	0.1 to 0.3	0.4
Corporate Functional	74	74	100.00% of 74	74	0.2	0.1 to 0.3	0.4
Engagement status and lifecycle stage
Active, Build-Out	31	31	100.00% of 31	31	0.2	0.0 to 0.3	0.4
Active, Transition/Cut-Over	43	43	100.00% of 43	43	0.3	0.1 to 0.4	0.5
Active, Production	20	20	100.00% of 20	20	0.2	†	0.4
Canceled	56	56	100.00% of 56	56	0.2	0.1 to 0.3	0.4

Note: † Base under 30. No interval is reported. ‡ Base under 10. No statistic is reported.

Table 5b. Descriptive statistics by segment, part 2 of 2Table

Segment	Min	Q1	Median	Q3	Max	Distressed n	Distressed %
Study set	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Outsourcing model
CXM	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
ITO	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
BPO	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
KPO	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Institution type
Asset management	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Wealth management and private banking	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.5	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Investment banking (advisory and capital-markets origination)	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Insurance (life, property and casualty, health)	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Commercial and business banking	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Payments and merchant acquiring (networks, acquiring, processing)	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Credit card and payments issuing	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Retail and consumer banking	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Markets and trading (sales and trading, global markets)	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Private equity and private capital	‡ n = 9
Process family
Corporate and back-office functions	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Technology engineering and operations	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Client servicing and communications	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Trade, settlement and reconciliation	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Payments, cards and disputes	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Credit, underwriting and suitability	‡ n = 9
Regulatory, audit, tax and legal	‡ n = 9
Financial crime and client onboarding	‡ n = 7
Class of work
LOB Operational	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Corporate Functional	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Engagement status and lifecycle stage
Active, Build-Out	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Active, Transition/Cut-Over	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Active, Production	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable
Canceled	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	Not applicable	Not applicable

Note: ‡ Base under 10. No statistic is reported.

Every figure in the segment tables is at engagement level, and the mean of the count is the share of engagements with a portfolio director among the respondents. Segments with fewer than 30 engagements carry no interval. Segments with fewer than 10 report counts only.

Tests of Difference Between Segments

Table 6a. Tests of difference between segments, part 1 of 2Table

Segment family	Welch F	df	p	Holm p	Omega squared	90% CI
Outsourcing model	0.27	3, 79.9	0.848	1.000	−0.015	0.000 to 0.016
Institution type	a
Process family	2.01	4, 41.3	0.110	0.442	0.028	0.000 to 0.112
Class of work	0.01	1, 148.0	0.907	1.000	−0.007	0.000 to 0.008
Engagement status and lifecycle stage	0.63	3, 61.7	0.596	1.000	−0.006	0.000 to 0.042

Note: a Not tested: a level has no spread, so Welch's test is undefined.

Table 6b. Tests of difference between segments, part 2 of 2Table

Segment family	Kruskal-Wallis H	p	Distressed chi-square	df	p	Cramer's V	Levels excluded
Outsourcing model	0.79	0.852	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	None
Institution type	a
Process family	7.39	0.116	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	Credit, underwriting and suitability, n = 9, Regulatory, audit, tax and legal, n = 9, Financial crime and client onboarding, n = 7
Class of work	0.01	0.906	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	None
Engagement status and lifecycle stage	2.12	0.548	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	None

Note: a Not tested: a level has no spread, so Welch's test is undefined.

Each segment family was tested on engagements. No family differed after Holm correction. Welch's test was undefined for institution type, because at least one level recorded the same value on all its engagements. The Kruskal-Wallis test across the institution types showed no difference (H = 11.60, df = 8, p = 0.170).

Association with Cancellation Rate

Cancellation rate is the share of engagements canceled by the study date, measured at engagement level (150 engagements, 56 canceled). Canceled engagements were rated after cancellation, so the association is a descriptive contrast and not a forecast of cancellation.

