MOOCs A Disruptive Innovation for Higher Education?

The Epistemology of Living OrganizationsTheoretical Foundations and Practical Applications

Access my research papers from Google CitationsA unique area inthe state space of the Mandlebrot setAn attractorPresentation for Melbourne Emergence Meetup, 12 September 2013

AttributionCC BY

William P. Hall

PresidentKororoit Institute Proponents and Supporters Assoc., Inc. - http://kororoit.org

AssociateEA Principals http://eaprincipals.com

william-hall@bigpond.comhttp://www.orgs-evolution-knowledge.netdefinition1My BackgroundEarly life: physics / natural history / cytogenetics / evolutionary biology (PhD Harvard, 1973)Defining life as a physical phenomenonUnderstanding how it evolves1981-1989: Computer literacy journalism, technical writing, commercial software development, banking1990-2007: Documentation and knowledge management systems analyst/designer for Tenix Defence/$ 7 BN ANZAC Ship Project Tenix grew to be Australias largest defence engineering prime contractor and then failed. How did Tenix succeed and why did it fail? 2001-now: Researcher trying to understand what organizational knowledge is and why organizations have such major problems managing and applying it2Understanding the relationships betweenknowledge and lifeWhat is life - autopoiesisKarl Poppers evolutionary epistemologyHuman biologyAdaptationGenetic vs cultural heredity (knowledge transfer)Origins of culture and social organizationAnswering questions from my corporate careerOrganizations as complex adaptive systemsJames Martins Cybercorp (1996)< 2001: trying to combine my understanding of biology and corporate experience in a hypertext fugue on the theory of knowledgeTheoretical foundations of organizational knowledgeThis talk only scratches surface - see my publications

3Autopoietic (i.e., living) systems

Knowledge and life are inseparable. With a proper definition of life, knowledge-based organizations are seen to be living Maturana, H.R., Varela, F.J. 1980. Autopoiesis and Cognition the Realization of the Living. Kluwer.Nelson, R.R., Winter, S.G. 1982. An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change, Harvard Uinv. Press.Kauffman, S.A. 1993. The Origins of Order Self-organization and Selection in Evolution. Oxford Univ. PressHall, W.P. 2005. Biological nature of knowledge in the learning organization. The Learning Organization 12(2):169-188.Ellis (2006) Evolving block universe (Newtonian)Ellis & Rothman (2010) Crystallizing block universe (quantum mechanical)Past is fixedPresent is determined in the instant of becomingFuture is undeterminedSolid line what happenedStuart Kauffman adjacent possiblet1 Dashed lines represent all of the possible future states that can be reached in the next instant from the present instantt2 One state was realized at t1 , Dotted lines lead to states that could have happened at t1 but didnt/cant happen. Dashed lines represent states that can still be reached from the state at t2 Future possibilities are continually and progres-sively constrained by realization of the present

5

6What makes a system living?AutopoiesisSelf-regulating, self-sustaining, self-(re)producing dynamic entityFundamentally cyclical, continuation depends on the causal structure of the state in the previous instant to produce autopoiesis in the next instant (ref Popper; Maturana & Varela)Selective survival builds knowledge into the system one problem solution at a time

Self producing entity in Conways Game of Lifecellular automatonAutopoietic system67Six necessary and sufficient criteria for recognizing an autopoietic systemBounded System components identifiably demarcated from environmentE.g., organizational badges, logos, reception desks, gates, etc.Complex separate and functionally different subsystems exist within boundary)Mechanistic System dynamics driven by self-sustainably regulated economic cash flows or dissipative metabolic processesSelf-defining System demarcation intrinsically producedE.g., employment policies, procedures, etc.Self-producing System intrinsically produces own componentsE.g., recruitment & training programsAutonomous self-produced components are necessary and sufficient to produce the system.78Spontaneous co-emergence of autopoiesis and knowledge(Stuart Kauffman) The dynamic vectors of the present instant result from causal events in past instants as reflected in the adjacent possibles of the immediately prior instantHistorical connections (heritage) determine the vectors in state space of the present instant.Attractor basins: convergent paths may become coherently autopoietic, such that the ensemble structure of a convergent state in one instant generates an ensemble structure that remains convergent in the next instant.Chaos: divergent paths lead to incoherent structures that dis-integrate and lose the historical thread of successful autopoiesisEnsembles that remain convergent through the selective elimination of divergent outcomes retain structural knowledge that solved a problem of survival to retain convergent structure

