羅致恆富 (RHI) 2026 Q1 法說會逐字稿

Hello, and welcome to the Robert Half First Quarter 2026 conference call. Today's conference call is being recorded. (Operator Instructions) Our hosts for today's call are Mr. Keith Waddell, President and Chief Executive Officer of Robert Half and Mr. Michael Buckley, Chief Financial Officer.

各位好，歡迎參加羅致恆富（Robert Half）2026 年第一季電話會議。今天的電話會議將被錄音。（接線員指示）今天的主持人為羅致恆富總裁兼執行長 Keith Waddell 先生，以及財務長 Michael Buckley 先生。

Mr. Waddell, you may begin.

Waddell 先生，您可以開始。

Hello, everyone. We appreciate your time today. Before we get started, I'd like to remind you that the comments made on today's call contain forward-looking statements, including predictions and estimates about our future performance.

各位好。感謝大家今天撥冗參與。在開始之前，我想提醒各位，今天電話會議中的評論包含前瞻性陳述，包括對我們未來表現的預測與估計。

These statements represent our current judgment of what the future holds. However, they are subject to the risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from the forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties are described in today's press release and our most recent 10-K and 10-Q filed with the SEC. We assume no obligation to update the statements made on today's call.

這些陳述代表我們目前對未來情勢的判斷。然而，這些陳述受到風險與不確定性的影響，可能導致實際結果與前瞻性陳述存在重大差異。相關風險與不確定性已載於今天的新聞稿，以及我們最近向美國證券交易委員會（SEC）提交的 10-K 與 10-Q 文件中。我們不承擔更新今天電話會議中所作陳述的任何義務。

During this presentation, we may refer to certain non-GAAP financial measures as adjusted. Adjusted revenue growth excludes the impact of billing day variations and foreign currency exchange rates. Adjusted gross margin, SG&A, and operating income reflect the combining of investment gains and losses related to employee deferred compensation plans with correspondent changes in those obligations. These items have no impact on reported net income.

在本次簡報中，我們可能會提及某些非 GAAP 財務衡量指標，並以「調整後」呈現。調整後營收成長排除計費天數變動與外匯匯率的影響。調整後毛利率、銷售、一般及行政費用（SG&A）與營業利益，反映將與員工遞延補償計畫相關的投資損益，與該等義務的相應變動合併呈列。這些項目對已報導的淨利沒有影響。

Reconciliations and additional information are included in the supplemental schedules to our earnings release. For your convenience, our prepared remarks for today's call are available in the Investor Center of our website, roberthalf.com.

對帳表與其他補充資訊已包含在我們財報新聞稿的補充附表中。為方便各位，今天電話會議的事先準備講稿已公布於我們網站 roberthalf.com 的投資人中心（Investor Center）。

For the first quarter of 2026, global enterprise revenues were $1.3 billion, down 4% from last year's first quarter on a reported basis and down 6% on an adjusted basis. We're very pleased that talent solutions delivered a second consecutive quarter of positive sequential growth on a same-day constant currency basis. With revenue trends strengthening as the quarter progressed and into early April.

2026 年第一季，全球企業營收為 13 億美元，按報導基礎較去年第一季下降 4%，按調整後基礎下降 6%。我們非常高興人才解決方案（talent solutions）在同日、固定匯率基礎下，連續第二季實現正向的季比成長。隨著本季進行以及進入 4 月上旬，營收趨勢持續改善。

Overall, we believe market conditions are becoming increasingly conducive to our business, and our unique combination of award-winning high-tech capabilities and high-touch expertise positions us well to deliver meaningful value for clients navigating a dynamic business environment.

整體而言，我們認為市場狀況正變得愈來愈有利於我們的業務；而我們獨特結合屢獲殊榮的高科技能力與高接觸（high-touch）專業服務，使我們能在客戶面對動態商業環境時，提供具實質意義的價值。

Net income per share in the first quarter was $0.14, compared to $0.17 in the first quarter a year ago. As Michael discussed, first quarter EPS was impacted by a seasonally elevated tax rate tied to stock-based compensation, which we expect to normalize as the year progresses. We remain very well positioned to capitalize on emerging opportunities and support our clients' talent and consulting needs through the strength of our industry-leading brand, people, technology, and unique business model that includes both professional staffing and business consulting services. Cash flow used in operations during the first quarter was $112 million. Cash outflows are seasonally elevated each year in the first quarter due to the annual payment cycle for bonuses and SaaS subscription renewals, among others.

第一季每股淨利為 0.14 美元，去年同期為 0.17 美元。如 Michael 所述，第一季 EPS 受到與股票基礎薪酬相關、季節性偏高的稅率影響；我們預期該稅率將隨著年度推進而回歸正常。我們仍具備非常良好的條件，可把握新興機會，並憑藉我們業界領先的品牌、人才、科技，以及同時涵蓋專業人力派遣與企業顧問服務的獨特商業模式，支援客戶的人才與顧問需求。第一季營運活動使用的現金流為 1.12 億美元。由於年度獎金支付週期與 SaaS 訂閱續約等因素，每年第一季的現金流出通常具有季節性偏高的特性。

In March, we distributed a $0.59 per share cash dividend to our shareholders of record for a total cash outlay of $62 million. Return on invested capital for the company was 4% in the first quarter.

3 月，我們向在冊股東發放每股 0.59 美元的現金股利，合計現金支出 6,200 萬美元。公司第一季的投入資本報酬率（ROIC）為 4%。

Now, I'll turn the call back over to our CFO, Mike Buckley.

接下來我把電話會議交回給我們的財務長 Mike Buckley。

Thank you, Keith, and hello, everyone. As Keith noted, global revenues were $1.3 billion in the first quarter. On an adjusted basis, first quarter talent solutions revenues were down 7% year-over-year. US talent solutions revenues were $626 million, down 7% from the prior year's first quarter. Non-US talent solutions revenues were $208 million, down 3% year-over-year. We conduct talent solutions operations throughout offices in the United States and 18 other countries.

謝謝你，Keith，各位好。如 Keith 所提，第一季全球營收為 13 億美元。按調整後基礎，第一季人才解決方案營收年減 7%。美國人才解決方案營收為 6.26 億美元，較去年第一季下降 7%。非美國人才解決方案營收為 2.08 億美元，年減 3%。我們在美國及其他 18 個國家的辦公據點皆有經營人才解決方案業務。

In the first quarter of 2026, there were 61.9 billing days, the same as the first quarter one year ago. The second quarter of 2026 has 63.1 billing days, compared to 63.2 billing days in the second quarter of last year.

2026 年第一季計費天數為 61.9 天，與一年前的第一季相同。2026 年第二季計費天數為 63.1 天，去年第二季為 63.2 天。

Currency exchange rate movements during the first quarter had the effect of increasing reported year-over-year total revenues by $24 million -- $16 million for talent solutions, and $8 million for Protiviti. Contract Talent Solutions bill rates for the first quarter increased 2.6% compared to one year ago, adjusted for changes in the mix of revenues by functional specialization, currency, and country. This rate for the fourth quarter was 3.2%.

第一季匯率變動使年比的已報導總營收增加 2,400 萬美元——其中人才解決方案增加 1,600 萬美元，Protiviti 增加 800 萬美元。第一季合約型人才解決方案（Contract Talent Solutions）的計費單價（bill rates）較一年前上升 2.6%，此數據已就職能專業別、幣別與國家別的營收組合變動進行調整。第四季該增幅為 3.2%。

Now let's take a closer look at the results for Protiviti. Global revenues in the first quarter were $466 million. $362 million of that is from the United States, and $104 million is from outside of the United States. On an adjusted basis, global first quarter Protiviti revenues were down 4% versus the year-ago period. US Protiviti revenues were down 6%, while non-US Protiviti revenues were up 8% compared to one year ago. Protiviti and its independently owned Member Firms serve clients through locations in the United States and 27 other countries.

接著更深入檢視 Protiviti 的表現。第一季全球營收為 4.66 億美元，其中 3.62 億美元來自美國，1.04 億美元來自美國以外地區。按調整後基礎，Protiviti 第一季全球營收較去年同期下降 4%。美國 Protiviti 營收下降 6%，非美國 Protiviti 營收則較一年前成長 8%。Protiviti 及其獨立持有的會員事務所（Member Firms）透過美國及其他 27 個國家的據點為客戶提供服務。

Turning now to gross margin: In contract talent solutions, gross margin was 38.9% of applicable revenues in both the current quarter and the first quarter one year ago. Conversion, or contract-to-hire, revenues were 3.1% of contract revenues in the current quarter compared to 3.2% in the first quarter of 2025. Our permanent placement revenues were 13.1% of consolidated talent solutions revenues in the current quarter, compared to 12.8% in the first quarter of 2025. When combined with contract talent solutions gross margin, overall gross margin for talent solutions was 46.8% of applicable revenues in the current quarter, compared to 46.7% in the first quarter of 2025. Protiviti gross margin was 19.2% of Protiviti revenues in the first quarter and 18.9% in the first quarter one year ago. Adjusted gross margin for Protiviti was 18.8% for the quarter just ended, compared to 18.1% last year.

