Mindtree BENCHMARK REPORT · Level of importance in driving NPS 2 2 2 2 2 2 R = .64 R = .64 R=.63 R...

MindtreeBENCHMARK REPORT

ISG Star of Excellence™

2019Research™

ISG Star of Excellence | Table of Contents

Table of contentsIntroductionResponse summaryKey messagesDrivers of NPSOverall satisfaction comparisons

Mindtree response summaryStar of Excellence Awards - Mindtree rankingsNPS analysisRelationship perceptions of MindtreeMindtree performanceRegion analysisTechnology analysisIndustry analysisQualitative comment reviewClosing note on Mindtree's results

Cross tab analysesProgram methodologySurvey questions

Client Confidential © 2019 Information Services Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Overall results

Mindtree results

Appendices

3461011

13141617181924273031

iivvii

ISG Star of Excellence | Introduction

Client Confidential © 2019 Information Services Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 3

2019 ISG Star of Excellence™

The Star of Excellence is an independent, industry wide Voice of the Customer program.Introduced in 2018, the ISG Star of Excellence Awards™ are designed to reward and recognize providers whoconsistently deliver outstanding client service. It is our intention that by making client service a measurablecompetitive differentiator, the Star of Excellence will encourage the broader industry to make this a key focus.p

This year we expanded the program to include two separate award categories. The first category recognizesservice excellence among providers offering core technology services, including those delivered via the cloud,in areas such as application development and maintenance (ADM), managed data centers (DC), end usercomputing (EUC), managed network services (MNS) and business process services (BPM). The second categoryrecognizes excellence in emerging technology services, including blockchain, big data analytics, machinelearning / artificial intelligence (AI/ML) and the Internet of Things (IoT).

Andrea MurrayPartner - ISG Performex™

In 2019, we received over 1400 evaluations from more than 600 enterprises covering more than 100 different service providers. This year we alsointroduced a nomination process where service providers could invite their clients to share their perspectives about working with them.p

This report outlines the key findings of the research. We encourage you to use this report to understand your competitive position, your strengthsand weaknesses, and to guide your improvement initiatives. We look forward to your continued participation in 2020 as together we seek to improvethe client experience in our industry.

ISG Star of Excellence | Overall Results

Response Summary

107Providers Evaluated

770Unique EnterprisesEvaluations

1,417

4Client Confidential © 2019 Information Services Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

459UK & Rep. Ireland

138SEMEA

687North America

103Nordics

92LATAM

131DACH

365APAC

140ANZ

Note: Evaluations could span multiple regions


Response Summary


ADM

EUC

As a service

Data center

BPM

MNS

AI

IoT

Big data

Blockchain22

61

94

100

143

150

151

173

183

340

By Technology

BFSI

Manufacturing

Retail

Life Sciences &Healthcare

High Tech

Hospitality & Travel

Government

Business Services

Transport &Logistics

Other 96

30

48

77

78

142

182

220

249

295

By IndustryTechnologystrategist

Business leader

Technology user

Technologyprocurement

Commercial vendormanager 170

237

274

353

383

By Role

EmergingTechnologies



Key Messages

Democratization of IT demands inclusive stakeholdermanagement.

As technology becomes increasingly democratized, morestakeholders influence buying decisions. This requires a shift inhow providers think about stakeholder management.Traditionally, providers have emphasized strong relationshipswith business leaders and technology strategists. However,leading providers are increasingly focusing on broaderengagement with more people within enterprises.

This trend was evident in the Star of Excellence results, withhigher satisfaction recorded for business leaders andtechnology strategists. Winners, however, were more likely tohave consistently high satisfaction across all stakeholdergroups.

This finding confirms the importance of providers beingprepared to engage in conversations across all stakeholdergroups.

"The relationship is strong at thesenior levels and executiveengagement is good but it doesn’tseem to filter down to the middle andoperational layers in the organization.There isn’t enough focus on what theycould be doing to improve the enduser experience, which for many ofour employees, is their maintouchpoint with [Provider]."



Key Messages

Innovation is the key to higher Net Promoter Scores.

Enterprises are undergoing significant business modeldisruption. During these changes, there is an expectation thatproviders will act as a partner in envisioning and acceleratingtransformation.

The research revealed that innovation was a key driver of NetPromoter Scores (NPS). However, this an area where the marketis relatively immature. Across the areas assessed, innovationwas one of the lowest rated capabilities. This means that thereis a significant opportunity for providers who can demonstratea consistent and disciplined approach to innovation, todifferentiate themselves from their competitors.

Another key capability is the ability to bridge what providersview as innovation, versus what enterprises want frominnovation. Whilst providers tend to focus on proofs of concept,expansion into broader areas of enterprises and co-design ofsolutions, enterprises are more pragmatic. They want to see astrong track record of service optimization and proactiveprovision of industry best practice. Leading providers can offera distinctive point of view, something which enterprises not onlyvalue, but identify as a key reason for engaging providers.

