Note 1. Overview and Basis of Presentation

Business — Sykes Enterprises, Incorporated and consolidated subsidiaries (“SYKES” or the “Company”) provides comprehensive outsourced customer contact management solutions and services in the business process outsourcing arena to companies, primarily within the communications, financial services, technology/consumer, transportation and leisure, and healthcare industries. SYKES provides flexible, high-quality outsourced customer contact management services (with an emphasis on inbound technical support, demand generation and customer service), which includes customer assistance, healthcare and roadside assistance, technical support, and product and service sales to its clients’ customers. Utilizing SYKES’ integrated onshore/offshore global delivery model, SYKES provides its services through multiple communication channels encompassing phone, e-mail, social media, text messaging, chat and digital self-service. SYKES complements its outsourced customer contact management services with various enterprise support services in the United States that encompass services for a company’s internal support operations, from technical staffing services to outsourced corporate help desk services. In Europe, SYKES also provides fulfillment services, which includes order processing, payment processing, inventory control, product delivery and product returns handling. The Company has operations in two reportable segments entitled (1) the Americas, which includes the United States, Canada, Latin America, Australia and the Asia Pacific Rim, in which the client base is primarily companies in the United States that are using the Company’s services to support their customer management needs; and (2) EMEA, which includes Europe, the Middle East and Africa.

Acquisitions

On April 1, 2016, the Company completed the acquisition of Clear Link Holdings, LLC (“Clearlink”), pursuant to a definitive Agreement and Plan of Merger (the “Merger Agreement”), dated March 6, 2016. The Company has reflected the operating results in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations since April 1, 2016. See Note 2, Acquisitions, for additional information on the acquisition.

In July 2015, the Company completed the acquisition of Qelp B.V. and its subsidiary (together, known as “Qelp”), pursuant to a definitive Share Sale and Purchase Agreement, dated July 2, 2015. The Company has reflected the operating results in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations since July 2, 2015. See Note 2, Acquisitions, for additional information on the acquisition.

Basis of Presentation — The accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“generally accepted accounting principles” or “U.S. GAAP”) for interim financial information, the instructions to Form 10-Q and Article 10 of Regulation S-X. Accordingly, they do not include all of the information and notes required by generally accepted accounting principles for complete financial statements. In the opinion of management, all adjustments (consisting of normal recurring accruals) considered necessary for a fair presentation have been included. Operating results for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2016 are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for any future quarters or the year ending December 31, 2016. For further information, refer to the consolidated financial statements and notes thereto, included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) on February 29, 2016.

Principles of Consolidation — The condensed consolidated financial statements include the accounts of SYKES and its wholly-owned subsidiaries and controlled majority-owned subsidiaries. All intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated in consolidation.

Use of Estimates — The preparation of condensed consolidated financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires the Company to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Subsequent Events — Subsequent events or transactions have been evaluated through the date and time of issuance of the condensed consolidated financial statements. There were no material subsequent events that required recognition or disclosure in the accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements.

Customer-Acquisition Advertising Costs — The Company utilizes direct-response advertising the primary purpose of which is to elicit purchases from its clients’ customers. These costs are capitalized when they are expected to result in probable future benefits and are amortized over the period during which future benefits are expected to be received, which is generally less than one month. All other advertising costs are expensed as incurred. As of September 30, 2016, the Company had less than $0.1 million of capitalized direct-response advertising costs included in “Prepaid expenses” in the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet (none in 2015). Total advertising costs included in “Direct salaries and related costs” in the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Income Statements for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2016 were $9.8 million and $17.8 million, respectively (none in 2015).

Reclassifications — Certain balances in the prior period have been reclassified to conform to current period presentation.