接下來看毛利率：在合約型人才解決方案中，本季與一年前第一季的毛利率皆為適用營收的 38.9%。轉換（conversion，或合約轉正職 contract-to-hire）營收占本季合約營收的 3.1%，而 2025 年第一季為 3.2%。本季永久派遣（permanent placement）營收占合併後人才解決方案營收的 13.1%，2025 年第一季為 12.8%。結合合約型人才解決方案毛利率後，本季人才解決方案整體毛利率為適用營收的 46.8%，2025 年第一季為 46.7%。Protiviti 第一季毛利率為 Protiviti 營收的 19.2%，一年前第一季為 18.9%。Protiviti 的調整後毛利率在本季為 18.8%，去年為 18.1%。

Enterprise selling, general, and administrative costs were 34.1% of global revenues in the first quarter, compared to 34.0% in the same quarter one year ago. Adjusted enterprise SG&A costs were 34.6% for the quarter just ended, compared to 35.2% one year ago. Talent solutions SG&A costs were 44.2% of talent solutions revenues in the first quarter, versus 43.7% in the first quarter of 2025. Adjusted talent solutions SG&A costs were 45% for the quarter just ended, compared to 45.5% last year. First quarter SG&A costs for Protiviti were 15.9% of Protiviti revenues, compared to 16.3% for the same quarter one year ago.

企業層級的銷售、一般及行政成本在第一季占全球營收的 34.1%，一年前同季為 34.0%。剛結束季度的調整後企業 SG&A 成本為 34.6%，一年前為 35.2%。第一季人才解決方案 SG&A 成本占人才解決方案營收的 44.2%，2025 年第一季為 43.7%。剛結束季度的調整後人才解決方案 SG&A 成本為 45%，去年為 45.5%。Protiviti 第一季 SG&A 成本占 Protiviti 營收的 15.9%，一年前同季為 16.3%。

Operating income for the first quarter was $37 million. Adjusted operating income was $29 million in the quarter, or 2.2% of revenues. First quarter adjusted operating income from talent solutions was $16 million, or 1.8% of revenues. Adjusted operating income for Protiviti in the first quarter was $13 million, or 2.9% of revenues.

第一季營業利益為 3,700 萬美元。調整後營業利益為 2,900 萬美元，占營收的 2.2%。第一季人才解決方案的調整後營業利益為 1,600 萬美元，占營收的 1.8%。Protiviti 第一季調整後營業利益為 1,300 萬美元，占營收的 2.9%。

Our first quarter 2026 income statement includes an $8 million loss from investments held in employee deferred compensation trusts. This is completely offset by an equal amount of lower employee deferred compensation costs, which are reflected in SG&A expenses and direct costs. As such, it has no effect on our reported net income.

我們 2026 年第一季損益表包含員工遞延補償信託所持投資的 800 萬美元損失。此損失完全被等額的員工遞延補償成本下降所抵銷；該成本下降反映於 SG&A 費用與直接成本中。因此，對我們已報導的淨利沒有影響。

Our first quarter tax rate was 56% compared to 22% one year ago. This elevated tax rate is primarily the result of a tax charge related to our employee stock-based compensation grants, the majority of which vest in the first quarter, and the magnified impact of non-deductible tax items when measured against seasonally low Q1 pre-tax income.

第一季稅率為 56%，一年前為 22%。此偏高稅率主要源自與員工股票基礎薪酬授予相關的稅負費用（其中多數於第一季歸屬），以及在第一季稅前所得季節性偏低的情況下，不可扣抵稅項對稅率造成的放大影響。

At the end of the first quarter, accounts receivable were $776 million, and implied day sales outstanding, or DSO, was 53.8 days. Before we move to second-quarter guidance, let's review some of the monthly revenue trends we saw in the first quarter and so far in April, all adjusted for currency and billing days.

第一季末，應收帳款為 7.76 億美元，推算的應收帳款週轉天數（DSO）為 53.8 天。在我們進入第二季財測之前，先回顧第一季以及截至 4 月目前為止所觀察到的每月營收趨勢；以下數據皆已就匯率與計費天數進行調整。

Contract talent solutions exited the first quarter with March revenues down 5% versus the prior year, compared to a 7% decrease for the full quarter. Revenues for the first two weeks of April were down 1% compared to the same period last year.

合約型人才解決方案在第一季末的 3 月營收較去年同期下降 5%，相較之下全季為下降 7%。4 月前兩週的營收較去年同期下降 1%。

Permanent placement revenues in March were down 6% versus March 2025. This compares to a 5% decrease for the full quarter. For the first three weeks of April, permanent placement revenues were down 7% compared to the same period in 2025.

永久派遣營收在 3 月較 2025 年 3 月下降 6%。相較之下，全季為下降 5%。4 月前三週，永久派遣營收較 2025 年同期下降 7%。

We provide this information so you have insight into some of the trends we saw during the first quarter and into April. But as these are very brief time periods. We caution against reading too much into them. With that in mind, we offer the following second-quarter guidance. Revenues: $1.275 billion to $1.375 billion; income per share: $0.20 to $0.30; income per share, excluding the $0.03 one-time severance charge, which I'll discuss in a moment, $0.23 to $0.33.

我們提供這些資訊，是為了讓您了解我們在第一季以及進入四月期間所觀察到的一些趨勢。但由於這些都是非常短的時間區間，我們提醒您不要對其過度解讀。基於此，我們提供以下第二季指引。營收：12.75 億美元至 13.75 億美元；每股盈餘：0.20 美元至 0.30 美元；每股盈餘（不含一次性遣散費用 0.03 美元，我稍後會說明）：0.23 美元至 0.33 美元。

Midpoint revenues of $1.325 billion are 4% lower than the same period in 2025 on an adjusted basis. Our midpoint revenue guidance for the second quarter reflects continued positive adjusted sequential revenue growth for talent solutions.

以中位數計算，營收 13.25 億美元在調整後基礎上較 2025 年同期低 4%。我們對第二季的營收中位數指引，反映人才解決方案（talent solutions）持續呈現正向的調整後連續季營收成長。

Our Q2 revenue guidance for Protiviti reflects ongoing shifts in the US Financial services regulatory environment, which Keith will address in just a moment. As a result, cost actions are planned that impacted our Q2 midpoint adjusted gross margin guidance by $5 million in expected severance costs, or $0.03 per share. We expect these actions will be fully completed by the beginning of the third quarter. Major financial assumptions underlying the midpoint of these estimates are as follows: Adjusted revenue growth year-over-year: for talent solutions, flat to down 4%, Protiviti down 4% to 8%, overall down 1% to 5%.

我們對 Protiviti 的第二季營收指引，反映美國金融服務監管環境持續變化所帶來的影響，Keith 稍後會進一步說明。因此，我們規劃採取成本行動，預計遣散費用為 500 萬美元，或每股 0.03 美元，這使我們第二季中位數調整後毛利率指引受到影響。我們預期這些行動將在第三季初前全面完成。支撐上述估計中位數的主要財務假設如下：調整後營收年增率：人才解決方案持平至下滑 4%；Protiviti 下滑 4% 至 8%；整體下滑 1% 至 5%。

Adjusted gross margin percentage: contract talent, 38% to 40%, Protiviti, 19% to 21%, overall 36% to 39%. Adjusted SG&A as a percentage of revenue: talent solutions, 43% to 45%. Protiviti, 16% to 18%, overall 34% to 36%.

調整後毛利率：合約人才（contract talent）38% 至 40%；Protiviti 19% 至 21%；整體 36% 至 39%。調整後 SG&A（銷售、一般及行政費用）占營收比：人才解決方案 43% 至 45%；Protiviti 16% 至 18%；整體 34% 至 36%。

Adjusted operating income as a percentage of revenues: talent solutions, 2% to 4%, Protiviti, 2% to 4%, overall 2% to 4%. Tax rate: 34% to 36%; shares outstanding: $100 million to $101 million 2026 capital expenditures and capitalized cloud computing costs: $70 million to $90 million, with $15 million to $25 million in the second quarter.

