Good morning. Thank you for joining today’s call. With me today are George Colony, Forrester’s Chairman of the Board and CEO; Charles Rutstein, Forrester’s Chief Operating Officer; and Mike Doyle, Forrester’s Chief Financial Officer. George will open the call, Mike will follow George to discuss our financials. We’ll then open the call to Q&A. A replay of this call would be available until February 23, 2012, and can be accessed by dialing 1 (888) 286-8010 or internationally at 1 (617) 801-6888. Please reference the passcode 47888750. Before we begin, I’d like to remind you that this call will contain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Words such as expects, believes, anticipates, intends, plans, estimates or similar expressions are intended to identify these forward-looking statements. These statements are based on the company’s current plans and expectations and involve risks and uncertainties that could cause future activities and results of the operations to be materially different from those set forth in the forward-looking statements. Some of the important factors that could cause actual results to differ are discussed in our reports and filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The company undertakes no obligation to update publicly any forward-looking statements whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. I’ll now hand the call over to George Colony. You have the floor, sir.

Thank you, and I’d like to welcome everyone to the call. Thank you for joining us today. I will give an overview of Forrester’s business, followed by a financial review from our CFO, Mike Doyle. Charles Rutstein, Forrester’s COO, will then join us for questions and answers. As you know, Forrester focuses on 3 business imperatives. These are, one, moving our role-based strategy forward, two, the expansion of the company’s sales force, and three, our continued efforts to increase the percentage of our business that is syndicated. And for this call, I’d like to comment on our progress on the imperatives in 2011 and then I'd like to give a look ahead to 2012. Now we will start by reviewing our progress and roles. We devoted much work in 2011 to moving our role based strategy forward. In events, in client facing technology and in our social offerings and these efforts will be intensified in 2012. I’d like to start first with events. Our events business continues to move from generalized events to roll focused events, a trend that is increasing relevancy for attendees and enabling sponsors to target with a greater position. In 2011, we staged 20 events with 75% being fully role based. Paid seat attendance was up 16% in 2011 over 2010. In 2012, we’re expanding to 28 events all focused on unique roles. It is noteworthy that our highest attended event in 2011 performed for customer experience professionals was exclusively for one role. Accordingly this event will be held in 2 locations in 2012, New York City and Los Angeles. Forrester’s social technologies continue to widen our value for executives in their roles. By year-end 2011, the company offered a dedicated social community for each of the roles we serve. At year-end those communities had 33,000…

Thanks very much, George. I will now begin my review of the financial performance for Forrester’s fourth quarter results the balance sheet at December 31, our fourth quarter metrics and the outlook for the first quarter and full year of 2012. Please note that the income statement numbers I’m reporting are pro forma and they exclude the following items: amortization of intangibles, stock-based compensation expense, duplicate lease costs, reorganization costs, acquisition and integration costs and net gains from investment. Also, we continue to utilize an effective tax rate at 40% for pro forma purposes. The actual effective tax rate for the fourth quarter of 2011 is approximately 37%. For the fourth quarter Forrester met revenue guidance and exceeded its quarterly guidance for pro forma operating margin and earnings per share. Our key customer metrics continue to perform at historically high levels and our midyear acquisition of Springboard Research continues to perform well. In addition, our balance sheet remains strong with 2011 cash flow from operations exceeding expectations. On the strength of our balance sheet and operating cash flow, this morning Forrester announced the initiation of a quarterly dividend of $0.14 per share. On an annualized basis, this represents approximately 24% of our 2011 operating cash flow. We believe this move will enhance shareholder value and still leave us well positioned to invest for growth and pursue M&A opportunities. In our third quarter call we indicated we were observing some choppiness in our sales activity with some segments underperforming expectations. Our fourth quarter bookings activity did pick up relative to our third-quarter performance and while it did not meet our aggressive internal targets we are very encouraged by the results. Now let me turn to a more detailed review of our fourth quarter results. Forrester’s fourth quarter revenue increased 11% to…

[Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from Dan Leben with Robert W. Baird.

Just first off could you talk a little bit more about some of the changes you saw in the fourth quarter in terms of the selling environment relative to the third. You mentioned it got better but the metrics all came off a little bit. Help us walk through some of the areas you saw in terms of the geographies or verticals of products that did better or worse than the average.

Dan, it’s Charles. I’d say in terms of the dynamics of the environment there was really no change from the prior quarter. The overall results as Mike mentioned were certainly better. But we saw the same kind of choppiness. In other words, there was no single product line and there was no single geography that we would think -- that we would call out as being particularly weak. The sales cycles were about the same as we saw in Q3, no change to the approvals required or any of that stuff. Just basically better performance against the similar environment.

