Adaptability to negative fluctuations in demand or supply within a network can be quantified to provide a metric for assessing resilience. This involves evaluating the impact of disruptions, such as sudden decreases in demand or interruptions in the flow of materials, on key performance indicators. Consider a scenario where a key supplier experiences a production halt. Evaluating the resulting impact on order fulfillment rates and the time required to recover normal operations would be part of the calculation. The capacity to maintain service levels during these adverse events is central to this measurement.
Quantifying this resilience is vital for mitigating risks and ensuring operational continuity. Historically, supply chains focused primarily on efficiency, often neglecting the potential consequences of unforeseen circumstances. A measure of the ability to weather disruptions offers strategic advantages, including improved customer satisfaction, reduced revenue losses, and enhanced brand reputation. Furthermore, it supports informed decision-making regarding investments in redundancy, diversification, and risk management strategies.
The subsequent discussion will delve into specific methods for determining this adaptive capacity, including the identification of relevant metrics, data collection strategies, and analytical techniques. We will examine various approaches to model potential disruptions and their corresponding impact, providing a framework for organizations to assess and improve their ability to respond to adverse conditions effectively.
1. Demand Reduction Impact
Demand reduction impact is a critical component when evaluating supply chain resilience. The severity of potential revenue losses and operational challenges resulting from decreased demand significantly influences the overall assessment of adaptability. Understanding the scope and nature of this influence is essential for developing effective mitigation strategies.
-
Revenue Volatility Assessment
A primary facet is the evaluation of revenue volatility associated with demand fluctuations. This involves analyzing historical sales data, market trends, and economic indicators to predict potential revenue declines under various demand reduction scenarios. For example, a sudden shift in consumer preferences away from a specific product line can trigger a substantial revenue drop. Evaluating the magnitude of this potential drop is crucial for determining the required level of supply chain responsiveness.
-
Inventory Management Optimization
Effective inventory management is inextricably linked to demand reduction. Excess inventory becomes a liability during periods of decreased demand, leading to storage costs, obsolescence, and potential write-offs. Accurate forecasting and responsive inventory control mechanisms are vital for minimizing these losses. For instance, implementing a just-in-time inventory system, while potentially increasing efficiency under stable conditions, may require careful calibration to avoid stockouts during unexpected demand spikes while limiting exposure to excess inventory during demand dips.
-
Production Capacity Adjustment
The ability to adjust production capacity swiftly in response to changing demand patterns is fundamental. This necessitates flexible manufacturing processes, scalable equipment, and readily available resources. Consider a manufacturing plant that produces both high-demand and low-demand products. During a demand reduction for the high-demand product, the plant must be able to shift production to the lower-demand product or reduce overall output without incurring significant downtime or resource wastage. The speed and cost-effectiveness of this adjustment directly impact the resilience metric.
-
Contractual Agreement Flexibility
Contractual agreements with suppliers and distributors must incorporate flexibility to accommodate demand fluctuations. This may involve renegotiating order quantities, adjusting delivery schedules, or diversifying the supplier base. A rigid contract that mandates fixed purchase volumes, irrespective of demand, can severely limit an organization’s ability to adapt to negative market shifts. The presence of flexible terms, such as cancellation clauses or volume discounts, significantly enhances adaptability.
In summary, the revenue volatility, inventory control, production capacity, and contract agreement flexibility all provide critical facets on the demand reduction. These components collectively illuminate the extent to which a negative shift in consumer demand can impact profitability. These insights are directly relevant to the broader effort to quantify supply chain downside adaptability, providing a basis for implementing targeted improvements and enhancing overall resilience.
2. Supplier Failure Probability
The probability of a supplier’s inability to fulfill contractual obligations directly and significantly influences a supply chain’s downside adaptability. A higher supplier failure probability increases the likelihood of disruptions, such as material shortages, production delays, and order fulfillment issues. These disruptions negatively impact key performance indicators, which in turn reduce the overall score when assessing the ability to adapt to adverse conditions. For example, if a manufacturer relies on a single supplier for a critical component, and that supplier has a history of financial instability or operational challenges, the manufacturer’s supply chain is inherently less adaptable to unexpected events. The higher the probability of that supplier failing, the lower the supply chain’s capacity to withstand the resulting disruption without significant impact on production and customer service.
