LP762-L2 WEEK 6
KarenS
LP762Notes6.pptxWJC LP 762: The Psychology of Leadership and Followership Dr. Dan Jacobs William James College
Notes 6
1
Leaders and Followers
Possible Topics This Week:
Relationship dynamics
Interaction styles
The necessary exercise of power
Cost/Benefits of utilization of power
2
Followership in Leadership Studies
As we have talked about before, the study of followership has historically been very sparse in the leadership literature.
When it has occurred, the majority of research on followership has more often still been done from the perspective of the leader and not of the follower. We are going to try to focus on more heavily on the followership side of the equation as we move forward:
3
Social Identity (Tee, et al., 2013)
“In this conceptual review, we build links between followership and social identity theory by considering how emotions account for how followers shape group identity and leadership outcomes. We highlight the role of emotions and argue that group-level emotions constitute an integral element of the salient group identity. As a consequence, emotional processes occur within the context of groups, and such expressions of emotions have implications for group identity and leadership effectiveness.”
4
Social Identity (Tee, et al., 2013)
“Central to our main thesis also is that leadership exists as a group-level process, that leaders are members of the groups they lead, and thus, are also subject to the social dynamics that occur within group processes.
We propose that followers themselves can moderate the influence of leaders through unified group-level emotions and collective action towards leaders.”
5
Social Identity (Tee, et al., 2013)
“We also consider individual and group-level moderators of our proposed follower-centric expressions of emotions and collective actions towards leaders.
A wide range of research from both studies of leadership based on the social identity model together with newer evidence from intergroup emotion theory supports our proposition that group identification influences the extent to which group members identify with, and are willing to be influenced by, group emotions.”
6
Social Identity (Tee, et al., 2013)
“We extend on this by also proposing that heightened identification with the group also motivates action tendencies in followers.
We suggest in particular that high-identifying group members, relative to their low-identifying counterparts, are more likely to be responsive towards influences of group-level emotions, sensitive towards leader influences towards leader influences on group identity and more likely to engage in collective action as a result of emotions experienced towards leader attempts to influence group identity.”
7
Shared Identity (Tee, et al., 2013)
“We then propose that at the group-level, the strength of followers' shared identity may also moderate the extent to which they are willing to express emotions towards leaders who attempt to influence the group identity. A strong, unified sense of collective emotions, in particular, may be one way in which followers resist the influences of leader attempts on influencing the group identity. Taken together, these propositions inform possibilities for future research within the area of followership research, which we hope to revive and to contribute to its further development and refinement.”
Next Steps: More followership research is needed, in particular on how leader-follower interactions are influenced by shared social identity (social context).
8
HOW we view the dynamic impacts how we UNDERSTAND the dynamic
So, per Tee, et al. (2013), we need to understand that followers in the group experience group emotions, to which the leader (also a part of the group) is subject.
This leads to dynamics which appear to indicate that the group (the followers) can have an impact on the leader and on the leader’s actions.
We are starting to see research finally examine the impact of Followers on Leaders—Tee, Paulsen & Ashkanasy got the ball rolling for us and now Malakyan takes it a bit further:
9
Understanding Leader—Follower Dynamics
10
Followership in Leadership Studies
Malakyan’s article again supports the views that:
1. “Modern leadership studies have been developed strictly from the leader’s perspective with little or no attention on followership.
2. Leadership studies have primarily been based on the static understanding of leadership (leaders always remain leaders).
3. There seems to be a need for a new paradigm for leader-follower relationships, which may result in organic relationships between leaders and followers through exchange of leadership and followership functions and roles.” -Malakyan (2014)
11
The Leader-Follower Trade Approach (Malakyan, 2014)
“To address the two problems in leadership studies (the omission of followership and the static concept of leadership and followership), the leader–follower trade (LFT) approach is introduced to the leadership theories as an organic way of doing leadership and followership and a new way of integrating followership into the leadership practice and research.”
12
Leader-Follower Trade (LFT) Definition
“The definition of the LFT approach is as follows: Leadership–followership processes occur in relationships and leading–following functions are exchangeable behaviors in human relationships.