New Accounting Standards Not Yet Adopted

In May 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2014-09, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606)” (“ASU 2014-09”). The amendments in ASU 2014-09 outline a single comprehensive model for entities to use in accounting for revenue arising from contracts with customers and indicate that an entity should recognize revenue to depict the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. To achieve this, an entity should identify the contract(s) with a customer, identify the performance obligations in the contract, determine the transaction price, allocate the transaction price to the performance obligations in the contract and recognize revenue when (or as) the entity satisfies a performance obligation. In August 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-14, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606) Deferral of the Effective Date” (“ASU 2015-14”). The amendments in ASU 2015-14 defer the effective date of ASU 2014-09 to annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within that reporting period. Earlier application is permitted only as of annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim reporting periods within that period. An entity should apply the amendments using either the full retrospective approach or retrospectively with a cumulative effect of initially applying the amendments recognized at the date of initial application. The Company is currently evaluating the methods of adoption and the impact that the adoption of ASU 2014-09 may have on its financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

In January 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-01, “Financial Instruments - Overall (Subtopic 825-10) Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities” (“ASU 2016-01”). These amendments modify how entities measure equity investments and present changes in the fair value of financial liabilities. Under the new guidance, entities will have to measure equity investments that do not result in consolidation and are not accounted for under the equity method at fair value and recognize any changes in fair value in net income unless the investments qualify for the new practicality exception. A practicality exception will apply to those equity investments that do not have a readily determinable fair value and do not qualify for the practical expedient to estimate fair value under Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 820, “Fair Value Measurements”, and as such, these investments may be measured at cost. These amendments are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company does not expect the adoption of ASU 2016-01 to materially impact its financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-02, “Leases (Topic 842)” (“ASU 2016-02”). These amendments require the recognition of lease assets and lease liabilities on the balance sheet by lessees for those leases currently classified as operating leases under ASC 840, “Leases”. These amendments also require qualitative disclosures along with specific quantitative disclosures. These amendments are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early application is permitted. Entities are required to apply the amendments at the beginning of the earliest period presented using a modified retrospective approach. The Company is currently evaluating the impact that the adoption of ASU 2016-02 will have on its financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-05, “Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815) – Effect of Derivative Contract Novations on Existing Hedge Accounting Relationships” (“ASU 2016-05”). These amendments clarify that a change in the counterparty to a derivative instrument that has been designated as the hedging instrument under Topic 815 does not, in and of itself, require dedesignation of that hedging relationship provided that all other hedge accounting criteria continue to be met. These amendments are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted. Entities have the option to apply the amendments on either a prospective basis or a modified retrospective basis. The Company is evaluating the methods of adoption but does not expect the adoption of ASU 2016-05 to materially impact its financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-08, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606) – Principal versus Agent Considerations (Reporting Revenue Gross versus Net)” (“ASU 2016-08”). These amendments clarify the implementation guidance on principal versus agent considerations and require entities to determine whether the nature of its promise to provide goods or services to a customer is performed in a principal or agent capacity and to recognize revenue in a gross or net manner based on its principal/agent designation. In April 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-10, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606) – Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing” (“ASU 2016-10”). These amendments clarify the identification of performance obligations and the licensing implementation guidance. In May 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-11, “Revenue Recognition and Derivatives and Hedging: Rescission of SEC Guidance Because of Accounting Standards Updates 2014-09 and 2014-16 Pursuant to Staff Announcements at the March 3, 2016 Emerging Issues Task Force Meeting (“EITF”)” (“ASU 2016-11”). These rescissions include changes to topics pertaining to accounting for shipping and handling fees and costs and accounting for consideration given by a vendor to a customer. In May 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-12, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606) – Narrow-Scope Improvements and Practical Expedients” (“ASU 2016-12”). These amendments clarify the guidance in certain narrow areas and add several practical expedients. These ASUs affect the guidance in ASU 2014-09, which is not yet effective. The effective date and transition requirements for ASU 2016-08, ASU 2016-10, ASU 2016-11 and ASU 2016-12 are the same as the effective date and transition requirements of ASU 2014-09, as updated by ASU 2015-14. The Company is currently evaluating the impact the guidance will have on its financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-09, “Compensation – Stock Compensation (Topic 718) – Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting” (“ASU 2016-09”). These amendments are intended to simplify several aspects of the accounting for share-based payment transactions, including the income tax consequences, classification of awards as either equity or liabilities, and classification on the statement of cash flows. These amendments are effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2016, and interim periods within those annual periods. Early adoption is permitted. Entities have the option to apply the amendments on either a prospective basis or a modified retrospective basis. The Company is currently evaluating the impact the guidance will have on its financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-13, “Financial Instruments – Credit Losses (Topic 326) – Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments” (“ASU 2016-13”). These amendments require measurement and recognition of expected versus incurred credit losses for financial assets held. These amendments are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, and interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the impact the guidance will have on its financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-15, “Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230) – Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments” (“ASU 2016-15”). These amendments clarify the presentation of cash receipts and payments in eight specific situations. These amendments are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, and interim periods within those fiscal years. These amendments will be applied using a retrospective transition method to each period presented. Early adoption is permitted, including adoption in an interim period. The Company does not expect the adoption of ASU 2016-15 to materially impact its financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