"What they have done really well, isbring us their unique viewpoint onwhat we could be doing and what theyhave seen work in other clients. Theyare actively scanning their broadercustomer base and thinking aboutwhat we might be interested inhearing about. Almost nobody doesthat well."



Key Messages

The gap between the winner and others is “people”.

For all the focus on automation, cost reduction and serviceoptimization, people remain at the heart of truly successfulprovider-enterprise relationships. The quality of the peopleworking in accounts day to day continues to dictate howrelationships are viewed.

The Star of Excellence results demonstrate this clearly. For mostof the areas measured, there was a relatively low variation inscores across providers, sitting between 7.5 to 8.0. Thissuggests that enterprises perceive a limited difference betweenproviders they work. However, there was one area within theStar of Excellence where the winners clearly outperformed allother providers; people. Given that enterprises view manyproviders as essentially interchangeable, leading organizationswill be those who recognize the critical role that their peopleplay.

Providers must focus on attracting and retaining the righttalent, as well as setting up their service delivery models in away that drives authentic engagement.

"The key difference here is that[Provider] ensures that we have theA-team. Everyone on our account isreally committed to what we are tryingto deliver as an organization and hasthe capabilities to make it happen."



Key Messages

A tailored approach to governance is required.

As enterprise ecosystems become disaggregated and thenumber of service providers increase, so does the complexity.This elevates the criticality of effective governance across theentire ecosystem.

Across the program, governance was the area that scored thelowest satisfaction. For the enterprises that were more satisfiedoverall, this factor became an increasingly important driver ofNPS. This suggests that effective governance can be a catalystfor enhancing business partnerships.

To truly develop trusted partnerships with their providers,enterprises need to take a mature approach to governance,with a willingness to evaluate performance through the lens ofjoint success. This is instead of the more traditional SLA basedperformance management lens.

"Our SLAs don’t seem to be groundedin actual business needs. What we aremeasuring doesn’t matter, and whatmatters isn’t measured."


Key Drivers of NPS


Working with other suppliers in the ecosystem

Identifying solutions to solve problems

Taking ownership of issues

Understanding of business

Responsiveness

Collaboration19%

Solving business problems through innovation

Successfully executing innovation

Driving innovation conversations

Leveraging broader experience

Providing value beyond scope

Innovation31%

Execution21%

People14%

Governance15%

Delivering continuous improvement

Fulfilling role as a service provider

Performance against agreed SLA’s

Delivering a seamless transition

Meeting delivery expectations

Aligning with client’s organizational culture

Providing access to subject matter experts

Working as part of client team

Ease of working together

Capability of personnel

Compliance reporting and solutions

Quality of performance reporting

Risk management framework

Governance framework

Change management

Core TechnologiesR = .73

Level of importance in driving NPS

2

2

2

2

2

2

R = .64

R = .64

R = .63

R = .61

R = .62

lems

Regression analysis was conducted on the coretechnology survey questions to determine thekey drivers of NPS. All of the five measuredpillars were identified as significant drivers, tovarying degrees. Within each of the five pillars,all metrics were also revealed as significant.The chart to the right illustrates the magnitudeof importance for each of the metrics in drivinghigher NPS scores.


Overall Satisfaction Comparisons


AI Big data ADM IoT BPM Data center MNS Blockchain As a service EUC

6

7

8

9

Technologies

Core Technology Emerging Technology

LATAM APAC North America ANZ Nordics DACH SEMEA UK & Rep.Ireland

6

7

8

9

Regions

Manufacturing BFSI High Tech Hospitality &Travel


Retail Transport &Logistics

Government Other Business Services

6

7

8

9

Industries


Technology strategist Business leader Commercial vendormanager

Technology user

5

6

7

8

9

Role types

12

Results

ISG Star of Excellence | Mindtree Results

Mindtree Response Summary

Source of Evaluations

44Unique EnterprisesEvaluations

51


By Region

ADM

Data center

MNS

As a service

EUC

BPM1

2

2

4

6

24

AI

IoT

Big data

Blockchain1

3

4

4

Technology strategist

Business leader

Technology user

Technology procurement

Commercial vendor manager 4

5

7

17

18

BFSI

Retail


High Tech

Life Sciences & Healthcare

Manufacturing

Transport & Logistics

Business Services

Other 5

1

2

3

3

6

7

9

15

By Technology By Industry

By Role

Note: Evaluations could span multiple regions.

11UK & Rep. Ireland

2SEMEA

26North America

3Nordics

3LATAM

6DACH

18APAC

5ANZ

25MindtreeNominations

26Other

12345678910111213

8.7

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

8.5


Star of Excellence Award - Mindtree Ranking


Mindtree

12345678910111213

8.5

Collaboration Execution Governance PeopleInnovation

12345678910111213

8.6 12345678910111213

8.2

12345678910111213

8.2

To qualify for the ISG Star of Excellence Award,providers required 30+ evaluations, across 20+ uniqueclients, covering 2+ core technologies across 2+different regions.

