"GREEN" CRITERIA

I. In selecting an outsourcing vendor and in "greened-up" contractual performance

agreements, companies in the survey stated they are demanding that their
outsourcing suppliers:

1. Are Reducing the Carbon/Environmental Footprint of the client company to Zero Impact
(24.9%)
2. Oversee Environmental Health in areas where the client is supported (96.2%)
3. Communicate Environmental Stewardship on behalf of the client (84.5%)
4. Drive Product and Service Innovations that Effect Environmental Protection (78.0%)
5. Mandate environmental legal compliance (97.2%)
6. Assure public trust in the outsourcer through developed and communicated "green"
tracking measures (not just rhetoric) (45.0%)
7. Develop new green technologies, products and services which reduce wastes, converse
energies and increase the efficiency of resources (40.6%)

Clients intend to contractually enforce outsourcers to:

1. Reduce global greenhouse gas emissions (15.4%)

2. Manifest successful green strategies which progress over the term of the agreements
(92.3%)
3. Provide outsourcing company employees with ability to provide input for sustaining green
processes (94.5%)
4. Developing a Green Program Office as a formal conduit for communication and
measurement reporting (67.9%)

II. Investors are now embracing strategies that correlate environmental

performance with a firm's financial performance.

We predict that the next few years will be critical for outsourcing firms to establish their
roadmap to green leadership, not only for their clients but as global businesses impacting
the entire earth. The impression of an outsourcer on the environment is becoming an
increasingly critical issue for companies.

Financially, Investors that purchase stock in green outsourcing companies and their
clients believe these companies will be successful in the long term, which will cause the
stock price to go up, so they can sell the stock at a higher price and make money. Socially
responsible companies can gain a competitive advantage over their peers through cost
reductions, quality improvements, increased profitability and access to new and growing
markets. Environmentally responsible companies also have less risk of environmental
liability, which could have a major impact on future stock prices.

Advocates of green investing also believe that a company's environmental performance is a

reflection of how the company is managed. Management style is an intangible factor that is
difficult to measure, yet it can have a dramatic impact on a stock's performance. We believe
that if management cares about the environment, it is culturally disposed toward caring
about other things, including employees, shareholders and corporate governance.
2007 RANK COMPANY

1 Accenture
2 CSC
3 Hewlett Packard
4 SAIC
5 IBM
6 Unisys
7 UST Global
8 Perot Systems
9 Oracle
10 Intelligroup
11 CIBER
12 Atos Origin
13 Bearing Point
14 Fujitsu
15 Sapient
16 BT
17 Capgemini
18 T-Systems
19 SAP
20 EDS
THE TOP GREEN ITO VENDORS 2007
Criteria Key Findings

Key to Raw Scores

GENERALLY INCONSISTENTLY SATISFICATORY OVERWHELMING

DISSATISFIED SATISFED PERFORMANCE SATISFACTION

DOES NOT MEET MEETS SOME/FEW MEETS EXCEEDS

EXPECTATIONS EXPECTATIONS EXPECTATIONS EXPECTATIONS

CAN NOT RECOMMEND RESERVES RECOMMENDS HIGHLY

VENDOR RECOMMENDATION VENDOR RECOMMENDED
VENDOR

How the Data Is Collected

Black Book utilizes a three-step process to collect candid performance data. First, Black Book collects a series of direct evaluations
covering 26 performance areas on leadership and senior management, which comprise the scored ranking of the “Black Book 50 Best
Managed Vendors”.

Second, Black Book collects ballot results on 18 performance areas of operational excellence to rank vendors by outsourced service
lines. Third, the gathered data is subjected immediately to an internal and external audit to verify completeness and accuracy, and to
make sure the respondent is valid while ensuring the anonymity of the client company is maintained. During the audit, each data set is
reviewed by a Brown-Wilson executive and at least two other people. In this way, our clients are able to clearly see how a vendor is
truly performing. The 18 criteria on operational excellence are subdivided by the client's industry, market size, geography and function
outsourced and reported accordingly.