New Accounting Standards Recently Adopted

In June 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-12, “Compensation – Stock Compensation (Topic 718) Accounting for Share-Based Payments When the Terms of an Award Provide That a Performance Target Could Be Achieved after the Requisite Service Period” (“ASU 2014-12”). The amendments in ASU 2014-12 require that a performance target that affects vesting and that could be achieved after the requisite service period be treated as a performance condition. A reporting entity should apply existing guidance in ASC 718, “Compensation — Stock Compensation” (“ASC 718”), as it relates to awards with performance conditions that affect vesting to account for such awards. These amendments, adopted prospectively, were effective for annual periods and interim periods within those annual periods beginning after December 15, 2015. The adoption of ASU 2014-12 on January 1, 2016 did not have a material impact on the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Company.

In January 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-01, “Income Statement – Extraordinary and Unusual Items (Subtopic 225-20) Simplifying Income Statement Presentation by Eliminating the Concept of Extraordinary Items” (“ASU 2015-01”). The amendments eliminate from U.S. GAAP the concept of extraordinary items as part of the FASB’s initiative to reduce complexity in accounting standards. These amendments, adopted prospectively, were effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2015. The adoption of ASU 2015-01 on January 1, 2016 did not have a material impact on the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Company.

In February 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-02, “Consolidation (Topic 810) Amendments to the Consolidation Analysis)” (“ASU 2015-02”). The amendments are intended to improve targeted areas of the consolidation guidance for legal entities such as limited partnerships, limited liability corporations and securitization structures. These amendments affect the consolidation evaluation for reporting organizations. In addition, the amendments simplify and improve current U.S. GAAP by reducing the number of consolidation models. These amendments, adopted retrospectively, were effective for fiscal years, and for interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2015. The adoption of ASU 2015-02 on January 1, 2016 did not have a material impact on the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Company.

In April 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-03, “Interest – Imputation of Interest (Subtopic 835-30) Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs” (“ASU 2015-03”). These amendments require that debt issuance costs related to a recognized debt liability be presented in the balance sheet as a direct deduction from the carrying amount of that debt liability, consistent with debt discounts. These amendments were effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2015, and interim periods within those fiscal years. The adoption of ASU 2015-03 on January 1, 2016 did not have a material impact on the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Company.

In April 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-05, “Intangibles – Goodwill and Other – Internal-Use Software (Subtopic 350-40) Customer’s Accounting for Fees Paid in a Cloud Computing Arrangement” (“ASU 2015-05”). These amendments provide guidance to customers about whether a cloud computing arrangement includes a software license. If a cloud computing arrangement includes a software license, the customer should account for the software license element of the arrangement consistent with the acquisition of other software licenses. If a cloud computing arrangement does not include a software license, the customer should account for the arrangement as a service contract. The new guidance does not change the accounting for a customer’s accounting for service contracts. These amendments, adopted prospectively, were effective for annual periods, including interim periods within those annual periods, beginning after December 15, 2015. The adoption of ASU 2015-05 on January 1, 2016 did not have a material impact on the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Company.

In September 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-16, “Business Combinations (Topic 805) Simplifying the Accounting for Measurement-Period Adjustments” (“ASU 2015-16”). These amendments eliminate the requirement for an acquirer to retrospectively adjust provisional amounts recorded in a business combination to reflect new information about the facts and circumstances that existed as of the acquisition date and that, if known, would have affected measurement or recognition of amounts initially recognized. As an alternative, the amendment requires that an acquirer recognize adjustments to provisional amounts that are identified during the measurement period in the reporting period in which the adjustment amounts are determined. The amendments require that the acquirer record, in the financial statements of the period in which adjustments to provisional amounts are determined, the effect on earnings of changes in depreciation, amortization, or other income effects, if any, as a result of the change to the provisional amounts, calculated as if the accounting had been completed at the acquisition date. These amendments, adopted prospectively, were effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2015, including interim periods within those fiscal years. The adoption of ASU 2015-16 on January 1, 2016 did not have a material impact on the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Company.