An average was calculated for all qualifying providers ofevery satisfaction score they received for the coretechnology stream of the survey.

This year 13 providers qualified for the Star ofExcellence Award. While the scores were close amongthe qualifiers, there was one clear winner who recordeda score significantly higher than the remainder ofproviders; Mindtree.

Impressively, Mindtree not only achieved the highestscore (8.5), but also came 1st in four out of the fivemeasured capabilities. This is a strong reflection ofMindtree's commitment to customer service excellenceand is an accomplishment to be celebrated. Mindtree'skey stand outs were for satisfaction with People (8.7)and Execution (8.6).

Governance (8.2) was the one capability where Mindtreedid not rank 1st, coming in at 3rd. This was an area thatappears to be a challenge for many providers, withgenerally lower scores recorded across this capability.

(39)

Note: Mindtree's sample sizes are included in brackets.



To qualify for the ISG Star of Excellence EmergingTechnology Award, providers required 10+evaluations, across 5+ unique clients, spanning 2+phases (Incubate, Enable, Accelerate).

An average was calculated for all qualifying providersof every satisfaction score they received for theemerging technology stream of the survey.

For this stream, eight providers qualified. A notabledifference was observed between the top five andbottom three, with the top scores clustering closelytogether.

Mindtree's strong performance continued across theemerging technologies, with an impressive overallscore (8.4) earning Mindtree a 2nd place ranking.

However, this overall score masks variation recordedacross the difference phases. Participantsdemonstrated stronger satisfaction with Mindtree atthe Accelerate (8.5) phase of projects, compared tothe Incubate (8.2) phase.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

8.4

Mindtree

8.2

Incubate Enable Accelerate

8.4 8.5

Note: Due to the limited sample size for emerging technologies, rankings are not provided for phases. Mindtree's sample sizes are included in brackets.

Star of Excellence Emerging Technology Award - Mindtree Ranking

(7)(8)(6)

(12)



The Net Promoter Score (NPS) is an advocacy measureused to gauge the loyalty of customers. Participants areasked how likely they are to recommend a provider to afriend or colleague on a 0 to 10 point scale. Based on theresponse, participants are categorized into Promoters(scores of 9 or 10), Passives (scores of 7 to 8), orDetractors (scores of 0-6). The NPS score is calculated bysubtracting the % of Detractors from the % of Promoters.

Not surprisingly given Mindtree's exceptionalperformance across the Star of Excellence and EmergingTechnologies Awards, Mindtree (55) recorded the highestNPS across the program. This was notably higher thanthe benchmark average (26).

Mindtree's remarkable NPS was driven by the largeproportion of Promoters (63%), who can be consideredloyal enthusiasts that will keep buying and referringothers.

Across the stakeholders, Technology Procurementreported higher NPS scores (80), followed by TechnologyStrategists (67) and Business Leaders (65). While thesescores are considerably higher than other providers, thevariation in satisfaction across the stakeholder types isconsistent with broader trends.

NPS Analysis

PromoterPassiveDetracter

55Mindtree

26Benchmark

65

Businessleader(17)

25

Commercialvendormanager

(4)

80


(5)

67

Technologystrategist

(18)

0

Technologyuser(7)

NPS by Stakeholder Type

Note: Sample sizes for stakeholder groups are included in brackets



All participants were asked how they view therelationship with their provider. The relationship typesranged from tactical to strategic: Staffaugmentation/Resource Provider, Transactional Provider,Technology Advisor, Business Partner.

Across the study, the Technology Advisor (38%) perceptionwas most prevalent, and more so across emergingtechnologies (44%). This is not unusual given the morestrategic and high touch caliber of emerging technologyprojects. As expected, providers who were viewed asBusiness Partners or Technology Advisors attained highersatisfaction scores than those who were viewed in moretactical roles.

In the case of Mindtree, it is positive to see that morethan half of participants viewed the relationship asstrategic in nature, as either a Business Partner (33%) orTechnology Advisor (29%). This increases further whenconsidering emerging technologies, with a remarkable42% of participants perceiving a Business Partnerrelationship and 42% perceiving a Technology Advisorrelationship.

Relationship Perceptions of Mindtree

Staff augmentation/Resource Provider: Most tactical,‘body shop’ style engagement, no scope for strategicengagement.p

Transactional Provider: Provides commodity service andhas limited understanding of its role within technology valuechain, limited scope for strategic engagement.

Technology Advisor: Trusted provider who effectivelycontributes to technology decisions and roadmap.p

Business Partner: Most strategic, relationship extends beyondtechnology to the business, co-creates solutions. Co-activegovernance is often a feature, with both organizations sharingresponsibility for meeting outcome-based metrics.