調整後營業利益占營收比：人才解決方案 2% 至 4%；Protiviti 2% 至 4%；整體 2% 至 4%。稅率：34% 至 36%；流通在外股數：1.00 億股至 1.01 億股。2026 年資本支出及資本化雲端運算成本：7,000 萬美元至 9,000 萬美元，其中第二季為 1,500 萬美元至 2,500 萬美元。

For the third quarter, we offer the following general observations: For talent solutions, typical Q3 seasonal trends show relatively flat sequential revenues due to summer holiday effects, especially in Europe. That said, current trends would result in Q3 year-on-year adjusted revenue growth of 1% to 3%, marking a return to positive growth for the first time since 2022.

對於第三季，我們提出以下一般觀察：就人才解決方案而言，典型的第三季季節性趨勢顯示，由於暑期假期效應（尤其在歐洲），連續季營收通常相對持平。儘管如此，依目前趨勢推估，第三季調整後營收年增率將為 1% 至 3%，這將是自 2022 年以來首次回到正成長。

For Protiviti, Q3 revenues typically increase sequentially, tied to seasonally higher internal audit work related to clients' annual internal control certifications. This typically drives higher staff utilization rates and elevated incremental margins, and we expect a similar pattern this year.

就 Protiviti 而言，第三季營收通常會呈現連續季成長，與季節性較高的內部稽核工作相關，該工作與客戶年度內部控制認證有關。這通常會帶動較高的人員利用率與較高的增量利潤率，我們預期今年也會呈現類似型態。

In addition, Q3 for Protiviti will benefit from the absence of Q2 severance costs and lower Q3 staff costs following the Q2 cost actions previously referenced. We estimate Q3 Protiviti sequential revenue gains of 0% to 3% and, combined with the newer [lower] cost structure (corrected by company after the call), Q3 adjusted segment margins of 7% to 9%, a substantial improvement over Q2 margins and comparable to margins from last year. We estimate that both talent solutions and Protiviti will deliver positive year-over-year segment income growth in Q3, driving Q3 consolidated net income and EPS growth of 8% to 12% year-over-year. All estimates we provide on this call are subject to the risks mentioned in today's press release and in our SEC filings.

此外，Protiviti 的第三季將受惠於第二季遣散費用不再發生，以及在前述第二季成本行動後第三季人員成本降低。我們估計 Protiviti 第三季連續季營收增幅為 0% 至 3%，並結合較新的［較低］成本結構（公司於電話會議後更正），第三季調整後部門利潤率為 7% 至 9%，相較第二季利潤率將大幅改善，並與去年利潤率相當。我們估計人才解決方案與 Protiviti 兩者在第三季都將實現部門所得年增，進而帶動第三季合併淨利與 EPS 年增 8% 至 12%。我們在本次電話會議提供的所有估計，均受今日新聞稿及我們向 SEC 申報文件中所提及風險之影響。

Now, I'll turn the call back over to Keith.

現在，我把電話交回給 Keith。

Thank you, Mike. Our first-quarter results for talent solutions reflect continued sequential growth on a same-day constant currency basis. We experienced some weather-related disruption in February, but activity levels improved steadily throughout March and into early April. This included increased client engagement and higher numbers of job orders, particularly in areas such as technology modernization, data initiatives, and IT infrastructure.

謝謝你，Mike。我們第一季的人才解決方案業績，反映在同日數、固定匯率基礎上持續的連續季成長。二月我們受到一些與天候相關的干擾，但活動水準在三月期間並延續至四月初穩步改善。其中包括客戶互動增加以及職缺委託（job orders）數量上升，特別是在技術現代化、資料計畫與 IT 基礎設施等領域。

Resource levels at small and midsize businesses, which represent the majority of our client base, remain lean following several years of cost discipline, creating capacity constraints as project activity begins to recover.

中小型企業（占我們客戶基礎的大多數）的資源配置，在經過數年的成本紀律後仍維持精簡，當專案活動開始復甦時，因而產生產能限制。

In addition, broader labor market indicators continue to point to underlying demand for skilled talent. Unemployment remains slow, particularly among college-educated workers, and in many of the roles we support, while job openings continue to run above historical averages. Decision timelines remain extended but beginning to improve as companies revisit postponed initiatives and consider hiring tied to business-critical priorities.

此外，更廣泛的勞動市場指標仍指向對熟練人才的潛在需求。失業率仍然偏低，特別是在大學教育程度的勞工，以及我們所支援的許多職務上；同時，職缺數仍高於歷史平均。決策時程仍然拉長，但隨著企業重新檢視先前延後的計畫，並考量與關鍵業務優先事項相關的招募，情況開始改善。

Economic uncertainties related to the conflicts in the Middle East and higher energy costs have not yet significantly impacted client demand. However, concerns remain if these conditions persist. Candidate behavior also reflects a gradually improving market. Professionals with in-demand skills are increasingly selective, with continued preference for flexibility and competitive compensation, reinforcing the value of our ability to deliver highly skilled talent efficiently. With respect to artificial intelligence, we continue to see limited impact on employment levels related to the roles we place in our specialties. This is supported by multiple external studies, and there is very little evidence to date that AI adoption is leading to widespread job displacement. Instead, AI is reshaping the way work gets done and increasing the need for skilled professionals with domain expertise and enhanced AI skills who can also apply judgment, validate outputs, and support implementations.

與中東衝突及能源成本上升相關的經濟不確定性，尚未對客戶需求造成顯著影響；然而，若這些情況持續，疑慮仍在。候選人行為也反映市場正逐步改善。具備市場需求技能的專業人士愈來愈挑剔，仍偏好彈性與具競爭力的薪酬，這也強化了我們能有效率地提供高技能人才的價值。就人工智慧而言，我們仍看到其對我們專長領域所媒合職務的就業水準影響有限。多項外部研究亦支持此觀點，迄今幾乎沒有證據顯示 AI 的採用正導致大規模的工作被取代。相反地，AI 正在重塑工作完成的方式，並提高對具備領域專業與更強 AI 技能之熟練專業人士的需求；這些人也能運用判斷、驗證輸出並支援導入。

In addition, the growing use of generative AI by job seekers has increased application volumes, made it more difficult to verify candidate qualifications and made resumes more homogeneous and harder to differentiate. This further underscores the value of our services, including our proprietary data on candidate performance and our ability to deliver vetted, proven talent.

此外，求職者日益使用生成式 AI，使得投遞量增加、候選人資格更難以驗證，也讓履歷更趨同質化、難以區分。這進一步凸顯我們服務的價值，包括我們對候選人表現的專有數據，以及我們提供經審核、具實績人才的能力。

Protiviti’s segment results were impacted by the Q1 seasonal trends we previously guided, with internal audit revenues sequentially lower and higher staff compensation costs due to annual adjustments made as of January 1. Protiviti is also navigating continued shifts in its risk and compliance solutions practice, reflecting ongoing changes in the US financial service regulatory environment. With a marked decline in new enforcement actions and notable easing in prior enforcement requirements, client demand is increasingly focused on enhancing the efficiency of ongoing compliance programs, which currently involve substantial internal resources and aging infrastructure.

Protiviti 的部門業績受到我們先前指引所提及的第一季季節性趨勢影響，內部稽核營收連續季下降，且因每年於 1 月 1 日進行的年度調整而導致人員薪酬成本上升。Protiviti 也正因應其風險與法遵解決方案業務的持續轉變，反映美國金融服務監管環境的持續變化。隨著新的執法行動明顯減少，以及先前執法要求顯著放寬，客戶需求愈來愈聚焦於提升既有法遵計畫的效率；這些計畫目前涉及大量內部資源與老舊基礎設施。

This shift is influencing the mix of Protiviti's work with relatively fewer large-scale remediation engagements and increased demand for efficiency-oriented solutions, including the application of advanced technologies. These engagements are typically shorter in duration and have different resource leverage profiles than traditional remediation work.

這一轉變正在影響 Protiviti 的工作組合：大型補救（remediation）專案相對減少，而對效率導向解決方案（包括應用先進技術）的需求增加。這類專案通常期間較短，且其資源槓桿特性與傳統補救工作不同。

We are actively aligning our resource levels with these evolving client needs while continuing to invest in capabilities that support long-term growth. As such, we are taking cost actions that will reduce annual costs by $30 million and result in a Q2 one-time charge of $5 million, or $0.03 per share.

我們正積極使資源水準與這些演變中的客戶需求一致，同時持續投資於支持長期成長的能力。因此，我們正採取成本行動，將使年度成本降低 3,000 萬美元，並在第二季產生一次性費用 500 萬美元，或每股 0.03 美元。

These cost actions are expected to be fully implemented by the beginning of the third quarter. Protiviti's pipeline remains strong across all of its other major solutions, which are all expected to grow sequentially in the second quarter. Our strategic engagement of contract professionals via our talent solution operations plays an essential role in Protiviti's success and further amplifies our unique enterprisewide competitive advantage.

