Conectys — data sheet

Each line is a datapoint with its grade. Grades are the ones the anchors act on: a sub-criterion scored 5 requires at least one E1 or E2 source, and evidence that is entirely E3 caps the sub-criterion at 3.

• Founded 2004 in Belgium by Arnold Cobbaert (founder-led); HQ Bucharest E2
• Figure variance: 3,000+ / 7 sites (careers, current) vs 3,400 / 12 sites (BEROCC) vs 14 locations (2026 third-party profile) — logged. Current careers-page site list: Bucharest, Sibiu, Poznań, Lisbon, Ghent, Istanbul, Cairo (+ PH Davao/Iloilo, Taipei, US per location pages) E2
• Languages: 35+ claimed; the Poznań page names 13 for one hub; homepage claims “100+ with AI-human/gig workforce” — the 100+ is a marketing construct, scored as company-stated. Per-language verification against hiring data was not performed this edition and is planned for the next E2E3
• CX + trust & safety/UGC moderation + data annotation, L1–L3 technical support (stated), NOC; BlueTweak proprietary AI platform (evolution of ConectysOS, an industry award finalist) E2E3
• Human-in-the-loop explicitly architected: “human-in-the-loop oversight, complex decision making, high-empathy interactions” as the stated division of labor; EU AI Act / DSA / GDPR governance language — unusually concrete E3
• Commercial transparency is the field’s best: pilot, FTE, outcome-based and hybrid models published on location pages; per-work-unit + monthly retainer structure described publicly E2
• Dedicated public certificates page exists; ISO 9001 confirmed historically, “ISO, PCI DSS, HIPAA” stated currently. Which ISO standards, and their identifiers, are not stated on that page E2E5
• Awards: Stevie Gold (2016) + Silver (2017), CEE Best BPO 2014/2016, 12+ industry awards claimed E2E3
• VERIFIED Aug 18 — Clutch: 2 reviews total, despite “Top BPO Company 2023” Clutch awards. Those are directory-tier recognitions, not review volume, exactly the distinction A2.3 anchors for E2
• VERIFIED Aug 18 — Glassdoor 2.7–2.8 across ~420–444 reviews (Lisbon 2.7/97, Portugal 2.7/100); one cached snapshot shows 3.3, conflict logged; a review text claims ~50% of new hires leave within 6–12 months E2
• Clutch lists minimum project size $250,000+ and a <$25/hr band; “15+ locations” per current profile E2

Sub-criterion anchor scores in criterion order, with the weighted criterion total computed from them. Multiply each anchor by its sub-criterion weight over five and sum: that is the whole arithmetic, and it is why this total can be checked without taking anyone's word.

• Clutch awards are not review volume. Directory-tier recognition scores in A2.3, never in A1.
• Glassdoor conflict logged (2.7–2.8 current vs a 3.3 cached snapshot).
• The certificates page names standards but not identifiers or which ISO standards are held — E5, and the gap that keeps A3 off a higher anchor.
• Largest remaining evidence gap: Independent client evidence: two Clutch reviews; certificate identifiers not published

The transparency strengths — published pricing models, a certificates page, a concrete HITL design, pilots — all stand. The independent-evidence layer largely does not exist. The profile verdict survives the correction; the “field’s surprise” framing does not.

Every line above is meant to be checkable. If a datapoint is wrong, out of date, or missing a certificate identifier we could not find, the corrections process is open: submit the evidence and the score is re-derived through the anchors. Facts are correctable; scores follow facts. Accepted corrections are logged in the changelog.