29%

8%

29%

33%

Staff augmentation/Resource Provider

Transactional Provider

Technology Advisor

Business Partner

n = 51



As well as the NPS and relationship perceptionquestions, the core technology stream presentedparticipants with 25 questions. These questions werecentered around the five key relationship pillars;Collaboration, Execution, Governance, Innovation andPeople.

On this page, Mindtree's average satisfaction for each ofthese pillars are provided in the circles. Scores are alsoprovided for each of the individual metrics. Finally, anindication is provided of how Mindtree compared to theStar of Excellence benchmark average for each metric.

As expected given Mindtree's high rankings, exceptionalscores were recorded across the study, with all metricsplacing above the benchmarks. The benchmarkcomparisons particularly highlight the strength ofMindtree's People and Execution.

While still outperforming the benchmark average,Mindtree's lowest performing metric is Effectiveness ofthe governance framework (7.9), suggesting there may bean opportunity here for Mindtree to uplift Governancerankings.

Mindtree Performance

-2 -1 0 1 2

Collaboration Identifying technology solutions 8.3

Ownership of issues 8.7

Responsiveness 8.8

Understanding of client's business 8.4

Working with other suppliers 8.5

Execution Delivery of continuous improvement 8.4

Fulfillment of role as MSP 8.7

Meeting delivery expectations 8.6

Performance against agreed SLAs 8.6

Seamless transitions 8.8

Governance Effectiveness of change management 8.4

Effectiveness of the governance framework 7.9

Effectiveness of the risk management framework 8.1

Quality of performance reporting 8.2

Reporting non-compliance and offering solutions 8.2

Innovation Driving innovation conversations 8.1

Leveraging broader experience 8.3

Providing value beyond scope 8.2

Solving business problems through innovation 8.3

Successfully executing innovation 8.2

People Access to subject matter experts 8.5

Aligning with client business culture 8.4

Capability of personnel 8.7

Ease of working together 8.9

Working as part of client's team 8.7

Module Metric ± from Benchmark

8.5

8.6

8.2

8.2

8.7

MindtreeSatisfaction

Benchmark + +n = 39

Satisfaction Ranking

Satisfaction Comparison

ISG Star of Excellence | Mindtree Region Results

Region Overview


Participants were asked to report the region(s) of theengagement they were evaluating. In some cases,evaluations spanned multiple regions.

Rankings are provided on the right and highlighted ingreen for every region that Mindtree received 10 ormore evaluations for. A region specific deep dive forthese regions are is provided on subsequent pages.Where less than 10 evaluations were received, anindicative ranking is provided.

With the exception of LATAM and UK & Rep. Ireland, theoverall benchmark averages showed limited variation inthe scores across geographies.

Mindtree demonstrated consistently higher scores thanthe benchmarks, ranking 1st in APAC (8.6) and in NorthAmerica (8.6). For three out of the four regions thatMindtree did not receive enough evaluations for,indicative rankings show Mindtree would have ranked1st or 2nd. These results demonstrate that Mindtree'soutstanding service is not confined to a specific locationbut is rather consistent across a broad range of regions.

The only location where Mindtree achieved a lowerranking was in UK & Rep. Ireland (8.1, rank 4th),suggesting there may be growth opportunities forMindtree in this market.

ANZ APAC DACH LATAM Nordics North America SEMEA UK & Rep.Ireland

8.17.6

8.68.2

9.2

8.78.68.8

H.

I..

A.

I..

T..

Rankings (from first down to last)

M.

I..

C..

C..

A.

H.

I..

T..

.

8.6 I..

A.

H.

I..

B.

I..

H.

I..

M.

I..

H.

C..

A.

U.

A.

F..

I..

D.

T..

T..

C..

T..

A.

.

X..

8.6 I..

A.

H.

B.

I..

C..

I..

A.

M.

H.

X..

I..

C..

F..

U.

B.

A.

T..

8.1

Mindtree Satisfactionp

Benchmark

Other qualifying providersp

Mindtree rankingp

Mindtree indicative ranking

(11)(2)(26)(3)(3)(6)(18)(5)

-2 -1 0 1 2



Responsiveness 8.9
























Mindtree - APAC


18Number ofEvaluations

67MindtreeAPAC NPS

33%

6%33%

28%


Transactional Provider Technology Advisor

Business Partner

Relationship Perception

1/9Ranking inAPAC

8.6

8.9

8.6

8.3

8.8

Module Metric ± from APAC BenchmarkMindtreeSatisfaction

Benchmark + +

Note: Due to the small sample size, emerging technology metrics are not included on this page.