這些成本行動預期將在第三季初前全面落實。Protiviti 在其他所有主要解決方案上的案源（pipeline）仍然強勁，且預期在第二季皆將呈現連續季成長。我們透過人才解決方案營運來策略性地運用合約專業人士，對 Protiviti 的成功扮演關鍵角色，並進一步放大我們全企業層級獨特的競爭優勢。

Looking ahead, we believe current market conditions are increasingly conducive to our business. Clients are operating with lean teams, unemployment remains low, making it harder for our clients to hire on their own, and demand for professionals with specialized skills persists. As confidence continues to improve, even modest increases in hiring activity can drive incremental demand for our services.

展望未來，我們認為目前的市場狀況正愈來愈有利於我們的業務。客戶以精簡團隊運作，失業率仍低，使客戶更難自行招募，而對具備專業技能的專業人士需求依舊存在。隨著信心持續改善，即使招募活動僅小幅增加，也能帶動我們服務的增量需求。

We remain energized by our time-tested corporate purpose to connect people to meaningful and exciting work and provide clients with the talent and consulting expertise they need to compete and grow. Our unique combination of award-winning, high-tech capabilities and high-touch expertise positions us well to support clients as they navigate an evolving labor market and increasingly complex business environment.

我們仍因公司經時間考驗的宗旨而備受鼓舞：將人們連結到有意義且令人振奮的工作，並為客戶提供其競爭與成長所需的人才與顧問專業。我們獨特結合屢獲獎項的高科技能力與高接觸（high-touch）專業服務，使我們能在客戶因應演變中的勞動市場與日益複雜的商業環境時，提供有力支援。

Finally, we'd like to thank our global workforce for their continued dedication. Their efforts have earned Robert Half recent recognition as one of America's Most Innovative Companies by Fortune and one of the Fortune 100 Best Companies to Work For. And just this week, we were named by Forbes as one of America's Best Employers for Company Culture.

最後，我們要感謝全球員工持續的投入與奉獻。他們的努力使 Robert Half 近期獲《Fortune》評選為「美國最具創新力公司」之一，並入選「Fortune 100 最適合工作的公司」。而就在本週，我們也獲《Forbes》評選為「美國最佳雇主（企業文化）」之一。

Now, Mike and I'd be happy to answer your questions. Please ask just one question and a single follow-up as needed. If there's more time, we'll come back to you.

現在，Mike 和我很樂意回答各位的問題。請每次只提一個問題，並視需要提出一個追問。如果時間允許，我們會再回到您這邊。

(Operator Instructions)

（接線員指示）

Trevor Romeo, William Blair.

Trevor Romeo，William Blair。

I wanted to start with the Q3 commentary you had in the prepared remarks. Really appreciate your thoughts there, first of all. When you talk about returning to, I guess, 1% to 3% revenue growth for talent solutions, are you just essentially taking the recent kind of weekly revenues and holding them constant, or is there any further improvement there? And then for Protiviti, the sequential growth you'd embed there, does that contemplate any recovery in the risk and compliance area?

我想先從你在事先準備的發言中對第三季（Q3）的評論談起。首先非常感謝你在那裡分享的看法。當你談到人才解決方案的營收成長回到大約 1% 到 3% 時，你基本上是把近期每週的營收水準視為持平來推估，還是你也假設還會有進一步改善？另外，關於 Protiviti，你所納入的季比成長，是否也包含風險與法遵領域的任何復甦？

Okay, so for talent solutions, our current run rate is stronger than our Q2 guidance, which would fall over into Q3. And so I would say we're somewhat conservative for Q2 and its carryover into Q3, so hopefully there's some upside there.

好的，關於人才解決方案，我們目前的運行水準（run rate）比我們對第二季（Q2）的指引更強，而這會延續到第三季（Q3）。所以我會說，我們對 Q2 以及其延伸到 Q3 的假設是偏保守的，因此希望那裡會有一些上行空間。

Risk and compliance, we've taken a hard look at a portfolio of projects that we have. We have not assumed any short-term snapback, if you will, in the risk and compliance practice, but we believe it to be reasonable.

至於風險與法遵，我們已經仔細檢視了手上專案的組合。我們並沒有假設風險與法遵業務在短期內會出現你所說的那種快速反彈（snapback），但我們認為目前的假設是合理的。

Okay, I appreciate that. And then maybe as far as Protiviti's other solution areas outside risk and compliance, maybe you could talk about the underlying demand trends there and specifically on the tech consulting. I know you mentioned efficiency-oriented solutions, so maybe just a more specific sense of how the revenue trends for the tech consulting business. are trending and what you kind of see in the next several quarters going forward?

好的，感謝說明。那接著就 Protiviti 而言，除了風險與法遵以外的其他解決方案領域，你能否談談那裡的基礎需求趨勢，特別是科技顧問（tech consulting）？我知道你提到以效率為導向的解決方案，所以想更具體了解科技顧問業務的營收趨勢目前如何發展，以及你對未來幾季的看法？

Yes, I think I'll start by updating on the mix of solution areas within Protiviti, and tech consulting is now the largest, it's about a third of their revenues. Internal audit would be next at 25%, risk and compliance would be 20%, and business process improvement and a couple of other small make up the other 20%. So tech consulting is the largest. and we would argue has the brightest prospects as we speak. That crosses tech modernization, data, cyber, and the same themes would carry over into talent solutions. But we're very upbeat about Protiviti's tech consulting solutions area.

是的，我想先更新一下 Protiviti 內部各解決方案領域的組合。科技顧問現在是最大的，約占其營收的三分之一。接下來是內部稽核，占 25%；風險與法遵占 20%；流程改善（business process improvement）以及其他幾個較小的領域合計占另外 20%。所以科技顧問是最大的一塊，而且我們認為就目前而言，它的前景最為亮眼。這涵蓋科技現代化、資料、資安（cyber），而相同的主題也會延伸到人才解決方案。我們對 Protiviti 的科技顧問解決方案領域非常樂觀。

Internal audit is solid, it's not as impacted by financial services as is risk and compliance. And so in risk and compliance, 75% or more of that relates to financial services. In internal audit, it's well less than half. And so internal audit has the most longer-term contract-related revenue sources, so it's the most stable and the least impacted, not that it is totally unimpacted, by the regulatory rollback that we're talking about.

內部稽核表現穩健，它不像風險與法遵那樣受到金融服務業的影響那麼大。因此在風險與法遵中，75% 或更多與金融服務相關；而在內部稽核中，這個比例遠低於一半。內部稽核也擁有最多與長期合約相關的營收來源，因此最穩定、受影響最小——當然也不是完全不受影響——相較於我們所談到的監管鬆綁（regulatory rollback）。

And so we feel really good about technology. We feel good about internal audit. And then business process improvement, particularly as we move more and more into getting ready for AI with our clients, process improvement's a big part of that. On the risk and compliance side itself, remember this is a US phenomenon. Outside the US, regulatory enforcement action work is still quite strong, and we have some very good engagements there outside the US.

因此我們對科技非常有信心，對內部稽核也有信心。至於流程改善，特別是當我們與客戶越來越多地進入為 AI 做準備的階段，流程改善是其中很重要的一部分。就風險與法遵本身而言，請記得這是一個美國的現象。在美國以外，監管執法行動（regulatory enforcement action）相關的工作仍然相當強勁，我們在美國以外也有一些非常好的案子。

We would also say there's areas like fintech, insurance, and other adjacent, but still within financial services, opportunities that we're pursuing. And then further, as we alluded to, specifically to the extent that banks aren't spending as much time internally on regulatory compliance per se and dealing with enforcement actions. They've got more time to focus on efficiencies and with their aging infrastructure. There's a lot of low-hanging fruit there. We've already shown many of our banking clients that frankly, the co-sourcing work they do with us, we're more efficient than their internal people are and so there's learning we've experienced. There's automation we've already taken advantage of that we convey to our clients as well.

我們也會說，像是金融科技（fintech）、保險，以及其他相鄰但仍屬於金融服務範疇的領域，都是我們正在追求的機會。此外，正如我們先前提到的，特別是在銀行不再需要把那麼多時間花在內部的監管法遵本身以及處理執法行動之際，他們就有更多時間專注於效率提升與老舊基礎設施。那裡有很多「低垂的果實」。我們已經向許多銀行客戶證明，坦白說，他們與我們進行共同外包（co-sourcing）的工作，我們比他們內部人員更有效率，因此我們也累積了相關的學習。我們也已經運用了一些自動化，並同樣傳遞給客戶。

And so we think, while there's this lull in enforcement action work, there's a big opportunity with helping our clients become more efficient with the very large resources they're already dedicating to compliance themselves.