In November 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-17, “Income Taxes (Topic 740) Balance Sheet Classification of Deferred Taxes” (“ASU 2015-17”). These amendments require that deferred tax liabilities and assets be classified as noncurrent in a classified statement of financial position. The existing requirement that deferred tax liabilities and assets of a tax-paying component of an entity be offset and presented as a single amount is not affected by these amendments. These amendments, adopted prospectively, were effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2016, and interim periods within those annual periods, with early adoption permitted. The adoption of ASU 2015-17 on January 1, 2016 resulted in the reclassification of $12.0 million of current deferred tax assets included in “Other current assets” and $1.1 million of current deferred tax liabilities included in “Current deferred income tax liabilities” to noncurrent deferred income tax assets and liabilities. All future deferred tax assets and liabilities will be classified as noncurrent. No prior periods were adjusted.

Note 2. Acquisitions

Clearlink

On April 1, 2016, the Company acquired 100% of the outstanding membership units of Clearlink through a merger of Clearlink with and into a subsidiary of the Company (the “Merger”). Clearlink, with its operations located in the United States, is an inbound demand generation and sales conversion platform serving numerous Fortune 500 business-to-consumer and business-to-business clients across various industries and subsectors, including telecommunications, satellite television, home security and insurance. The results of Clearlink’s operations have been included in the Company’s consolidated financial statements since April 1, 2016 (the “Clearlink acquisition date”). The strategic acquisition of Clearlink expands the Company’s suite of service offerings while creating differentiation in the marketplace, broadening its addressable market opportunity and extending executive level reach within the Company’s existing clients’ organization. This resulted in the Company paying a substantial premium for Clearlink resulting in the recognition of goodwill. Pursuant to Federal income tax laws, intangible assets and goodwill from the Clearlink acquisition are deductible over a 15 year amortization period.

The Clearlink purchase price totaled $207.9 million, consisting of the following:

Approximately $2.6 million of the purchase price was placed in an escrow account as security for the indemnification obligations of Clearlink’s members under the merger agreement.

The Company accounted for the Clearlink acquisition in accordance with ASC 805, “Business Combinations” (“ASC 805”), whereby the purchase price paid was allocated to the tangible and identifiable intangibles acquired and liabilities assumed from Clearlink based on their estimated fair values as of the closing date. Certain amounts are provisional and are subject to change, including the tax analysis of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed, intangibles and goodwill. The Company expects to complete its analysis of the purchase price allocation during the fourth quarter of 2016 and the resulting adjustments will be recorded in accordance with ASU 2015-16, “Business Combinations (Topic 805) Simplifying the Accounting for Measurement-Period Adjustments.”

The following table summarizes the estimated Clearlink acquisition date fair values of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed, all included in the Americas segment (in thousands):

Fair values are based on management’s estimates and assumptions including variations of the income approach, the cost approach and the market approach.

The following table presents the Company’s purchased intangibles assets as of April 1, 2016, the Clearlink acquisition date (in thousands):

The amount of Clearlink’s revenues and net income since the April 1, 2016 acquisition date, included in the Company’s Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations for the periods indicated below, were as follows (in thousands):

The following table presents the unaudited pro forma combined revenues and net earnings as if Clearlink had been included in the consolidated results of the Company for the entire three and nine month periods ended September 30, 2016 and 2015. The pro forma financial information is not indicative of the results of operations that would have been achieved if the acquisition and related borrowings had taken place on January 1, 2016 and 2015 (in thousands):

These amounts have been calculated to reflect the additional depreciation, amortization, interest expense and rent expense that would have been incurred assuming the fair value adjustments and borrowings occurred on January 1, 2016 and January 1, 2015, together with the consequential tax effects. In addition, these amounts exclude costs incurred which are directly attributable to the acquisition, and which do not have a continuing impact on the combined companies’ operating results. Included in these costs are advisory and legal costs, net of the tax effects.