-2 -1 0 1 2



Responsiveness 8.9
























Mindtree -North America



62Mindtree

North America NPS

38%

15%

23%

23% Staff augmentation/Resource Provider


Technology Advisor

Business Partner


1/17Ranking inNorth America

8.7

8.9

8.4

8.5

8.9

Module Metric ± from North America BenchmarkMindtreeSatisfaction

Benchmark + +


-2 -1 0 1 2



Responsiveness 9.0
























Mindtree -UK & Rep. Ireland



45Mindtree

UK & Rep. Ireland NPS

36%

36%

27% Staff augmentation/Resource Provider

Technology Advisor

Business Partner


4/13Ranking in

UK & Rep. Ireland

8.4

8.4

8.0

8.2

8.7

Module Metric ± from UK & Rep. Ireland BenchmarkMindtreeSatisfaction

Benchmark + +




ISG Star of Excellence | Mindtree Technology Results

Technology Overview


Participants elected a specific technology engagement toprovide feedback on. This was either a core technologyor an emerging technology.

Rankings are provided on the right and highlighted ingreen for every technology that Mindtree received 10 ormore evaluations for. If less than 10 evaluations werereceived, an indicative ranking is provided. Due to thelow sample size, no rankings are available for theemerging technologies.

On average, providers scored higher on emergingtechnologies than core technologies, with AI/MLrecording the highest satisfaction across the study. As aservice and EUC typically recorded the lowest satisfaction.

For Mindtree, the only technology ranking that wasavailable was for ADM. Positively, Mindtree claimed 1stplace in this technology, with an outstanding overallscore (8.7). A one page specific deep dive for Mindtree'sADM is provided on the following page.

For all other technologies, a limited sample was receivedand the results should therefore be interpreted withcaution.

ADM As a service BPM Data center EUC MNS AI Big data Blockchain IoT

8.2

7.3

8.8

8.17.6

7.3

8.2

7.3

9.4

8.7

M.

C..

I..

U.

A.

C..

C..

H.

A.

T..

I..

8.7


A.

C..

B.

I..

A.

C..

T..

I..

C..

H.

I..

A.

I..

B.

T..

I..

H.

I..

X..

B.

F..

I..

I..

A.

A.

B.


Benchmark


Mindtree rankingp


(4)(1)(3)(4)(4)(2)(6)(1)(2)(24)

-2 -1 0 1 2



Responsiveness 9.0























ISG Star of Excellence | Mindtree Technology Results

Mindtree - ADM



75MindtreeADM NPS

29%

8%29%

33%



Technology Advisor

Business Partner


1/11Ranking inADM

8.9

8.9

8.4

8.6

8.9

Module Metric ± from ADM BenchmarkMindtreeSatisfaction

Benchmark + +



ISG Star of Excellence | Mindtree Industry Results

Industry Overview


Participants were asked to provide the primary industrythey work in.

Rankings are provided on the right and highlighted ingreen for every industry that Mindtree received 10 ormore evaluations for. If less than 10 evaluations werereceived, an indicative ranking is provided. Due to lowsample sizes, rankings are only available for 5 out of the10 industries.

General trends across providers indicated that BFSI andManufacturing participants are typically more satisfiedthan others.

The only industry that Mindtree received enoughevaluations to attain a ranking for was BFSI (8.4), whereMindtree placed 3rd. A BFSI deep dive analysis isprovided on the following page. The other industry thatMindtree almost received enough evaluations for wasRetail (8.2) where the indicative ranking showed Mindtreewould have placed second.

While it is important to acknowledge the low sample sizerecorded for other industries, and therefore potentiallyvolatile results, a large variation was recorded. Mindtreeachieved the highest score for the Other category (9.4)and recorded the lowest for Life Sciences & Healthcare(7.9).

BFSI BusinessServices

Government High Tech Hospitality &Travel

Life Sciences& Healthcare

Manufacturing Retail Transport &Logistics

Other

9.48.9

8.28.27.9

8.7

8.08.4

9.3

I..

A.

M.

C..

A.

H.

C..

B.

T..

I..

8.4


C..

I..

I..

T..

A.

I..

I..

A.

H.

T..

B.

I..

I..

C..

A.

H.

T..


Benchmark


Mindtree rankingp


(5)(2)(9)(3)(3)(7)(6)(1)(15)

H.

A.

I..

F..

C..

I..

B.

-2 -1 0 1 2



Responsiveness 8.8























ISG Star of Excellence | Mindtree Industry Results

Mindtree - BFSI



47MindtreeBFSI NPS

40%

7%27%

27%



Technology Advisor

Business Partner


3/10Ranking inBFSI

8.6

8.7

8.4

8.4

8.7

Module Metric ± from BenchmarkMindtreeSatisfaction

Benchmark + +




Where Clients Think Mindtree Could Improve

Ensure key high-value resources with strongknowledge of client businesses are retained

Provide regular analytics and insights to informclients about the impact of Mindtree programs

Better assist in taking emerging technologies fromtheory into practice

.