Calculating the potential impact involves assessing various factors contributing to supplier vulnerability. Financial stability, geographic location (considering natural disaster risk), production capacity, technological capabilities, and reliance on other suppliers are all pertinent aspects. For instance, a supplier located in an area prone to earthquakes and lacking robust disaster recovery plans will have a higher failure probability than a supplier in a stable region with comprehensive contingency measures. Furthermore, quantifying the potential impact requires modeling different failure scenarios and estimating the resulting delays, costs, and service level degradations. Sensitivity analysis can then be employed to determine how changes in supplier failure probability affect overall supply chain performance under stress.
In conclusion, supplier failure probability serves as a critical input when evaluating a supply chain’s ability to adapt to negative events. Accurately assessing and mitigating supplier-related risks enhances resilience and safeguards against potential disruptions. Ignoring this factor can lead to an overestimation of adaptability and leave the supply chain vulnerable to unexpected challenges. The integration of this probability into a broader framework for assessing downside adaptability provides a more realistic and actionable understanding of potential vulnerabilities and informs targeted risk mitigation strategies, leading to more reliable and robust operations.
3. Lead Time Variability
Lead time variability, the degree to which the time required for a supplier to deliver materials or components deviates from the expected duration, is directly and inversely related to supply chain downside adaptability. Increased variability necessitates larger safety stock levels and potentially impacts production schedules, both of which reduce the network’s capacity to respond effectively to demand decreases or supply disruptions. Consider the case of a clothing manufacturer sourcing fabric from overseas. If the lead time for fabric delivery fluctuates significantly due to port congestion, customs delays, or supplier production issues, the manufacturer must maintain larger inventories to avoid stockouts. These inflated inventories tie up capital and storage space, diminishing financial flexibility and adaptability when faced with unexpected market changes or other challenges.
The impact of lead time variability can be quantified using statistical measures such as standard deviation or coefficient of variation. These metrics can be integrated into simulations or analytical models to assess their effect on key performance indicators, such as fill rates, inventory holding costs, and order cycle times. For instance, a simulation that incorporates varying lead times for critical components can reveal the vulnerability of the supply chain to specific disruption scenarios, highlighting the importance of mitigating lead time uncertainty. This understanding then informs decisions regarding supplier selection, inventory management strategies, and the implementation of risk mitigation measures. Effective management of lead time variability may involve negotiating contracts with suppliers that incentivize on-time delivery, investing in improved transportation infrastructure, or diversifying the supplier base to reduce reliance on a single, unreliable source.
In summary, lead time variability is a significant factor influencing downside adaptability. Accurate measurement, analysis, and mitigation are essential for building a resilient supply chain capable of weathering unexpected disruptions. A failure to address lead time variability can lead to increased costs, reduced service levels, and a diminished ability to respond to adverse conditions, ultimately undermining the supply chain’s overall capacity to adapt to negative pressures. Therefore, incorporating the impact of lead time variability is crucial for any comprehensive assessment of supply chain resilience.
4. Inventory buffer effectiveness
Inventory buffer effectiveness directly influences the calculation of supply chain downside adaptability. The degree to which safety stock mitigates the impact of supply disruptions or demand surges determines its value in a resilience assessment. Ineffective buffers provide a false sense of security, failing to protect against stockouts during adverse events, thereby reducing adaptability. Conversely, properly sized and strategically positioned inventory buffers enhance the ability to maintain service levels when unexpected fluctuations occur. For example, a company experiencing a sudden increase in demand may rely on pre-existing safety stock to fulfill orders until production catches up. If the buffer is insufficient, resulting in delayed shipments and lost sales, the adaptability score will reflect this deficiency. The quantitative difference between a buffer’s intended performance and its actual performance under duress is a key element in measuring overall downside adaptability.
The assessment of inventory buffer effectiveness involves evaluating several factors, including buffer size, placement within the supply chain, and responsiveness to changing conditions. Buffer size must be appropriately calculated based on demand variability, lead times, and service level requirements. Too little inventory exposes the supply chain to stockouts, while excessive inventory ties up capital and increases holding costs. Placement is also critical; buffers strategically located near critical bottlenecks or in regions with high demand volatility provide the greatest benefit. Responsiveness refers to the ability to adjust buffer levels dynamically in response to real-time data and changing market conditions. For instance, implementing a system that automatically replenishes inventory based on actual demand signals improves buffer effectiveness and contributes to a higher adaptability score. Consider a scenario where a natural disaster disrupts a key supplier. If strategically placed inventory buffers can sustain production until an alternative supplier is secured, the supply chain demonstrates a higher degree of adaptability.