Table 7a. Association with cancellation rate by segment, part 1 of 2Table

Segment	Engagements	Canceled	Cancellation rate	Point-biserial r	95% CI	p	Holm p
Study set	150	56	37.33% of 150	−0.09	−0.24 to 0.07	0.286	1.000
Outsourcing model
CXM	42	15	35.71% of 42	−0.18	−0.46 to 0.13	0.245	1.000
ITO	40	15	37.50% of 40	0.08	−0.24 to 0.38	0.635	1.000
BPO	37	14	37.84% of 37	−0.23	−0.52 to 0.10	0.162	1.000
KPO	31	12	38.71% of 31	0.01	−0.34 to 0.36	0.951	1.000
Institution type
Asset management	24	13	54.17% of 24	−0.04	†	0.862	1.000
Wealth management and private banking	23	8	34.78% of 23	−0.23	†	0.300	1.000
Investment banking (advisory and capital-markets origination)	19	9	47.37% of 19	0.02	†	0.941	1.000
Insurance (life, property and casualty, health)	14	5	35.71% of 14	a
Commercial and business banking	13	4	30.77% of 13	0.03	†	0.921	1.000
Payments and merchant acquiring (networks, acquiring, processing)	13	3	23.08% of 13	0.03	†	0.921	1.000
Credit card and payments issuing	12	5	41.67% of 12	−0.03	†	0.930	1.000
Retail and consumer banking	12	4	33.33% of 12	−0.13	†	0.699	1.000
Markets and trading (sales and trading, global markets)	11	3	27.27% of 11	−0.19	†	0.568	1.000
Private equity and private capital	9	2	2 of 9	‡
Process family
Corporate and back-office functions	47	19	40.43% of 47	−0.07	−0.35 to 0.22	0.639	1.000
Technology engineering and operations	35	10	28.57% of 35	−0.04	−0.37 to 0.29	0.806	1.000
Client servicing and communications	16	9	56.25% of 16	0.23	†	0.396	1.000
Trade, settlement and reconciliation	15	8	53.33% of 15	0.25	†	0.369	1.000
Payments, cards and disputes	12	2	16.67% of 12	−0.38	†	0.226	1.000
Credit, underwriting and suitability	9	1	1 of 9	‡
Regulatory, audit, tax and legal	9	4	4 of 9	‡
Financial crime and client onboarding	7	3	3 of 7	‡
Class of work
LOB Operational	76	30	39.47% of 76	−0.09	−0.31 to 0.14	0.456	1.000
Corporate Functional	74	26	35.14% of 74	−0.09	−0.31 to 0.14	0.449	1.000
Engagement status and lifecycle stage
Active, Build-Out	31	0	0.00% of 31	b
Active, Transition/Cut-Over	43	0	0.00% of 43	b
Active, Production	20	0	0.00% of 20	b
Canceled	56	56	100.00% of 56	b

Note: † Base under 30. No interval is reported. ‡ Base under 10. No statistic is reported. a Not tested: the indicator or the measure is constant in this row. b Not tested: no variation in cancellation.

Table 7b. Association with cancellation rate by segment, part 2 of 2Table

Segment	Odds ratio per point	95% CI	AUC	Rate, distressed engagements	Rate, other engagements	Fisher p	TOST p
Study set	0.63	0.27 to 1.48	0.54	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.004
Outsourcing model
CXM	0.37	0.07 to 2.01	0.58	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.219
ITO	1.45	0.32 to 6.56	0.53	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.079
BPO	0.22	0.02 to 2.04	0.59	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.341
KPO	1.07	0.15 to 7.54	0.50	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.057
Institution type
Asset management	0.82	† n = 24	0.51	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.106
Wealth management and private banking	0.29	† n = 23	0.60	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.361
Investment banking (advisory and capital-markets origination)	1.13	† n = 19	0.51	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.122
Insurance (life, property and casualty, health)	a
Commercial and business banking	1.17	† n = 13	0.51	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.189
Payments and merchant acquiring (networks, acquiring, processing)	1.17	† n = 13	0.52	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.189
Credit card and payments issuing	0.89	† n = 12	0.51	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.200
Retail and consumer banking	0.56	† n = 12	0.56	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.291
Markets and trading (sales and trading, global markets)	0.71	† n = 11	0.56	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.374
Private equity and private capital	‡ n = 9
Process family
Corporate and back-office functions	0.69	0.15 to 3.17	0.53	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.056
Technology engineering and operations	0.79	0.13 to 4.79	0.52	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.066
Client servicing and communications	2.65	† n = 16	0.56	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.390
Trade, settlement and reconciliation	3.00	† n = 15	0.56	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.426
Payments, cards and disputes	0.20	† n = 12	0.75	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.604
Credit, underwriting and suitability	‡ n = 9
Regulatory, audit, tax and legal	‡ n = 9
Financial crime and client onboarding	‡ n = 7
Class of work
LOB Operational	0.64	0.20 to 2.06	0.54	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.029
Corporate Functional	0.61	0.17 to 2.16	0.54	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	0.032
Engagement status and lifecycle stage
Active, Build-Out	b
Active, Transition/Cut-Over	b
Active, Production	b
Canceled	b

Across the study set, the count was not associated with cancellation (r = −0.09, 95% CI −0.24 to 0.07, Holm p = 1.000, n = 150 engagements). Engagements with a portfolio director among the respondents had an odds ratio of cancellation of 0.63 (95% CI 0.27 to 1.48, p = 0.286), an interval that includes one. The association held after Holm correction in none of the 19 segment levels tested.

Association with Customer Satisfaction

Customer satisfaction is the percentage recorded against each engagement. The primary estimate uses the 94 active engagements. A descriptive contrast uses all 150 engagements.

