Partner Basecamp · Cross-Cohort Trends

Programme snapshot

Programme · all cohorts

Cohorts run

Organisations

207

D1 sessions · all cohorts

Participants

Programme NPS

+37

weighted aggregate

NPS

52%

Promoters

32%

Passives

16%

Detractors

D2 Confidence means /5

4.22

all cohorts

Apply / Lead

4.22

v1 + v2

Advise clients

4.23

v2 only

Design eval

Participant function

EngineeringArchitectureBusiness LeadershipProject / Engmt

35%

25%

15%

25%

San Francisco

2 cohorts · C7, C8

+35NPS↑ Latest ++8 vs avg

n=96 D2 respondents

London

2 cohorts · C6, C9

+40NPS→ Latest -2 vs avg

n=45 D2 respondents

Cohort detail

C6 London · v2

May 18-19, 2026

+43

NPS

Avg score 8.3/10

57% Prom · 29% Pass · 14% Det

n=21 · D2 rate 54%

C7 San Francisco · v2

May 19-20, 2026

+31

NPS

Avg score 8.2/10

52% Prom · 25% Pass · 22% Det

n=59 · D2 rate 91%

C8 San Francisco · v2

May 20-21, 2026

+43

NPS

Avg score 8.6/10

54% Prom · 35% Pass · 11% Det

n=37 · D2 rate 77%

C9 London · v2

May 20-21, 2026

+38

NPS

Avg score 8.3/10

46% Prom · 46% Pass · 8% Det

n=24 · D2 rate 44%

NPS direction

Trend over time · dot position shows direction · hover for score

Dashed line = programme average · dots show direction, not individual scorecards

Function: v1 cohorts estimated from role type · marked (est.) · seniority and experience from v2 cohorts only

Function & seniority

Primary function · all cohorts + recent

Top bar = all cohorts aggregate · v1 estimated from role type

EngineeringArchitectureBusiness LeadershipProject / Engmt

All cohorts (includes est. v1)n=207

35%

25%

15%

25%

C6 Londonn=39

36%

33%

21%

10%

C7 San Franciscon=65

32%

18%

15%

34%

C8 San Franciscon=48

25%

21%

19%

35%

C9 Londonn=55

45%

31%

15%

Level / seniority · v2 cohorts only

Sr PractitionerPractitionerManager / Sr ManagerDirector / Sr DirectorPartner / MD / Exec

All cohortsn=207

22%

26%

29%

17%

C6 Londonn=39

21%

31%

28%

13%

C7 San Franciscon=65

17%

20%

34%

25%

C8 San Franciscon=48

35%

21%

10%

12%

C9 Londonn=55

18%

35%

31%

16%

Experience profile · v2 cohorts only

AI tools experience prior to programme

Learning & exploringApplying in practiceDelivering independentlyOperating at the frontier

All cohortsn=207

16%

45%

22%

16%

C6 Londonn=39

18%

41%

21%

C7 San Franciscon=65

14%

58%

22%

C8 San Franciscon=48

21%

38%

23%

19%

C9 Londonn=55

15%

38%

24%

Prior exposure to Claude or Anthropic API

Not at allA littleRegularly

All cohortsn=207

45%

48%

C6 Londonn=39

49%

44%

C7 San Franciscon=65

54%

40%

C8 San Franciscon=48

10%

38%

52%

C9 Londonn=55

38%

56%

Composition over time · v2 cohorts

Proficiency and persona mix per cohort

Descriptive only — shifts reflect partner nomination decisions

% of D1 respondents per cohort · v2 cohorts only · descriptive — shifts reflect partner nomination decisions

Proficiency level over time

Frontier

Independent

Applying

Learning

Persona mix over time

Architect

Developer

Transformation Lead

Transformation Lead aggregates the survey's Business Leadership and Project / Engagement Management function categories.

