(3) Per unit price or other underlying value of transaction computed pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 0-11 (set forth the amount on which the filing fee is calculated and state how it was determined):

 

 

 

PERFICIENT, INC.

 

 

 

PERFICIENT, INC.

 

 

PURPOSE OF MEETING

 

The specific proposals to be considered and acted upon at the Meeting are summarized in the accompanying Notice of Annual Meeting of Stockholders and the E-Proxy Notice. Each proposal is described in more detail in this Proxy Statement.

 

VOTING RIGHTS AND SOLICITATION OF PROXIES

 

Only holders of record of Perficient common stock, $0.001 par value per share (“Common Stock”), at the close of business on the record date, April 1, 2016 (the “Record Date”), will be entitled to vote at the Meeting, and any adjournment thereof. On the Record Date, there were 36,160,117 shares of Common Stock outstanding and entitled to vote. Each outstanding share of Common Stock is entitled to one vote on each matter to be voted upon. Votes cast, either in person or by proxy, will be tabulated by Broadridge, the Company’s proxy facilitator.

The Company’s bylaws provide that the holders of a majority of the Company’s outstanding shares of stock entitled to vote at the Meeting, present in person or represented by proxy, shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business at the Meeting. Abstentions and broker non-votes will be counted as present for the purpose of determining the presence of a quorum.

Stockholders will need the information on the E-Proxy Notice that is printed in the box marked by the arrow.

 

Holders of record of the Common Stock may vote using one of the following methods:

 

 

 

By Internet: Stockholders of record may vote by the Internet by following the instructions included on the E-Proxy Notice that you received in the mail or, if you requested or received a hard copy of this Proxy Statement, on the enclosed proxy card. Stockholders electing to vote by the Internet may incur Internet access charges.

By Telephone: Stockholders of record may vote by telephone by following the instructions included on the proxy card if you requested or received a hard copy of this Proxy Statement. Stockholders electing to vote by telephone may incur telephone access charges.

Proxies submitted by telephone or the Internet are treated in the same manner as if the stockholder had signed, dated, and returned the proxy card by mail. Therefore, stockholders of record electing to vote by telephone or the Internet should not return their proxy cards by mail.

 

In some instances, only one copy of the proxy materials, including the E-Proxy Notice, is being delivered to multiple stockholders sharing an address, unless we have received instructions from one or more of the stockholders to continue to deliver multiple copies.  We will deliver promptly upon oral or written request a separate copy of the proxy materials to any stockholder at your address.  If you wish to receive a separate copy of proxy materials, requests should be directed to Mr. Paul E. Martin, Perficient, Inc., 555 Maryville University Dr., Suite 600, Saint Louis, Missouri, 63141, telephone number (314) 529-3600.  If you have received only one copy of the proxy materials and wish to receive a separate copy for each stockholder in the future, you may call us at the telephone number listed above or write us at the address listed above.  Alternatively, stockholders sharing an address who now receive multiple copies of the proxy materials may request delivery of a single copy, also by calling us at the number listed above, or writing to us at the address listed above.

At the Meeting, five directors will be elected to hold office for a term expiring at the next Annual Meeting of Stockholders.  The nominees for election (the “Nominee Directors”) are:

Each Nominee Director is currently serving as a director of Perficient and has consented to being named in this Proxy Statement and to serve as a director if elected.  Each director will be elected to serve until a successor is elected and qualified or until the director’s earlier resignation or removal.

 

If any of the Nominee Directors listed above becomes unable to serve or for good cause will not serve, an event that is not anticipated by the Company, either (i) the shares represented by the proxies will be voted for a substitute nominee or substitute nominees designated by the Board; or (ii) the Board may reduce the size of the Board. At this time, the Board knows of no reason why any of the persons listed above may not be able to serve as directors if elected.

 

 

Jeffrey S. Davis became the Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) and a member of the Board in September 2009.  He previously served as the Chief Operating Officer of the Company following its acquisition of Vertecon in April 2002, and was named the Company’s President in 2004. He served the same role of Chief Operating Officer at Vertecon from October 1999 to its acquisition by the Company. Before Vertecon, Mr. Davis was a Senior Manager and member of the leadership team in Arthur Andersen’s Business Consulting Practice, where he was responsible for defining and managing internal processes, while managing business development and delivery of all products, services, and solutions to a number of large accounts.  Mr. Davis also served in a leadership position at Ernst & Young LLP in the Management Consulting practice and in industry at Boeing, Inc. and Mallinckrodt, Inc.  Mr. Davis is an active volunteer member of the board of directors of the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation of St. Louis and a member of the University of Missouri Trulaske College of Business advisory board. Mr. Davis has a M.B.A. from Washington University and a B.S. degree in Electrical Engineering from the University of Missouri.

 

Kathryn J. Henely was appointed as the Company’s Chief Operating Officer (“COO”) in November 2009.  Ms. Henely joined the Company as a Director in the St. Louis office following its acquisition of Vertecon in April 2002.  Ms. Henely was the General Manager of the St. Louis office and the Vice President for the Company’s largest business group, which included several local and national business units along with the Company’s offshore development center in China. Prior to her appointment to COO, she actively participated in the due diligence and integration of several acquisitions within her business group.  Additionally, she led the establishment of the Company Wide Practices and Corporate Recruiting organizations.  Ms. Henely received her M.S. in Computer Science from the University of Missouri-Rolla and her B.S. in Computer Science from the University of Iowa.