Table 8a. Association with customer satisfaction by segment, part 1 of 2Table

Segment	Active engagements	Clean r	95% CI	p	Holm p	Spearman rho	p
Study set	94	−0.05	−0.25 to 0.16	0.661	1.000	−0.05	0.648
Outsourcing model
CXM	27	−0.11	†	0.598	1.000	−0.06	0.757
ITO	25	0.26	†	0.207	1.000	0.27	0.190
BPO	23	−0.06	†	0.799	1.000	−0.04	0.839
KPO	19	−0.36	†	0.126	1.000	−0.37	0.120
Institution type
Asset management	11	0.41	†	0.212	1.000	0.49	0.129
Wealth management and private banking	15	−0.21	†	0.453	1.000	−0.28	0.314
Investment banking (advisory and capital-markets origination)	10	−0.04	†	0.909	1.000	0.00	1.000
Insurance (life, property and casualty, health)	9	‡
Commercial and business banking	9	‡
Payments and merchant acquiring (networks, acquiring, processing)	10	−0.47	†	0.173	1.000	−0.42	0.228
Credit card and payments issuing	7	‡
Retail and consumer banking	8	‡
Markets and trading (sales and trading, global markets)	8	‡
Private equity and private capital	7	‡
Process family
Corporate and back-office functions	28	0.21	†	0.279	1.000	0.17	0.395
Technology engineering and operations	25	0.12	†	0.555	1.000	0.13	0.535
Client servicing and communications	7	‡
Trade, settlement and reconciliation	7	‡
Payments, cards and disputes	10	−0.18	†	0.611	1.000	−0.03	0.924
Credit, underwriting and suitability	8	‡
Regulatory, audit, tax and legal	5	‡
Financial crime and client onboarding	4	‡
Class of work
LOB Operational	46	−0.16	−0.43 to 0.14	0.293	1.000	−0.16	0.284
Corporate Functional	48	0.09	−0.20 to 0.37	0.529	1.000	0.09	0.537
Engagement status and lifecycle stage
Active, Build-Out	31	−0.10	−0.44 to 0.26	0.579	1.000	−0.10	0.607
Active, Transition/Cut-Over	43	−0.09	−0.38 to 0.22	0.568	1.000	−0.11	0.463
Active, Production	20	0.16	†	0.503	1.000	0.18	0.436
Canceled	0	a

Note: † Base under 30. No interval is reported. ‡ Base under 10. No statistic is reported. a Not tested: canceled engagements fall outside the active population.

Table 8b. Association with customer satisfaction by segment, part 2 of 2Table

Segment	Slope, points per rating point	95% CI	R squared	TOST p	All engagements	Descriptive r	p
Study set	−1.25	−6.91 to 4.41	0.00	0.006	150	0.06	0.441
Outsourcing model
CXM	−2.94	† n = 27	0.01	0.160	42	0.15	0.353
ITO	6.55	† n = 25	0.07	0.422	40	−0.05	0.750
BPO	−1.31	† n = 23	0.00	0.129	37	0.21	0.217
KPO	−12.56	† n = 19	0.13	0.613	31	−0.11	0.569
Institution type
Asset management	9.83	† n = 11	0.17	0.638	24	0.10	0.656
Wealth management and private banking	−4.20	† n = 15	0.04	0.369	23	0.16	0.456
Investment banking (advisory and capital-markets origination)	−1.56	† n = 10	0.00	0.239	19	−0.02	0.938
Insurance (life, property and casualty, health)	‡ n = 9
Commercial and business banking	‡ n = 9
Payments and merchant acquiring (networks, acquiring, processing)	−14.29	† n = 10	0.22	0.699	13	−0.20	0.506
Credit card and payments issuing	‡ n = 7
Retail and consumer banking	‡ n = 8
Markets and trading (sales and trading, global markets)	‡ n = 8
Private equity and private capital	‡ n = 7
Process family
Corporate and back-office functions	6.32	† n = 28	0.04	0.319	47	0.12	0.421
Technology engineering and operations	3.13	† n = 25	0.02	0.193	35	0.05	0.767
Client servicing and communications	‡ n = 7
Trade, settlement and reconciliation	‡ n = 7
Payments, cards and disputes	−4.00	† n = 10	0.03	0.372	12	0.27	0.395
Credit, underwriting and suitability	‡ n = 8
Regulatory, audit, tax and legal	‡ n = 5
Financial crime and client onboarding	‡ n = 4
Class of work
LOB Operational	−4.79	−13.85 to 4.27	0.03	0.163	76	0.03	0.805
Corporate Functional	2.25	−4.90 to 9.41	0.01	0.073	74	0.10	0.388
Engagement status and lifecycle stage
Active, Build-Out	−2.51	−11.67 to 6.65	0.01	0.138	31	−0.10	0.579
Active, Transition/Cut-Over	−2.53	−11.38 to 6.33	0.01	0.082	43	−0.09	0.568
Active, Production	4.63	†	0.03	0.269	20	0.16	0.503
Canceled	a

Note: † Base under 30. No interval is reported. ‡ Base under 10. No statistic is reported. a Not tested: canceled engagements fall outside the active population.