Kauffman, S. 1993. The Origins of Order. Oxford Univ Press, London.Hall, W.P., Else, S., Martin, C., Philp, W. 2011. Time-based frameworks for valuing knowledge: maintaining strategic knowledge. Kororoit Institute Working Papers No. 1: 1-28.Hall, W.P. 2011. Physical basis for the emergence of autopoiesis, cognition and knowledge. Kororoit Institute Working Papers No. 2: 1-63

8Karl Poppers Evolutionary Epistemology

In his later work, Popper applied evolutionary biology to his theory of knowledge Popper, K.R. 1972. Objective Knowledge an Evolutionary Approach. Oxford University Press / Routledge.Popper, K.R. 1994. Knowledge and the Body-Mind Problem in Defence of Interaction. Routledge.Hall, W.P. 2003. Managing maintenance knowledge in the context of large engineering projects - Theory and case study. Journal of Information and Knowledge Management, Vol. 2, No. 2 - http://tinyurl.com/3yqh8jPopper's first great idea: three worlds ontology10Energy flowThermodynamicsPhysicsChemistryBiochemistryCyberneticself-regulationCognitionConsciousnessTacit knowledgeGenetic heredityRecorded thoughtComputer memoryLogical artifactsExplicit knowledge

Reproduce/ProduceDevelop/RecallDrive/EnableRegulate/ControlInferred logicDescribe/PredictTest

ObserveWorld 1 External RealityWorld 2

Organismic/personal/situational/subjective/tacit knowledge in world 2 emerges from world 1World 3

The world of objective knowledgeliving knowledgecodified knowledgeThe real worldKarl Popper's second great idea from Objective Knowledge:Knowledge = solutions to problems11

Pn a real-world problem faced by a living entityTS a tentative solution/theory.Tentative solutions are varied through serial/parallel iterationEE a test or process of error eliminationPn+1changed problem as faced by an entity incorporating a surviving solutionThe whole process is iteratedAll knowledge claims are constructed, cannot be proven to be trueTSs may be embodied as structure in the knowing entity, orTSs may be expressed in words as hypotheses, subject to objective criticism; or as genetic codes in DNA, subject to natural selectionObjective expression and criticism lets our theories die in our steadThrough cyclic iteration, sources of errors are found and eliminatedSolutions/theories become more reliable as they survive repetitive testingSurviving TSs are the source of all knowledge!Karl Popper, Objective Knowledge An Evolutionary Approach(1972), pp. 241-244Biological basis of human individual and social knowledge

Basically we are bipedal apes who became top predators on the African savannah Hall, W.P. 2013. Evolutionary origins of Homo sapiens. Extract from Application Holy Wars or a New Reformation: A fugue on the theory of knowledge [in preparation] - http://tinyurl.com/kqrcxsf13Our family tree

White et als (2009) depiction of the adaptive plateaus achieved by the different species grade shifts in the Pliocene radiation of hominins as our ancestors became more adapted to more open and arid environments. CLCA = chimpanzee-human last common ancestor.CLCA was a forest ape using simple natural and biodegradable tools to increase dietary range probably a lot like todays chimps and bonobosChanging climates broke up forest into grassy woodlands. Ardipithecus adapted by developing bipedal locomotion and use of tools for self-protection and to harvest wider dietary range.Australopithecus became a successful savannah dwellerHomo became top carnivore in Africa and Eurasia13We are apesOur close primate cousins, orangutans, gorillas, chimpanzees and bonobos live in organized social groups that make and use toolsOrangutans live in small single mum families but are effective tool users and teachers

Another video shows mother taking boat to raid a fish trap for a mealChimpanzees work in larger social groups with a lot of interaction14Attenborough: Amazing DIY Orangutans - BBC Earth - http://tinyurl.com/avl8yby

Charlotte Uhlenbroek Chimpanzees' sophisticated use of tools - BBC wildlife http://tinyurl.com/lj8ejt2

Grave risk of predation by big cats & other carnivores on savanna

Gangs of chimps can cooperate to deter cats

Anthropoid apes arent the only primate tool usersSee Capuchin nut-cracking industry - http://tinyurl.com/mky2b3l