Paul E. Martin joined the Company in August 2006 as Chief Financial Officer (“CFO”), Treasurer and Secretary. From August 2004 until February 2006, Mr. Martin was the Interim co-Chief Financial Officer and Interim Chief Financial Officer of Charter Communications, Inc. (“Charter”), a publicly traded multi-billion dollar revenue domestic cable television multi-system operator. From April 2002 through April 2006, Mr. Martin was the Senior Vice President, Principal Accounting Officer and Corporate Controller of Charter, and was Charter’s Vice President and Corporate Controller from March 2000 to April 2002. Prior to Charter, Mr. Martin was Vice President and Controller for Operations and Logistics for Fort James Corporation, a manufacturer of paper products with multi-billion dollar revenue. From 1995 to February 1999, Mr. Martin was Chief Financial Officer of Rawlings Sporting Goods Company, Inc., a publicly traded multi-million dollar revenue sporting goods manufacturer and distributor. Mr. Martin received a B.S. degree with honors in accounting from the University of Missouri – St. Louis.  Mr. Martin is also a board member of the St. Louis chapter of Autism Speaks.

 

Ralph C. Derrickson became a member of the Board in July 2004. Mr. Derrickson has more than 28 years of technology management experience in a wide range of settings including start-up, interim management, and restructuring situations. Currently Mr. Derrickson is President, CEO and a director of Carena, Inc., a virtual medicine services company. Prior to joining Carena, Inc., Mr. Derrickson was managing director of venture investments at Vulcan Inc., an investment management firm headquartered in Seattle, Washington, from October 2001 to July 2004. Mr. Derrickson is a founding partner of Watershed Capital, an early-stage venture capital firm, and is the managing member of RCollins Group, LLC, a management advisory firm. From September 2009 to July 2012 he served as a board member of Array Health Solutions.  He also previously served as a board member of Metricom, Inc., a publicly traded company, from April 1997 to November 2001, and as Interim CEO of Metricom from February 2001 to August 2001. From June 1993 to June 1997, he served as vice president of product development at Starwave Corporation, one of the pioneers of the Internet. Earlier, Mr. Derrickson held senior management positions at Metricom, Inc., Starwave Corporation, and NeXT Computer, Inc. He has served on the boards of numerous start-up technology companies. Mr. Derrickson is a lecturer at the Michael G. Foster School of Business at the University of Washington, and serves on the Executive Advisory Board of the Burek Center for Entrepreneurship and Innovation at the University of Washington.  Mr. Derrickson also serves on the Board of Trustees of Hyla Middle School on Bainbridge Island, Washington.  He is a member of the board of Life Science Washington (formerly the Washington Biotechnology & Biomedical Association (WBBA)) in Seattle, Washington. Mr. Derrickson holds a bachelor’s degree in systems software from the Rochester Institute of Technology.

 

John S. Hamlin became a member of the Board in March 2009.  Mr. Hamlin has been President and Managing Partner of Bozeman Limited Partnership, an Austin, Texas-based private equity firm, since April 2007. He currently serves on the corporate board of Recreational Equipment, Inc., an outdoor retailer in Seattle, Washington; Presiding Director of the board of Tory Burch LLC, a luxury American sportswear company in New York; and a corporate board member of Spiceworks, a privately held network management software company in Austin, Texas.  He also served on the corporate board of Trackingpoint, an optics technology company in Austin, Texas from 2011 to 2015.  Mr. Hamlin served on the board of Serena and Lily, a privately held premium home goods retailer in California from 2012 to 2014.  From March 2009 until their acquisition by Shiseido in March 2010, Mr. Hamlin also served on the board of Bare Escentuals, a publicly-held premium cosmetic company.  From 2006 to 2008, he was a corporate board member and audit committee member at Safeco, a publicly-held insurance company, which was sold to Liberty Mutual Insurance.  From 2010 to 2013, Mr. Hamlin served on the board of Food on the Table.  He also previously served on the advisory board of Bazaarvoice, a publicly held online ratings and review company. Prior to joining Bozeman, Mr. Hamlin spent 11 years at Dell Inc. (“Dell”), a technology solutions, services, and support provider, where he was an Executive Officer and Senior Vice President reporting directly to the Office of the Chairman.  From 2005 to 2007 he was the Senior Vice President responsible for Dell’s global online business and brand strategy. Mr. Hamlin previously served as Senior Vice President and General Manager of Dell’s United States consumer business for five years, and led that business from the Number 6 to the Number 1 market share in the U.S.  He also served as Vice President and General Manager of Dell’s Home and Small Business division in Japan, and held marketing and operations positions in the U.S. Home and Small Business division before moving to Japan. Prior to joining Dell, Mr. Hamlin worked in the venture capital field for three years and served as a strategic consultant at Bain & Company for six years. He is a Phi Beta Kappa graduate of Dartmouth College and received a graduate degree from the Harvard Business School.