Across the active engagements, the count was not associated with customer satisfaction (r = −0.05, 95% CI −0.25 to 0.16, Holm p = 1.000, n = 94 engagements). The association held after Holm correction in none of the 16 segment levels tested.

Association with the Engagement Indicator Mean

The engagement indicator mean is the mean of an engagement's ratings across the rated indicators, measured at engagement level (150 engagements). The count is not a rated indicator and does not enter the mean.

Table 9a. Association with the engagement indicator mean by segment, part 1 of 2Table

Segment	Engagements	Leave-one-out r	95% CI	p	Holm p	Spearman rho	p
Study set	150	0.06	−0.10 to 0.22	0.471	1.000	0.08	0.306
Outsourcing model
CXM	42	0.09	−0.22 to 0.38	0.585	1.000	0.12	0.449
ITO	40	0.05	−0.26 to 0.36	0.754	1.000	0.02	0.886
BPO	37	0.23	−0.10 to 0.52	0.167	1.000	0.25	0.132
KPO	31	−0.18	−0.50 to 0.19	0.345	1.000	−0.15	0.430
Institution type
Asset management	24	0.14	†	0.528	1.000	0.08	0.708
Wealth management and private banking	23	0.10	†	0.649	1.000	0.18	0.413
Investment banking (advisory and capital-markets origination)	19	−0.03	†	0.900	1.000	0.00	1.000
Insurance (life, property and casualty, health)	14	a
Commercial and business banking	13	−0.24	†	0.434	1.000	−0.20	0.523
Payments and merchant acquiring (networks, acquiring, processing)	13	−0.19	†	0.529	1.000	−0.13	0.663
Credit card and payments issuing	12	−0.01	†	0.966	1.000	−0.02	0.940
Retail and consumer banking	12	−0.06	†	0.858	1.000	−0.10	0.751
Markets and trading (sales and trading, global markets)	11	0.19	†	0.584	1.000	0.00	1.000
Private equity and private capital	9	‡
Process family
Corporate and back-office functions	47	0.10	−0.19 to 0.38	0.484	1.000	0.08	0.576
Technology engineering and operations	35	0.10	−0.24 to 0.42	0.575	1.000	0.08	0.644
Client servicing and communications	16	−0.13	†	0.636	1.000	−0.03	0.918
Trade, settlement and reconciliation	15	−0.18	†	0.518	1.000	−0.12	0.660
Payments, cards and disputes	12	0.20	†	0.528	1.000	0.32	0.313
Credit, underwriting and suitability	9	‡
Regulatory, audit, tax and legal	9	‡
Financial crime and client onboarding	7	‡
Class of work
LOB Operational	76	0.02	−0.20 to 0.25	0.830	1.000	0.07	0.544
Corporate Functional	74	0.10	−0.13 to 0.32	0.413	1.000	0.11	0.368
Engagement status and lifecycle stage
Active, Build-Out	31	−0.03	−0.38 to 0.33	0.890	1.000	0.01	0.961
Active, Transition/Cut-Over	43	−0.06	−0.36 to 0.24	0.690	1.000	−0.09	0.576
Active, Production	20	0.02	†	0.922	1.000	0.02	0.928
Canceled	56	0.08	−0.18 to 0.34	0.540	1.000	0.17	0.210

Note: † Base under 30. No interval is reported. ‡ Base under 10. No statistic is reported. a Not tested: the indicator or the measure is constant in this row.

Table 9b. Association with the engagement indicator mean by segment, part 2 of 2Table