Thus, leaders and followers trade their functions from leader to follower and from follower to leader in order to develop their intrapersonal perspectives, foster interpersonal relationships, and maximize mutual effectiveness.” -Malakyan (2014)
13
Influence in LFT (Malakyan, 2014)
“From the perspective of the LFT approach, influence between the leaders and the followers is always mutual. They mutually influence each other. Hollander (2009) calls it “two-way flow of influence” (p. 37), or as Martin Buber (1958) puts it, “I–Thou” mutual dialogue.
Thus, the study and research on leadership–followership as one unit focuses on mutual influence: the leader influences the follower, and the follower influences the leader. Moreover, effectiveness, according to the LFT approach, refers to a leader–follower dyad…”
14
Influence in LFT (Malakyan, 2014)
“As soon as the paradigm is shifted from a leader to a leader– follower dynamic, one may easily view effectiveness in light of leader–follower relationships.
Effectiveness, in turn, which equally depends on the leader and the follower, is mutually addressed and evaluated. Both the leader and the follower seek effectiveness together. Thus the attitude of the leader and the follower toward each other seems to be a regulating determinant for effective leadership and followership. Thus the leader’s and the follower’s effectiveness is the condition for maximum effectiveness in a group or organizational setting.”
Q: What does this say about empowerment?
15
LFT and Power Dynamics (Malakyan, 2014)
“Leadership traits do not make one superior over a person who has followership traits. After all, leadership and followership functions are valuable human functions and both leaders and followers possess unique talents and abilities.
Thus, the static concept of leadership seems discriminatory and separatist. Leadership here is taken as a mere function or a role, as opposed to social stratifications, that emerges in human interactions for service toward the common good of humanity…”
16
LFT and Power Dynamics (Malakyan, 2014)
“Thus, the LFT approach to leadership and followership, like situational behavioral functions, is more inclusive and humane because every person, although not equal, has both leadership and followership traits and abilities.”
Q: What could this mean for long-term relationships?
17
LFT and Other Approaches
The Trait Approach
The Skills Approach
The Style Approach
The Situational Approach
Contingency Theory
Path-Goal Theory
Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Theory
Q: Why do some of the differences with these theories and LFT seem more significant than others as Malakyan describes them? (Hint: The more rigid or hierarchical the theory, the more likely for there to be discrepancy with LFT, which is advocating for mutuality and role rotation possibilities)
18
LFT and Transformational Leadership (Malakyan, 2014)
“From the perspective of the LFT approach, transformational leadership considers the possibility for transformational followership and advocates for mutual transformation. Much like the mutual influence between the follower and the leader, the transformational influence is also mutual. Thus, transformational leadership and followership are beyond who the leaders or the followers are. They transcend human limitations and embrace a vision that is always bigger and higher than the leaders’ or the followers’ abilities…”
19
LFT and Transformational Leadership (Malakyan, 2014)
“Moreover, although transformational leadership promotes inspiration and empowerment for followers and enhances personal and organizational change and growth, the intention has never been the transformation of the follower into a change agent.
However, just like leaders, followers are also agents for change (Kellerman, 2008). Thus, the LFT approach may open new horizons for followers to be functionally transformed into leaders equipped for leadership tasks…”
20
LFT and Transformational Leadership (Malakyan, 2014)
“In the process both the leader and the follower are transformed into a new functional reality: the leader becomes a follower and the follower becomes a leader, which may offer solutions to the problems in transformational leadership (lone-ranger mentality, psychological influence, elitism).” -Malakyan (2014)
Q: What about this concept has RADICAL potential?
21
LFT and Other Leadership Concepts
While I am not going to go over these in depth in this lecture, Malakyan also does a nice job of considering LFT in the context of:
Charismatic Leadership
Team Leadership
Collective Leadership
Servant Leadership
The Psychodynamic Approach
Leadership Ethics
Authentic Leadership
Intercultural Leadership
Gender Issues and Leadership
Comment: Any of these areas holds a great deal of promise for someone interested in exploring these issues further (regarding research, learning opportunities, even doctoral projects…)
22
Limitations of LFT Implementation
“Two major limitations of the LFT approach seem evident in the areas of willingness and competencies.
First, some leaders or followers may not be willing to exchange their roles and functions due to their personal preferences.