 

James R. Kackley became a member of the Board in December 2010 and was appointed as non-executive Chairman in November 2011.  He is currently the non-executive Chairman of the Board of Orion Energy Systems, Inc., a leading innovator in power technology, having served as President and Chief Operating Officer in 2009 and 2010 and as a director since 2005.  Prior to 2000 he served as Managing Partner—Chief Financial Officer of Andersen Worldwide SC.  Mr. Kackley spent more than three decades at Arthur Andersen LLP and Andersen Worldwide.  He served as a partner in both the U.S. and Worldwide firms from 1974.  He served as an adjunct Professor at the Kellstadt School of Management at DePaul University from 1999 to 2002.  He was a director of Herman Miller, Inc. from 2003 to 2014, a director of PepsiAmericas Inc. from December 2004 to February 2010, and a director of Ryerson Inc. from February to October 2007.  Mr. Kackley has been involved in a number of civic and charitable organizations.  He currently serves as a Life Trustee of Northwestern University and as a Life Trustee at the Museum of Science and Industry (Chicago).  Mr. Kackley received his undergraduate degree from Northwestern University.

 David S. Lundeen became a member of the Board in 1998.  Mr. Lundeen was a founding angel investor and currently serves as the Chairman of the Audit Committee.  Mr. Lundeen was a founding angel investor, board member and venture investor of Parago, Inc. (“Parago”), a leading corporate incentives and rebate company, from 1999 until 2014.  Parago grew from zero revenue in 1999 to over $120 million in revenue in 2014. He served on Parago’s board until its sale to Blackhawk Network Holdings, Inc. in November 2014 for $290 million.  Beginning in 1999, Mr. Lundeen was an angel investor, venture investor and board member of Tipping Point, Inc., a network security company, until its sale to 3Com Corporation in January 2005 for $442 million. From 1999 through 2002, he was a co-founder and a partner of Watershed Capital, a venture capital firm, based in Mountain View, California.  From early 1995 through 1997, Mr. Lundeen was CFO and COO of BSG Corporation, in Austin, Texas.  Mr. Lundeen orchestrated a growth turnaround, taking BSG from an unprofitable $35 million business to a profitable $65 million business.  BSG was sold to Per Se Technology for $350 million in 1996.  From 1990 until 1995, he was employed by Blockbuster Entertainment Corporation in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, first as head of Mergers and Acquisitions and Corporate Finance and later as President of Blockbuster’s Technology Division during the last two years of his tenure.  Blockbuster was sold to Viacom in September 1994 for $7.6 billion.  Prior to Blockbuster, Mr. Lundeen was an investment banker with Drexel Burnham Lambert in New York City.  He worked for Booz, Allen & Hamilton in Chicago from mid-1985 through 1987.  Prior to Booz, Allen & Hamilton, he spent one year at Anderson Consulting (now Accenture Plc) in Chicago.  Mr. Lundeen received a B.S. in Engineering from the University of Michigan in 1984 and a M.B.A. from the University of Chicago in 1988.

 

There are no family relationships between any of the Company’s directors and executive officers.

  

COMPOSITION AND MEETINGS OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND COMMITTEES

 

The size of the Board is set at five directors.  The Board has affirmatively determined that a majority of the directors qualify as independent directors as defined by SEC regulations and The Nasdaq Global Select Market (“Nasdaq”) listing standards. The independent directors are Ralph C. Derrickson, John S. Hamlin, James R. Kackley, and David S. Lundeen.

During 2015, the Board held eight meetings.  Each of the directors participated in at least 75% of the aggregate of all meetings of the Board and the total number of meetings held by all committees of the Board of which each respective director was a member during the time he was serving as such during 2015.  All members of the Board are encouraged to attend the Annual Meeting.  Two of the directors attended the 2015 Annual Meeting of Stockholders by telephone.

The Board has created a Compensation Committee, an Audit Committee, and a Nominating & Governance Committee. Each member of these committees is independent as defined by SEC regulations and the Nasdaq listing standards.

 

This committee held one meeting during 2015.  John S. Hamlin and James R. Kackley served on the Nominating & Governance Committee. Mr. Hamlin serves as Chairman of the Nominating & Governance Committee.  For 2015, the Board affirmatively determined that each of Messrs. Hamlin and Kackley qualifies as an independent director as defined by the Nasdaq listing standards.

When considering whether directors and nominees have the experience, qualifications, attributes, diversity, and skills, taken as a whole, to enable the Board to satisfy its oversight responsibilities effectively in light of the Company’s business and structure, the Nominating & Governance Committee and the Board focused primarily on the information discussed in each of the directors’ individual biographies set forth on pages 3-5.  In particular:

 

 

Communications by stockholders or by other parties may be sent to the Board by U.S. mail or overnight delivery and should be addressed to the Board of Directors c/o Secretary, Perficient, Inc., 555 Maryville University Dr., Suite 600, Saint Louis, Missouri, 63141. Communications directed to the Board, or one or more directors, will be reviewed by the Secretary and forwarded to the Board as appropriate.  Communications may be made anonymously.