Segment	r with indicator included	Slope	95% CI	R squared	TOST p	Equivalent
Study set	Not a component	0.22	−0.37 to 0.80	0.00	0.001	Yes
Outsourcing model
CXM	Not a component	0.33	−0.88 to 1.54	0.01	0.082	No
ITO	Not a component	0.15	−0.84 to 1.14	0.00	0.058	No
BPO	Not a component	0.78	−0.34 to 1.89	0.05	0.335	No
KPO	Not a component	−0.77	−2.42 to 0.88	0.03	0.242	No
Institution type
Asset management	Not a component	0.56	† n = 24	0.02	0.214	No
Wealth management and private banking	Not a component	0.33	† n = 23	0.01	0.175	No
Investment banking (advisory and capital-markets origination)	Not a component	−0.11	† n = 19	0.00	0.133	No
Insurance (life, property and casualty, health)	a
Commercial and business banking	Not a component	−0.79	† n = 13	0.06	0.416	No
Payments and merchant acquiring (networks, acquiring, processing)	Not a component	−0.66	† n = 13	0.04	0.358	No
Credit card and payments issuing	Not a component	−0.03	† n = 12	0.00	0.188	No
Retail and consumer banking	Not a component	−0.19	† n = 12	0.00	0.225	No
Markets and trading (sales and trading, global markets)	Not a component	0.94	† n = 11	0.03	0.366	No
Private equity and private capital	‡ n = 9
Process family
Corporate and back-office functions	Not a component	0.42	−0.78 to 1.61	0.01	0.088	No
Technology engineering and operations	Not a component	0.31	−0.80 to 1.41	0.01	0.116	No
Client servicing and communications	Not a component	−0.84	† n = 16	0.02	0.257	No
Trade, settlement and reconciliation	Not a component	−0.95	† n = 15	0.03	0.331	No
Payments, cards and disputes	Not a component	0.52	† n = 12	0.04	0.377	No
Credit, underwriting and suitability	‡ n = 9
Regulatory, audit, tax and legal	‡ n = 9
Financial crime and client onboarding	‡ n = 7
Class of work
LOB Operational	Not a component	0.09	−0.76 to 0.94	0.00	0.008	Yes
Corporate Functional	Not a component	0.35	−0.49 to 1.19	0.01	0.037	Yes
Engagement status and lifecycle stage
Active, Build-Out	Not a component	−0.07	−1.08 to 0.94	0.00	0.067	No
Active, Transition/Cut-Over	Not a component	−0.17	−1.01 to 0.68	0.00	0.059	No
Active, Production	Not a component	0.08	† n = 20	0.00	0.119	No
Canceled	Not a component	0.14	−0.32 to 0.59	0.01	0.050	No

Note: † Base under 30. No interval is reported. ‡ Base under 10. No statistic is reported. a Not tested: the indicator or the measure is constant in this row.

The count was not associated with the engagement indicator mean (r = 0.06, 95% CI −0.10 to 0.22, Holm p = 1.000, n = 150 engagements). The association held after Holm correction in none of the 23 segment levels tested.

Association with Intent to Leave

Intent to leave is the answer to C019, “How likely are you to leave your current job in the next 12 months?”, rated 1 to 10. It is measured at respondent level on up to 798 respondents, each carrying the count recorded for the respondent's engagement.

Table 10a. Association with intent to leave by segment, part 1 of 2Table

Segment	Respondents	r	95% CI	Cluster bootstrap 95% CI	p	Holm p
Study set	798	−0.06	−0.13 to 0.01	−0.21 to 0.09	0.103	1.000
Outsourcing model
CXM	215	−0.11	−0.24 to 0.03	−0.35 to 0.14	0.112	1.000
ITO	233	0.07	−0.06 to 0.20	−0.26 to 0.35	0.288	1.000
BPO	196	−0.26	−0.39 to −0.12	−0.55 to 0.08	< 0.001	0.007
KPO	154	0.14	−0.01 to 0.30	−0.19 to 0.42	0.074	1.000
Institution type
Asset management	122	−0.12	−0.29 to 0.06	−0.60 to 0.32	0.189	1.000
Wealth management and private banking	132	−0.13	−0.30 to 0.04	−0.50 to 0.27	0.129	1.000
Investment banking (advisory and capital-markets origination)	98	−0.01	−0.21 to 0.19	a	0.927	1.000
Insurance (life, property and casualty, health)	71	b
Commercial and business banking	76	0.33	0.12 to 0.52	−0.20 to 0.74	0.003	0.080
Payments and merchant acquiring (networks, acquiring, processing)	69	0.11	−0.13 to 0.34	−0.42 to 0.56	0.381	1.000
Credit card and payments issuing	70	−0.01	−0.24 to 0.23	−0.56 to 0.53	0.965	1.000
Retail and consumer banking	67	0.00	−0.24 to 0.24	−0.49 to 0.51	0.979	1.000
Markets and trading (sales and trading, global markets)	55	−0.16	−0.41 to 0.11	a	0.229	1.000
Private equity and private capital	38	−0.48	−0.70 to −0.19	a	0.002	0.053
Process family
Corporate and back-office functions	226	−0.06	−0.19 to 0.07	−0.31 to 0.18	0.354	1.000
Technology engineering and operations	194	−0.03	−0.17 to 0.11	−0.38 to 0.30	0.680	1.000
Client servicing and communications	89	0.20	−0.01 to 0.39	a	0.062	1.000
Trade, settlement and reconciliation	75	0.22	−0.01 to 0.42	a	0.062	1.000
Payments, cards and disputes	70	−0.43	−0.60 to −0.22	−0.78 to 0.07	< 0.001	0.006
Credit, underwriting and suitability	53	0.43	0.18 to 0.63	a	0.001	0.034
Regulatory, audit, tax and legal	49	−0.06	−0.34 to 0.22	§ n = 9	0.669	1.000
Financial crime and client onboarding	42	0.12	−0.19 to 0.41	§ n = 7	0.433	1.000
Class of work
LOB Operational	424	−0.06	−0.15 to 0.04	−0.28 to 0.16	0.225	1.000
Corporate Functional	374	−0.06	−0.16 to 0.04	−0.27 to 0.15	0.269	1.000
Engagement status and lifecycle stage
Active, Build-Out	166	−0.13	−0.28 to 0.02	−0.38 to 0.11	0.087	1.000
Active, Transition/Cut-Over	237	0.10	−0.02 to 0.23	−0.17 to 0.36	0.111	1.000
Active, Production	95	−0.02	−0.22 to 0.19	−0.30 to 0.30	0.880	1.000
Canceled	300	0.00	−0.11 to 0.12	−0.07 to 0.08	0.932	1.000