Third, situational studies are conducted on areas of high interest such as Green Outsourcers, Educational Providers in Outsourcing,
Outsourcing Advisors, and Outsourcing Legal Firms. These specific survey areas range from four to twenty questions or criteria each.
 Understanding the Statistical Confidence of Black Book Data
Statistical confidence for each performance rating is based upon the number of organizations scoring the outsourcing service. Black
Book identifies data confidence by one of several means:

1. Top Ten ranked vendors must have a minimum of five unique clients represented. Broad categories require a minimum of ten unique
client ballots. Data that is asterisked (*) represents a sample size below required limits and are intended to be used for tracking
purposes only, not ranking purposes. Performance data for an asterisked vendor services can vary widely until a larger sample size is
achieved. The margin of error can be very large and the reader is responsible for considering the possible current and future variation
(margin of error) in the Black Book performance score reported.

2. Vendors with over ten unique client votes are eligible for top ten rankings and are assured to have highest confidence and lowest
variation. Confidence increases as more organizations report on their outsourcing vendor. Data reported in this form is shown with a 95
percent confidence level (+/- .25, .20 or .15, respectively). Raw numbers include the quantity of completed surveys and the number of
unique organizations contributing the data for the survey pool of interest.

Who Participates in the Black Book Ranking Process

Over 120,000 individuals are invited to participate annually (including C officers of the Fortune 2000, Inc 500, institutional members and
officers of various professional organizations, subscribers of our media partners and previously validated survey participants). Non-
invitation receiving participants must complete a verifiable profile, utilize valid corporate email address and are then included as well.
Over 22,000 users were validated in the 2007 ranking process. The Black Book survey web instrument is open to respondents and
new participants each year from March 1 - May 31 at http://TheBlackBookOfOutsourcing.com

Color-coded Stop Light Dashboard Scoring Key

Green (Top 10%) Scores Better than 90% of ITO VENDORS Green Coded Vendors have received constantly highest client satisfaction scores.
8.71 +

Clear (Top 33%) Scores Better than 67% of ITO VENDORS Well scored vendor which have middle of the pack results
7.31 to 8.70

Yellow Scores Better Than Half/ 50%of ITO VENDORS Cautionary performance scores, Areas of improvement required.
5.88 to 7.30

Red Scores Worse Than 66% of ITO VENDORS Poor performances reported, Potential
Less than 5.87
TIERS OF ITO VENDORS
OUTSOURICNG VENDORS GROUPED BY
OVERALL SCORE MEAN & CORRESPONDING RANKING ITO VENDORS
Rank

ITO VENDORS Overall

Mean
1 Accenture 9.66 ◄ TOP TIER
2 CSC 9.54 ITO VENDORS
3 Hewlett Packard 9.49
4 SAIC 9.41
5 IBM 9.35
6 Unisys 9.21
7 UST Global 9.08
8 Perot Systems 9.05
9 Oracle 9.00
10 Intelligroup 8.92 ◄UPPER MIDDLE
11 CIBER 8.87 TIER ITO
12 Atos Origin 8.83 VENDORS
13 Bearing Point 8.79
14 Fujitsu 8.69
15 Sapient 8.65
16 BT 8.56
17 Capgemini 8.50 ◄MIDDLE TIER
18 T-Systems 8.49 ITO VENDORS
19 SAP 8.43
20 EDS 8.30
 GREEN SCORES BY VENDOR

Rank ITO VENDORS Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15 Q16 Q17 Q18 MEAN