.

.

All participants were given the opportunity to provide feedbackon how their experience could be improved with their provider.

Across all providers, the key themes that arose were aroundcustomer service and relationships, followed bycommunication and improved technology.

Interestingly for Mindtree, almost half of the commentsprovided were positive, praising Mindtree's willingness to goabove and beyond, as well as the capabilities of teams toeffectively execute projects. This commentary was receiveddespite the prompt for participants to provide areas forimprovement.

Where suggestions for improvement were provided, someexamples included:



A Closing Note on Mindtree's Star of Excellence Results

Mindtree’s performance in the Star of Excellence was exceptional, as evidenced by a strong NPS score, top rankings across four of the five pillarsassessed and overwhelmingly positive qualitative feedback. Given this foundation of service excellence, it comes as no surprise that Mindtree wasthe winner of the 2019 Star of Excellence Award and came second in the Emerging Technology stream. This is a testament to the level of clientcentricity and strength of the workforce employed by Mindtree.

With these results, there is the temptation to rejoice and relax. Yet, the opposite is true. While celebration is warranted, maintaining and defending aleadership position is incredibly challenging. Customers become accustomed to current levels of service and raise their future expectationsaccordingly. We refer to this phenomenon as the Status Quo Bias. Overcoming the Status Quo bias requires a constant focus on innovation anddevelopment into new areas, whether this is geographic or scope expansion. For Mindtree, two opportunities were identified. Firstly, whilst Mindtreeundoubtedly excels in the ADM space, if it intends to grow its scope moving forwards, it will need to increase its capacity in adjacent service areas.This is especially critical in view of the industry trend towards composite deals, with multiple towers included.

The second area of opportunity for Mindtree is in the UK & Rep. Ireland region. This was one of the weaker performing geographies for Mindtree,where Mindtree achieved it's lowest rank (4th). In view of the fact that this is a challenging market, with satisfaction scores considerably lower acrossall providers, there is an opportunity for Mindtree to position itself for growth here if the right level of executive sponsorship, investment andresources are applied.

In conclusion, Mindtree’s results are outstanding and worthy of celebration. If Mindtree continues to excel in its traditional strength areas andfocuses on broadening its reach, there is every reason to expect Mindtree will remain in the top cohort of providers in the Star of Excellence 2020.

APPENDICES

ISG Star of Excellence | Appendices

Client Confidential © 2019 Information Services Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved. i

Appendix A: Cross Tab AnalysesMindtree Detailed Analysis - Region by Technology


ANZ

APAC

DACH

LATAM

Nordics

North America

SEMEA

UK & Rep. Ireland

8.2(2)

8.3(2)

7.9(2)

8.1(2)

8.9(3)

8.8(4)

8.5(4)

9.4(2)

8.5(3)

8.8(15)

8.9(2)

8.1(4)

8.7(7)

8.8(3)

8.2(4)

8.8(3)

8.1(4)

7.6(4)

7.3(2)

8.2(6)

9.4(2)

8.7(24)

Overall

8.1(11)

7.6(2)

8.6(26)

8.2(3)

9.2(3)

8.7(6)

8.6(18)

8.8(5)

Overall

Note 1: Heat map coloring is based on satisfaction scores. Navy highlights strong satisfaction while lighter blue, reflects lower satisfaction.Note 2: The sample size for each breakdown is included in brackets. Only segments with more than one evaluation are included.Note 3: Participants could select multiple regions in an evaluation.


Client Confidential © 2019 Information Services Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved. ii

Appendix A: Cross Tab AnalysesMindtree Detailed Analysis - Region by Industry

BFSIBusinessServices

Government High TechHospitality &Travel


Manufacturing RetailTransport &Logistics

Other

ANZ

APAC

DACH

LATAM

Nordics

North America

SEMEA

UK & Rep. Ireland

10.0(2)

9.1(2)

7.3(3)

8.2(4)

8.1(2)

8.1(2)

7.9(2)

7.9(2)

8.9(3)

8.6(2)

6.8(2)

9.0(3)

9.1(4)

8.7(13)

9.0(4)

9.4(5)

8.9(2)

8.2(9)

8.2(3)

7.9(3)

8.7(7)

8.0(6)

8.4(15)

Overall

8.1(11)

7.6(2)

8.6(26)

8.2(3)

9.2(3)

8.7(6)

8.6(18)

8.8(5)

Overall

Note 1: Heat map coloring is based on satisfaction scores. Navy highlights strong satisfaction while lighter blue, reflects lower satisfaction.Note 2: The sample size for each breakdown is included in brackets. Only segments with more than one evaluation are included.Note 3: Participants could select multiple regions in an evaluation.