Note: § Too few engagements for a cluster bootstrap interval. a Not computed: under 90% of bootstrap resamples valid. b Not tested: the indicator or the measure is constant in this row.

Table 10b. Association with intent to leave by segment, part 2 of 2Table

Segment	Spearman rho	p	Share at 7 or above, distressed	Share at 7 or above, other	Engagements	Engagement level r	95% CI	TOST p
Study set	−0.06	0.075	Not applicable	Not applicable	150	−0.08	−0.24 to 0.08	0.003
Outsourcing model
CXM	−0.12	0.087	Not applicable	Not applicable	42	−0.09	−0.38 to 0.22	0.083
ITO	0.08	0.214	Not applicable	Not applicable	40	−0.04	−0.35 to 0.28	0.050
BPO	−0.26	< 0.001	Not applicable	Not applicable	37	−0.27	−0.55 to 0.06	0.422
KPO	0.14	0.090	Not applicable	Not applicable	31	0.15	−0.22 to 0.48	0.199
Institution type
Asset management	−0.06	0.532	Not applicable	Not applicable	24	−0.20	†	0.319
Wealth management and private banking	−0.14	0.114	Not applicable	Not applicable	23	−0.11	†	0.182
Investment banking (advisory and capital-markets origination)	−0.02	0.829	Not applicable	Not applicable	19	0.01	†	0.113
Insurance (life, property and casualty, health)	a
Commercial and business banking	0.33	0.004	Not applicable	Not applicable	13	0.30	†	0.497
Payments and merchant acquiring (networks, acquiring, processing)	0.10	0.436	Not applicable	Not applicable	13	0.08	†	0.232
Credit card and payments issuing	0.00	0.995	Not applicable	Not applicable	12	0.06	†	0.225
Retail and consumer banking	−0.01	0.963	Not applicable	Not applicable	12	0.04	†	0.207
Markets and trading (sales and trading, global markets)	−0.16	0.253	Not applicable	Not applicable	11	−0.15	†	0.330
Private equity and private capital	−0.52	< 0.001	Not applicable	Not applicable	9	‡	‡
Process family
Corporate and back-office functions	−0.09	0.175	Not applicable	Not applicable	47	−0.07	−0.35 to 0.22	0.054
Technology engineering and operations	−0.04	0.616	Not applicable	Not applicable	35	−0.13	−0.44 to 0.21	0.153
Client servicing and communications	0.21	0.053	Not applicable	Not applicable	16	0.22	†	0.378
Trade, settlement and reconciliation	0.21	0.068	Not applicable	Not applicable	15	0.20	†	0.361
Payments, cards and disputes	−0.38	0.001	Not applicable	Not applicable	12	−0.37	†	0.596
Credit, underwriting and suitability	0.41	0.002	Not applicable	Not applicable	9	‡	‡
Regulatory, audit, tax and legal	−0.10	0.504	Not applicable	Not applicable	9	‡	‡
Financial crime and client onboarding	0.05	0.752	Not applicable	Not applicable	7	‡	‡
Class of work
LOB Operational	−0.06	0.211	Not applicable	Not applicable	76	−0.07	−0.30 to 0.15	0.023
Corporate Functional	−0.07	0.161	Not applicable	Not applicable	74	−0.09	−0.31 to 0.15	0.030
Engagement status and lifecycle stage
Active, Build-Out	−0.14	0.071	Not applicable	Not applicable	31	−0.16	−0.49 to 0.20	0.224
Active, Transition/Cut-Over	0.10	0.121	Not applicable	Not applicable	43	0.06	−0.25 to 0.35	0.055
Active, Production	0.01	0.953	Not applicable	Not applicable	20	−0.02	†	0.113
Canceled	0.02	0.775	Not applicable	Not applicable	56	0.00	−0.26 to 0.26	0.013

Note: † Base under 30. No interval is reported. ‡ Base under 10. No statistic is reported. a Not tested: the indicator or the measure is constant in this row.