1 Accenture 9.68 9.80 9.42 9.90 9.43 9.91 9.74 9.51 9.76 9.70 9.61 9.73 9.77 9.60 9.56 9.20 9.76 9.82 9.66

2 CSC 9.62 9.54 9.70 9.65 9.03 9.82 9.45 9.43 9.17 9.77 9.85 9.63 8.82 9.48 9.73 9.69 9.78 9.56 9.54

3 Hewlett Packard 9.54 9.35 9.81 9.57 9.22 9.67 9.27 9.78 9.56 9.80 9.65 9.55 8.93 9.69 9.17 9.74 9.35 9.13 9.49

4 SAIC 9.20 9.67 9.09 9.22 9.51 9.75 9.48 9.30 8.98 9.63 9.44 9.29 9.77 9.59 9.22 9.38 9.26 9.55 9.41

5 IBM 9.12 9.17 8.53 9.52 9.48 9.64 9.76 8.91 9.64 9.27 9.25 9.59 9.66 9.33 9.79 9.16 9.00 9.40 9.35

6 Unisys 8.79 8.27 9.68 8.98 9.23 9.32 9.66 9.69 9.30 8.21 9.54 9.05 9.49 9.66 9.47 9.08 9.44 8.98 9.21

7 UST Global 8.59 8.79 9.43 8.34 8.98 9.28 9.36 8.79 9.54 9.80 9.55 9.16 8.89 9.74 8.90 9.20 8.90 8.28 9.08

8 Perot Systems 8.26 9.44 8.86 9.44 9.05 9.02 9.28 8.51 8.80 9.18 9.38 9.19 9.41 9.37 9.28 9.18 8.55 8.62 9.05

9 Oracle 8.84 8.32 9.49 9.18 9.13 9.52 7.78 8.47 7.96 9.02 8.86 9.33 9.25 9.76 9.41 9.28 9.63 8.71 9.00

10 Intelligroup 8.99 7.65 8.60 9.24 9.19 8.92 8.78 9.30 8.84 9.45 7.90 9.33 9.29 9.38 8.68 9.24 9.33 8.37 8.92

11 CIBER 8.77 8.07 9.11 9.16 6.95 8.90 9.03 9.43 9.49 9.09 9.38 8.78 8.29 9.33 9.54 9.43 7.49 9.42 8.87

12 Atos Origin 9.50 7.52 8.15 7.68 8.22 9.08 9.58 9.52 8.49 9.59 9.17 9.40 8.73 9.72 9.70 8.14 9.06 7.67 8.83

13 Bearing Point 8.27 8.99 9.14 8.82 9.28 7.96 8.88 9.25 8.90 9.21 8.05 9.04 9.65 8.91 7.25 9.00 8.90 8.73 8.79

14 Fujitsu 9.19 7.87 8.27 9.13 9.20 7.88 7.81 8.62 9.02 9.38 7.98 8.90 8.75 8.47 9.09 8.74 8.91 9.20 8.69

15 Sapient 8.53 9.31 7.02 8.95 9.34 7.95 8.95 9.48 7.79 9.12 9.34 7.48 9.09 9.33 7.41 9.08 9.52 7.98 8.65

16 BT 7.50 8.82 8.74 7.94 7.29 9.25 8.66 9.03 8.73 9.00 9.47 8.64 8.18 8.91 9.03 8.74 8.93 7.26 8.56

17 Capgemini 9.22 8.90 7.83 8.59 9.20 8.15 7.35 9.08 9.23 8.50 8.63 7.94 9.18 8.93 8.76 9.50 7.30 6.64 8.50

18 T-Systems 7.27 8.83 8.75 7.23 8.88 9.21 9.20 9.15 8.91 7.58 7.43 9.09 7.85 9.13 7.47 8.98 8.74 9.03 8.49

19 SAP 7.98 7.78 9.03 9.12 6.83 8.15 7.57 8.66 8.24 8.73 9.05 8.73 9.20 8.11 9.17 9.25 9.02 7.04 8.43

20 EDS 6.93 9.19 7.80 7.21 6.81 7.88 9.24 8.09 8.66 7.29 8.91 9.27 7.70 8.92 8.60 8.76 9.17 8.90 8.30
 AVERAGE VALID RESPONDENTS
Average Valid
Respondents per ITO VENDORS
Criteria
605 IBM
512 Hewlett Packard
499 EDS
480 Capgemini
467 Accenture
425 Oracle
387 CSC
371 SAP
344 Unisys
312 Perot Systems
258 Bearing Point
212 BT
193 Fujitsu
190 Atos Origin
185 SAIC
165 CIBER
160 Sapient
135 T-Systems
106 Intelligroup
97 UST Global
CLIENTS REPORTED GREEN PERFORMANCE OF TOP TWENTY SCORING ITO VENDORS
Exceeds Needs
Improvement

TOP 20 SCORING Exceeds General Exceeds UN Global Exceeds ISO 14000 &
Green Sourcing Compact Principles 14001 Principles
ITO VENDOR Principles
Accenture
Atos Origin NI
Bearing Point
BT NI NI NI
Capgemini NI NI NI
CIBER
CSC
EDS NI NI
Fujitsu NI
Hewlett Packard
IBM
Intelligroup
Oracle
Perot Systems
SAIC
SAP NI NI
Sapient NI
T-Systems NI NI
Unisys
UST Global
 LEADING ITO VENDORS BY GREEN PERFORMANCE