Pleiocene climate change forced some apes onto a savanna a tough neighbourhood to survive in!15From Tattersall (2010) Masters of the Planet, p. 49

see Kortlandt 1980. How might early hominids have defended themselves against large predators and food competitors? Journal of Human Evolution 9, 79-112 http://tinyurl.com/l5z5vu2Guthrie (in Roebroeks 2007) speculated that a tiny technological improvement was all that was needed for a more effective defence than waving big sticksAny cat running into a thorn branch will have its eyes torn to shreds. Cats know this!Easy step from thorn branch to spear for hunting

Cultural knowledge transfer and adaptation to the savanna opened new worlds16Genetic vs cultural heredity (mechanisms for knowledge transfer)Shared heritage defines the species/groupAdaptation = change through timeNatural selection eliminates entities with maladaptive genes/knowledgeGenetic heritage from one gen. to next is slow to change)Cultural heritage can lead to more rapid changeMore plastic but may not durable unless reinforcedCan be shared laterallyCapacity for language is very recentLinguistically expressed language can be criticized & peer reviewedTacit vs explicit sharing & transferSelf-selection / criticism to eliminate errorsMemory of and learning from historySpeech, writing1718

Increasing tool complexity in archaeological recordDevelopment of increasingly complex stone tools (after Stout 2011), correlates with increasing brain capacity (and more social intelligence?)Exponential growth in technology continues up to today with development of cognitive tools: speech, writing, printing, computers and the internet.Today computing technology is growing hyper-exponentiallySee extract from my draft book18Foundations of organizational knowledge

Understanding organizational knowledge and how to manage it flows naturally from the biological point of view Hall, W.P., Dalmaris, P., Nousala, S. 2005. A biological theory of knowledge and applications to real world organizations. Knowledge Management in Asia Pacific, Wellington, N.Z. 28-29 November 2005Vines, R., Hall, W.P. 2011. Exploring the foundations of organizational knowledge. Kororoit Institute Working Papers No. 3: 1-3920Knowledge-based autopoietic systems may emerge at several different hierarchical levels of organizational structureNationStateCouncilCommunity groupPersonBody cellFor effective action, flows of knowledge, decision and action must pass through several hierarchical levels Scalability and the complex organizational hierarchy

Hall, W.P. 2006 Emergence and growth of knowledge and diversity in hierarchically complex living systems. Workshop "Selection, Self-Organization and Diversity CSIRO Centre for Complex Systems Science and ARC Complex Open Systems Network, Katoomba, NSW, Australia 17-18 May 2006.20Personal (i.e., human) knowledge21Sense makingW2 process constructing tacit understanding in contextWe only know what we know when we need to know it