Second, the leaders and followers may feel incompetent for the role and functional exchange. For instance, it would seem unrealistic or perhaps naïve to assume that an inexperienced leader, who lacks knowledge, skills, and expertise, may increase his or her effectiveness by implementing the LFT approach. Moreover, in order for true dialogue and mutual learning to take place between leaders and followers, the same benefits and privileges, such as decision-making power, compensation, and status, must apply to both parties.” -Malakyan (2014)
23
4 Possible Feasibility Variations of LFT
There are 4 Possible Feasibility Variations of Successfully Applying the LFT Approach:
1. Resistant Avoidance
2. Apprehensive Avoidance
3. Inquisitive Avoidance
4. Enthusiastic Engagement
24
4 Possible Feasibility Variations of LFT
1. “Resistant Avoidance = High competency, Low willingness. Leaders and followers may resist but not avoid the LFT approach. Thus it may be infeasible.
Response-change: When the leader and the follower are competent but unwilling for a functional exchange, a persuading and modeling style may be used for the implementation of the LFT approach.
25
4 Possible Feasibility Variations of LFT
2. “Apprehensive Avoidance = Low competency, Low willingness. Leaders and followers may hesitate and avoid the LFT approach. Thus it may be infeasible.
Response-change: When the leader and the follower are incompetent and unwilling for a functional exchange, a teaching and encouraging development style may be used for the implementation of the LFT approach.
26
4 Possible Feasibility Variations of LFT
3. “Inquisitive Avoidance = Low competency, High willingness. Leaders and followers may express interest but avoid the LFT approach. Thus it may be feasible.
Response-change: When the leader or the follower is incompetent but willing for a functional exchange, a teaching and participatory development style may be used for the implementation of the LFT approach.
27
4 Possible Feasibility Variations of LFT
4. “Enthusiastic Engagement = High competency, High willingness. Leaders and followers may be enthusiastic and engaged in the LFT approach. Thus it is feasible.
Response-change: When the leader or the follower is competent and willing for a functional exchange, an empowering and delegating development style may be used for the implementation of the LFT approach.” -Malakyan (2014)
28
Usefulness of LFT Feasibility Analysis for Consultants
“When the leader–follower willingness is high, it is more likely that the LFT approach will be feasible.
Conversely, when the leader–follower willingness is low, it is more likely that the LFT approach will be infeasible” and
“When the leader–follower competency is high, it is more likely that the LFT approach will be feasible.
Conversely, when the leader–follower competency is low, it is more likely that the LFT approach will be infeasible.” -Malakyan (2014)
Q: How does this knowledge help us in our consulting work?
29
Summary of Conclusions and Recommendations from Malakyan (2014)
1. “Human beings are born with abilities to lead and follow (organic leadership and followership). Leaders and followers share common humanity with their unique personalities and characteristics. Subsequently both are valuable and useful human behavioral functions.”
30
Summary of Conclusions and Recommendations from Malakyan (2014)
2. “In reality, one cannot claim that he or she is a leader or a follower at all times and in all circumstances. Thus the concepts of a “leader” or a “follower” as nouns and separate human identities do not exist and seem rather myth. Thus the nonstatic paradigm of the LFT approach to “leading” and “following” as verbs seems more natural and authentic to every individual regardless of their social status.”
31
Summary of Conclusions and Recommendations from Malakyan (2014)
3. “Leadership and followership traits and skills are valuable human functions and cannot independently exist. Contingent upon their preferences and circumstances*, some people develop leadership skills whereas others develop followership skills. Both skills and abilities are attainable through education and thus deserve attention.”
Q: Does circumstances sound a lot like context to you? It does to me…
32
Summary of Conclusions and Recommendations from Malakyan (2014)
4. “Leadership and followership are not static concepts or behavioral functions. In one situation a person may function as a leader and in another as a follower, or both.”
33
Summary of Conclusions and Recommendations from Malakyan (2014)
5. “Leadership and followership cannot occur in a vacuum because they are defined by action and behavior in a particular context. They require relationship, which involves influence. Influence, on the other hand, is always mutual. As the leader influences the follower, the follower correspondingly influences the leader. Thus the question always remains, “Who is influencing whom and who is leading whom?”
34
Summary of Conclusions and Recommendations from Malakyan (2014)
6. “The relational and task behaviors are characteristic of both leaders and followers: (1) leader–follower, (2) follower–leader, and (3) follower–follower. Leadership and followership are situational. Individuals may constantly exchange their leadership and followership functions. The situational exchange must be geared toward leader–follower mutual empowerment, effectiveness, and growth.”