Top General Green Principle Score: 9.68

Accenture

Top UN Global Compact Score: 9.67

Accenture

Top ISO 14000 & 14001 Score: 9.68

CSC

366 Qualified ITO Vendors with Minimum 10 Unique Client Ballots

Green Standard Performance
Meets
Critera Set Exceed Need Improvement Do Not Meet
to Exceed
General Green Principles 14 74 278
UN Global Compact 15 98 253
Principles
ISO 14000/14001 Principles 16 90 260

TOTAL (All Principles 12 53 301

1. General Principle
Reduces Carbon Imprint of Client Towards Zero Impact
`

Overall
Final Q1 ITO Supplier MEAN
Rank Rank
1 1 Accenture 9.68

2 2 CSC 9.62

3 3 Hewlett Packard 9.54

12 4 Atos Origin 9.50

17 5 Capgemini 9.22

4 6 SAIC 9.20

14 7 Fujitsu 9.19

5 8 IBM 9.12
10 9 Intelligroup 8.99

9 10 Oracle 8.84

6 11 Unisys 8.79
11 12 CIBER 8.77

7 13 UST Global 8.59

15 14 Sapient 8.53
13 15 Bearing Point 8.27
8 16 Perot Systems 8.26

19 17 SAP 7.98

16 18 BT 7.50
18 19 T-Systems 7.27

20 20 EDS 6.93
2. General Principle

Oversees Environmental Health on Behalf of Client

Overall
Final Q2 ITO Supplier MEAN
Rank Rank
1 1 Accenture 9.80

4 2 SAIC 9.67

2 3 CSC 9.54
8 4 Perot Systems 9.44

3 5 Hewlett Packard 9.35

15 6 Sapient 9.31

20 7 EDS 9.19

5 8 IBM 9.17
13 9 Bearing Point 8.99

17 10 Capgemini 8.90

18 11 T-Systems 8.83
16 12 BT 8.82

7 13 UST Global 8.79

9 14 Oracle 8.32
6 15 Unisys 8.27
11 16 CIBER 8.07

14 17 Fujitsu 7.87

19 18 SAP 7.78
10 19 Intelligroup 7.65

12 20 Atos Origin 7.52

3. General Principle

Communicates Environmental Stewardship on Behalf of Client

Overall
Final Q3 ITO Supplier MEAN
Rank Rank
3 1 Hewlett Packard 9.81

2 2 CSC 9.70

6 3 Unisys 9.68
9 4 Oracle 9.49
7 5 UST Global 9.43

1 6 Accenture 9.42

13 7 Bearing Point 9.14

11 8 CIBER 9.11
4 9 SAIC 9.09

19 10 SAP 9.03

8 11 Perot Systems 8.86

18 12 T-Systems 8.75

16 13 BT 8.74

10 14 Intelligroup 8.60
5 15 IBM 8.53
14 16 Fujitsu 8.27
12 17 Atos Origin 8.15

17 18 Capgemini 7.83
20 19 EDS 7.80

15 20 Sapient 7.02
4. General Principle

Drives Product and Service Innovations that Effect Environmental Protection

Overall
Final Q4 ITO Supplier MEAN
Rank Rank
1 1 Accenture 9.90

2 2 CSC 9.65

3 3 Hewlett Packard 9.57

5 4 IBM 9.52

8 5 Perot Systems 9.44

10 6 Intelligroup 9.24

4 7 SAIC 9.22

9 8 Oracle 9.18
11 9 CIBER 9.16

14 10 Fujitsu 9.13

19 11 SAP 9.12
6 12 Unisys 8.98

15 13 Sapient 8.95

13 14 Bearing Point 8.82

17 15 Capgemini 8.59
7 16 UST Global 8.34

16 17 BT 7.94

12 18 Atos Origin 7.68

18 19 T-Systems 7.23

20 20 EDS 7.21
5. General Principle

Mandates Environmental Legal Compliance

Overall
Final Q5 ITO Supplier MEAN
Rank Rank
4 1 SAIC 9.51
5 2 IBM 9.48
1 3 Accenture 9.43
15 4 Sapient 9.34
13 5 Bearing Point 9.28
6 6 Unisys 9.23
3 7 Hewlett Packard 9.22
17 8 Capgemini 9.20
14 9 Fujitsu 9.20
10 10 Intelligroup 9.19
9 11 Oracle 9.13
8 12 Perot Systems 9.05
2 13 CSC 9.03
7 14 UST Global 8.98
18 15 T-Systems 8.88
