1. environmental failure analysis & prevention health technology development A leading engineering & scientific consulting firm dedicated to helping our clients solve their technical problems. Firm Overview March, 2008

2. 2 Exponent Video (90 seconds -- Will not be seen on webcast)

3. 3 Who We Are Mission Statement Exponent is a multi-disciplinary consulting firm dedicated to solving important science, engineering and business problems for clients science, engineering and business problems for clients Professional services firm Engineering & scientific consulting 600+ consulting and technical staff Best known for analyzing accidents & failures Revenues of $205M (ttm)

4. 4 Major Clients Corporations Law Firms Associations Government

5. 5 Exponent’s Value Proposition  Solve high exposure problems  Multi-disciplinary capabilities  Innovative solutions  World class talent  Extensive experience  Rapid response  Geographic coverage

6. 6 Mechanics & Materials Industrial Structures Technology Development Human Factors Public Health & IH Environmental Electrical & Semiconductors Buildings & Structures Biomechanics Vehicle Statistical & Data Sciences EcoSciences Construction Consulting Visual Communication Exposure Assessment Toxicology Epidemiology Thermal Sciences Chemical Regulation & Food Safety Civil

7. 7 Masters 33% Doctorates 50% Bachelors 17% Consulting Staff

8. 8 DüsseldorfHarrogateHangzhou Chicago Denver Detroit Houston Miami New York Philadelphia Phoenix Seattle Southern California: Irvine Los Angeles San Diego Washington, DC: Alexandria Bowie Washington DC San Francisco Bay Area: Menlo Park Oakland Exponent Offices Boston: Maynard Natick Winchester

9. 9 Growth Opportunities  Health Consulting  Construction Consulting  Product Design Consulting  Defense Technology Development  Energy Consulting

10. 10 Why Health?  Big exposures  Same clients  No major competitors  Synergy with environmental & engineering practices

11. 11 Health Food & Chemical Safety Product Contamination Pesticide Registrations Potential Carcinogens

12. 12 Why Construction Consulting?  Big exposures  Almost every capital project has disputes  Engineering expertise differentiates service offering  SOX has competitors in flux, talent available

13. 13 Construction Consulting Disputes Delays and Cost Overruns

14. 14 Why Product Design Consulting?  Niche is one of solving very difficult problems  New service offering to existing clients  Leverages Exponent’s failure experience  Superior talent is a competitive advantage

15. 15 Product Design Consulting Medical Devices Design Support for Implants

16. 16 Product Design Consulting Portable Power Li-Ion Battery Control Circuitry & Testing

17. 17 Why Energy?  Huge market opportunity  Potential for rapid growth  Growing demand for high-end talent  Leverages our multi-disciplinary capabilities

18. 18 Energy LNG Safety Concerns Environmental Concerns & Efficiency

19. 19 Energy Nuclear Power Technical and Financial Risk Management

20. 20 Energy Electric Power Technical and Management Advisory

21. 21 Why Defense Technology Development?  Big market opportunity  Potential for rapid growth  Leverages our multi-disciplinary capabilities  New paradigm

22. 22 The Marcbot Is Saving Lives

23. 23 Rapid Deployment Integrated Surveillance System REF – Support in Iraq

24. 24 Financial Review: Quarterly Revenues ’03 ’04 ’05 ’06 ‘07 Q1 ($ millions) ‘03 ‘04 ’05 ’06 ‘07 Q2 ’03 ’04 ’05 ’06 ‘07 Q3 ’03 ’04 ’05 ’06 ‘07 Q4

25. 25 Financial Review: Quarterly EPS ‘03 ’04 ’05 ’06 ‘07 Q1 ’03 ’04 ’05 ’06 ‘07 Q2 ’03 ’04 ’05 ’06 ‘07 Q3 ’03 ’04 ’05 ’06 ‘07 Q4 Historical EPS adjusted for stock split

26. 26 Financial Review: Fiscal Year Comparison ($ Millions) 2007 2006 %% Revenue w/o Reimbursables$ 183.1156.7 17% Reimbursables22.011.8 87% Revenue205.1168.5 22% Comp119.5105.9 13% Other Op21.719.9 9% Reimbursable Expense22.011.8 87% G & A12.010.8 11% Op. Expense175.2148.3 18% Op. Income29.920.2 48% Misc. Income3.73.4 9% Income Taxes13.39.4 42% Net Income$ 20.314.2 43% Return on Net Revenue11.1%9.1% % calculated on actual $

27. 27 Financial Review: Fiscal Year EBITDAS ($ Millions) 2007 2006 %% Net Income$ 20.37$ 14.19 43% Add Back: Income Taxes13.249.38 41% Interest Income, net-1.82-1.93 -6% Depreciation and Amortization3.853.63 6% Stock-based Comp6.194.41 40% EBITDAS$ 41.82$ 29.69 41% % calculated on actual $

28. 28 ($ millions) Dec 28, 2007 Dec 29, 2006  % Assets: Cash/Short Term Invest. $ 63.7 $ 58.1 10% AR 59.8 48.224% Total Assets 182.9 161.2 13% Total Liabilities 51.0 36.9 38% Total Equity 131.9 124.3 6% Financial Review: Balance Sheet Comparison % calculated on actual $

29. 29 Summary  Strong market position  Long standing blue chip clients  Top caliber talent  Solid financial performance  Strong balance sheet  Excellent growth opportunities

30. 30