Ultimately, incorporating inventory buffer effectiveness into the calculation of supply chain downside adaptability provides a more realistic and actionable assessment of resilience. By quantifying the protective capacity of inventory buffers, organizations can identify vulnerabilities, optimize buffer strategies, and enhance their ability to weather unexpected disruptions. This understanding enables informed decision-making regarding inventory investments and contributes to a more robust and adaptable supply chain. Challenges to accurate assessment include the complexity of modeling diverse disruption scenarios and the difficulty in obtaining reliable data on actual buffer performance during extreme events. Despite these challenges, quantifying inventory buffer effectiveness is essential for developing a resilient and adaptive supply chain.
5. Capacity utilization rate
Capacity utilization rate, defined as the percentage of total capacity that is actually being used, holds a crucial position when evaluating a supply chain’s ability to adapt to adverse events. The degree to which operational capacity is already committed directly influences its capacity to absorb unexpected demand surges or compensate for supply disruptions. A high utilization rate generally indicates limited slack, hindering the ability to respond flexibly. Conversely, a lower rate might suggest greater potential for adaptation, but also raises questions about operational efficiency. Evaluating this rate within the context of downside adaptability provides insights into the network’s ability to maintain service levels under stress.
-
Impact on Surge Capacity
A high rate limits the surge capacity, defined as the ability to rapidly increase production to meet unexpected demand spikes. With minimal available capacity, the supply chain struggles to fulfill additional orders promptly, potentially leading to lost sales and customer dissatisfaction. For example, a manufacturing plant operating at 95% capacity is less capable of handling a sudden 20% increase in demand compared to one operating at 70%. The available buffer provides the necessary resources to scale up production without significant delays. This ability to dynamically increase throughput without straining resources is a key determinant of adaptability.
-
Vulnerability to Bottlenecks
High utilization rates exacerbate the impact of bottlenecks within the supply chain. Even minor disruptions at critical nodes can cascade through the entire network, causing significant delays and impacting overall performance. If a distribution center is already operating at near-full capacity, a temporary shutdown due to a weather event or equipment failure can create significant backlog and hinder the flow of goods. Lower utilization rates provide greater buffer and allow the system to absorb such disruptions more effectively. Identification and alleviation of bottlenecks are crucial in maintaining responsiveness, especially when operating near capacity limits.
-
Trade-off with Efficiency
While maximizing capacity utilization is often viewed as a key operational efficiency metric, it can come at the expense of adaptability. A relentless focus on minimizing idle capacity can lead to a rigid system that is ill-equipped to handle unforeseen circumstances. Balancing efficiency with the need for flexibility requires careful consideration of risk tolerance, market volatility, and the potential consequences of disruptions. Maintaining a certain level of planned underutilization can provide a valuable buffer against unexpected events, thereby enhancing overall resilience.
-
Influence on Recovery Speed
Capacity utilization also impacts the speed at which a supply chain can recover from disruptions. A system operating near its limits may struggle to catch up after experiencing a setback, leading to prolonged delays and increased costs. The availability of spare capacity allows for quicker recovery by enabling increased output and accelerated order fulfillment. Consider an airline that experiences widespread flight cancellations due to inclement weather. The airlines ability to recover quickly depends on having sufficient aircraft and personnel available to resume operations once the weather clears. Underutilized resources become critical during the recovery phase.
These insights highlight the multifaceted nature of capacity utilization rate within the context of supply chain downside adaptability. A simplistic view of maximizing utilization may overlook the critical need for flexibility and responsiveness in the face of unforeseen challenges. A balanced approach that considers both efficiency and resilience is essential for building a robust and adaptable supply chain.