因此我們認為，雖然執法行動相關工作目前有一段空窗期，但在協助客戶用更有效率的方式運用他們已經投入在法遵上的龐大資源方面，存在很大的機會。

Mark Marcon, Baird.

Mark Marcon，Baird。

Good afternoon, and thanks for taking a question and a follow-up. In terms of the first question, when I and a number of my peers ended up attending the staffing industry analyst conference down in Austin, Texas, there was some discussion from a number of different staffing players that are private that were basically saying, they are certainly seeing a pickup in terms of demand trends. and part of that seemed to be due to the fact that in some cases, companies are basically holding off in terms of permanent employment, but the work still needs to be done. And so they're turning more towards the temps if they have some freezes in place. I'm just wondering to what extent you're obviously seeing some improvement with regards to the talent solutions.

下午好，謝謝讓我提問並追問一題。就第一個問題而言，我和一些同業最近去德州奧斯汀參加人力派遣產業分析師會議時，有一些不同的民營派遣業者提到，他們確實看到需求趨勢正在回升。其中一部分似乎是因為有些公司在正式（permanent）聘僱方面暫緩，但工作仍需要完成，所以在有凍結措施時就更轉向使用臨時人力（temps）。我想了解你們在人才解決方案方面，是否也明顯看到一些改善？

And so I'm wondering to what extent do you think that might also be the case for some of your smaller clients if that applies or not? Or what are you seeing in terms of the primary driver in terms of the improving sequential trends with regards to talent solutions? I want to start there.

因此我也想問，這種情況在你們一些較小的客戶身上是否也可能成立（如果適用的話）？或者，就人才解決方案的逐季改善趨勢而言，你們看到的主要驅動因素是什麼？我想先從這裡開始。

Well, I would say for our SMB clients, our perm operations are just as strong, if not stronger, than our contract operations are. So we're certainly not seeing disproportionate weakness in perm while contract gains.

嗯，我會說對我們的中小企業（SMB）客戶而言，我們的正職（perm）業務和合約（contract）業務一樣強，甚至更強。所以我們並沒有看到正職相對疲弱、而合約走強的失衡情況。

Instead, we would point out once again that if you look over the last four years, companies with fewer than 500 employees have hired 2.5 times to 3 times fewer people than those at bigger companies. They're leaner, and there's a backlog of projects to be done. And as they get more confident about the future, they're more willing to invest. And I would argue, it's that more than, I'll pause on full time, that's fueling demand for contract.

相反地，我們會再次指出，如果你回顧過去四年，員工少於 500 人的公司，其招募人數比大型公司少了 2.5 倍到 3 倍。他們的人力更精簡，且有一批待完成的專案積壓。當他們對未來更有信心時，就更願意投資。我會認為，推動合約需求的更主要是這一點，而不是——我先暫停在全職（full time）這件事上——而不是全職用工的因素。

I mean as we go up to larger companies, I think there is some kind of evaluation by larger companies as to what this whole AI wave is going to mean to their full-time employee count. And while they're making that evaluation to the extent they have needs, they hire -- they use more contractors in that case. But as to our bread and butter core SMB clients, it's more about pent-up demand and really lean resources. There’s only so much you can stretch your existing employees, and our SMB clients are pretty much at that point.

我的意思是，當我們看到更大型的公司時，我認為他們確實在評估這一波 AI 浪潮對其全職員工人數會意味著什麼。在他們進行評估的同時，只要有需求，就會在那種情況下雇用——使用更多承包商（contractors）。但就我們的核心主力 SMB 客戶而言，更多是被壓抑的需求與非常精簡的資源所致。現有員工能被拉伸的程度有限，而我們的 SMB 客戶基本上已經到那個臨界點了。

Great. And then stepping over to Protiviti, you're taking a $5 million cost action here in this quarter, and that's going to yield $30 million in terms of savings. But the cost action, that falls all in the gross margin line, which basically would imply that it's basically bench talent that is being pruned and wondering, is that all in the risk and compliance area? Or how is that set up? And to what extent, is it broader than just risk and compliance?

很好。接著談 Protiviti，你們在本季採取了 500 萬美元的成本行動，將帶來 3,000 萬美元的節省。但這個成本行動全部反映在毛利率（gross margin）那一行，這基本上意味著是在修剪閒置人力（bench talent）。我想問，這是否全部都在風險與法遵領域？或是具體是怎麼配置的？以及它在多大程度上不僅限於風險與法遵？

It's primarily by leaps and bounds directly related to the regulatory enforcement action work that I just described. And so it's Q2 cost actions relative to people in that particular area.

這主要、而且非常明顯地，直接與我剛才描述的監管執法行動相關工作有關。因此這是第二季（Q2）針對該特定領域人員所採取的成本行動。

Okay. Can I just ask one sneak one more in? Just with regards to the, with regards to the other areas, particularly on the technology side, there is another player that was basically saying they were seeing some delays with regards to projects and things being pushed back. Are you seeing any of that?

好的。我可以再偷偷多問一題嗎？關於——關於其他領域，特別是科技這一塊，有另一家業者基本上表示他們看到一些專案延遲、以及事情被往後推。你們有看到類似情況嗎？

It's kind of hard not to be aware of that other company. But just a couple of comments as well as about delays. I'd say, first of all, remember, we're 70% SMB, 30% mid-cap. They're mostly large cap. They have a large exposure to federal government. We have a less than 1% exposure to federal government. They've grown significantly by acquisition. All our growth is organic. We have no debt. We have a strong balance sheet.

很難不注意到那家公司。不過關於延遲，我也補充幾點。首先，請記得我們的客戶結構是 70% SMB、30% 中型企業（mid-cap）；他們多數是大型企業（large cap）。他們對聯邦政府的曝險很高；我們對聯邦政府的曝險不到 1%。他們透過併購大幅成長；我們所有成長都是有機成長。我們沒有負債，資產負債表很強健。

Tech is our strongest practice group. Not only has there not been delays in the areas of tech modernization, data, cyber, that I talked about earlier, the pipeline is small but strong. The project size itself is smaller, but they're more of them. Frankly, our mid-cap is even stronger than our SMB in tech. And Protiviti too, which then leans toward large cap, it's also Protiviti's largest and strongest solution area.

科技是我們最強的業務群組。不僅在我先前提到的科技現代化、資料、資安等領域沒有出現延遲，案源管道（pipeline）雖然不大但很強。單一專案的規模較小，但數量更多。坦白說，我們的中型企業客戶在科技方面甚至比 SMB 更強。而 Protiviti 也是如此——它更偏向大型企業客戶——科技同樣是 Protiviti 最大、也最強的解決方案領域。

And so the answer is an emphatic, no. We're not seeing delays. And as you look at the progression and the improvement we saw over the course of the first quarter, which has continued into the second, tech is a big part of that. It's the largest part of that.

所以答案是非常明確的：沒有。我們沒有看到延遲。而且當你看第一季期間我們看到的逐步進展與改善，並且延續到第二季，科技是其中很大的一部分，也是最大的一部分。

Andrew Steinerman, JPMorgan.

Andrew Steinerman，JPMorgan。

Keith, now that Robert Half is closer to targeted year-over-year growth in the third quarter, my question is, what do you think about the shape of the revenue recovery for Robert Half kind of once it begins?

Keith，現在 Robert Half 在第三季更接近達到你們所設定的年增成長目標，我的問題是：一旦 Robert Half 的營收復甦開始，你認為它的復甦曲線（shape）會是什麼樣子？

Well, we're optimistic about the shape of the recovery for the reasons we've talked about. There is pent-up demand. Job openings are way above traditional levels. Unemployment is low. It's harder for our clients to hire. It's harder yet again for them to hire themselves because of AI and the homogenization of resumes that we've talked about. And so given the leanness of our client base, we're further enthused about the shape of recovery.

嗯，基於我們先前談到的原因，我們對復甦的樣貌感到樂觀。存在被壓抑的需求。職缺數遠高於傳統水準。失業率偏低。我們的客戶更難招募人才。而且由於我們談到的 AI 與履歷同質化，他們自己要招募更是難上加難。因此，鑑於我們客戶基礎相當精實，我們對復甦的型態更感到振奮。

It seems like we've had a false start or two the last two years. Last year, it was tariffs. This year so far, the conflict in Iran doesn't seem to have an impact. But Andrew, we're feeling pretty good about where we are. We just had our annual top awards conference in Las Vegas for our people.