12 16 Atos Origin 8.22
16 17 BT 7.29
11 18 CIBER 6.95
19 19 SAP 6.83
20 20 EDS 6.81
6. General Principle
Assures Public Trust through developed and communicated "Green" Tracking Measures
(not just rhetoric)
Overall
Final Q6 ITO Supplier MEAN
Rank Rank
1 1 Accenture 9.91
2 2 CSC 9.82
4 3 SAIC 9.75
3 4 Hewlett Packard 9.67
5 5 IBM 9.64
9 6 Oracle 9.52
6 7 Unisys 9.32
7 8 UST Global 9.28
16 9 BT 9.25
18 10 T-Systems 9.21
12 11 Atos Origin 9.08
8 12 Perot Systems 9.02
10 13 Intelligroup 8.92
11 14 CIBER 8.90
17 15 Capgemini 8.15
19 16 SAP 8.15
13 17 Bearing Point 7.96
15 18 Sapient 7.95
14 19 Fujitsu 7.88
20 20 EDS 7.88
7. General Principle
Develops new Green Technologies, products and services which reduce wastes, converse energies
& increase efficiency of resources
Overall
Final Q7 ITO Supplier MEAN
Rank Rank
5 1 IBM 9.76

1 2 Accenture 9.74

6 3 Unisys 9.66
12 4 Atos Origin 9.58

4 5 SAIC 9.48

2 6 CSC 9.45

7 7 UST Global 9.36

8 8 Perot Systems 9.28

3 9 Hewlett Packard 9.27

20 10 EDS 9.24

18 11 T-Systems 9.20
11 12 CIBER 9.03

15 13 Sapient 8.95

13 14 Bearing Point 8.88

10 15 Intelligroup 8.78
16 16 BT 8.66

14 17 Fujitsu 7.81

9 18 Oracle 7.78
19 19 SAP 7.57

17 20 Capgemini 7.35
8. General Principle

Voluntarily establishes Higher Standards of Sustainability for clients

than imposed in industry
Overall
Final Q8 ITO Supplier MEAN
Rank Rank
3 1 Hewlett Packard 9.78

6 2 Unisys 9.69

12 3 Atos Origin 9.52

1 4 Accenture 9.51
15 5 Sapient 9.48

2 6 CSC 9.43

11 7 CIBER 9.43

4 8 SAIC 9.30
10 9 Intelligroup 9.30

13 10 Bearing Point 9.25

18 11 T-Systems 9.15
17 12 Capgemini 9.08

16 13 BT 9.03

5 14 IBM 8.91
7 15 USTGlobal 8.79
19 16 SAP 8.66
14 17 Fujitsu 8.62

8 18 Perot Systems 8.51

9 19 Oracle 8.47

20 20 EDS 8.09
9. General Principle

Manifests successful Green Strategies which progress over the term of the agreements

Overall
Final Q9 ITO Supplier MEAN
Rank Rank
1 1 Accenture 9.76

5 2 IBM 9.64

3 3 Hewlett Packard 9.56

7 4 UST Global 9.54

11 5 CIBER 9.49

6 6 Unisys 9.30

17 7 Capgemini 9.23

2 8 CSC 9.17
14 9 Fujitsu 9.02

4 10 SAIC 8.98

18 11 T-Systems 8.91
13 12 Bearing Point 8.90

10 13 Intelligroup 8.84

8 14 Perot Systems 8.80

16 15 BT 8.73
20 16 EDS 8.66

12 17 Atos Origin 8.49

19 18 SAP 8.24
9 19 Oracle 7.96

15 20 Sapient 7.79
10. General Principle

Governance Program orchestrates Goals and needs of client

Overall
Final Q10 ITO Supplier MEAN
Rank Rank
3 1 Hewlett Packard 9.80
7 2 UST Global 9.80
2 3 CSC 9.77
1 4 Accenture 9.70
4 5 SAIC 9.63
12 6 Atos Origin 9.59
10 7 Intelligroup 9.45
14 8 Fujitsu 9.38
5 9 IBM 9.27
13 10 Bearing Point 9.21
8 11 Perot Systems 9.18
15 12 Sapient 9.12
11 13 CIBER 9.09
9 14 Oracle 9.02
16 15 BT 9.00
19 16 SAP 8.73
17 17 Capgemini 8.50
6 18 Unisys 8.21
18 19 T-Systems 7.58
20 20 EDS 7.29
11. General Principle
Coordinates global trilogy aspects of Social, Economic and Environmental stewardship