35
Summary of Conclusions and Recommendations from Malakyan (2014)
7. “In organizational settings, leadership and followership have traditionally been perceived as separate roles. However, both roles may be exchangeable based on one’s giftedness, behavioral preference, expertise, and situational needs. Thus organizational effectiveness may be maximized if leaders and followers trade their functions, roles, and responsibilities toward developing leader–follower skills through mutually empowering synergetic relationships.”
36
Summary of Conclusions and Recommendations from Malakyan (2014)
8. “The LFT approach is based on the mutual influence through both (1) change of leadership style or behavior and (2) change of functions in order to make leadership and followership a shared experience.”
Q: How important is change for the Leader Follower Trade approach (LFT) to work?
37
Summary of Conclusions and Recommendations from Malakyan (2014)
9. “The skills, inner dispositions, and followership qualities do not come naturally. If this assumption were correct, then we would have more than one Leo Tolstoy against social injustice and court violence in Czarist Russia; Mahatma Gandhi against British colonialism in India; Martin Luther King, Jr. against segregation, discrimination, and racism in the United States; or more than one Archbishop Desmond Tutu against apartheid in South Africa. Thus followership along with leadership must be taught and developed in both leaders and followers from educational institutions to work environments.”
38
Summary of Conclusions and Recommendations from Malakyan (2014)
10. “If human behavioral functions, such as leading and following, are contingent upon or shaped by the cultural characteristics, then these behavioral functions must be studied from leader–follower perspective without falsely separating them into two independent functions.”
39
Summary of Conclusions and Recommendations from Malakyan (2014)
11. “The LFT approach may not be feasible for all individuals or circumstances. Individuals may not desire to exchange their leadership or followership roles or possess the necessary competencies for functional exchange.
Thus in order for the LFT approach to be successful on personal and organizational levels, one must acquire disposition of high moral conscience and competency for high performance to be able to
(1) acknowledge the reciprocal benefits of the LFT approach for the participants,
(2) appreciate LFT’s participatory inclusiveness in human performances, and
(3) recognize its potential to treat fellow humans with respect regardless of their leadership or followership functions or roles in society or organizations.”
40
Changes in Perspective
Tee, Paulsen & Ashkanasy, and Malakyan, have shown us different ways to begin to approach Leadership studies from the perspective of the Follower(s).
They have also talked about how “Leadership” is not static; some people may be more fluid about it than others but everyone has the potential to be both leader and follower depending on the context (and social dynamics).
41
Follower Impact on Leader?
42
Changes in Perspective
If you think back to our first readings with Burns and Bennis, the perspective on Leadership was very much focused on a top-down perspective; now we know that we can come at the issue of trying to understand leadership dynamics from many different angles.
As consultants (or as effective leaders) you have to be able to change perspective.
43
Kellerman and Perspective
“Once upon a time we simply obeyed orders issued by our superiors, our leaders and managers. Now we incline more to challenge them, emboldened to do so by the spread of democracy, by the rhetoric of empowerment, and by the practice of participation. The evidence of the decline in respect for authority is everywhere—and everywhere are leaders who labor to lead. The change is cultural, contextual. Norms are now such that followers demand more—and leaders succumb more often.” -Kellerman (2012)
44
Kellerman (2012) on Leadership Research in the 1950s
“The literature on leadership and management back then was in keeping with the times—employers were at the top and employees in the middle or down below—which is why leadership scholarship focused on leadership traits. After all, no one else seemed much to matter. It was only the leader who had, or seemed to have, most of the power, all of the authority, and most of the influence.”
(DBJ: Perception vs. Reality…)
45
Kellerman (2012) on Leadership in the 21st Century
“We know that the old order is over because people in positions of power and authority seem similar to, as opposed to far more imposing than, those who are not; because they are routinely derided, ignored, or circumvented by those who are not; and because they find it increasingly difficult to exercise either the one (power) or the other (authority).”
46
Kellerman (2012) on Leadership in the 21st Century
“To a degree, the leadership industry does take into account this transformation in patterns of dominance and deference.
In fact, a few experts have got to the point of concluding that leaders are dispensable altogether. (Ironically, if this were true, it would defeat the very purpose of the leadership industry).”