Relevance & confidence baseline

How relevant was today's content to your role? (mean /5)

Top bar = programme average · recent cohorts below

Programme avg

4.08/5

C6 London

3.95/5

C7 San Francisco

4.08/5

C8 San Francisco

4.10/5

C9 London

4.15/5

Day 1 confidence baseline (mean /5)

Top bar = programme average · recent cohorts below

Programme avg

4.01/5

C6 London

4.00/5

C7 San Francisco

4.08/5

C8 San Francisco

4.00/5

C9 London

3.95/5

Session quality

Technical depth · all cohorts

Top row = all cohorts · recent cohorts below

Too basicAbout rightToo advanced

Cohort	Too basic	About right	Too advanced
All cohorts	16%	76%	8%

C6 London	31%	62%	8%
C7 San Francisco	11%	82%	8%
C8 San Francisco	8%	79%	12%
C9 London	20%	76%	4%

Pace · all cohorts

Top row = all cohorts · recent cohorts below

Too slowWell pacedToo fast

Cohort	Too slow	Well paced	Too fast
All cohorts	5%	86%	9%

C6 London	8%	77%	15%
C7 San Francisco	3%	91%	6%
C8 San Francisco	6%	85%	8%
C9 London	5%	85%	9%

NPS direction

Score trend · dot position shows direction · hover for exact score

Dashed line = programme average · scores available on hover

Segment composition · Promoter / Passive / Detractor by cohort

Shows whether passives or detractors are shifting over time

PromotersPassivesDetractors

Programme avgn=141

52%

32%

16%

C6 London NPS +43n=21

57%

29%

14%

C7 San Francisco NPS +31n=59

52%

25%

22%

C8 San Francisco NPS +43n=37

54%

35%

11%

C9 London NPS +38n=24

46%

NPS by persona

Developer · Architect · Transformation Lead / Business

Persona	Appearances	Avg NPS	By cohort (v1 uses role-group proxy)
Developer	4	+33	C6 London: +14C7 San Francisco: +20C8 San Francisco: +83C9 London: +29
Architect	4	+52	C6 London: +50C7 San Francisco: +18C8 San Francisco: +71C9 London: +100
Transformation Lead / Business	4	+34	C6 London: +86C7 San Francisco: +32C8 San Francisco: +24C9 London: +22

NPS score distribution · v2 cohorts

Score breakdown 0–10 (cells show count · grows with each v2 cohort)

Cohort	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
C6 London		1	2	3	3	8	4
C7 San Francisco	2	5	6	3	12	10	21
C8 San Francisco			4	7	6	4	16
C9 London	1	1		3	8	4	7

NPS by organisation · recurring

Organisations in ≥2 cohorts — aggregate and per-cohort NPS

Organisation	Appearances	Avg NPS	By cohort
Accenture	2	+70	C7 San Francisco: +73C9 London: +67
Deloitte	2	+54	C7 San Francisco: +62C8 San Francisco: +47
PwC	2	-22	C7 San Francisco: -45C8 San Francisco: +0

What respondents said

NPS verbatim responses by segment · v2 cohorts

Up to 3 most recent per segment · thematic synthesis in insights.py

115 total responses · showing up to 3 most recent per segment · thematic synthesis in insights.py

Promoter · 59 responses

"evals"Score 10 · C9 London

"Take some time off daily tasks to deep dive. Great support from team."Score 9 · C9 London

"The program was well structured and covered important topics!"Score 9 · C9 London

Passive · 34 responses

"It helped a lot to know what we can do with Claude and Claude Code"Score 7 · C9 London

"Great content"Score 8 · C9 London

"The course was technical but gave a sense that the outcomes expected are achievable"Score 8 · C9 London

Detractor · 22 responses

"More for less experienced recipients"Score 5 · C9 London

"Few new things but mainly existing topics you mostly know when working with claude. Instructors did not seem to be capable of answering deeper technical questions."Score 4 · C9 London

"I think I was a little behind in almost all of the sessions, would be helpful to get a live demo in all the sessions to understand how to get working because I felt a little lost sometimes"Score 6 · C8 San Francisco

v1 cohorts include apply and client confidence metrics · three-way split and distributions from v2 only

D2 confidence means

Apply / Design / Commercial (mean /5 · Apply shows Δ vs D1 · top row = programme avg)

Apply / Lead conversation · v1 + v2

Programme avg

4.22

C6 London

4.24 (+0.24)

C7 San Francisco

4.17 (+0.09)

C8 San Francisco

4.32 (+0.32)

C9 London

4.17 (+0.22)

Advising clients on AI · v1 + v2

Programme avg

4.22

C6 London

4.19

C7 San Francisco

4.29

C8 San Francisco

4.19

C9 London

4.17

Design an evaluation · v2 only

Programme avg

4.23

C6 London

4.05

C7 San Francisco

4.29

C8 San Francisco

4.14

C9 London

4.38

Confidence trajectory D1 → D2 · v2 cohorts

Mean delta in build confidence by matched pairs

Developer

Programme avg

-0.07n=30

C6 London

+0.00n=7

C7 San Francisco

-0.30n=10

C8 San Francisco

+0.33n=6

C9 London

-0.14n=7

Architect

Programme avg

+0.45n=29

C6 London

+0.83n=6

C7 San Francisco

+0.09n=11

C8 San Francisco

+0.57n=7

C9 London

+0.60n=5

Transformation Lead

Programme avg

+0.14n=65

C6 London

+0.00n=7

C7 San Francisco

+0.14n=28

C8 San Francisco

+0.24n=21

C9 London

+0.00n=9

D2 confidence score distributions · v2 cohorts

1–5 distribution · cells show % of respondents

Row intensity indicates response concentration at each score.