 

COMPENSATION OF DIRECTORS

 

The Company uses a combination of cash and equity-based incentive compensation to attract and retain qualified candidates to serve on the Board. When recommending changes to director compensation, the Company considers the significant amount of time they expend in fulfilling their duties to the Company, as well as the skill level required of members of the Board.  A director who is also an employee of the Company, such as Mr. Davis, the Company’s CEO, is not entitled to any additional compensation for service as a member of the Board.

 

For 2015, the Board compensation plan provided the following for non-employee directors:

 

Based in part on an analysis of the Company’s director compensation relative to the Company’s peer group, which was performed by the Compensation Committee’s independent compensation consultant (see “Compensation Discussion and Analysis — Compensation Consultant” for additional information regarding the independent compensation consultant), the Compensation Committee determined to continue the above director compensation in 2016.

 The following table provides information relating to total compensation amounts paid to non-employee members of the Board in 2015:

 

Each outstanding share of Common Stock is entitled to one vote on each of the five director positions to be filled at the meeting.  The affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of the votes cast, excluding abstentions, at the Meeting is required for the election of each director.  Stockholders do not have cumulative voting rights in the election of directors, meaning they cannot aggregate their votes on all seats to be filled and vote them on a lesser number of nominees or a single nominee.

 

COMPENSATION OF EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

 

During 2015, various types of compensation were provided to the named executive officers of the Company set forth in the “Summary Compensation Table” at page 15, who are:

 

 

The objectives of the Company’s compensation programs are to:

 

•	Recruit and retain top executive officers with the experience and skills to aid and to support the Company’s growth;
•	Recognize job responsibility and offer competitive and compelling compensation programs that provide executives with an incentive to continue to expand their contributions to the Company;
•	Reward individuals for their continued contribution to the success of the Company, including the Company’s execution against its business plan and creation of stockholder value; and
•	Allow employees to acquire a proprietary interest in the Company as an incentive to remain employed with the Company.

 

The Company’s compensation programs are designed to attract, retain, and reward executives who are responsible for achieving the business objectives necessary to assure both revenue and profit growth while providing clients of the Company with the highest quality solutions and services. A significant portion of compensation paid to executives is directly related to delivering revenue and profit growth and other factors that influence stockholder value, thereby aligning executive interests closely with stockholder interests. This leads the Company to focus more on variable compensation than on base salary. The Company’s variable compensation programs for executives are structured to pay for high performance and are typically dependent on the Company’s financial results. It is the Company’s view that including an incentive-based compensation element keeps management motivated and retains top executives to ensure the Company’s long-term success. Each named executive officer is rewarded with the following types of cash and non-cash compensation:

 

In accordance with their respective employment agreements, Messrs. Davis and Martin may also be entitled to severance and the potential acceleration of vesting of long-term equity awards upon a termination of employment for certain specified reasons or a change in control. Ms. Henely is not entitled to any such payments or accelerated vesting of her long-term equity awards.

There is no predetermined policy for allocating compensation between these elements and each type of compensation is designed to achieve a specific purpose in line with the objectives of the Company’s compensation philosophy.

The Compensation Committee has the discretion to directly engage the services of a compensation consultant or other advisors. The Compensation Committee has engaged Lockton, an independent compensation consulting firm, to serve as the Compensation Committee’s compensation consultant. Lockton does not own any shares of the Company’s stock. There are no personal or business relationships between the Lockton consultants and any executive of the Company. In addition, there are no personal relationships between the Lockton consultants and any member of the Compensation Committee. Lockton maintains a detailed conflict of interest policy in order to ensure that the Compensation Committee receives conflict-free advice. Lockton did not provide additional services to the Company in excess of $120,000 during 2015.

The named executive officers are offered a competitive salary in order to retain their services and to also reward their performance with the Company. For the CEO and CFO, salary is set as part of a written agreement that has been approved by the Compensation Committee, but may be increased from time to time with the approval of the Board. Several factors are considered by the Compensation Committee when determining and approving an employment agreement or arrangement for a named executive officer. These factors include the named executive officer’s performance relative to the Company’s goals and objectives, such as the Company’s financial performance and relative stockholder return. For newly hired executives, the individual’s relevant experience in the industry is considered.  The base salary of other executive officers of the Company is recommended by the CEO after his review of the aforementioned factors with final approval given by the Compensation Committee.

 

The Compensation Committee determined that the base salary of the named executive officers was below the desired 50th percentile of the external market and approved increases during February 2015 to bring their salaries closer to the recommended targeted position according to the analysis performed by Lockton. The increase was deemed appropriate due to the importance of the roles of the named executive officers and the Company’s compensation strategy. See the “Summary Compensation Table” at page 15 for a detailed discussion of the named executive officers’ base salaries for years 2013, 2014, and 2015.

 

 

The short-term incentive target for the named executive officers is generally competitive with the external market in the study provided by Lockton. Lockton’s review of executive compensation for 2015 and prior years demonstrated that the Company’s Executive Bonus Plan targets have been consistently aggressive compared to the external market.