Acquisition-related costs associated with Clearlink in the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations were as follows (none in 2015) (in thousands):

Qelp

On July 2, 2015, the Company’s wholly-owned subsidiaries, Sykes Enterprises Incorporated B.V. and Sykes Enterprises Incorporated Holdings B.V., both Netherlands companies, entered into a definitive Share Sale and Purchase Agreement (the “Qelp Purchase Agreement”) with MobileTimes B.V., Yarra B.V., From The Mountain Consultancy B.V. and Sticting Administratiekantoor Qelp (the “Sellers”), all of which are Netherlands companies, to acquire all of the outstanding shares of Qelp B.V. and its wholly owned subsidiary (together, known as “Qelp”.) The strategic acquisition of Qelp (the “Qelp acquisition”) was to further broaden and strengthen the Company’s service portfolio around digital self-service customer support and extend its reach into adjacent, but complementary, markets. Pursuant to Federal income tax regulations, no amount of intangibles or goodwill from this acquisition will be deductible for tax purposes. The results of Qelp’s operations have been included in the Company’s consolidated financial statements since its acquisition on July 2, 2015 (the “Qelp acquisition date”).

The consideration consisted of an initial purchase price and a contingent purchase price. The initial purchase price of $9.8 million, including certain post-closing adjustments relating to Qelp’s working capital, was funded through cash on hand upon the closing of the transaction on July 2, 2015. The initial contingent purchase price to be paid over a three year period was based on achieving targets tied to revenues and earnings before interest, income taxes, depreciation and amortization (“EBITDA”) for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2017 and 2018, not to exceed EUR 10.0 million.

As of the Qelp acquisition date, the total consideration paid or to be paid by the Company for the Qelp acquisition is summarized below (in thousands):

The fair value of the contingent consideration was estimated using the discounted cash flow method, and was included in “Other long-term liabilities” in the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets (see Note 4, Fair Value, for further information). As part of the discounted cash flow method, the Company calculated an adjusted weighted average cost of capital (“WACC”) specifically attributable to the future payments of the contingent consideration. Based on the forecasted revenue and profitability scenarios and their respective probabilities of occurrence, the Company estimated the present value of the probability-adjusted future payments utilizing an adjusted WACC for the potential future payments. The Company believes that its estimates and assumptions are reasonable, but there is significant judgment involved. Changes in the fair value of the contingent consideration liabilities subsequent to the acquisition will be recorded in the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

On September 26, 2016, the Company entered into an addendum to the Qelp Purchase Agreement with the Sellers to settle the outstanding contingent consideration for EUR 4.0 million ($4.5 million as of September 30, 2016) to be paid on June 30, 2017.

The Company accounted for the Qelp acquisition in accordance with ASC 805, whereby the fair value of the purchase price was allocated to the tangible and identifiable intangible assets acquired and liabilities assumed from Qelp based on their estimated fair values as of the closing date. The Company completed its analysis of the purchase price allocation during the fourth quarter of 2015.

The following table summarizes the Qelp acquisition date fair values of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed, all included in the EMEA segment (in thousands):

Fair values were based on management’s estimates and assumptions including variations of the income approach, the cost approach and the market approach.

The following table presents the Company’s purchased intangibles assets as of July 2, 2015, the Qelp acquisition date (in thousands):

The amount of Qelp’s revenues and net (loss) since the July 2, 2015 acquisition date, included in the Company’s Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2015 were as follows (in thousands):

Acquisition-related costs associated with Qelp in the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations were as follows (none in 2016) (in thousands):

Note 3. Costs Associated with Exit or Disposal Activities

In connection with the Company’s initiatives to streamline excess capacity in The Philippines and various locations in the U.S. (the “Exit Plans”), the Company has paid $8.0 million in cash through September 30, 2016.

The cumulative costs expected and incurred as a result of the Exit Plans were as follows as of September 30, 2016 (in thousands):

The following table summarizes the accrued liability associated with the Exit Plans’ exit or disposal activities and related charges for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2016 and 2015 (in thousands):

⁽¹⁾  Related to lease obligations and facility exit costs.    