看起來過去兩年我們有過一兩次假性起步。去年是關稅；今年到目前為止，伊朗衝突似乎沒有造成影響。不過 Andrew，我們對目前的狀況感覺相當不錯。我們剛在拉斯維加斯為同仁舉辦年度最高獎項大會。

There were 600 or 700 of them, so we get to interact directly firsthand. And I've got to tell you the excitement and enthusiasm level was palpable and meaningfully better than it was 12 months ago. And that felt great. And it shows up our numbers.

現場大約有 600 或 700 人，因此我們能直接第一手互動。我得說，那種興奮與熱情的程度非常明顯，而且比 12 個月前有實質提升。那感覺很棒，也反映在我們的數字上。

We talked to you about earlier what we've done post quarter in contract, which is dramatically better even than how we ended the quarter in March. As I said, the run rate we've got so far this quarter is greater than our guidance we've given and probably by a greater extent than we've had in a long time. So we feel good, we feel good.

我們先前也跟你談過，我們在季後於合約業務上所做的事情，表現大幅改善，甚至比我們在 3 月結束該季時還要好得多。正如我所說，我們本季迄今的運行率高於我們給出的指引，而且超出的幅度可能是很長一段時間以來最大的一次。所以我們感覺很好，真的感覺很好。

And then as it relates to Protiviti, they've got this headwind from less scrutiny by the financial services regulators, but they've taken quick and effective cost actions. Interestingly, if you would pro forma our Q2 guidance and you would not only give effect to the severance, but you would also apply the cost savings as if they were in place then.

至於 Protiviti，他們面臨金融服務監管機構審查減少所帶來的逆風，但他們已迅速且有效地採取成本措施。有趣的是，如果你以備考（pro forma）方式看我們的 Q2 指引，不僅把資遣費的影響納入，還把成本節省也視同當時已經到位來計算。

And so then our Q2 guidance midpoint would be $0.33, right? So you'd add $0.03 for severance and you'd add $0.05 for cost savings to get a total of $0.08. And so our Q3 guidance rather than being what it was or what it is, it'd be $0.33. So that's pretty respectable and pretty close to what expectations were, absent the headwind on the regulatory front for Protiviti.

那麼我們 Q2 指引的中位數就會是 0.33 美元，對吧？也就是資遣費加 0.03 美元，成本節省再加 0.05 美元，合計 0.08 美元。因此，我們的 Q3 指引就不會是原本那個數字，而會是 0.33 美元。這相當體面，也非常接近市場原先的預期——如果不考慮 Protiviti 在監管面上的逆風的話。

Jeff Silber, BMO Capital Markets.

Jeff Silber，BMO Capital Markets。

You talked about some of the actions you're taking in Protiviti. I'm just curious from an internal headcount perspective. In talent solutions, are you starting to add hires? Or do you still have excess capacity, we don't necessarily need that to get to your goals?

你談到在 Protiviti 採取的一些行動。我想從內部人力編制的角度請教：在人才解決方案（talent solutions）方面，你們是否開始增加招募？還是你們仍有多餘產能，不一定需要增員也能達成目標？

We still have our 15% to 30% of capacity and talent solutions. So we're holding the line as we speak. We do anticipate some leverage as things get better. I think the guidance we've given you here for quarters two and three assume about one point as a percent of revenue of SG&A leverage, as we move forward into those better circumstances.

我們在人才解決方案仍有約 15% 到 30% 的產能空間。所以目前我們仍在守住人力規模。我們確實預期隨著情況改善會出現一些槓桿效應。我認為我們對第二季與第三季給出的指引，假設在邁向更好環境的過程中，SG&A 會有約占營收 1 個百分點的槓桿改善。

And so holding the line as we speak on talent solutions. But I can assure you at least half of those people, I was just with in Las Vegas, talk to me about gee whiz, things are getting better, we need more headcount.

所以就人才解決方案而言，我們目前仍在守住人力規模。但我可以向你保證，至少有一半的那些人——我剛在拉斯維加斯和他們在一起——都跟我說，哇，情況正在變好，我們需要更多人手。

Can I also ask a question about US versus non-US trends both in talent solutions and Protiviti. You gave us the numbers, but if we can get a little bit more color there, that would be great.

我也想問一個關於美國與非美國趨勢的問題，涵蓋人才解決方案與 Protiviti。你們給了我們數字，但如果能再多一些背景說明就太好了。

I'd say on talent solutions, biggest difference for the first quarter, we had more strength in permanent placement. In the international zone, permanent placement is a larger portion of the total in the international zone than it is in the US, and we had strength across several countries. It wasn't isolated. And so that drove the outperformance in talent solutions non-US.

我會說在人才解決方案方面，第一季最大的差異是我們在永久派遣（permanent placement）更強。在國際區域，永久派遣占比高於美國，而且我們在多個國家都表現強勁，並非集中在單一市場。因此，這帶動了非美國人才解決方案的優於預期表現。

In Protiviti, the difference in the regulatory environment is significant, and we still have some meaningful regulatory enforcement actions we're working on outside the US, and the environment is very different in the US as we talked about.

在 Protiviti 方面，監管環境的差異很顯著。我們在美國以外仍有一些重要的監管執法案件正在處理，而美國的環境如我們所談，則非常不同。

Manav Patnaik, Barclays.

Manav Patnaik，Barclays。

This is Ronan Kennedy on for Manav. If I may, please, I just have a follow-up as was discussed on the 3Q guide in response to Trevor and Andrew's question. Is it as simple as you have that run rate which is dramatically better exiting the quarter in contract [rather than] the cost efficiency actions in Protiviti?

我是 Ronan Kennedy，代 Manav 發問。如果可以的話，我想就你們回覆 Trevor 與 Andrew 問題時提到的第三季指引再追問一下：是否可以簡化理解為，你們在合約業務的運行率在季末時顯著改善，[而不是] Protiviti 的成本效率行動所致？

Is it as simple as run rate element of conservatism, comp and cost actions? Or are there responses to what needs to happen from a trend standpoint and sensitivities?

是否可以簡單理解為：運行率所帶來的保守性因素、薪酬與成本行動？還是還有一些關於趨勢面需要發生什麼、以及敏感度的考量？

No, no. It's just as simple as you described. It's existing run rate, even less conservative or more conservative, if you will, than existing run rate, plus cost actions get you year-on-year revenue growth, year-on-year income growth. It's simple math. There's no complicated math.

不，不。就像你描述的那麼簡單。就是現有的運行率——甚至可以說比現有運行率更保守或更不保守——再加上成本行動，就能帶來年對年營收成長、年對年獲利成長。就是簡單的數學，沒有複雜的計算。

Fair enough. So nothing to be mindful of from a sensitivity, drivers and trends for each of the (inaudible).

了解。所以就各個（聽不清）而言，沒有什麼需要特別留意的敏感度、驅動因素與趨勢？

I'm sorry, I didn't hear that last part.

抱歉，我沒聽清楚最後那一段。

So nothing to be particularly mindful of with regards to drivers and trends and/or sensitivities to those for each of the respective businesses?

也就是說，針對各個業務各自的驅動因素與趨勢，以及／或對這些因素的敏感度，沒有什麼需要特別留意的嗎？

No. No. I mean we called out the typical drivers of the Q3 trends, a little softer in perm because of summer, particularly Europe. Protiviti benefits, companies work on the internal controls, certifications in a big way in Q3, getting ahead of year-end, and Protiviti gets a lift from that.

沒有。沒有。我是說，我們已點出第三季趨勢的典型驅動因素：永久派遣在夏季會稍微偏弱，尤其是歐洲。Protiviti 則受惠於企業在第三季會大量進行內部控制與認證工作，以便提前因應年底，因此 Protiviti 會因此獲得提振。

And that lift is principally with their full-time staff, so they get a better utilization, better chargeability, which drives higher incremental margins. And as we said, our expectation would be Protiviti's segment margins get back into the 7% to 9% range, which is consistent with a year ago, notwithstanding these FSI headwinds.

而這個提振主要是由他們的全職員工承接，因此利用率更好、可計費性（chargeability）更高，進而帶動更高的增量利潤率。正如我們所說，我們預期 Protiviti 的部門利潤率會回到 7% 到 9% 的區間，與一年前一致，儘管仍有這些 FSI 逆風。

Got it. And then if I may, please follow up on contract solutions. I think it exited March down roughly 5% year-over-year versus down 7% for the full quarter and in April trending close to flat. What drove that improvement? Was it volume starts, bill rates mix? And how confident are you in that persisting through Q2?