The count was not associated with intent to leave (r = −0.06, cluster bootstrap 95% CI −0.22 to 0.10, p = 0.466 with standard errors clustered by engagement, n = 798 respondents). Every respondent on an engagement carries the same count, so the clustered test governs. The association held after Holm correction in three of the 27 segment levels tested, with signs in both directions. These segment tests treated respondents as independent.

Comparison of Associations Across the Four Measures

Table 11. Associations across the four measuresTable

Measure	Form	Unit	n	r	95% CI	p	Equivalent to zero	Rank among the four
Cancellation rate	Descriptive contrast	Engagement	150	−0.09	−0.24 to 0.07	0.286	Yes	1
Customer satisfaction	Clean estimate	Engagement	94	−0.05	−0.25 to 0.16	0.661	Yes	4
Engagement indicator mean	Full	Engagement	150	0.06	−0.10 to 0.22	0.471	Yes	2
Intent to leave	Respondent level, clustered	Respondent	798	−0.06	−0.22 to 0.10	0.466	Yes	3

Table 12. Pairwise comparison of associationsTable

Pair compared	Difference in r	Steiger z	p	Holm p	Reading
Cancellation rate and customer satisfaction	0.02	0.84	0.399	1.000	Did not differ
Cancellation rate and engagement indicator mean	0.03	0.46	0.645	1.000	Did not differ
Cancellation rate and intent to leave	0.01	0.16	0.876	1.000	Did not differ
Customer satisfaction and engagement indicator mean	0.00	0.09	0.926	1.000	Did not differ
Customer satisfaction and intent to leave	−0.02	−0.43	0.665	1.000	Did not differ
Engagement indicator mean and intent to leave	−0.02	−0.43	0.665	1.000	Did not differ

The four associations were compared in pairs on their engagement-level forms, each oriented so that a higher value is the better outcome, across the 150 engagements with all four measures. After Holm correction, none of the six pairs differed. Every association was near zero.

Clustering and Effective Sample Size

The count is recorded once for each engagement, so every respondent on an engagement shares its value. Every test of the count used engagements except the respondent-level form of intent to leave. That form used standard errors clustered by engagement.

Equivalence Tests of Null Results

Table 13. Equivalence tests of null resultsTable

Measure	n	r	Equivalence bound	TOST p, lower	TOST p, upper	Equivalent to zero	Achieved power	MDE at power 0.80	Detection floor for this n
Cancellation rate	150	−0.09	\|r\| < 0.30	0.004	< 0.001	Yes	0.96	0.23	0.23
Customer satisfaction	94	−0.05	\|r\| < 0.30	0.006	< 0.001	Yes	0.84	0.29	0.23
Engagement indicator mean	150	0.06	\|r\| < 0.30	< 0.001	0.001	Yes	0.96	0.23	0.23
Intent to leave	798	−0.06	\|r\| < 0.30	< 0.001	< 0.001	Yes	1.00	0.10	0.23

All four associations were equivalent to zero. No result was inconclusive. The detection floor shown is the study floor at 150 engagements.

Robustness Checks

Table 14. Robustness checksTable

Check	Measure	Primary r	Check r	95% CI	Change	Conclusion holds
Rank correlation in place of Pearson	Cancellation rate	−0.09	−0.09	a	0.00	Yes
Rank correlation in place of Pearson	Customer satisfaction	−0.05	−0.05	a	0.00	Yes
Rank correlation in place of Pearson	Engagement indicator mean	0.06	0.08	a	0.02	Yes
Rank correlation in place of Pearson	Intent to leave	−0.06	−0.06	a	−0.01	Yes
Active engagements only	Engagement indicator mean	0.06	−0.03	−0.23 to 0.17	−0.09	Yes
Active engagements only	Intent to leave	−0.06	0.02	−0.07 to 0.10	0.07	Yes
Most influential engagement removed (largest Cook's distance)	Cancellation rate	−0.09	−0.11	−0.26 to 0.06	−0.02	Yes
Most influential engagement removed (largest Cook's distance)	Customer satisfaction	−0.05	−0.01	−0.22 to 0.19	0.03	Yes
Most influential engagement removed (largest Cook's distance)	Engagement indicator mean	0.06	0.03	−0.13 to 0.19	−0.03	Yes
Most influential engagement removed (largest Cook's distance)	Intent to leave	−0.06	−0.04	−0.11 to 0.03	0.02	Yes
Engagements weighted by respondent count	Cancellation rate	−0.09	−0.09	a	0.00	Yes
Engagements weighted by respondent count	Customer satisfaction	−0.05	−0.10	a	−0.06	Yes
Engagements weighted by respondent count	Engagement indicator mean	0.06	0.04	a	−0.02	Yes
Bootstrap of engagements	Cancellation rate	−0.09	−0.09	−0.23 to 0.07	0.00	Yes
Bootstrap of engagements	Customer satisfaction	−0.05	−0.05	−0.24 to 0.15	0.00	Yes
Bootstrap of engagements	Engagement indicator mean	0.06	0.06	−0.08 to 0.20	0.00	Yes
Bootstrap of engagements	Intent to leave	−0.06	−0.06	−0.22 to 0.10	0.00	Yes
Thin-base segments removed	Cancellation rate	−0.09	−0.06	−0.28 to 0.16	0.02	Yes
Thin-base segments removed	Customer satisfaction	−0.05	0.17	−0.10 to 0.42	0.22	Yes
Thin-base segments removed	Engagement indicator mean	0.06	0.11	−0.11 to 0.32	0.05	Yes
Thin-base segments removed	Intent to leave	−0.06	−0.05	−0.15 to 0.04	0.01	Yes

Note: a No interval for this check.