Restructuring Liability Classification

The following table summarizes the Company’s short-term and long-term accrued liabilities associated with its exit and disposal activities, by plan, as of September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015 (in thousands):

The remaining restructuring liability relates to future rent obligations to be paid through the remainder of the lease terms, the last of which ends in February 2017.

Note 4. Fair Value

ASC 820 “Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures” (“ASC 820”) requires disclosure about how fair value is determined for assets and liabilities and establishes a hierarchy for which these assets and liabilities must be grouped, based on significant levels of observable or unobservable inputs. Observable inputs reflect market data obtained from independent sources, while unobservable inputs reflect the Company’s market assumptions. This hierarchy requires the use of observable market data when available. These two types of inputs have created the following fair value hierarchy:

Fair Value of Financial Instruments — The following methods and assumptions were used to estimate the fair value of each class of financial instruments for which it is practicable to estimate that value:

Fair Value Measurements — ASC 820 defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and expands disclosures about fair value measurements. ASC 820-10-20 clarifies that fair value is an exit price, representing the amount that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants.

ASC 825 “Financial Instruments” (“ASC 825”) permits an entity to measure certain financial assets and financial liabilities at fair value with changes in fair value recognized in earnings each period. The Company has not elected to use the fair value option permitted under ASC 825 for any of its financial assets and financial liabilities that are not already recorded at fair value.

Determination of Fair Value — The Company generally uses quoted market prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the Company has the ability to access to determine fair value, and classifies such items in Level 1. Fair values determined by Level 2 inputs utilize inputs other than quoted market prices included in Level 1 that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly. Level 2 inputs include quoted market prices in active markets for similar assets or liabilities, and inputs other than quoted market prices that are observable for the asset or liability. Level 3 inputs are unobservable inputs for the asset or liability, and include situations where there is little, if any, market activity for the asset or liability.

If quoted market prices are not available, fair value is based upon internally developed valuation techniques that use, where possible, current market-based or independently sourced market parameters, such as interest rates, currency rates, etc. Assets or liabilities valued using such internally generated valuation techniques are classified according to the lowest level input or value driver that is significant to the valuation. Thus, an item may be classified in Level 3 even though there may be some significant inputs that are readily observable.

The following section describes the valuation methodologies used by the Company to measure assets and liabilities at fair value on a recurring basis, including an indication of the level in the fair value hierarchy in which each asset or liability is generally classified.

Money Market and Open-End Mutual Funds — The Company uses quoted market prices in active markets to determine the fair value. These items are classified in Level 1 of the fair value hierarchy.

Foreign Currency Forward Contracts and Options — The Company enters into foreign currency forward contracts and options over the counter and values such contracts using quoted market prices of comparable instruments or, if none are available, on pricing models or formulas using current market and model assumptions, including adjustments for credit risk. The key inputs include forward or option foreign currency exchange rates and interest rates. These items are classified in Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.

Embedded Derivatives — The Company uses significant unobservable inputs to determine the fair value of embedded derivatives, which are classified in Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy. These unobservable inputs include expected cash flows associated with the lease, currency exchange rates on the day of commencement, as well as forward currency exchange rates; results of which are adjusted for credit risk. These items are classified in Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy. See Note 6, Financial Derivatives, for further information.

Investments Held in Rabbi Trust — The investment assets of the rabbi trust are valued using quoted market prices in active markets, which are classified in Level 1 of the fair value hierarchy. For additional information about the deferred compensation plan, refer to Note 7, Investments Held in Rabbi Trust, and Note 17, Stock-Based Compensation.

Guaranteed Investment Certificates — Guaranteed investment certificates, with variable interest rates linked to the prime rate, approximate fair value due to the automatic ability to re-price with changes in the market; such items are classified in Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.

Contingent Consideration — The Company uses significant unobservable inputs to determine the fair value of contingent consideration, which is classified in Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy. The contingent consideration recorded related to the Qelp acquisition and liabilities assumed as part of the Clearlink acquisition was recognized at fair value using a discounted cash flow methodology and a discount rate of approximately 14.0% and 10.0%, respectively, at the acquisition date. The discount rates vary dependent on the specific risks of each acquisition

including the country of operation, the nature of services and complexity of the acquired business, and other similar factors, all of which are significant inputs not observable in the market. Significant increases or decreases in any of the inputs in isolation would result in a significantly higher or lower fair value measurement.