Design an evaluation for an AI solution

Cohort	1	2	3	4	5	Mean
All cohorts	—	1%	16%	43%	40%	4.23

C6 London	—	—	24%	48%	29%	4.05
C7 San Francisco	—	—	19%	34%	47%	4.29
C8 San Francisco	—	3%	11%	57%	30%	4.14
C9 London	—	—	12%	38%	50%	4.38

Advising clients on AI when questions arise

Cohort	1	2	3	4	5	Mean
All cohorts	—	—	16%	46%	38%	4.23

C6 London	—	—	14%	52%	33%	4.19
C7 San Francisco	—	—	15%	41%	44%	4.29
C8 San Francisco	—	—	16%	49%	35%	4.19
C9 London	—	—	17%	50%	33%	4.17

Lead a conversation about Anthropic and Claude

Cohort	1	2	3	4	5	Mean
All cohorts	—	1%	16%	43%	40%	4.22

C6 London	—	—	24%	29%	48%	4.24
C7 San Francisco	—	3%	14%	46%	37%	4.17
C8 San Francisco	—	—	14%	41%	46%	4.32
C9 London	—	—	17%	50%	33%	4.17

Programme health

Flag detection matrix · hover ● for detail

Trend column compares first-half vs second-half cohorts · meaningful from 4+ cohorts

Flag	C6 London	C7 San Francisco	C8 San Francisco	C9 London	Total	Trend
Low satisfaction	—	—	—	—	0/4	→ stable
High passive rate	—	—	—	●	1/4	↑ more
Low D2 response rate	—	—	—	●	1/4	↑ more
Confidence regression	—	—	—	—	0/4	→ stable
Persona NPS split	●	—	●	—	2/4	→ stable
Org concentration	—	—	●	●	2/4	↑ more

● WARNING● INSIGHT● INFOHover dots for detail · Trend compares first half vs second half of cohorts

Org Landscape · organisations across all cohorts

Organisation reach — appearances, people, recency

People count from D1 org distribution · Avg NPS from D2 respondents meeting minimum n · Capability profile from v2 cohorts only

Organisations reached

207

D1 headcount

Total participants

Cohorts

17%

6 orgs in 2+ cohorts

Returning orgs

Organisation	Appearances	People	Recency	Avg NPS
Returning organisations
Deloitte	4	41	current	+54
Accenture	3	43	current	+70
Infosys	3	13	current	+20
PwC	2	23	1 cohort ago	-22
Capgemini	2	7	current	—
valantic	2	6	current	—
First appearance
Cognizant	1	9	2 cohorts ago	-14
Reply	1	8	3 cohorts ago	+50
Infomotion	1	5	3 cohorts ago	—
SFEIR	1	4	3 cohorts ago	—
Sia	1	4	1 cohort ago	—
Ascendion	1	4	1 cohort ago	—
Theodo	1	4	current	—
Lovelytics	1	3	1 cohort ago	—
Version 1	1	3	current	—
Netlight	1	3	current	—

+ 14 new orgs with <3 participants in the last 3 cohorts — included in total reach count above.

Capability Profile

Orgs with ≥3 participants who appeared within the last 3 cohorts. v2 data only.