Okay. And just a couple questions on the guidance. To help us understand the flows through the year first one is on the incremental investments on technology. Are these largely weighted to the first half or when you roll of new client facing technologies, we’ll see some of that investment level come down?

You’ll see a little bit of that Dan. I think what’s happening is these investments have a component of expense associated with them, which will be in all likelihood more of front-end loaded. And there is -- it is a component that’s depreciation related, which effectively will -- as these projects are implemented will move into the back half of the year. So you’ll see some operating expenses exclusive of depreciation that will be a little bit more front-end loaded, then the depreciation will be more to the second half of the year around these projects. So net-net I don’t think you’ll see an appreciable difference between first half, second half as you think about these initiatives. It might show up in different lines, Dan. So our depreciation line will probably be moving up a little bit as the second half of the year progresses and the operating expenses around these initiatives will be coming down.

Okay. And then just a little bit more on the changing of the events business bumping up the number of events. Both help us understand how they are going to flow through the year and how that’s different. You gave us some good guidance on the first quarter versus second quarter but also as you created these 8 new events, how many of these are kind of splitting for geographies or taking a current covenants splitting roles versus kind of new Greenfield opportunities in the event space?

Sure. What I will do Dan is give you just the mechanics in the flow of the events by quarter and I will let Charles give color on location and strategy around them. So as you think about our quarters. For 2012, the event bucket the way it’s going to break out is you will have one event as I mentioned in the first quarter. We have 15 events in the second quarter, 3 in the third quarter, and 9 in the fourth quarter. And to give you comparison, Dan, we had 5 in the first quarter last year. We had 4 in the second quarter of last, 4 in the third quarter and then 7 in the fourth quarter. So that will give you some sense. So what are you going to see is a revenue impact in the first quarter this year versus last year that’s north of $1 million to the downside. I think you’ll see a revenue impact on the positive front in the second quarter that is going to be around the $2.5 million plus minus kind of range than third quarter didn’t probably about $1 million associated with revenue than fourth quarter will take up somewhere in the neighborhood of $2 million plus or minus. So that’s sort of to frame and obviously those numbers fluctuate a little bit based on actual activity but I hope that helps directionally.

So Dan, with respect to the other part of your question, so we’re going from what about 20 to 28. About 2/3 of that is splitting up our existing events. 2/3 of that growth I should say is about, splitting up the existing events. That’s why you see such a steep ramp in the second quarter. We had some very big event in the second quarter that were multi-role events that are now going to be single role event, and then top of that we’re doing some new events, which are either geography extensions or net new events per role.

Dan, this is George. What I would say is what we learned in 2011 was that, a, an event focused on one role could be -- could have a lot of scale, and the customer experience professionals forum became our largest event in 2011. So that really showed us that the multi-events that was really best of our pre-role Forrester role and now -- that’s why we’re headed toward this single role events. We think that can be actually quite large.

Okay. And then last one for me. Just on the sales force reorganization, give us a sense of how much turnover there is in terms of typical sales force and how much their accounts are turning over. Do you have half of the level, what they had previously, or help us give us a sense of some of that dynamic?

Sure, Dan. This is Charles. Turnover number in 2011 was essentially flat to 2010. It’s a level where we’re very comfortable. With respect to changing the territories, as you would imagine as we go from 2 reps in each account to just a single rep, there is some churn that goes on there. And so we’re spending the early part of the year, deciding those new territories, getting those reps up to speed on those new territories and so forth. As George said in his comments, what we’re trying to do is we’re trying to get many fewer accounts per rep, thereby, allowing them significantly more time to understand those customers better.

Okay. And when you look at the internal productivity metrics around the sales force with this change, when do you expect those to kind of get back to 2011 levels and then kind of setting the base for improvement from there.

Yes, so we’re not actually looking for much of a dip here in productivity, Dan. I think what you have got is you’ve got in the aggregate if you look at the sales force in total, you have productivity coming in because -- first off, we’re seeing leverage in the management layer and in the support layer. As George said we’re not adding net 15% to 20% new heads this year. We’re adding all of the quarter carrying sales reps we would be doing in any given year, but we’re getting leverage out of the other parts. So that's one, as you see productivity as a result of that. Two, we expect to see productivity simply because of the effectiveness of this structure. It is simpler for our reps to understand, it is simpler for our customers to understand. So we’re not projecting a dip here.

