No. The actual arrangements and the applicant’s primary duties require assessment. A service agreement should be evaluated for what it really provides. Start from the scope schedule and the exclusions clause together, because the second frequently gives back what the first appears to take away. Work the provider has not undertaken is still performed by someone inside the business, and that person’s identity determines whether the role reads as managerial.
Account for the work that remains
Identify unassigned tasks and work the applicant continues to perform. Have the entire role assessed against managerial or executive capacity. Buying a service does not by itself establish that the applicant’s remaining work qualifies.
Two records make the allocation concrete. A signed scope schedule fixes the outer edge of what has been bought; the provider’s own reporting or invoicing detail shows what was actually delivered against it in a given month. Where invoices consistently describe less than the schedule promises, the difference is unassigned work, and unassigned work does not disappear.
Ask who covered it. The governing condition sits behind all of this: L-1A requires one continuous year of qualifying employment abroad with a related entity within the preceding three years, and a position managerial or executive in capacity rather than in title. Neither element is supplied by a contract with a third party, however comprehensive that contract looks.