了解。那如果可以的話，我想再追問合約解決方案（contract solutions）。我記得 3 月季末時年對年大約下滑 5%，相較於整季下滑 7%，而 4 月的趨勢接近持平。是什麼驅動了這個改善？是開案量（volume starts）、計費率（bill rates）組合，還是其他？你們對這種改善能在第二季持續有多大信心？

Well, it was broad-based. It was led by technology. We're excited about that trend line. We think it's sustainable. Our guidance is more conservative than that start. But we feel the best we felt in a long time, including better than we felt 90 days ago.

嗯，這是全面性的改善，其中以科技領域帶頭。我們對這條趨勢線感到興奮，也認為它具有可持續性。我們的指引比這個起步狀況更保守。但我們已經很久沒有像現在這麼有信心了，甚至比 90 天前更有信心。

George Tong, Goldman Sachs.

George Tong，Goldman Sachs。

It appears the permanent placement revenues exiting the quarter and heading into March or April worsened a bit from 1Q, which is different than contract talent solutions doing better exiting the quarter and into April. Could you dive deeper into what's causing that dichotomy in performance at separation, perm weakening and temps doing better?

看起來永久派遣營收在季末、進入 3 月或 4 月時，相較第一季略有惡化；但合約型人才解決方案在季末與進入 4 月時反而變好。你能更深入說明造成這種表現分歧的原因嗎？也就是永久派遣走弱、臨時／合約人力表現較佳。

Well, George, perm is more volatile on a weekly or monthly basis than is contract. Short-term perm trends are not near as predictive of how we'll end up for a given quarter. And so frankly, if anything, as we looked at our own internal guidance, perm for the quarter actually exceeded our internal expectations more so than contracted.

George，永久派遣在每週或每月的波動性比合約更大。短期的永久派遣趨勢，對於我們某一季最終結果的預測性沒有那麼強。所以坦白說，如果有什麼值得一提，從我們內部指引來看，該季永久派遣其實比我們內部預期超出得更多，反而比合約還多。

And so we read very little into kind of one month or post quarter. And if you look back and you'll do a study with hindsight looking at how we started the quarter versus how we reported the entire quarter, you'll see that they're not very predictive. And so quite frankly, we still feel good about perm, equally good about perm as we do about contract. And ironically, versus our own internal expectations, perm actually outperformed.

因此，我們不太會從單一月份或季後的變化解讀太多。如果你回頭做一個事後研究，比較我們每季開始時的狀況與整季實際報告結果，你會發現它們的預測性並不高。所以老實說，我們對永久派遣仍然感覺良好，對永久派遣的信心與對合約一樣好。而且有點諷刺的是，相較我們自己的內部預期，永久派遣其實是超出表現的。

Got it. You talked about expecting positive growth across the business in 3Q year-over-year. Does that apply to the individual lines within talent solutions? So finance and accounting, admin, customer support, technology, all of those you expect to inflect positively in 3Q as well?

了解。你提到預期第三季整體業務年對年會轉為正成長。這是否也適用於人才解決方案內的各個細分線？例如財務與會計、行政、客服支援、科技等，你們也預期這些在第三季都會轉正嗎？

Yes. I don't have that in front of me. It would certainly be true for tech, that's close, if not already there. It's likely true finance and accounting, administrative customer service maybe not. We've walked away from some lower-margin business in ACS, as we call it.

是的。我手邊沒有逐項資料。但科技肯定會是如此，已經很接近了，甚至可能已經轉正。財務與會計很可能也是。行政與客服支援可能不一定。我們在 ACS（我們內部這樣稱呼）中退出了一些低毛利業務。

We further reallocated some headcount away from that practice group, that area to the others. And so it might be -- for internal reasons. That would not be the case for ACS. But again, overall, which is the most important, we do expect not only sequential but year-on-year contract revenue growth for Q3.

我們也進一步把部分人力從該實務群組、該領域重新配置到其他領域。因此，出於內部原因，ACS 可能不會是那樣。不過再說一次，最重要的是整體而言，我們確實預期第三季合約營收不僅會季對季成長，也會年對年成長。

And frankly, we feel even better about that based on what we've seen as up through this morning, which is when we got last week's results. We feel great about the prospects that we're going to have year-on-year revenue growth again. And as I talked about earlier, not only year-on-year top-line growth, but even more year-on-year bottom-line growth.

坦白說，根據我們截至今天早上所看到的情況（也就是我們拿到上週結果的時間點），我們對此感覺更好。我們對於再次實現年對年營收成長的前景感到非常樂觀。而且如我先前提到的，不僅是年對年營收（top-line）成長，甚至年對年獲利（bottom-line）成長會更高。

Kartik Mehta, Northcoast Research.

Kartik Mehta，Northcoast Research。

It seems as though decision timelines still remain a little bit extended. And I'm wondering if you could look at them in terms of what they were when they were normal, how stretched they are. Maybe normal has been a long time ago. But just your perspective on where they are today versus where they were when things were better.

看起來決策時程仍然有點拉長。我想請教，如果把它們和過去正常時的狀況相比，現在到底拉長了多少？也許所謂「正常」已經是很久以前了。但想聽聽您對於目前相較於景氣較好時期的看法。

I'm not sure we've quantified precisely by what extent they're longer. I mean it's not a few percentage points. It's -- I'd venture to say 20% to 30% longer, but that's an educated guess based on any data that I'm looking at.

我不確定我們是否精確量化過到底延長了多少。我的意思是，這不是只多了幾個百分點。大概——我猜可能長了20%到30%，但這是根據我所看到的資料做出的有根據推測。

And then can you just, obviously, SMB clients are lagging a little bit on enterprise clients. So I imagine that's impacting mix compared to when things were obviously a lot better. What kind of impact is that having on margin for you?

另外，顯然中小企業（SMB）客戶相較於企業級客戶落後一些。所以我想這會影響到你們的組合（mix），相較於景氣明顯更好的時候。這對你們的毛利率有什麼影響？

Well, our mid-cap margins are a little bit lower than SMB margins, but they're not dramatically lower, and they're nowhere near what the other publicly held staffing firms that deal principally with large cap clients have. And so from a margin perspective, they're not that different.

嗯，我們的中型企業（mid-cap）毛利率比SMB毛利率略低一些，但差距並不大，而且遠高於那些主要服務大型企業（large cap）客戶的其他上市人力派遣公司。因此從毛利率角度來看，兩者其實差異不大。

Mid-caps are a little smaller but not orders of magnitude smaller. But our mid-cap clients are doing better for us at the top line than our SMBs, and that's a very typical pattern. SMBs always lag enterprise. And so our view of enterprise is both our 30% of staffing, which are mid-cap, as well as what we're seeing in Protiviti, ex-FSI regulatory.

中型企業規模稍小，但不是小到差好幾個數量級。不過就營收（top line）而言，我們的中型企業客戶表現比SMB更好，這是非常典型的模式：SMB總是落後於企業端。因此我們對企業端的觀察，包含我們人力派遣業務中約30%來自中型企業，以及我們在Protiviti（不含FSI監管）所看到的情況。

Stephanie Moore, Jefferies.

Stephanie Moore，Jefferies。

I wanted to maybe go back to the discussion on AI and you always give, I think, really good color on just the investments that you're making. I think this has been a key theme across really the entire sector here. So I just wanted to get a little bit more color on two sides of AI questions.

我想回到AI的討論。你們一向會提供我認為很好的細節，談你們正在做的投資。我想這也是整個產業的關鍵主題。所以我想就AI的兩個面向再多了解一些。

So first, like are you seeing the benefits of the investments that you've made, maybe just the hire, any color around increased placement rates, have you seen faster close time for job openings?

首先，你們是否已經看到先前投資帶來的效益？例如招募方面，有沒有更多配對成功率提升的跡象？職缺的結案時間是否變快？

And then on the other side of it, I mean, I think there's a lot of conversation just across all industries about just that AI could ultimately lead to certain job eliminations. So maybe if you could just address any strategic changes around end markets or jobs that you would look to address that might not be so in line with being potentially disintermediated by AI?

另一方面，我想各行各業都在討論AI最終可能導致某些工作被消除。可否請你談談，針對終端市場或職種，你們是否有任何策略調整，以因應那些可能被AI去中介化（disintermediated）的領域？

As far as benefits from investments, as you know, have been in how we match candidates to job orders. Our clients for 40 years when surveyed, the most important thing to them is the quality of candidates that we deliver that match their needs. And so our AI specifically addresses that, it's award-winning. We continuously look at the inputs, the weightings, the factors we use there, it continues to improve.