47
Kellerman (2012) on Leader Limits
“To be sure, though leaders are constrained now by the culture within which they operate, and by followers who feel freer than before to demean and debase those at the top, bad leaders remain ubiquitous. But when followers know full well that their leader has fallen short, and when enough of them happen really to care, and when, to boot, they have a modicum of freedom, leaders are newly vulnerable.”
48
Kellerman (2012) on Context
“This is the arc of history—recent incarnations of the devolution of power and influence and the diminishment of authority.
We are reminded that context—in this case culture—is as important to patterns of dominance and deference as are leaders and followers. As we are primed for the technological imperatives that further explain change.”
49
Perspective
Do Different Types of Trust Make a Difference? (Zhu, et al., 2013)
“This study examines the mediating effects of cognitive and affective trust on the relationship between follower perceptions of transformational leadership behavior and their work outcomes.
Using data obtained from 318 supervisor–subordinate dyads from a manufacturing organization located in mainland China, structural equation modeling results revealed that affective trust fully mediated the relationships between transformational leadership and the work outcomes of followers, including their affective organizational commitment, organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs), and job performance…”
Do Different Types of Trust Make a Difference? (Zhu, et al., 2013)
“In contrast, cognitive trust negatively mediated the relationship between transformational leadership and follower job performance, and had insignificant effects on their affective organizational commitment and organizational citizenship behaviors.
These findings highlight the importance of affective trust as a mechanism which translates transformational leadership into positive work outcomes for the organization…”
Trust is Not Uni-Dimensional (Zhu, et al., 2013)
“Over the last three decades a great deal of research has examined the direct effects of transformational leadership on follower work outcomes including job performance, creativity and organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs)…
However, it is only in recent years that leadership researchers have begun to unravel the psychological mechanisms which underlie such relationships…One mechanism central to the process of effective transformational leadership is the development of follower trust in the leader…Trust has been typically used to measure the quality of social exchange between follower and leader…”
Trust is Not Uni-Dimensional (Zhu, et al., 2013)
“Previous empirical studies have found that trust fully mediates the impact of transformational leadership on organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs)…and job performance…
However, these studies have typically conceptualized trust as a uni-dimensional measure, and neglected the fact that it may consist of more than one dimension…”
More Than One Type of Trust (Zhu, et al., 2013)
“Recent developments in the literature indicate that there are two types of trust, one of which is exchange-based or relational in nature and the other character-based or cognitive in nature…
Affective trust refers to the trust which is based on emotional ties between two parties in a relationship that results from the mutual exhibition of care and concern…It is generally agreed that affective trust is a good proxy for the process of social exchange, given it measures the extent to which both parties in a relationship engage in the reciprocated exchange of care and concern…
Cognitive trust, on the other hand, refers to that which is based on an instrumental evaluation by the follower of the salient personal characteristics of the leader such as their integrity, competence, reliability and dependability…”
Cognitive Trust (Zhu, et al., 2013)
“In other words, cognitive trust influences employee attitudes by making them feel more confident in their supervisor's ability and qualification to guide their task performance…This should lead employees to judge their work experiences in a favorable light, and encourage them to engage in behavior that benefits the organization…”
Differences in Trust (Zhu, et al., 2013)
“However, there is also preliminary evidence to suggest that unlike affective trust, cognitive trust may also lead to over-dependence or reliance of the follower on the leader and result in the tendency of followers to engage in free-riding or social loafing behavior…
This suggests that whereas affective trust might positively influence work outcomes such as job performance in a positive way, cognitive trust may have negative outcomes, given that job performance requires employees to act on their own initiative and not rely on their supervisor's ability…”
Differences in Trust (Zhu, et al., 2013)
“As previous studies examining the mediating effects of trust on the relationship between transformational leadership and follower outcomes at the individual level have typically used measures of trust which combine affective and cognitive dimensions…we believe that, due to the fact that these two types of trust are of a different nature (McAllister, 1995), they could have very different effects on the dynamic relationships between leadership and follower outcomes.