Nickols, F. 2000. The knowledge in knowledge management (KM). in J.W. Cortada and J.A. Woods, eds. The Knowledge Management Yearbook 2001-2002. Butterworth-Heinemann (W2)(W2)(W3)(W2)(W2/W3)22Creating and building knowledge is cyclicalKnowledge is solutions to problems of livingIterated cycles of creation and destruction (Boyd, Osinga)Creation = assembly of sense data and information to suggest claims about the worldDestruction = testing and criticizing claims against the world to eliminate those claims that dont workPopper: solutions are those claims which prove to work (at least most of the time)Knowledge is mentally constructedCannot logically prove that any claimed solution is actually trueAll claims must be considered to be tentative (i.e., potentially fallible)Follow tested claims until they are replaced by something that works betterKnowledge building cycles are endlessly iterated and may exist at several hierarchical levels of organization22Cyclic construction of tactical/strategic knowledgeAchieving strategic power depends critically on learning more, better and faster, and reducing decision cycle times compared to competitors. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OODA_loop.AOOBSERVE(Results of Test)OBSERVATIONPARADIGMEXTERNAL INFORMATIONCHANGING CIRCUMSTANCESUNFOLDING ENVIRONMENTAL RESULTS OF ACTIONSORIENTDDECIDE(Hypothesis)OCULTURE PARADIGMS PROCESSESDNA GENETIC HERITAGEMEMORY OF HISTORYINPUTANALYSIS SYNTHESISACT(Test)GUIDANCE AND CONTROLPARADIGMUNFOLDING INTERACTION WITH EXTERNAL ENVIRONMENTJohn Boyd's OODA Loop processPersonal vs organizational knowledgeImportant differenceindividual knowledge (in any form) is known only by a person organizational knowledge is available and physically or socially accessible to those who may apply it for organizational needsEven where explicit knowledge exists, individual knowledge may be required to access it within a useful response time. People know: what knowledge the organization needs, who may know the answer, where in the organization explicit knowledge may be found, why the knowledge is important or why it was created, when the knowledge might be needed, and how to apply the knowledge This human knowledge is critical to the organizationSnowden, D. 2002. Complex acts of knowing: paradox and descriptive self-awareness. J. Knowledge Management 6:100-111Personal knowledge is volunteered; it cannot be conscripted. People always know more than can be told, and will tell more than can be written down. People only know what they know when they need to know it.2425OODA system of systems in the knowledge-based organizationORIENT (PROCESS) PEOPLECULTURE & PARADIGMSINFRASTRUCTURECORPORATE MEMORYSENSEANALYSIS SYNTHESISPEOPLEPEOPLEGENETIC HERITAGEDATACONTENTLINKSRELATIONSANNOTA-TIONSOBSERVEDECIDE, ACTDOCSRECORDSBoyd 1996 see Osinga, F.P.B. (2005) Science, Strategy and War: the strategic theory of John Boyd. Eburon Academic Publishers, Delft, Netherlands [also Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group (2007)] - http://tinyurl.com/26eqduv 25Building and processing knowledge in the organization / communityVines, R., Hall, W.P. 2011. Exploring the foundations of organizational knowledge.26IFK(W2)FKCKEK}Semantics of explicit knowledge are only available via World 2 processes Code:EK Explicit KnowledgeCKCommon KnowledgeFKFormal KnowledgeIFKIntegrated Formal KnowledgeFor the purposes of this diagramCK and FK are expressionsof explicit knowledge (EK)WORLD 1WORLD 2PERSONALKNOWLEDGEWORLD 3KNOWLEDGE BUILDINGPROCESSESKNOWINGORGANIZATION(including organizational tacit knowledge)ENVIRONMENTALCONTEXTSSEMIPERMEABLEBOUNDARY??DRIVE & ENABLEANTICIPATE & INFLUENCEOBSERVE, TEST & MAKE SENSEKNOWLEDGE FLOWS& EXCHANGESIFK(W2)FKCKEK}Semantics of explicit knowledge are only available via World 2 processes Code:EK Explicit KnowledgeCKCommon KnowledgeFKFormal KnowledgeIFKIntegrated Formal KnowledgeFor the purposes of this diagramCK and FK are expressionsof explicit knowledge (EK)WORLD 1WORLD 2PERSONALKNOWLEDGEWORLD 3KNOWLEDGE BUILDINGPROCESSESKNOWINGORGANIZATION(including organizational tacit knowledge)ENVIRONMENTALCONTEXTSSEMIPERMEABLEBOUNDARY??DRIVE & ENABLEANTICIPATE & INFLUENCEOBSERVE, TEST & MAKE SENSEKNOWLEDGE FLOWS& EXCHANGES2627Hierarchy of knowledge building cycles3 stages in building reliable knowledgePersonal/individualGroup/teamPeer review/formal publication

world knowledge-baseapplication of existing knowledgeKnowledge construction cycleVines et al. 2011Hall, Nousala 2010Nousala et al. 2010Hall et al. 201027Putting theory into practice

Understanding how to manage organizational knowledge flows naturally from the biological point of view Hall, W.P., Dalmaris, P., Nousala, S. 2005. A biological theory of knowledge and applications to real world organizations. Knowledge Management in Asia Pacific, Wellington, N.Z. 28-29 November 2005Vines, R., Hall, W.P. 2011. Exploring the foundations of organizational knowledge. Kororoit Institute Working Papers No. 3: 1-39Enterprises exist in contexts that must be addressed as imperatives if they are to surviveEnterprises are living entitiesRequire cash flow & replacement of staff departuresIf they fail to satisfy their imperatives they disintegrateNo enterprise or subsidiary component should be considered in isolation from its existential contextsWhat are its imperatives for continued existence?to maintain survival and wellbeingto maintain resource inputs necessary to survivalto produce and distribute goods necessary to survivalto survive environmental changesto minimize riskto maintain future wellbeingOrganizational systems satisfying imperatives must track continually changing contexts with observations, decisions and actions2929Begin here to emphasize that organizations are organic entities whose continued existence depends on satisfying their imperatives for continued existence. Taking a holistic view of organizations and their problems that would benefit from architectural reengineering reduces the likelihood that important issues and the benefits from resolving them will be missed in the initial analyses.An important aspect of this analysis is to understand the organizational imperatives both from the viewpoint of an independent observer, and from what the organization itself thinks are its imperatives. The latter are ordinarily expressed in high-level formal documents within the organization. However, such documents are often platitudinous and do not reflect true situations.