Client Confidential © 2019 Information Services Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved. iii

Appendix A: Cross Tab AnalysesMindtree Detailed Analysis - Technology by Industry


BFSI

Business Services

Government

High Tech


Life Sciences & Healthcare

Manufacturing

Retail

Transport & Logistics

Other

8.2(3)

7.9(3)

8.2(2)

8.7(3)

9.4(2)

9.6(4)

8.1(2)

8.1(2)

8.1(2)

8.7(5)

8.6(6)

8.2(4)

8.8(3)

8.1(4)

7.6(4)

7.3(2)

8.2(6)

9.4(2)

8.7(24)Overall

9.4(5)

8.9(2)

8.2(9)

8.2(3)

7.9(3)

8.7(7)

8.0(6)

8.4(15)

Overall

Note 1: Heat map coloring is based on satisfaction scores. Navy highlights strong satisfaction while lighter blue, reflects lower satisfaction.Note 2: The sample size for each breakdown is included in brackets. Only segments with more than one evaluation are included.


Appendix B: Program Methodology

ivClient Confidential © 2019 Information Services Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

ANZ

Nominations SurveyAnalysis &Reporting Winners

8 Apr - 29 Jul 15 Apr - 29 Jul 30 Jul - 13 Sep Announced 17 Sep 19

Providernominated

ISGnominated

Selfnominated

Core Tech

EmergingTech

Analysis of results

Benchmarking andinsight generation



vClient Confidential © 2019 Information Services Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

ANZ

NominationsProviders were able to nominate clients to participate in the Star of Excellence™program through a dedicated microsite http://www.isg-star.com/. Participantscould also nominate themselves or others. Everyone nominated through themicrosite received a unique URL via email to verify the identity of the nominee.

Survey

Field periodThe Star of Excellence™ survey was open from 8 April 2019 to 29 July 2019.

Technology streamsThe Star of Excellence™ survey measured two streams; core technology andemerging technology. The following technologies were included in each:

Core Technology Emerging Technology

MNS

IoTEUC

Data centerBPM Blockchain

Big dataAs a serviceAIADM

Questions within each stream focused on the following areas:

Core technology – collaboration, execution, people, governance, innovationand thought leadership.Emerging technology – incubate, enable, accelerate.

Analysis and reporting

Analysis of resultsProviders’ scores were calculated by taking an average of every relevant score.

Net Promoter Score (NPS) analysisThe NPS question asks participants are asked how likely they are to recommenda provider to a friend or colleague on a 0 to 10 point scale. Based on theresponse, participants are categorized into Promoters (scores of 9 or 10),Passives (scores of 7 to 8), or Detractors (scores of 0-6). The NPS score iscalculated by subtracting the percentage of Detractors from the percentage ofPromoters.

Benchmarking and insight generationThe Star of Excellence results were amalgamated to form a benchmarkingcohort that individual provider results can be compared against. Qualitativeanalysis of the open ended feedback has been integrated with quantitativeresults to derive key insights for individual providers, technologies andgeographies.



viClient Confidential © 2019 Information Services Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

ANZ

Winners

Award categoriesTwo main awards identified the top overall performers in each of the core andemerging technology streams. Across the regions, industries and technologies,16 category winners were identified.

Main Awards

Award criteriaTo qualify for the Star of Excellence™ Award (core technologies), a providerhad to receive a minimum of 30 evaluations, from 20 unique clients, across 2technologies and 2 geographies.

To qualify for the Star of Excellence™ Emerging Technologies Award, aprovider had to receive a minimum of 20 evaluations, from 10 unique clients,across 2 phases (incubate, enable, accelerate).

To qualify as a category winner a provider had to receive a minimum of 10evaluations in the given category. A minimum of 5 providers were required toqualify for a category winner to be announced.

Identification of winnersTo win, providers were required to achieve the highest average score across therelevant stream or category.Announcement of winnersWinners were announced at the Americas Sourcing Industry Conference on 17September 2019.

Star of Excellence AwardStar of Excellence Emerging

Technology Award

Category winners

Regional Winners

ANZ APAC (ex. ANZ) DACH North America SEMEA UK & Rep. Ireland

••••••

Industry Winners

BFSI Hi Tech Life Sciences & Healthcare Manufacturing Retail

Technology Winners

ADM BPM Data Center EUC MNS

•••••

•••••


Appendix C: Survey Questions (Core Technologies)

viiClient Confidential © 2019 Information Services Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

ANZ

On a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is extremely dissatisfied and 10 is extremely satisfied, how satisfied are you with the following aspects of working with [provider]:

Collaboration

1. [Provider]’s understanding of your businessp

2. [Provider]’s ability to identify technology solutions that can solve your business problemsp

3. [Provider]’s responsivenessp

4. [Provider]’s willingness to take ownership of issues that are important to youp