Accenture43 people · 3 cohorts · current

AI Proficiency

Frontier 7Independent 7Applying 22Learning 7

Personas

Architect 14Developer 12T.Lead 17

Deloitte41 people · 4 cohorts · current

AI Proficiency

Frontier 3Independent 11Applying 18Learning 9

Personas

Architect 14Developer 7T.Lead 20

PwC23 people · 2 cohorts · 1 cohort ago

AI Proficiency

Frontier 1Independent 5Applying 16Learning 1

Personas

Architect 5Developer 2T.Lead 16

Infosys13 people · 3 cohorts · current

AI Proficiency

Independent 1Applying 5Learning 7

Personas

Architect 2Developer 5T.Lead 6

Cognizant9 people · 1 cohort · 2 cohorts ago

AI Proficiency

Frontier 1Independent 3Applying 3Learning 2

Personas

Architect 2T.Lead 7

Capgemini7 people · 2 cohorts · current

AI Proficiency

Frontier 2Independent 4Applying 1

Personas

Architect 3T.Lead 4

valantic6 people · 2 cohorts · current

AI Proficiency

Frontier 1Independent 3Applying 1Learning 1

Personas

Architect 2Developer 3T.Lead 1

Sia4 people · 1 cohort · 1 cohort ago

AI Proficiency

Frontier 2Independent 1Applying 1

Personas

Architect 1T.Lead 3

Ascendion4 people · 1 cohort · 1 cohort ago

AI Proficiency

Frontier 3Independent 1

Personas

T.Lead 4

Theodo4 people · 1 cohort · current

AI Proficiency

Frontier 1Independent 3

Personas

Developer 1T.Lead 3

Lovelytics3 people · 1 cohort · 1 cohort ago

AI Proficiency

Independent 1Applying 2

Personas

Architect 1T.Lead 2

Version 13 people · 1 cohort · current

AI Proficiency

Frontier 1Applying 2

Personas

Developer 1T.Lead 2

Netlight3 people · 1 cohort · current

AI Proficiency

Frontier 1Independent 1Applying 1

Personas

Developer 2T.Lead 1

Regional divergence · audience profile and outcomes by city

London

2 cohorts · n=45 D2

+40

NPS

4.20

D2 conf /5

San Francisco

2 cohorts · n=96 D2

+35

NPS

4.23

D2 conf /5

Primary function

London

EngineeringArchitectureBusiness LeadershipProject / Engmt

All cohorts (includes est. v1)n=94

41%

32%

14%

13%

C6 Londonn=39

36%

33%

21%

10%

C9 Londonn=55

45%

31%

15%

San Francisco

EngineeringArchitectureBusiness LeadershipProject / Engmt

All cohorts (includes est. v1)n=113

29%

19%

17%

35%

C7 San Franciscon=65

32%

18%

15%

34%

C8 San Franciscon=48

25%

21%

19%

35%

AI experience · v2 cohorts

London

Learning & exploringApplying in practiceDelivering independentlyOperating at the frontier

All cohorts (includes est. v1)n=94

16%

39%

22%

C6 Londonn=39

18%

41%

21%

C9 Londonn=55

15%

38%

24%

San Francisco

Learning & exploringApplying in practiceDelivering independentlyOperating at the frontier

All cohorts (includes est. v1)n=113

17%

50%

22%

12%

C7 San Franciscon=65

14%

58%

22%

C8 San Franciscon=48

21%

38%

23%

19%

Seniority · v2 cohorts

London

Sr PractitionerPractitionerManager / Sr ManagerDirector / Sr DirectorPartner / MD / Exec

All cohorts (includes est. v1)n=94

19%

33%

30%

15%

C6 Londonn=39

21%

31%

28%

13%

C9 Londonn=55

18%

35%

31%

16%

San Francisco

Sr PractitionerPractitionerManager / Sr ManagerDirector / Sr DirectorPartner / MD / Exec

All cohorts (includes est. v1)n=113

25%

20%

28%

19%

C7 San Franciscon=65

17%

20%

34%

25%

C8 San Franciscon=48

35%

21%

10%

12%

Technical depth

London

Too basicAbout rightToo advanced

Cohort	Too basic	About right	Too advanced
All cohorts	24%	70%	5%

C6 London	31%	62%	8%
C9 London	20%	76%	4%

San Francisco

Too basicAbout rightToo advanced

Cohort	Too basic	About right	Too advanced
All cohorts	10%	81%	10%

C7 San Francisco	11%	82%	8%
C8 San Francisco	8%	79%	12%

Pace

London

Too slowWell pacedToo fast

Cohort	Too slow	Well paced	Too fast
All cohorts	6%	82%	12%

C6 London	8%	77%	15%
C9 London	5%	85%	9%

San Francisco

Too slowWell pacedToo fast

Cohort	Too slow	Well paced	Too fast
All cohorts	4%	88%	7%

C7 San Francisco	3%	91%	6%
C8 San Francisco	6%	85%	8%

D2 confidence means /5

Metric	London	San Francisco
Apply / Lead conversation	4.20	4.23
Advising clients on AI	4.18	4.25
Design an evaluation	4.24	4.23

Programme Trends

Capability Profile