Total Direct Compensation Analysis 

The named executive officers are provided with primarily the same company-sponsored health, welfare, and retirement benefits as all other employees, including life insurance benefits and a tax-qualified retirement savings plan. The Company provides all employees with basic life insurance in the amount of two times their annual salary with a $100,000 minimum benefit and a $400,000 maximum benefit. In addition to the standard life insurance, the Company retains a $1.5 million life insurance policy for the CEO. The benefit on this policy is payable to the CEO’s beneficiary, as applicable, upon death.  The Company also provides short- and long-term disability benefits to all employees, including the named executive officers, at no cost, for 60% of base salary for up to 90 days and 60% of base salary up to a maximum benefit of $10,000 per month after 90 days, respectively.  In addition to the standard short- and long-term disability benefits, the Company pays for additional disability coverage for the CEO, which provides a monthly income benefit of $15,000 for five years.

 

 

The Company has entered into employment agreements with the CEO and CFO, which contain severance and change in control provisions. Severance benefits under the agreements are payable upon a “double-trigger.”  In other words, although the employment agreements provide for accelerated vesting of equity upon a change in control, additional payments under the agreements are only triggered upon both a change in control and termination of employment.  

 

The Company provides a level of severance benefits that the Compensation Committee believes is necessary to provide a competitive compensation package to these senior executives.  Maintaining these arrangements enables the Company to attract and retain senior executives, provide senior executives with a degree of certainty regarding their future employment relationship, and ensure the continued commitment of senior executives in the event of a potential or actual change in control.  Payments upon a change in control also further align the interests of the executives with those of the stockholders.  Providing change in control benefits is designed to reduce the reluctance of management to pursue potential change in control transactions that may be in the best interests of the stockholders, and helps ensure stability in the event of a change in control of the Company.

 

The Compensation Committee further believes that the level of severance benefits and vesting of outstanding equity awards under the employment agreements, including multiples of pay, are consistent with market practice and necessary for the Company to be competitive in attracting and retaining talent in the Company’s industry, and are also commensurate with each senior executive’s level of responsibility.

 

Finally, the Compensation Committee believes that the potential payments to be made upon termination and/or change in control are an important part of executive compensation as structured at the Company.  As discussed above, Company executives are generally paid a lower base salary than market but receive long-term equity compensation at a greater rate than the market.  The focus on variable compensation helps to retain executives and reward them for performance over time.  Due to this philosophy, offering potential payments upon termination and/or change in control is an attractive compensation element that allows the executives to become equalized with market compensation should these events occur.

 

 

Risk Oversight of the Company’s Compensation Policies and Programs

 

COMPENSATION COMMITTEE REPORT

 

The Compensation Committee has reviewed and discussed the Compensation Discussion and Analysis required by Item 402(b) of Regulation S-K with management and based on such review and discussions, has recommended to the Board that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in this Proxy Statement. 

COMPENSATION COMMITTEE INTERLOCKS AND INSIDER PARTICIPATION

 

The members of the Compensation Committee are James R. Kackley, Ralph C. Derrickson and David S. Lundeen.  No member of the Compensation Committee in 2015 was, or had ever been, an officer or employee of the Company or any of its subsidiaries, or had any substantial business dealings with the Company.  In addition, no “compensation committee interlocks” existed during 2015, that is no member of the Compensation Committee or the Board was an executive officer of another company on whose compensation committee or board any of the executive officers served.

SUMMARY COMPENSATION TABLE

 

The following table summarizes the total compensation paid or earned by each of the named executive officers for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2013, 2014, and 2015, including the Principal Executive Officer, which is the CEO, the Principal Financial Officer, which is the CFO, and the other most highly compensated executive officer, the COO, based on total compensation:

Employment Agreements

 

 

Mr. Davis has agreed to refrain from competing with the Company for a period of three years following the termination of his employment. Mr. Davis’s compensation is subject to review and adjustment on an annual basis in accordance with the Company’s compensation policies as in effect from time to time. Mr. Davis’s annual salary was increased to $550,000 and $575,000 in March 2015 and March 2016, respectively.

 

Mr. Martin has agreed to refrain from competing with the Company for a period of three years following the termination of his employment. Mr. Martin’s compensation is subject to review and adjustment on an annual basis in accordance with the Company’s compensation policies as in effect from time to time. Mr. Martin’s annual salary was increased to $325,000 and $335,000 in March 2015 and March 2016, respectively.

GRANTS OF PLAN-BASED AWARDS

 

The following table reflects awards granted to the named executive officers during 2015 under the Company’s equity and non-equity incentive plans:

 

 

Bonuses available to the named executive officers as an annual incentive bonus under the 2015 Executive Bonus Plan are based upon pre-set percentages of salary and are earned by reaching certain target performance levels, which are subject to adjustment by the Compensation Committee based on acquisitions and other extraordinary or non-recurring items.

 

In February 2015, the Compensation Committee established the targets for the named executive officers under the 2015 Executive Bonus Plan.  The table below lists the potential bonus awards as a percent of base salary for the named executive officers as reflected in the “2015 Grants of Plan-Based Awards” table: 

 

The restricted shares awarded to the named executive officers on March 3, 2015 were granted under the 2012 Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended.  Under the terms of the restricted share award agreements, one-third of the shares subject to an award will vest on each anniversary of March 3, 2015 with the final tranche vesting on March 3, 2018, provided the named executive officer continues his or her employment with the Company through the applicable vesting dates.