6. Recovery time estimation
Recovery time estimation constitutes a fundamental element in the quantification of a supply chain’s ability to adapt to negative fluctuations. Accurate assessment of the duration required to restore normal operational capacity following a disruption directly influences the calculation of downside adaptability. Extended recovery times exacerbate the negative impacts of disruptions, reducing the supply chain’s capacity to meet demand and maintain service levels. For example, a manufacturing facility experiencing a fire may require weeks or months to resume full production. The estimated time to rebuild or repair the facility, procure new equipment, and retrain personnel directly impacts the supply chain’s ability to fulfill outstanding orders and meet future demand. This estimation necessitates consideration of all relevant factors, including insurance claim processing, construction lead times, equipment availability, and workforce readiness.
The practical significance of recovery time estimation extends beyond immediate operational considerations. It informs strategic decisions related to risk mitigation and business continuity planning. Organizations can use recovery time estimates to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of investments in redundancy, alternative sourcing, or disaster recovery infrastructure. For instance, a company might choose to maintain a secondary manufacturing facility in a geographically diverse location to minimize the impact of regional disruptions. The decision to invest in this redundancy would be justified, in part, by comparing the cost of maintaining the facility with the potential losses associated with an extended recovery time resulting from a single-facility disruption. Furthermore, recovery time estimates can guide the development of communication strategies to manage customer expectations and maintain relationships during periods of reduced capacity.
In conclusion, recovery time estimation is not merely a post-disruption activity; it is an integral component of proactive supply chain risk management and the calculation of downside adaptability. It informs decisions regarding investments in resilience, the development of contingency plans, and the management of stakeholder expectations. Overly optimistic or inaccurate estimations can lead to underinvestment in risk mitigation measures and a diminished capacity to respond effectively to unforeseen challenges. A realistic and data-driven approach to recovery time estimation is essential for building a truly adaptable and resilient supply chain.
7. Cost impact analysis
Cost impact analysis forms an integral component when determining a supply chain’s capacity to adapt to negative events. It quantifies the financial consequences associated with disruptions, enabling a more comprehensive understanding of vulnerabilities and guiding resource allocation for mitigation strategies. Without a detailed assessment of potential financial losses arising from adverse events, organizations risk underestimating their exposure and misallocating resources, leading to inadequate resilience measures. The magnitude of potential financial losses, including increased operating costs, decreased revenue, and potential penalties, provides a tangible measure against which to evaluate the effectiveness of adaptability efforts.
Consider a scenario where a key supplier experiences a prolonged shutdown due to a cyberattack. A thorough cost impact analysis would quantify the costs associated with lost production, expedited shipping of alternative materials, penalties for late delivery to customers, and potential reputational damage. The resulting financial figures provide a clear picture of the potential disruption, enabling informed decisions about investments in cybersecurity measures, supplier diversification, or increased inventory buffers. For example, if the cost impact analysis reveals that a supplier shutdown would result in millions of dollars in losses, the organization might justify the expense of implementing redundant supply chains or developing alternative sourcing agreements. This approach ensures that resilience investments are aligned with the actual risks faced by the supply chain.
In summary, cost impact analysis translates abstract risks into concrete financial terms, providing a critical input for calculating supply chain downside adaptability. It enables organizations to prioritize mitigation efforts, allocate resources effectively, and make informed decisions about investments in resilience. Ignoring the potential financial consequences of disruptions leads to an incomplete and potentially misleading assessment of adaptability, leaving the supply chain vulnerable to unforeseen challenges. Accurately quantifying the economic impact of disruptions is essential for building a truly resilient and adaptable supply chain.
8. Flexibility implementation cost
Flexibility implementation cost is a critical element in evaluating a supply chain’s downside adaptability. The investment required to introduce or enhance flexibility mechanisms within the network directly impacts the overall assessment of resilience, as these costs must be weighed against the potential benefits of improved responsiveness to disruptions.
-
Technology Investment
The introduction of advanced technologies often underlies enhancements to supply chain flexibility. Examples include implementing cloud-based inventory management systems, deploying predictive analytics tools for demand forecasting, or integrating robotic process automation in manufacturing operations. The financial outlay for these technologies encompasses hardware, software licenses, implementation services, and ongoing maintenance. When assessing downside adaptability, the cost of these technological upgrades must be considered alongside the anticipated gains in agility and responsiveness to adverse events.
-
Process Redesign and Training
Achieving greater flexibility necessitates process redesign and workforce training. Adapting production lines for rapid changeovers, implementing cross-training programs to increase workforce versatility, or establishing agile product development methodologies all require investment. These costs extend beyond direct monetary outlays to include the time and resources dedicated to process mapping, workflow optimization, and employee skill development. These investments must be quantified and incorporated into the overall cost-benefit analysis of enhanced flexibility.