In connection with the addendum to the Qelp Purchase Agreement with the Sellers dated September 26, 2016, the Company agreed to settle the outstanding contingent consideration for EUR 4.0 million ($4.5 million as of September 30, 2016) to be paid on June 30, 2017.

The Company’s assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis subject to the requirements of ASC 820 consist of the following (in thousands):

⁽¹⁾ See Note 6, Financial Derivatives, for the classification in the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

⁽²⁾ Included in “Other current assets” in the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. See Note 7, Investments Held in Rabbi Trust.

⁽³⁾ Included in “Deferred charges and other assets” in the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

⁽⁴⁾ The carrying value of long-term debt approximates its estimated fair value as it re-prices at varying interest rates. See Note 11, Borrowings.

⁽⁵⁾ In the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

Reconciliations of Fair Value Measurements Categorized within Level 3 of the Fair Value Hierarchy

Embedded Derivatives in Lease Agreements

A rollforward of the net asset (liability) activity in the Company’s fair value of the embedded derivatives is as follows (in thousands) (none in 2015):

Contingent Consideration

A rollforward of the activity in the Company’s fair value of the contingent consideration is as follows (in thousands):

The Company recorded a fair value adjustment of $2.6 million to the Qelp contingent consideration in “General and administrative” in the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2016 due to the execution of an addendum to the Qelp Purchase Agreement subject to which the Company will pay the Sellers EUR 4.0 million on June 30, 2017 ($4.5 million as of September 30, 2016). The Company recorded a fair value adjustment of $0.2 million to the Clearlink contingent consideration in “General and administrative” in the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations in the three and nine months ended September 30, 2016 due to changes in the probability of achievement of certain revenue targets.

The Company accretes interest expense each period using the effective interest method until the contingent consideration reaches the estimated future value of $7.3 million. Interest expense related to the contingent consideration is included in “Interest (expense)” in the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations.

Non-Recurring Fair Value

Certain assets, under certain conditions, are measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis utilizing Level 3 inputs, like those associated with acquired businesses, including goodwill, other intangible assets and other long-lived assets. For these assets, measurement at fair value in periods subsequent to their initial recognition would be applicable if these assets were determined to be impaired. The adjusted carrying values for assets measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis (no liabilities) subject to the requirements of ASC 820 were not material at September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015.

Note 5. Goodwill and Intangible Assets

Intangible Assets

The following table presents the Company’s purchased intangible assets as of September 30, 2016 (in thousands):

The following table presents the Company’s purchased intangible assets as of December 31, 2015 (in thousands):

The Company’s estimated future amortization expense for the succeeding years relating to the purchased intangible assets resulting from acquisitions completed prior to September 30, 2016, is as follows (in thousands):

Goodwill

Changes in goodwill for the nine months ended September 30, 2016 consist of the following (in thousands):

Changes in goodwill for the year ended December 31, 2015 consist of the following (in thousands):

                ⁽¹⁾ See Note 2, Acquisitions, for further information.    

The Company performs its annual goodwill impairment test during the third quarter, or more frequently, if indicators of impairment exist.

For the annual goodwill impairment test, the Company elected to forgo the option to first assess qualitative factors and performed its annual two-step goodwill impairment test as of July 31, 2016. Under ASC 350, the carrying value of assets is calculated at the reporting unit level. The quantitative assessment of goodwill includes comparing a reporting unit’s calculated fair value to its carrying value. The calculation of fair value requires significant judgments including estimation of future cash flows, which is dependent on internal forecasts, estimation of the long-term rate of growth, the useful life over which cash flows will occur and determination of the Company’s weighted average cost of capital. Changes in these estimates and assumptions could materially affect the determination of fair value and/or conclusions on goodwill impairment for each reporting unit. If the fair value of the reporting unit is less than its carrying value, goodwill is considered impaired and an impairment loss is recorded to the extent that the fair value of the goodwill within the reporting unit is less than its carrying value.