Our next question comes from the line of Robert Riggs with William Blair.

It’s just kind of following up on the question on the sales force, in terms of what the task that you’re working through in terms of the realignment. How far are you along today with that, and kind of when is the expectation that all the changes will be made remaining cognizant that it is kind of an ongoing process.

Yes, the -- I guess I should mention upfront that we planned this with great care as you would imagine. Much of the work behind the scenes was done at the tail end of last year, so that we were ready to hit the ground running on 1st of January. What that means is that everybody got their new territories within the first week or 2 in January. They know who they’re selling to and they know what they’re selling so all of that is in the rearview mirror. Now of course they are spending time coming up to speed on those accounts and figuring out the account plans for the year. But we think that most of that transitional effect is now in the rearview mirror.

And can you provide some additional detail in terms of are you seeing more growth from your existing clients or is it from winning just brand new customers. And then against the backdrop of moving to this playbook strategy and how would that split kind of play out on a go forward basis?

In terms of our growth clearly when you look at -- I mean, the idea is with the realignment we’ve done a couple things. I think we’ve given fewer clients per rep with the intent that they’re going to go deeper. I mean, I think you’ve heard George talk about this for a year as we think about Robert, where do we think the greatest opportunity is. And it almost always lies with your existing clients because it roles for client of 3 we’ve got substantial opportunity to grow. That said, we’re not taking the pedal off the new business activity. We’ve got a group that is very focused on these emerging clients and folks that we can convert into much larger accounts. I think the realignment will get us smarter about getting business that comes in the door and sticks. So if anything the hope there is we’ll see a little bit improvement over time in client retention. So I think we’re still going to be reasonably well balanced between growth in existing and growth in new. But I’d say the long run it could get really interesting with this new realignment in terms of the growth we get with existing clients.

Where playbook get, this is George -- where playbooks comes into this is that we expect playbooks to be quite differentiated in the marketplace and therefore -- and also to bring, use that term a much higher, but higher value to the client and helping to solve problems faster. So I think what it’s going to do is, I think it could create the renewal rate and because it’s differentiated, I think it’s going to be attractive to new customers as well.

Our next question comes from the line of Brian Murphy with Sidoti & Company.

George, could you -- on the new I guess integrated website or platform with research data to social et cetera, could you give us a timeframe for when that’s going to be launched, and also is that going to have an impact on pricing or product packaging?

You’re going to see product packaging being impacted by playbooks. As you know we do pricing in the summer time so that -- so the new platform will precede the new pricing. But of course it is built for new packaging and new pricing. I mean this is all of one piece. What I would say the new platform is really first half and I expect we will talk about it in more detail in Q1 and in great deal of that detail in the Q2 call.

Okay. And to follow-up on the change in the sales force coverage model, have you guys employed this kind of named account coverage model in the past?

Yes.

Okay. And has there been a change in sales of leadership?

There has not.

There has not. So what’s informing this switch back to be named account coverage model now?

Yes, Brian, it’s Charles. Really 3 things. Number one, our customers told us that they wanted this. They have been asking us for some time for a more simplistic approach. Second, is simplicity for ourselves? We were dealing with a lot of complexity internally about orchestrating those multiple reps in the account, dealing with how they pass leads and share opportunities and so forth. This drive simplicity for us. Number three, as we alluded to several times here is effectiveness. We think that by cutting the number of accounts that a rep has by roughly half we will increase their client fluency in a material way. That is they will be more fluent in the needs of the customer. And we think the right now that’s what’s needed in order to drive more productivity.

Okay. And I understand going forward, are you going to be making additional investments in sort of sales force productivity technology. I think you’ve been making some investments there and just looking at the anticipated growth for the total sales headcount versus the quota reps, I mean, is it fair to say that you guys have been getting some benefit from those sort of sales force type technology investments that you’ve made so far?

I think we’re starting to see a little bit of leverage there, but I think it’s -- a lot of the leverage that you are seeing here is really due to the structure as opposed to any of the underlying technology. As I say because we’re simplifying the structure you need fewer managers, you can deal with the support staff in a different way and so forth and so on. So that’s where I would say the majority of the leverage comes from.

I would also say that our sales force automation is now 10 or 11 years old and we are now going to be -- coming up on a renewable of all that technology as well which will happen this year.