In the event of a recipient’s termination of employment with the Company for any reason (including death or disability) prior to full vesting of the restricted shares, restricted shares that have not vested as of the date of termination will be null and void and will be forfeited to the Company, unless the terms of the recipient’s employment agreement provide otherwise.  The employment agreements for Messrs. Davis and Martin provide for accelerated vesting of equity awards such as the restricted share awards in the case of certain involuntary terminations or upon the occurrence of a change in control.  These acceleration provisions are described below in the section of this Proxy Statement entitled “Potential Payments upon Termination and/or Change in Control.”

 

Dividends are payable on restricted shares once vested at the same rate and at the same time that dividends are paid to stockholders generally; however, the Company has not historically paid, and in the future does not intend to pay, dividends.

OUTSTANDING EQUITY AWARDS AT FISCAL YEAR-END

 

STOCK AWARDS VESTED

 

 

 

The Company does not sponsor or maintain any plans that provide for specified retirement payments or benefits, such as tax-qualified defined benefit plans or supplemental executive retirement plans, for the named executive officers.

 

 

The Deferred Compensation Plan allows each participant to contribute up to 80% of base salary and commission and 100% of annual incentive bonus payments.  Contributions may be made to either the retirement account or the in-service account of the participant; however, no contributions may be made to a participant’s in-service account during a deferral period when amounts are scheduled to be distributed from that account.  Also, if the Compensation Committee determines that a participant has incurred a financial hardship, it may terminate the participant’s deferrals.

 

The Company may, in its discretion, provide a matching contribution of 25% of the participant’s contribution to the Deferred Compensation Plan up to the first 6% of a participant’s compensation (including base salary and bonus or incentive compensation); however, any matching contribution under the Deferred Compensation Plan will be reduced by the amount of matching contributions actually made on the participant’s behalf under the Company’s 401(k) Plan.  Matching contributions vest annually over a three-year period.  The Company may also make discretionary contributions on behalf of participants in the Deferred Compensation Plan, which will be in the amounts and will vest in accordance with the schedule determined by the Company.  The Company made no matching contributions to the Deferred Compensation Plan in 2015.

 

The Deferred Compensation Plan permits each participant to make investment allocation choices for both the participant’s contributions and any Company matching or discretionary contributions made on the participant’s behalf among the investment choices designated by the Company, which earn market rates of return.  Participants are permitted to change their investment elections on a daily basis.

 

A participant will receive a distribution of amounts deferred in a particular year upon the earlier to occur of: (i) the time specified in the participant’s deferral commitment election with respect to the participant’s in-service account; (ii) his termination of employment; or (iii) his death or disability.  In addition, a participant may receive a distribution if the Compensation Committee determines that the participant has experienced a financial hardship, to the extent reasonably necessary to satisfy the participant’s needs. Upon a participant’s termination of employment, the participant’s benefits under the Deferred Compensation Plan shall be paid to him as soon as administratively practicable following the date of the participant’s termination of employment, unless the participant constitutes a “specified employee” (within the meaning of Section 409A of the Code), in which case the initial payment will be made no earlier than the first day of the seventh month following the participant’s termination.  A participant’s vested benefits may, at the option of the participant, be distributed in one cash lump sum payment, or in up to a maximum of 15 annual installments (or a maximum of five annual installments with respect to the participant’s in-service account).  Certain small account balances (a retirement account balance of less than $50,000 and an in-service account balance of less than $25,000) will be paid in a lump sum regardless of the participant’s election.

 

Mr. Davis’s employment agreement provides for the following death, disability, severance, and change in control benefits (certain applicable definitions are set forth below):

 

To the extent payments and benefits to Mr. Davis in connection with a change in control would constitute “excess parachute payments” for purposes of Section 280G of the Code subject to excise taxes, Mr. Davis can elect to receive a lesser amount and eliminate the accelerated vesting of his unvested stock options and restricted stock in order to decrease or eliminate the excise taxes.

 

 

Mr. Martin’s employment agreement provides for the following severance and change in control benefits (certain applicable definitions are set forth below):

 

 

The employment agreements for Messrs. Davis and Martin generally use the following terms:

 

“Change in Control” means: (a) the acquisition by one person, or more than one person acting as a group, of ownership of stock of the Company that, together with stock held by such person or group, constitutes more than 50% of the total fair market value or total voting power of the stock of the Company; (b) the acquisition by one person, or more than one person acting as a group, of ownership of stock of the Company, that together with stock of the Company acquired during the 12-month period ending on the date of the most recent acquisition by such person or group, constitutes 30% or more of the total voting power of the stock of the Company; (c) a majority of the members of the Company’s board of directors is replaced during any 12-month period by directors whose appointment or election is not endorsed by a majority of the members of the Company’s board of directors before the date of the appointment or election; or (d) one person, or more than one person acting as a group, acquires (or has acquired during the 12-month period ending on the date of the most recent acquisition by such person or group) assets from the Company that have a total gross fair market value (determined without regard to any liabilities associated with such assets) equal to or more than 40% of the total gross fair market value of all of the assets of the Company immediately before such acquisition or acquisitions.