Fixed price contract (only adjusted for currency changes)Procurement - 80% subcontracted17 years in productionIn service for 27 yearsWarranty12 months for each ship 2 year latent defects period10 ship years of Operational Availability Assessment PeriodThe 17 year $7 Bn ANZAC Ship ProjectDesign & systems integrationFabrication and assembly10 ships (8 RAN + 2 RNZN) 3 training facilities (2 RAN + 1 RNZN)Support engineering (without this the ships are scrap metal)Full ship fitouts & supply chain sparesCrew trainingOperations manuals2000+ maintenance procedures per ship

30Direct Business Drivers for Performance Based Logistics?WarrantyLatent DefectsOperational Availability Assessment Period

Our Build Program for ANZAC is winding down, so we are shifting to In Service focus for ANZACS. This presentation will focus in the data management needs in this in-service environment.

Warranty & Latent DefectClearly important from a Tenix perspectiveData to support warranty claim resolution with customers, suppliers and sub constractorsIncludes time of install, serial number, planned design usage profiles

Operational Availability AssessmentTook 10 ship years of operation data (4 x 1, 3 x 2, 2 x 3, 1 x 4)Everything done in that time recordedSparing activitiesFailuresMaintenance This was designed to uncover issuesProud to say the ILS package survived the test well, only requiring minor tweaks.This was a very large logistics expertise one of the largest weve ever conducted because of the amount of data involved.Used OARRS (operational assessment recording & reporting), superceded by CSARS (???)

Constant refinement of ship support package based on operational performance metrics.E.g. recommending reduced sparing holdings to save $, Or recommending part super-session by reviewing failure analysisLead into product lifecycle management and the product data management to support this.

31What does an imperative look like?10 ships must be accepted $A 7 Bn project valuePayment depends on acceptance!Non acceptance = non-payment, project delay, liquidated damages + reputational damage

Imperatives for delivering knowledge or using it in an engineering/production environmentCustomer end user's knowledge imperativesCorrectCorrect informationConsistent across the fleet / product rangeApplicable/EffectiveApplicable to the configuration of the individual productEffective for the point in time re engineering changes, etc.AvailableTo who needs it, when and where it is neededUseableReadily understandable by those needing itReadily managed & processed in computer systemsSupplier's knowledge production and usage goalsFastHigh qualityLow cost32What are the overriding goals for the delivery of operational knowledge to fleet managers and operators?Correct and consistent - use same words to describe the same actions wherever they occur.Applicable and EffectiveAvailability of the documentation - this is an important issue. (It didn't exist for Longford.) Explicitly documented knowledge is useless if it sits on a shelf and isn't readily accessed when and where decisions need to be made. (Westralia?? Sensible procedural documentation existed . Why wasn't it followed?)Usable - discoverable, understandable and relevant to the end user (e.g., an operator or maintainer) and manageable in whatever kind of knowledge management environment the fleet operator uses. (Library shelves full of paper manuals is one form of knowledge management - a bad one)Capturing, managing and delivering knowledge is a cost and risk burdenMinimise cycle times - new information and changes must be deployed to the end-users when and where they need itMaximise quality - knowledge capture, production processes must deliver a high quality product or the product won't be used or will cause more problems than it solves.Minimise costs - data/documentation is a cost against the needed capability to be minimised wherever possible - but not at the expense of increasing risk."Faster, better, cheaper" - but not at the risk of catastrophe. Up front saving is worthless if the project fails - e.g., the Mars Lander.