Brian, it’s Mike. I think the good news is, I think there’s more to come. I think in a positive way. I think the investments that we are making, I would agree with Charles, I think the productivity that you are seeing in 2012 is primarily in the sales side driven by the realignment. I think the productivity you are going to see in ‘13 and beyond is going to be driven by the tools that we put in place this year and so that is encouraging. That’s we continue to expect to get productivity out of the sales organization. In addition on the G&A side, we made some improvement this year, but the strategy and the game plan is to continue to invest in tools there such that you are going to see productivity again in ‘13 and again in ‘14 and so on. So I think we’re actually in a good place when we get through ‘12 to continue the momentum on the margin side without certainly the kinds of investment we made in the last couple of years. I mean, the capital spending dollars particularly in ‘11 were unusually high for Forrester and I think we’re going to drift back down to a much more meaningful level. So this year I expect we will be certainly probably south of $10 million and then it going forward that will probably be a little bit less. Again, we’re planning to commit still to invest, but it won’t be near the levels dollar wise that you saw in the last couple of years.

Okay. And Mike, since you brought up the out years, I mean are you guys anticipating that you can get the operating margin back to maybe 2008 or 2009 levels?

Yes. Absolutely. I mean, as I think about it, Brian, from my perspective I look at it and say we had an uphill climb going from ‘11 to ‘12 which you have a couple of points on the rent and the facility depreciation. That effectively going out for us is going to be flat line or minor increases. So we don’t have that huge delta there. And I think the incentive compensation was another couple of points and we typically don’t see that. That’s normally not an uphill battle and not one frankly we like to have. So have a year-over-year impact adverse bringing incentive combat to sort of targeted levels. We won’t see that again, so as I think about the 5 points that I described in the call that sort of drive margins south in 2012, 4 of those you are probably are not going to see it in 2013. So I look at those going away, I look at the 3 points we got in productivity and 12 that’s embedded in our plan and figure there will be more to come and ‘13, so absolutely. And if you think George is happy with revenue growth at 9% to 11%, you don’t understand them well enough. We are going to be better as we go out. So I think absolutely we are looking for margins to come back to those ‘08 into ‘09 levels. I think that’s where we are targeting as a company and we certainly think it is doable. As George said the opportunity is right out there in front of us.

I have question comes from the line of Vincent Colicchio with Noble Financial.

Yes. I’m not sure this question -- what portion of revenue came from Europe and has there been any change in sentiment there and sort of what's your outlook for the year?

We didn’t give specific guidance on what came out. I think Vince, you know of that we had roughly 31% of our Q4 revenue that was outside North America. Typically the bulk of that, so if you break it down is probably 25% or 26% of our revenues are from Europe. And to Charles point, again, you read them macro on Europe and you think that the entire continent is going in the tank. We didn’t see that. We had one segment that performed exceptionally well quarter in quarter out all year long, double-digit growth. And then we had others that struggled a little bit because we made some leadership changes during the course of the year. So I don’t think we are making a macro assumption for Europe as it relates to 2012 that says, hey you are going to grow at a dramatically lower rate because of the macro. I think that there is certainly headwinds in Europe but we look at it and believe there is some very real opportunities there as well. So I think what the -- in our own internal tech guy Andy Bartels says tech spending should be lower in Europe and in Asia. That said there is still a lot of activity and a lot of change going on in companies that need our help. So it’s our view still that we are going to get growth out of Europe in 2012.

And Vince this is George here. Our long-term plan is to increase our business outside the U.S. faster than within the U.S.

Okay. And then Mike I knew you had some opportunities to do some automation of operations. How is that sort of progressing?

I think we have made some progress on that front. And we plan more in 2012. I think you are going to see a lot of activity outside the sales organization that will begin to occur in the latter part of 2012 and roll into 2013. If you think about how our -- at the Head of our business technology group here thinks about technology, he is got a real busy plate to finish up customer facing experience in CRM tools. And at the same time we’ve got some of his folks making progress on some of my backlog type equipment. What we’ve got, we have got a lot more to go and I think he will be able to sort of turn his full focus on that in the latter part of '12 and go into '13. So we’re pretty excited about what is still to come on that front so we have made some progress but I would say there is no meaningful progress to be made in a good way over the next year or so.

And Vince our new CBTO, that’s Chief Business Account, the office is Steve Peltzman has really brought a lot of fantastic ideas and expertise to us. He is -- we’re -- Forrester business is really moving from IT to business technology. And you’re going to see a lot of moves here in this month. He did a good job.

Ladies and gentlemen that will conclude the question-and-answer portion for our event. Right now, I’d now like to turn the presentation back over to Mr. Mike Doyle for closing remarks.

Thanks very much to everyone for joining us and enjoy the rest of the day, and we look forward to seeing you on the road in the first quarter.