 

Persons will not be considered to be acting as a group solely because they purchase or own stock of the same corporation at the same time, or as a result of the same public offering. However, persons will be considered to be acting as a group if they are owners of a corporation that enters into a merger, consolidation, purchase or acquisition of stock, or similar business transaction with the Company.

 

“Without Cause Termination” means a termination of the executive’s employment by the Company other than due to (a) Termination for Cause; (b) Disability; (c) death; or (d) the expiration of the employment agreement.

 

Under the employment agreements with Messrs. Davis and Martin, each executive would be entitled to receive the estimated benefits described below. These disclosed amounts are estimates only and do not necessarily reflect the actual amounts that would be paid to the aforementioned executives, which would only be known at the time that they become eligible for payment and would only be payable if the events set forth in the table below occur.

The table below reflects the amount that could be payable under the various arrangements assuming that the triggering event set forth in the title of each column occurred on December 31, 2015. Any actual payments that may be made pursuant to the arrangements described above are dependent on various factors, which may or may not exist at the time a termination of employment or change in control actually occurs.

COMPARATIVE STOCK PERFORMANCE

The following graph compares the cumulative five-year total stockholder return on the Common Stock from December 31, 2010 through December 31, 2015, with the cumulative total return on (i) the NASDAQ Composite Index and (ii) S&P 500 Index.  The comparison assumes the investment of $100 on December 31, 2010, in the Common Stock and in each of the indices and, in each case, assumes reinvestment of all dividends.

 

PROPOSAL 2. ADVISORY VOTE ON EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

 

 

 

Stockholders are urged to read the CD&A beginning on page 9, which more thoroughly discusses how the compensation policies and procedures implement the Company’s compensation philosophy.  The Compensation Committee and the Board believe that these policies and procedures are effective in implementing the Company’s compensation philosophy and in achieving its goals.

 

Stockholders have the opportunity to vote “FOR,” “AGAINST,” or “ABSTAIN” on the following advisory resolution relating to the executive compensation of our named executive officers as disclosed in this Proxy Statement:

 

“Resolved, that the compensation paid to the Company’s named executive officers, as disclosed pursuant to Item 402 of Regulation S-K, including the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, compensation tables, and narrative discussion set forth in this Proxy Statement, is hereby approved.”

 

This vote is not intended to address a specific item of compensation, but rather the overall compensation of the named executive officers and the philosophy, policies, and practices as described in this Proxy Statement.  The affirmative vote of a majority of the shares of the Company’s Common Stock cast in person or by proxy, excluding abstentions, on the proposal will be considered approval by the stockholders of the advisory resolution on executive compensation.

 

The Board recommends a vote “FOR” the proposal to approve the advisory resolution relating to the executive compensation of our named executive officers.

PROPOSAL 3. RATIFICATION OF SELECTION OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

 

The Audit Committee has appointed the firm of KPMG LLP (“KPMG”) as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for 2016.  KPMG has served as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm since 2007.  Although action by the stockholders in this matter is not required, the Audit Committee believes that in light of the critical role played by the independent registered public accounting firm in maintaining the integrity of the Company’s financial controls and reporting, it is a matter of good practice. The affirmative vote of a majority of the shares of our Common Stock cast in person or by proxy, excluding abstentions, on the proposal will be considered approved by the stockholders.

 

In the event our stockholders fail to approve the proposal to appoint KPMG as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm, the Audit Committee will reconsider whether or not to retain the firm.  Even if the selection is ratified, the Audit Committee, in its discretion, may direct the appointment of a different independent registered public accounting firm at any time during the year if it determines that such a change would be in the best interest of the Company and its stockholders.

 

The Board recommends a vote “FOR” the proposal to ratify the independent registered public accounting firm.

The table below sets forth an estimate of the fees that we expect to be billed for audit services for fiscal year 2015, as well as the fees expected to be billed with respect to audit-related, tax and all other services rendered during that period. In addition, the table sets forth the fees billed for audit, audit-related, tax and all other services during or in connection with fiscal year 2014.

 

Tax Fees. Tax fees represent all fees provided for professional services rendered by KPMG for tax compliance, tax advice and tax planning. The Company did not pay any other tax-related fees to KPMG for the years ended December 31, 2015 or December 31, 2014.

Audit-Related Fees. Assurance and related services that are reasonably related to the performance of the audit or review of financial statements including attest or audit services that are not required.

 

We expect that one or more representatives of KPMG will be present at the Meeting. Each of these representatives will have the opportunity to make a statement, if he or she desires, and is expected to be available to respond to any questions.