-
Supplier Relationship Restructuring
Achieving supply chain flexibility often involves restructuring relationships with suppliers. This may include diversifying the supplier base to reduce reliance on single sources, negotiating flexible contract terms, or investing in collaborative planning and forecasting initiatives. These changes entail costs associated with supplier onboarding, contract negotiation, information sharing, and collaborative technology platforms. These costs must be carefully evaluated in light of the anticipated improvements in supply chain responsiveness and reduced vulnerability to supplier-related disruptions.
-
Infrastructure Modifications
Enhancing physical infrastructure is another element that may affect implementation costs. Examples are investing in modular manufacturing facilities, expanding warehouse capacity for strategic inventory positioning, or establishing alternative transportation routes to mitigate disruptions. These modifications can entail significant capital expenditures and require careful planning to ensure that the benefits of increased flexibility outweigh the associated costs. The financial implications of infrastructure modifications must be incorporated into the overall evaluation of supply chain downside adaptability.
The costs associated with implementing flexibility enhancements must be carefully balanced against the potential benefits of improved resilience and reduced vulnerability to adverse events. Organizations must conduct thorough cost-benefit analyses to ensure that flexibility investments are economically justified and contribute to a net improvement in supply chain performance. Ignoring the financial implications of flexibility can lead to inefficient resource allocation and a misallocation of efforts to resilience, undermining the overall goal of enhancing downside adaptability.
9. Service level maintenance
Service level maintenance represents a critical component when quantifying a supply chain’s downside adaptability. The ability to sustain predetermined service levels during periods of disruption or fluctuating demand directly influences the assessment of resilience. A supply chain that demonstrably maintains high service levels, such as on-time delivery rates and order fulfillment accuracy, even under duress, exhibits a greater capacity for adaptation. Conversely, a precipitous decline in service levels during adverse events indicates a lack of resilience and a lower score when evaluating the overall capacity to adapt. Therefore, service level maintenance is not merely a performance metric; it serves as a tangible indicator of a supply chain’s robustness when faced with unfavorable conditions. For example, an electronics manufacturer experiencing a component shortage but still managing to fulfill a significant portion of customer orders within agreed-upon timeframes demonstrates a higher degree of adaptability than a competitor experiencing similar shortages but failing to meet customer commitments.
The connection between service level maintenance and the calculation of downside adaptability is multi-faceted. The metrics used to evaluate service levels, such as fill rates, order cycle times, and customer satisfaction scores, directly contribute to the overall calculation of adaptability. Consider the implementation of alternative sourcing strategies during a supply disruption. The effectiveness of these strategies can be directly measured by their impact on service levels. If the new sourcing arrangement allows the company to maintain pre-disruption service levels, then the adaptability score would reflect the positive impact. This highlights the cause-and-effect relationship between strategic actions and measured outcomes and demonstrates that adaptability is not just a theoretical concept, but a quantifiable characteristic influenced by practical interventions. This measurement approach, coupled with an in-depth understanding of the operational elements impacting these service level metrics, enables the establishment of improvement priorities.
Effective service level maintenance during downturns necessitates proactive planning and execution. The organization is expected to monitor key metrics, implement early warning systems, identify the root cause and quickly make action. An assessment of downside adaptability should include an evaluation of service level targets and corresponding buffer levels to ensure they are accurately aligned with business goals. By integrating these aspects into the measurement of adaptability, enterprises can obtain comprehensive knowledge regarding their operational resilience to negative events.
Frequently Asked Questions About Determining Supply Chain Downside Adaptability
The following questions and answers address common inquiries regarding the methodology and significance of assessing a supply chain’s capacity to withstand adverse events.
Question 1: Why is quantification of resilience to negative fluctuations necessary?
The quantification of resilience is necessary to provide a tangible metric for evaluating risk exposure and prioritizing mitigation strategies. Without a measurable assessment, resources may be misallocated, leading to inadequate preparedness for potential disruptions.
Question 2: What key performance indicators are typically employed in calculating this adaptive capacity?
Key performance indicators often include service level maintenance, recovery time estimation, and cost impact analysis. These metrics provide a comprehensive view of the supply chain’s performance under duress.