5. [Provider]’s effectiveness in working with other suppliers in your ecosystem

Execution

6. [Provider]’s ability to deliver a seamless transitionp

7. [Provider]’s ability to meet your delivery expectationsp

8. [Provider]’s performance against agreed SLA’sp

9. [Provider]’s proactive delivery of continuous improvementp

10.[Provider]’s fulfillment of its role as a service provider

People

21. [Provider]’s ability to provide access to subject matter expertsp

22. Capability of the [provider] personnel you interact withp

23. Extent to which [provider] personnel work as part of your teamp

24. Extent to which [provider] personnel align with your organization’s culturep

25. Ease of working with [provider] personnel

Governance

11. Effectiveness of the governance frameworkp

12. Quality of performance reportingp

13. Effectiveness of the risk management frameworkp

14. Effectiveness of change managementp

15. Willingness to report on non-compliance and offer solutions

Innovation & thought leadership

16. Ability to leverage broader experience and apply to your organizationp

17. Ability to solve important business problems through innovationp

18. Extent to which [provider] has successfully executed innovation within your organizationp

19. Extent to which [provider] drives innovation conversationsp

20. Ability to provide value beyond scope

Closing questions26. How likely are you to recommend [provider] to another business or colleague? (0-10)p

27. Which of the following most accurately describes your view of the relationship with [Provider]? (Picklist: Staff augmentation/resource provider, transactional provider, technology advisor, business partner)p

28. What could be done to improve your experience with [Provider]? (open ended)


Appendix C: Survey Questions (Emerging Technologies)

viiiClient Confidential © 2019 Information Services Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

ANZ

Thinking about the [stage] of your [technology] initiative, how satisfied are you with the manner in which [provider]:(participants could provide feedback on any or all stages)

Incubate

1. Socialized the idea of [technology] within your business2. Built executive awareness and support for [technology]3. Identified the target business processes4. Demonstrated a functional (demo) model5. Identified the required process, people and technology changes6. Built comprehensive risk registers7. Provided skilled and capable team members8. Created an easy working relationship with your team9. Ensured the [provider] team aligned with your business’ culture10.Designed an effective governance plan11. Identified the likely return on investment12. Designed success measurement criteria13. Validated business requirements from stakeholders from across your business14. Identified opportunities for process disruption15. Considered opportunities for expansion beyond the initial scope

Enable

1. Assisted in establishing a business case2. Built targeted business solutions3. Built and implemented prototypes4. Built a comprehensive change management plan5. Designed effective risk management processes6. Executed small scale implementation7. Provided skilled and capable team members8. Created an easy working relationship with your team9. Ensured the [provider] team aligned with your business’ culture10. Implemented an effective governance plan11. Measured return on investment12. Implemented a monitoring and reporting framework13. Identified improvement initiatives for the prototype(s)14. Validated organization wide requirements15. Developed a roadmap for optimization and innovation

Accelerate

1. Designed an enterprise wide solution2. Identified implementation partners3. Designed an effective enterprise wide rollout plan4. Implemented effective change management5. Implemented effective risk management6. Executed large scale implementation7. Provided skilled and capable team members8. Created an easy working relationship with your team9. Ensured the [provider] team aligned with your business’ culture10. Adhered to, and refined where necessary, the governance framework11. Demonstrated large scale business outcomes12. Implemented business level SLAs13. Established a program of continuous improvement initiatives14. Shared industry best practice15. Inspired me to explore other potential [technology] applications within my business

Closing questions16. How likely are you to recommend [provider] to another business or colleague? (0-10)p

17. Which of the following most accurately describes your view of the relationship with [Provider]? (Picklist: Staff augmentation/resource provider, transactional provider, technology advisor, business partner)p

18. What could be done to improve your experience with [Provider]? (open ended)

ISG Star of Excellence

ISG Performex™ Overview

Client Confidential © 2019 Information Services Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

The 2019 ISG Star of Excellence™ program was bought to you by ISG Performex™.

ISG Performex™ works with providers and enterprises to strengthen business relationships, enhance end userproductivity and build world class workplace technology experiences. This is done through:

ISG UserX™ measures and benchmarks the end user experience with workplace technologies and sharedservices.

ISG Relationship360™ assesses the health of enterprise-provider relationships, as well as how well IT is meetingthe needs of the business. Bilateral feedback ensures joint ownership for driving improvements.

ISG Performex™ is built on ISG’s unparalleled data, methodology and expertise. With one of the world’s largestdatabases of satisfaction and experience benchmarks, you can understand your performance relative to others,gain insight into levers for success and make the necessary changes to drive outstanding client experiences.

Mindtree BENCHMARK REPORT · Level of importance in driving NPS 2 2 2 2 2 2 R = .64 R = .64 R=.63 R...

Documents

Transcript of Mindtree BENCHMARK REPORT · Level of importance in driving NPS 2 2 2 2 2 2 R = .64 R = .64 R=.63 R...