The combination of two rather different types of trust into one general construct by previous researchers means we are unable to fully understand the dynamic and complex roles played by different types of trust on follower responses to leadership behavior…”
Transformational Leadership and Trust (Zhu, et al., 2013)
“The present study contributes to the literature on transformational leadership and trust by providing a more nuanced understanding as to the mediating role played by trust on the relationships between transformational leadership and follower work outcomes than previous studies which have typically conceptualized trust as a uni-dimensional construct. This is done through the adoption of a more finely-tuned two-dimensional conceptualization of trust, comprising measures of cognitive and affective trust as suggested by Dirks and Ferrin (2002)…”
Transformational Leadership and Trust (Zhu, et al., 2013)
“In line with our initial expectations, transformational leadership was found to lead to higher levels of both cognitive and affective trust. However, only affective trust was found to positively mediate the impact of transformational leadership on follower affective organizational commitment, OCBs, and job performance.
In addition, cognitive trust negatively mediated the relationship between transformational leadership and job performance, and did not mediate the effect of transformational leadership on affective organizational commitment and OCBs…”
OCBs=organizational citizenship behaviors
Transformational Leadership and Trust (Zhu, et al., 2013)
“These findings suggest that it is affective trust, which is developed through the mutual exchange of concern and care between the follower and leader, and not cognitive trust, which is developed through the follower's instrumental evaluation of the leader's personal characteristics, that translates transformational leadership into positive work outcomes for the organization.
These findings provide support for social exchange based explanations as to how trust engenders positive work outcomes amongst followers, and are important given the lack of research into how affective and cognitive dimensions of trust influence the response of followers to transformational leadership…”
Leadership Implications (Zhu, et al., 2013)
“Although the results of the present study establish that transformational leadership plays an important role in engendering positive work outcomes through the development of affective trust, managers should be aware that it may have a negative impact on job performance through eliciting higher levels of cognitive trust.
Organizations should not simply seek to promote transformational leadership behavior without seeking to understand how it may impact on the development of affective and cognitive trust. Managers, especially those who tend to be more task-oriented, should be aware of the potential downside that might exist through developing high levels of cognitive trust…”
Leadership Implications (Zhu, et al., 2013)
“In addition, in order to decrease the chance of cognitive trust in negatively impacting follower job performance, leaders need to encourage their followers to accept personal responsibility and take the initiative rather than to over rely on the ability of the leader in accomplishing group tasks.
At the same time, it is also beneficial for leaders to clarify each follower's job roles and set goals for each follower in the group (Locke & Latham, 1990), which is posited to positively influence follower job performance…”
Leader, Trust & Responsibility
Questions for the consultant to consider:
Does the leader act in a fashion that promotes the development of trust?
Is it affective trust or cognitive trust?
Does the employee (follower) also have a developed sense of personal responsibility?
How is empowerment fostered and is questioning (constructively) encouraged?
Next Steps?
Learning to understand relationship dynamics (beyond just issues of trust) is obviously key for a leadership consultant
Being able to put our own affect “on the shelf” while we consult is a concept I talk about often. The next step is to be able to do that but then take it “off the shelf” as necessary, as a strategic move not as a reactive one, to help in making connections with the leaders (and now the followers) we may be called on to help.
65
Next Steps
Application of the concepts considered above becomes more “real” when we consider an actual consulting situation.
Next best thing: Speculating in a paper how it would look applied. Speaking of which—I am looking forward to seeing everyone’s papers soon (remember the due date please).
“See you” on the discussion board—One of the things we are going to consider is how what Liu, Lian & Loi (2012) have to say about “the dark side of leadership” fits in with the other concepts covered this week. Thank you!
66
References
Kellerman, B. (2012). The end of leadership. New York, NY: HarperBusiness.
Liu, D., Lian, H. & Loi, R. (2012). The dark side of leadership: A three-level investigation of the cascading effect of abusive supervision on employee creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 55(5), 1187-1212.
Malakyan, P. (2014). Followership in leadership studies: A case of leader-follower trade approach. Journal of Leadership Studies, 7(4), 6-22.
67
References
Tee, E., Paulsen, N. & Ashkanasy, N. (2013). Revisiting followership through a social identity perspective: The role of collective follower emotion and action. The Leadership Quarterly, 24 (6), 902-918.
Zhu, W., Newman, A., Miao, Q. & Hooke, A. (2013). Revisiting the mediating role of trust in transformational leadership effects: Do different types of trust make a difference? The Leadership Quarterly, 24(1), 94-105.
68