Question 3: How does supplier failure probability factor into the assessment of downside adaptability?
Supplier failure probability is a critical input, as it directly influences the likelihood of supply disruptions. A higher probability necessitates more robust mitigation strategies, such as alternative sourcing or increased inventory buffers.
Question 4: What is the role of inventory buffer effectiveness in enhancing resilience?
Inventory buffer effectiveness determines the degree to which safety stock can mitigate the impact of supply disruptions or demand surges. Properly sized and strategically positioned buffers enhance the ability to maintain service levels.
Question 5: How does capacity utilization rate impact a supply chain’s ability to adapt to negative events?
A high capacity utilization rate limits the surge capacity, thereby hindering the ability to respond effectively to unexpected demand spikes or supply disruptions. Maintaining some level of planned underutilization can provide a valuable buffer.
Question 6: How does understanding recovery time influence strategic decision-making?
Accurate recovery time estimation informs decisions related to risk mitigation and business continuity planning. It allows organizations to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of investments in redundancy, alternative sourcing, and disaster recovery infrastructure.
In conclusion, a thorough quantification of a supply chain’s capacity to adapt to adverse conditions enables informed decision-making, optimized resource allocation, and enhanced operational resilience.
The next section will explore strategies for improving supply chain resilience based on the findings of the adaptability assessment.
Tips for Enhancing Measurement of Supply Chain Downside Adaptability
Employing a structured approach to measure and improve a supply chain’s capacity to withstand adverse events is essential. The following recommendations provide guidance for enhancing the accuracy and effectiveness of this assessment process.
Tip 1: Establish Clear and Measurable Key Performance Indicators (KPIs): Define specific, quantifiable metrics that accurately reflect the supply chain’s performance during disruptions. Examples include on-time delivery rates, order fulfillment accuracy, and inventory turnover rates. This establishes a baseline for evaluating adaptability.
Tip 2: Conduct Regular Risk Assessments: Identify potential vulnerabilities within the supply chain, such as reliance on single-source suppliers, geographical concentrations of production facilities, or dependencies on critical infrastructure. Quantify the likelihood and potential impact of these risks.
Tip 3: Model Disruption Scenarios: Develop realistic models of potential disruption scenarios, including natural disasters, supplier failures, and demand fluctuations. Simulate the impact of these scenarios on key performance indicators to assess the supply chain’s response capabilities.
Tip 4: Incorporate Financial Impact Assessments: Translate potential disruptions into financial terms by quantifying the costs associated with lost sales, increased operating expenses, and potential penalties. This provides a clear economic justification for investments in resilience.
Tip 5: Evaluate Inventory Buffer Effectiveness: Assess the capacity of existing inventory buffers to mitigate the impact of supply disruptions or demand surges. Optimize buffer sizes and placement to maximize their protective capacity while minimizing holding costs.
Tip 6: Assess and Quantify Supplier Reliability: Implement methods of measuring and scoring supplier reliability, which should factor into the model.
Tip 7: Implement a Continuous Improvement Cycle: Regularly review and update the measurement process based on performance data and evolving risk landscapes. This ensures that the assessment remains accurate and relevant over time.
Implementing these tips facilitates a more accurate and comprehensive quantification of a supply chain’s capacity to adapt to negative conditions. This enhanced understanding enables targeted investments in resilience and a more robust defense against unforeseen challenges.
The subsequent section will address the future trends that will affect supply chain downside adaptability.
Conclusion
The examination of “how to calculate supply chain downside adaptability” has revealed it as a multifaceted process, requiring careful consideration of various interconnected elements. The accurate measurement relies on quantitative metricsincluding service level maintenance, recovery time estimation, and cost impact analysisas well as a thorough understanding of qualitative factors, such as supplier relationships and operational flexibility. The capacity to accurately assess and quantify potential disruptions is essential for effective risk mitigation.
The calculation of downside adaptability should serve as an ongoing initiative, continuously refined and adapted to reflect evolving risk landscapes and changing market dynamics. Implementing a rigorous framework, organizations enhance their ability to proactively address potential vulnerabilities, ensuring a more resilient and responsive supply chain capable of weathering unforeseen challenges. By embracing a data-driven approach to risk management, businesses can secure long-term stability and maintain a competitive advantage in an increasingly volatile global economy.