Overall
Final Q11 ITO Supplier MEAN
Rank Rank
2 1 CSC 9.85
3 2 Hewlett Packard 9.65
1 3 Accenture 9.61
7 4 UST Global 9.55
6 5 Unisys 9.54
16 6 BT 9.47
4 7 SAIC 9.44
11 8 CIBER 9.38
8 9 Perot Systems 9.38
15 10 Sapient 9.34
5 11 IBM 9.25
12 12 Atos Origin 9.17
19 13 SAP 9.05
20 14 EDS 8.91
9 15 Oracle 8.86
17 16 Capgemini 8.63
13 17 Bearing Point 8.05
14 18 Fujitsu 7.98
10 19 Intelligroup 7.90
18 20 T-Systems 7.43
12. UN Global Compact Principle

Outsourcing vendor supports a Precautionary Approach to Environmental challenges

Overall
Final Q12 ITO Supplier MEAN
Rank Rank
1 1 Accenture 9.73
2 2 CSC 9.63
5 3 IBM 9.59
3 4 Hewlett Packard 9.55
12 5 Atos Origin 9.40
10 6 Intelligroup 9.33
9 7 Oracle 9.33
4 8 SAIC 9.29
20 9 EDS 9.27
8 10 Perot Systems 9.19
7 11 UST Global 9.16
18 12 T-Systems 9.09
6 13 Unisys 9.05
13 14 Bearing Point 9.04
14 15 Fujitsu 8.90
11 16 CIBER 8.78
19 17 SAP 8.73
16 18 BT 8.64
17 19 Capgemini 7.94
15 20 Sapient 7.48
13. UN Global Compact Principle
Outsourcing vendor undertakes initiatives to promote greater Environmental
Responsibility
Overall
Final Q13 ITO Supplier MEAN
Rank Rank
1 1 Accenture 9.77

4 2 SAIC 9.77

5 3 IBM 9.66
13 4 Bearing Point 9.65

6 5 Unisys 9.49

8 6 Perot Systems 9.41

10 7 Intelligroup 9.29

9 8 Oracle 9.25
19 9 SAP 9.20

17 10 Capgemini 9.18

15 11 Sapient 9.09
3 12 Hewlett Packard 8.93

7 13 UST Global 8.89

2 14 CSC 8.82
14 15 Fujitsu 8.75
12 16 Atos Origin 8.73

11 17 CIBER 8.29

16 18 BT 8.18
18 19 T-Systems 7.85

20 20 EDS 7.70
14. UN Global Compact Principle
Outsourcing vendor encourages the Development and Diffusion of environmentally
friendly technologies
Overall
Final Q14 ITO Supplier MEAN
Rank Rank
9 1 Oracle 9.76
7 2 UST Global 9.74
12 3 Atos Origin 9.72
3 4 Hewlett Packard 9.69
6 5 Unisys 9.66
1 6 Accenture 9.60
4 7 SAIC 9.59
2 8 CSC 9.48
10 9 Intelligroup 9.38
8 10 Perot Systems 9.37
5 11 IBM 9.33
11 12 CIBER 9.33
15 13 Sapient 9.33
18 14 T-Systems 9.13
17 15 Capgemini 8.93
20 16 EDS 8.92
13 17 Bearing Point 8.91
16 18 BT 8.91
14 19 Fujitsu 8.47
19 20 SAP 8.11
15. UN Global Compact Principle

Supports Green Benchmarks & baselines for outsourcing

Overall
Final Q15 ITO Supplier MEAN
Rank Rank
5 1 IBM 9.79

2 2 CSC 9.73

12 3 Atos Origin 9.70

1 4 Accenture 9.56

11 5 CIBER 9.54

6 6 Unisys 9.47

9 7 Oracle 9.41

8 8 Perot Systems 9.28

4 9 SAIC 9.22

3 10 Hewlett Packard 9.17

19 11 SAP 9.17
14 12 Fujitsu 9.09

16 13 BT 9.03

7 14 UST Global 8.90

17 15 Capgemini 8.76
10 16 Intelligroup 8.68

20 17 EDS 8.60

18 18 T-Systems 7.47
15 19 Sapient 7.41

13 20 Bearing Point 7.25

16. ISO 14000/14001 Principle

Program Oversight, Assessment & Audit (includes non-regulated services)