就投資效益而言，如你所知，主要體現在我們如何將候選人與職缺需求做配對。40年來，我們調查客戶時，他們最重視的是我們提供、且符合其需求的候選人品質。因此我們的AI就是專門解決這件事，而且還獲獎。我們持續檢視輸入資料、權重與使用的因素，系統也持續改善。

Our people have adopted it. We've embedded it into the tools they use every day anyway. And so I would argue that the quality of our matches, it is not only what our clients care most about. But if you ask their candidates, what's the most important thing to them, it's the quality of the jobs that we offer. And that same matching engine does that same matching for the benefit of our candidates.

我們的同仁也已經採用它。我們把它嵌入到他們每天本來就會使用的工具中。所以我會主張，我們配對的品質不僅是客戶最在意的；如果你問候選人，他們最在意的是我們提供的工作品質。而同一套配對引擎也以同樣方式為候選人帶來好處。

And I would argue, again, our award-winning matching engine, which is AI driven, does a better and better and better job. And it's core to who we are. It's core to how we provide value to our clients and our candidates, and so there's no question in my mind.

我也會再強調一次，我們這個獲獎、由AI驅動的配對引擎做得越來越好、越來越好、越來越好。它是我們的核心，是我們為客戶與候選人創造價值的核心，所以在我看來毫無疑問。

And the fact that it's driven based on proprietary data around candidate performance rather than clicks, which is what many of the larger aggregator job board, AI-native platforms use, I would argue it further distinguishes it because we're trying to optimize for candidate performance, not for clicks.

而且它是基於我們的專有資料（proprietary data）來衡量候選人表現，而不是基於點擊（clicks）——許多大型聚合型求職網站、AI原生平台使用的就是點擊。我會主張，這讓我們更具差異化，因為我們要最佳化的是候選人表現，而不是點擊量。

Similarly, as we've talked about before, we're trying to kind of make our pipeline more intelligent by rank ordering for our people, the prospects that they should pursue. So we can quantify number of calls it takes for them to get a connect with the client. Further, we can quantify the conversion rates once they do connect, and they're both meaningfully improved when they use our AI-driven intelligent pipeline, if you will.

同樣地，如我們之前談過的，我們也在嘗試讓我們的業務管線更「聰明」：替同仁把應該追蹤的潛在客戶做排序。我們可以量化他們要打多少通電話才能與客戶接通；此外，一旦接通後，我們也能量化轉換率。而當他們使用我們AI驅動的智慧管線時，這兩項指標都有顯著改善。

On this issue of job elimination, I guess with every passing day, I get more and more convinced this is about augmentation more than it is displacement, that it's more about taking somebody that already has domain expertise and enhancing their skills with AI. And I'll take a person with that domain expertise as enhanced every day versus a novice that doesn't have the domain expertise using these new tools.

至於工作被消除這個議題，我想隨著時間推進，我越來越相信這更像是「增強」（augmentation）而不是「取代」（displacement）。也就是把已經具備領域專業（domain expertise）的人，用AI來強化其技能。我每天都會選擇那種具備領域專業、再加上AI增強的人，而不是沒有領域專業的新手只靠這些新工具。

And so domain expertise is not obsolete. I don't think it's going to become obsolete. And every technology cycle, every technology wave we've seen historically, that's exactly what's happened, and that's exactly what we see playing out so far, and I would expect to continue to see play out.

因此，領域專業並沒有過時。我不認為它會變得過時。歷史上每一次科技循環、每一波科技浪潮，結果都是如此；而這也正是我們目前看到正在發生的情況，我也預期會持續如此。

Tobey Summer, Truist.

Tobey Summer，Truist。

This is Tyler Barishaw on for Toby. Just on the regulatory environment, you're mentioning it's a little bit weaker. Is this going to last for the duration of the administration? Or just curious of your thoughts on this period of weakness.

我是Tyler Barishaw，代Toby提問。關於監管環境，你提到它稍微偏弱。這會持續到本屆政府任期結束嗎？或只是想聽聽你對這段疲弱期的看法。

Well, it's either going to last the duration of this administration or there's going to be some event. There's going to be some money laundering event that's going to trigger a rethink of the current environment, but it's certainly unprecedented, particularly the way the examiners have followed a new administration relative to the past because typically, there's more inertia at the examiner implementation level relative to policies above it than this time where they've gotten in line.

嗯，這要嘛會持續到本屆政府任期結束，要嘛會發生某個事件——例如某起洗錢事件——觸發對目前環境的重新思考。但這確實是前所未見的，尤其是稽核人員（examiners）跟隨新政府的方式，相較於過去更是如此。因為通常在稽核執行層面，相對於上層政策會有更大的慣性；但這一次他們很快就跟上了。

And so as I said, it's either a different administration or at some event that could happen. And history says major money laundering events do happen and arguably with less scrutiny, they'll happen more often. But the good news is Protiviti has kind of bitten the bullet and said, all right, let's assume this is the new normal, now let's adjust our cost structure accordingly, and that's what they've done. They've done it quickly, and they've done effectively.

所以如我所說，要嘛是換一個政府，要嘛是發生某個事件。歷史告訴我們，重大洗錢事件確實會發生，而且可以說在審查較少的情況下，發生頻率會更高。但好消息是，Protiviti已經算是咬牙承擔，說好吧，就假設這是新的常態，然後相應調整成本結構——他們也確實這麼做了，而且做得很快、也做得有效。

Got it. That makes sense. I think last quarter, you said you expect Protiviti margins to increase by about 100 bps year-over-year. Just curious what these cost actions and the weakness in the regulatory environment. Does that guidance still stand or any changes to that?

了解，這很合理。我記得上季你提到，預期Protiviti的利潤率年對年大約提升100個基點（bps）。想請教在這些成本措施以及監管環境疲弱之下，這個指引還成立嗎？或有任何變化？

Well, I would say, as we previously remarked, given that the headwinds are more than we expected on the regulatory scrutiny front, just to stay even with last year's margins, I think is an accomplishment in this market. Might we do better than that? Yes. But I would probably dial that back again given that the headwinds intensified and the cost actions certainly get us back to near last year margins. Maybe there's some upside there, but let's let it be upside.

我會說，如我們先前提到的，鑑於監管審查方面的逆風比我們預期更大，在這個市場裡能夠維持與去年相同的利潤率，我認為就是一項成就。我們有可能做得更好嗎？有。但考量逆風加劇，我可能會再把那個預期下修一些；成本措施確實能讓我們回到接近去年利潤率的水準。也許還有一些上行空間，但就讓它成為上行吧。

Kevin McVeigh, UBS.

Kevin McVeigh，UBS。

I don't know if you mentioned this in another call. But on the restructuring, was that -- it sounds like primarily Protiviti. And how much does it benefit Q3?

我不確定你是否在其他電話會議提過。但關於重整（restructuring），聽起來主要是Protiviti？它對第三季（Q3）有多大助益？

Well, and so just to be clear, we have a pro forma Q2 as if these actions were taken as of the beginning of Q2 and that adds $0.08 to our Q2 guidance. $0.03 is the absence of severance and $0.05 is the impact of the cost savings.

好的，先澄清一下：我們提供了一個第二季（Q2）的備考（pro forma）數字，假設這些措施從Q2一開始就已經採取，這會讓我們的Q2指引增加0.08美元。其中0.03美元來自不再發生資遣費（severance），0.05美元來自成本節省的影響。

Because those cost savings are expected to be done, complete by the beginning of Q3, the Q3 number we've given you is pure. There's no severance and it has the full impact of cost savings. But what that does is it takes your Q2 pro forma EPS to $0.33, which is $0.08 higher than what we just guided. And the Q3 directional guidance we gave includes the benefit of the cost savings and doesn't have any severance.

由於這些成本節省預期在Q3開始前就會完成，因此我們給你的Q3數字是「純的」：沒有資遣費，且包含成本節省的完整影響。這樣一來，你的Q2備考每股盈餘（EPS）會到0.33美元，比我們剛剛給的指引高0.08美元。而我們提供的Q3方向性指引已包含成本節省的效益，且不含任何資遣費。

That was our last question. Thank you very much for joining us.

這是我們最後一個問題。非常感謝各位加入。

Thank you. This concludes today's teleconference. If you missed any part of the call will be archived in the audio format in the Investor Center of Robert Half's website at roberthalf.com. You can also log into the conference call replay. Details are contained in the company's press release issued earlier today.

謝謝。今天的電話會議到此結束。若您錯過通話的任何部分，將會以音訊格式存檔於Robert Half網站roberthalf.com的投資人中心（Investor Center）。您也可以登入電話會議重播。相關細節已包含在公司今日稍早發布的新聞稿中。