Objective knowledge development lifecycle for a large projectProject ADesign StudyReview, edit, signoffNegotiateReview, agree, amendProject APrime ContractRFT and BidReview, edit, signoffProject ABid DocumentsRFQsBidsNegotiationsProject ASubcontractsReview,agree, amendProject AProcedures,Design DocsReview,edit,signoffProject ASupport Documents20 - 50 year lifecycleProject BDesign StudyReview, edit, signoffProject BDesign StudyReview, edit, signoffProject BDesign StudyReview, edit, signoffOperationalexperienceNegotiateExplicit knowledge for a long lived project is expressed in its documentation. Project documentation is developed through a number of phases, and at least for defence engineering projects the same information and knowledge is often contained in many different documents, in both similar contexts and in different contexts.A major issue is to manage this redundant content consistently over the life-cycle in relation to changing product configurations and to reflect project experience.The remainder of the presentation discusses architectures and tools we have implemented in Tenix to do these things.The full support engineering knowledge management environment

TenixNavyThis slide shows the complete knowledge cycle for ANZAC Ship maintenance procedures. The green area encompasses the parts of the system implemented by Tenix (now being managed by the ANZAC Alliance).The knowledge to manage maintenance is originally assimilated from a number of sources including system and component definitions maintained in the ILS Database into text and maintenance management metadata by technical authors and ILS analysts according to the maintenance philosophies developed in the technical maintenance plans. Authoring now takes place under control of the TeraText DB.Released documents and associated maintenance management metadata are transferred electronically into the AMPS system. When a maintenance procedure is triggered and the job raised, AMPS prints instructions to the maintainer(s), who do the job and enter completion details back into AMPS.Job histories (including spares use and maintainer comments) are periodically downloaded into the CSARS system for analysis. Analysis will highlight systems with low availability or high maintenance costs for attention, and will help to define causes of the problems. On further investigation, engineering or documentation changes will be suggested, defined and implemented. Part of the engineering change process is to incorporate configuration and documentation changes into the maintenance procedures and associated metadata, which are then fed back into the AMPS system as the engineering changes become applicable and effective. Tenix ANZACs measured improvements from KM solutionTenixs Ship 05 delivery challengeFor safe maintenance documents must be understood by human maintainers and computerized maintenance management systemDocument & engineering change management issuesClient threat to not accept 05 if still dissatisfiedStructured authoring solution resolved the issueCondensed 8,000 procedures for 4 ships to class-set of less than 2,000 structured records for 10 shipsRoutines delivered for Ship 5 CUT 80%Subsequent content deliveries CUT 95%Keyboard time for one change CUT more than 50%Change cycle time CUT from 1 year to days$ 7 Billion 17+ year long project completed successfullyEach ship delivered on time - every timeFor the stringently fixed price no cost overruns!For a healthy company profitThe customers are still happy with the shipsThe company failed on its next largish project because it did not transfer its learning from the old project to the new one

Although we were delivering a high quality of wordprocessed documentation, the client threatened not to accept the 5th ship unless we solved the data quality issues impaired AMPS's ability to link all of the metadata contained in the routines. We were also required to enter new H&S warnings and cautions into virtually every routine. The document conversion to SGML had to satisfy these requirements for the deliverable to be acceptable to the client.4,000 (one each RAN and RNZN) ship specific WordPerfect routines were converted to SGML. These were reviewed and the latest routine of each type was edited to produce a dual language instance applicable to the whole class of 10 ships. Edits included adding new warnings and cautions to almost all routines, standardising the routines logical structures, checking for consistency between line item lists and text references, and rewriting many routines to improve consistency for the relevant systems and routines of that type. This conversion process stress tested the system far beyond what any normal authoring process would have: with more than 6000 live documents in the repository (RAN, RNZN and Class), and more than 2,000 active workflow items. We could not have managed to enter all the warnings and cautions in the WordPerfect environment and maintain any semblance of document quality - which would very likely would have triggered the payment of liquidated damages against a failed Ship acceptance. By doing everything required to move the documents into SGML in the TeraText environment, we saved the bacon.Volume reduction was achieved primarily by single sourcing (one routine applies to both RAN and RNZN fleets and can apply to more than one configuration item on each ship). Data delivery is the difference producing between full ship-sets each year to delivering net changes against the class set in near real time.We eliminated a significant documentation quality issue which could not have been realistically solved in our WordPerfect environment, and which could have indefinitely delayed acceptance of our fifth ship.