Overall
Final Q16 ITO Supplier MEAN
Rank Rank
3 1 Hewlett Packard 9.74
2 2 CSC 9.69
17 3 Capgemini 9.50
11 4 CIBER 9.43
4 5 SAIC 9.38
9 6 Oracle 9.28
19 7 SAP 9.25
10 8 Intelligroup 9.24
1 9 Accenture 9.20
7 10 UST Global 9.20
8 11 Perot Systems 9.18
5 12 IBM 9.16
6 13 Unisys 9.08
15 14 Sapient 9.08
13 15 Bearing Point 9.00
18 16 T-Systems 8.98
20 17 EDS 8.76
14 18 Fujitsu 8.74
16 19 BT 8.74
12 20 Atos Origin 8.14
17. ISO 14000/14001 Principle

Staff Training & Development

Overall
Final Q17 ITO Supplier MEAN
Rank Rank
2 1 CSC 9.78
1 2 Accenture 9.76
9 3 Oracle 9.63
15 4 Sapient 9.52
6 5 Unisys 9.44
3 6 Hewlett Packard 9.35
10 7 Intelligroup 9.33
4 8 SAIC 9.26
20 9 EDS 9.17
12 10 Atos Origin 9.06
19 11 SAP 9.02
5 12 IBM 9.00
16 13 BT 8.93
14 14 Fujitsu 8.91
7 15 UST Global 8.90
13 16 Bearing Point 8.90
18 17 T-Systems 8.74
8 18 Perot Systems 8.55
11 19 CIBER 7.49
17 20 Capgemini 7.30
18. ISO 14000/14001 Principle

Sets Green Performance Targets and Objectives

Overall
Final Q18 ITO Supplier MEAN
Rank Rank
1 1 Accenture 9.82
2 9.56
2 CSC
4 3 SAIC 9.55
11 4 CIBER 9.42
5 9.40
5 IBM
14 6 Fujitsu 9.20
7 9.13
3 Hewlett Packard
18 8 T-Systems 9.03
6 9 Unisys 8.98
10 8.90
20 EDS
13 11 Bearing Point 8.73
9 12 Oracle 8.71
13 8.62
8 Perot Systems
10 14 Intelligroup 8.37
7 15 UST Global 8.28
15 16 Sapient 7.98
17 7.67
12 Atos Origin
16 18 BT 7.26
19 19 SAP 7.04
20 6.64
17 Capgemini
The Outsourcing Management Institute sanctions the annual process by authorizing and endorsing specific quantifiable and qualifiable criteria
that objectively judge outsourcing leadership impact and organizational operational excellence as result of managerial control. Bringing true
value to outsourcing buyers, job seekers and vendors, Outsourcings Best Managed top fifty ranked vendors, recognized globally as the “Black
Book 50” is differentiated from similar judged rankings by not being based on any subjective criteria.

Nearly 4000 global and regional outsourcing providers of various service offerings were graded and analyzed by actual customers, employees,
contractors and partners to arrive at the 50 Best Managed Outsourcing Vendors in 2007, the fourth year of the survey process. Recognized as
the only unbiased resource for Outsourcing Buyers, Investors and Competitive vendors, it was first included in the initial release of “The Black
Book of Outsourcing” in April 2005, (Wiley Publishers), now the internationally best-selling business book, translated into five languages and
available in audio book as well.

The purpose of annual updating the list is

to provide objective analysis and non-biased advisement to outsourcing buyers and investors.

For more information contact:

Brown-Wilson Group, Inc.
2519 McMullen Booth Road N, Suite 510, Mail Stop 108
Clearwater, Florida 33761
Phone: (727) 784-6689
Web site: http://www.TheBlack BookofOutsourcing.com
& http://www.Brown-Wilson.com

Recipient agrees that the Confidential Information is to be considered confidential and proprietary to Owner and Recipient shall hold the same
in confidence, shall not use the Confidential Information other than for the purposes of its business with Owner, and shall disclose it only to its
officers, directors, or employees with a specific need to know. Recipient will not disclose, publish or otherwise reveal any of the Confidential
Information received from Owner to any other party whatsoever except with the specific prior written authorization of Owner.