The process of evaluating the fair value of the reporting units is highly subjective and requires significant judgment and estimates as the reporting units operate in a number of markets and geographical regions. The Company used an average of the income and market approaches to determine its best estimates of fair value which incorporated the following significant assumptions:

As of July 31, 2016, the Company concluded that goodwill was not impaired for all six of its reporting units with goodwill, based on fair value estimates developed using generally accepted valuation techniques and the significant assumptions outlined above. While the fair values of four of the six reporting units were substantially in excess of their carrying value, the Qelp reporting unit’s fair value exceeded its carrying value (although not substantially) and the newly acquired Clearlink reporting unit’s fair value approximated its carrying value due to the proximity to the acquisition date of April 1, 2016. The Clearlink reporting unit’s fair value of $207.9 million includes $70.2 million of goodwill.

The Qelp and Clearlink reporting units are at risk for future impairment if projected operating results are not met or other inputs into the fair value measurement change. However, as of September 30, 2016, there were no indicators of impairment.

Note 6. Financial Derivatives

Cash Flow Hedges – The Company has derivative assets and liabilities relating to outstanding forward contracts and options, designated as cash flow hedges, as defined under ASC 815 “Derivatives and Hedging” (“ASC 815”), consisting of Philippine Peso, Costa Rican Colon, Hungarian Forint and Romanian Leu contracts. These contracts are entered into to protect against the risk that the eventual cash flows resulting from such transactions will be adversely affected by changes in exchange rates.

The deferred gains (losses) and related taxes on the Company’s cash flow hedges recorded in “Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)” (“AOCI”) in the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets are as follows (in thousands):

Deferred gains (losses) and other future reclassifications from AOCI will fluctuate with movements in the underlying market price of the forward contracts and options.

Net Investment Hedge – The Company enters into foreign exchange forward contracts to hedge its net investment in certain foreign operations, as defined under ASC 815. The purpose of these derivative instruments is to protect the Company’s interests against the risk that the net assets of certain foreign subsidiaries will be adversely affected by changes in exchange rates and economic exposures related to the Company’s foreign currency-based investments in these subsidiaries.

Non-Designated Hedges

Foreign Currency Forward Contracts – The Company also periodically enters into foreign currency hedge contracts that are not designated as hedges as defined under ASC 815. The purpose of these derivative instruments is to protect the Company’s interests against adverse foreign currency moves relating primarily to intercompany receivables and payables, and other assets and liabilities that are denominated in currencies other than the Company’s subsidiaries’ functional currencies. These contracts generally do not exceed 180 days in duration.

Embedded Derivatives – The Company enters into certain lease agreements which require payments not denominated in the functional currency of any substantial party to the agreements. The foreign currency component of these contracts meets the criteria under ASC 815 as embedded derivatives. The Company has determined that the embedded derivatives are not clearly and closely related to the economic characteristics and risks of the host contracts (lease agreements), and separate, stand-alone instruments with the same terms as the embedded derivative instruments would otherwise qualify as derivative instruments, thereby requiring separation from the lease agreements and recognition at fair value. Such instruments do not qualify for hedge accounting under ASC 815.

The Company had the following outstanding foreign currency forward contracts and options, and embedded derivatives (in thousands):

Master netting agreements exist with each respective counterparty to reduce credit risk by permitting net settlement of derivative positions. In the event of default by the Company or one of its counterparties, these agreements include a set-off clause that provides the non-defaulting party the right to net settle all derivative transactions, regardless of the currency and settlement date. The maximum amount of loss due to credit risk that, based on gross fair value, the Company would incur if parties to the derivative transactions that make up the concentration failed to perform according to the terms of the contracts was $0.5 million and $11.0 million as of September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015, respectively. After consideration of these netting arrangements and offsetting positions by counterparty, the total net settlement amount as it relates to these positions are asset positions of $10.2 million as of December 31, 2015 (none at September 30, 2016) and liability positions of $3.2 million and $0.1 million as of September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015, respectively.

Although legally enforceable master netting arrangements exist between the Company and each counterparty, the Company has elected to present the derivative assets and derivative liabilities on a gross basis in the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. Additionally, the Company is not required to pledge, nor is it entitled to receive, cash collateral related to these derivative transactions.

The following tables present the fair value of the Company’s derivative instruments included in the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets (in thousands):