The Audit Committee has adopted policies and procedures relating to the pre-approval of all audit services and non-audit services that are permitted by applicable laws and regulations, and that are to be performed by the Company’s independent auditors. As part of those policies and procedures, the Audit Committee has pre-approved specific audit and audit-related services that may be provided by the Company’s independent auditors subject to certain maximum dollar amounts. No further approval by the Audit Committee is required in advance of services falling within the specific types of services and cost-levels included in the pre-approved services. Any proposed services not specifically pre-approved or exceeding pre-approved cost levels require specific pre-approval by the Audit Committee. No services of any kind were approved pursuant to a waiver permitted pursuant to 17 CFR 210.2-01(c)(7)(i)(C).

 

The Audit Committee reports to and acts on behalf of the Board by providing oversight of the financial management, legal compliance programs, independent auditors, and accounting policies and procedures of the Company. The Company’s management is responsible for preparing the Company’s financial statements and systems of internal control and the independent auditors are responsible for auditing those financial statements and expressing its opinion as to whether the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position, results of operations, and cash flows of the Company in conformity with GAAP. The Audit Committee is responsible for overseeing the conduct of these activities by the Company’s management and the independent auditors.

 

In this context, the Audit Committee has met and held discussions with management and the independent auditors. Management represented to the Audit Committee that the Company’s consolidated financial statements, as of and for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, were prepared in accordance with GAAP, and the Audit Committee has reviewed and discussed the consolidated financial statements with management and the independent auditors.

 

The Audit Committee has discussed with the independent auditors matters required to be discussed by Public Company Accounting Oversight Board Auditing Standard No. 16 “Communications with Audit Committees.”  The Audit Committee also received the written disclosures from the independent auditors required by applicable requirements of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board regarding the independent accountant’s communications with the Audit Committee concerning independence and discussed with the independent auditors their independence and related matters.

 

The Audit Committee also has discussed with the Company’s independent auditors, with and without management present, their evaluations of the Company’s internal accounting controls and the overall quality of the Company’s financial reporting.

 

In further reliance on the reviews and discussions with management and the independent auditors referred to above, the Audit Committee recommended to the Board the inclusion of the audited financial statements in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, for filing with the SEC.

 

SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT

 

The following table sets forth the beneficial ownership of the Common Stock as of April 1, 2016 for each director, each of the Nominee Directors, and each executive officer named in the Summary Compensation Table herein, and by all directors and executive officers of the Company as a group.

 

 

Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners

 

 

 

Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act requires executive officers, directors, and persons who beneficially own more than 10% of a registered class of the Company’s equity securities to file reports of ownership and changes in ownership with the SEC and the Nasdaq. Based solely on a review of the copies of reports furnished to the Company and written representations from the Company’s executive officers, directors, and persons who beneficially own more than 10% of the Company’s equity securities, the Company believes that, during the preceding year, all filing requirements applicable to the Company’s officers, directors, and 10% beneficial owners under Section 16(a) were satisfied.

CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS

 

In order to identify and address concerns regarding related party transactions and their disclosures, the Company uses Directors and Officers Questionnaires and its conduct and ethics policies.  The Company also considers the independence of its directors.  The discussion of the independence of the directors contained herein under the caption “Composition and Meetings of the Board of Directors and Committees” beginning on page 5.

 

 

 

Relationships, including business, financial, personal, and family, may give rise to conflicts of interest or the appearance of a conflict. Employees are encouraged to carefully evaluate their relationships as they relate to Company business to avoid conflict or the appearance of a conflict. To avoid conflicts of interest or the appearance of a conflict:

 

 

Any employee or director who becomes aware of a conflict is required to bring it to the attention of a supervisor, management or other appropriate personnel.

 

Directors are expected and required to uphold the same dedication to corporate ethics as the Company’s employees.

 

STOCKHOLDER PROPOSALS FOR NEXT ANNUAL MEETING

 

Any stockholder of Perficient eligible to vote in an election may make stockholder proposals and nominations for the 2017 Annual Meeting.  In order to be considered for inclusion in the 2017 Proxy Statement and considered at the 2017 Annual Meeting, all stockholders proposals, nominations and notifications must: (i) comply with the procedures set forth in Perficient’s bylaws; and (ii) be appropriately received by the Secretary of Perficient on or before December 12, 2016.

 

Pursuant to the bylaws of Perficient, nominations of persons for election to the Board may be made at a meeting of stockholders by or at the direction of the Board or by any stockholder entitled to vote in the election of directors at the meeting who complies with the notice procedures set forth in the bylaws.  Such nominations, other than those made by or at the direction of the Board, shall be made pursuant to notice in writing to the Secretary of the Company, and must be received by the Secretary of Perficient on or before December 12, 2016.  Such stockholder’s notice shall set forth:

 

(1) the name, age, business address and residence address of such person;

 

(2) the principal occupation or employment of such person;

 

 

OTHER MATTERS

 

The Board does not intend to bring any matters before the Meeting other than those stated in this Proxy Statement, and is not aware that any other matters will be presented for action at the Meeting. If any other matters come before the Meeting, the persons named in the enclosed form of proxy will vote the proxy with respect thereto in accordance with their best judgment, pursuant to the discretionary authority granted by the proxy. Whether or not you plan to attend the Meeting in person, please promptly complete, sign, date, and return a proxy card or vote your proxy by telephone or the Internet according to the instructions on your proxy card.

---