Each change was computed before rounding and may differ by 0.01 from the difference between the two printed values.

All 21 checks held. A check holds when its test falls on the same side of 0.05 as the primary test.

Measure Independence and Part-Whole Correction

Each of the four measures was computed from data the indicator does not contain. Each result is therefore a finding and not an arithmetic consequence.

Comparison with the Study Norm

Table 15. Comparison with the study normTable

Measure	The indicator, oriented r	Study median, oriented r	Deviation	Fisher z	p	Holm p
Cancellation rate	0.09	0.60	−0.51	−7.30	< 0.001	< 0.001
Customer satisfaction	0.06	0.72	−0.66	−10.22	< 0.001	< 0.001
Engagement indicator mean	0.06	0.84	−0.78	−13.94	< 0.001	< 0.001
Intent to leave	0.08	0.71	−0.63	−9.82	< 0.001	< 0.001
Spread of deviations			0.27
Verdict	Divergent

Each deviation was computed before rounding and may differ by 0.01 from the difference between the two printed values.

The comparison covered 150 engagements. The count departed from the study's typical pattern on all four measures. The typical indicator is a rating with a strong association with each measure, and the study medians ran from 0.60 to 0.84. The count is not a rating, and its associations were near zero.

Interpretation of the Data

A portfolio director was among the respondents on 31 of the 150 engagements. Engagements with and without a portfolio director among the respondents did not differ in cancellation, customer satisfaction, the engagement indicator mean or intent to leave, each association was equivalent to zero, and every robustness check held.

Limitations

The evidence is the reported experience of the vendor's delivery teams, collected in a single cross-section. The associations reported here are not causal. Canceled engagements were described after cancellation.

The count records respondents and not the staffing of the engagement. An engagement may have had a portfolio director who did not respond.

The segment tests of intent to leave treated respondents as independent. Every respondent on an engagement carries the same count, so those tests overstate the information in the respondent answers.

Definitions

Table 16. DefinitionsTable

Term	Definition
Response scale	A whole number of respondents, as recorded on the Engagements sheet. The field is not a rating. No distressed range applies.
Answering base	Every engagement. The field is recorded for each engagement.
Indicator class	Engagement attribute: a property of the engagement rather than of the respondent, recorded once for each engagement.
Failure category	The five failure categories of the Study Taxonomy apply only to the rated indicators. The field carries none.
Portfolio director	One of the four roles a respondent could give in answer to C005, “What is your role on this engagement?”.
Engagement indicator mean	The mean of an engagement's ratings across the rated indicators. The field does not enter it.
Clustered test	A test whose standard error allows for the answers of respondents on the same engagement to be alike.
Equivalence test	Two one-sided tests of whether an association lies inside the bound shown. A result inside the bound is equivalent to zero.
Odds ratio	The odds of cancellation on engagements with a portfolio director among the respondents, divided by the odds on the others. A value of one marks no difference.

Sources and Provenance

Table 17. Sources and provenanceTable

Source	Value
Study data	Study Data.xlsx, Engagements sheet, sha256 219eba0457274d04
Statistics engine	compute_statistics.py, sha256 738319eef764602b
Statistics record	Computed Statistics.json, record ENG:PD Respondent Count, sha256 1ae50a3637fc9370
Computed	October 13, 2026, 04:57 UTC
Template	Indicator Template v2, version 2.0 of 10 October 2026
Figures placed by script	1,935

Continue the report

Executive summary →

Overview

Executive Summary

Four findings from 150 engagements

Read →

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

Definitions, indicator inventory, method, and disclosures

Read →

Data

Study Data

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

Read →

PD Respondent Count

On this page

Indicator Specification

Summary of Findings

Distribution of Recorded Values

Descriptive Statistics by Segment

Tests of Difference Between Segments

Association with Cancellation Rate

Association with Customer Satisfaction

Association with the Engagement Indicator Mean

Association with Intent to Leave

Comparison of Associations Across the Four Measures

Clustering and Effective Sample Size

Equivalence Tests of Null Results

Robustness Checks

Measure Independence and Part-Whole Correction

Comparison with the Study Norm

Interpretation of the Data

Limitations

Definitions

Sources and Provenance

Continue the report