Effective communication in an organization is dependent on the work of the organization, the interdependencies among its employees, relationships with other organizations, and the availability and use of communication channels. Introduction of new communication technologies into an organization's environment can influence policies, procedures, and communication patterns (Burkardt & Brass, 1990; Lewis, 1991); lead to resizing and restructuring of the organization (Fulk & DeSanctis, 1999); have unanticipated consequences in respect to existing organization design (Orlikowski, Yates, Okamura, & Fujimoto, 1999); and extend the range of communication and decision making options available (Huber, 1990).

Effects of the use of technology may include accelerating information flow, increasing efficiency through saving time, and regularizing the flow of information among larger groups. In many cases, electronic communication has been used to decrease coordination costs, facilitate scheduling, distribute task assignments, report accomplishments, disseminate information, and to promote awareness of organizational events, accomplishments, or announcements (Sproull & Kiesler, 1991).

An investigation of communication in organizations may include a communication audit or an information systems analysis that includes a review of the systems, tools, and templates that are used to exchange information within an organization (Gayeski, 2000). Traditionally, communication audits have addressed areas such as channel and message factors; the flow of formal and informal messages; the communication role an individual plays in an organizational communication system; perceptions of information adequacy; or the feelings of membership and identity an employee may have with the organization (Goldhaber, 1993). Although these remain important considerations, there is an ongoing interest in the role played by the introduction and use of communication technologies.

This report describes work conducted to examine the use of communication channels, purposes of communication, and uses of communication technology at the Austin History Center (AHC) during the Spring of 2001, using a communication audit approach.

The AHC is the research and local history repository for the City of Austin, operating as a part of the Austin Public Library system. Currently, AHC employs 19 staff members and operates in a single location. The majority of employees have a designated work location, however, access to technology is not uniform.

The history of technology use at the AHC shows that as early as 1991, a few AHC staff members had access to the City of Austin mainframe computing resources, including the DEC Electronic mail (email) system. Since that time, usage of city computing resources has expanded to include email accounts for 85% of the AHC staff and voice mail accounts for 64%. Only 68% of the staff have telephones on their desks. Two fax machines are available for staff use. Limited Internet access for staff was introduced in 1994, expanding between 1994 and 1999 to include a public website and intranet site. The Austin Public Library intranet site was launched in 1999 and during the next year became a site for the distribution of The Update, the Library employee communication bulletin. In 2001, the electronic clipboard was initiated providing communications among AHC employees concerning ongoing projects and activities. Most recently, the Director of Libraries stated that all employees will have email accounts in place as soon as possible.

To assess the purposes and patterns of communication at AHC as well as examine the uses of communication technology, the following research questions were asked:

RQ 1: How do employees describe communication at AHC?

RQ 2: What communication channels are used at AHC?

RQ 3: Who are the communication partners at AHC?

RQ 4: What communication tasks are performed at AHC?

RQ 5: What influences the adoption of new communication technologies and selection of channels at AHC?

Three domains of literature are relevant to this study. The first examines the history, benefits, and outcomes derived from the use of communication audits; the second involves the diffusion of innovations within an organization, while the third addresses the factors that influence the selection or use of media.

A communication audit is an organizational communication measurement system. Greenbaum pioneered the first large scale development effort in the 1970s to address the lack of standardized procedures for assessing organizational communication systems. The goal of the project was to develop a large sample size, use measurements that could be replicated, provide predictive value to those interested in communication effectiveness in organizations, and build data stores that could be studied over time to provide a basis for comparative analysis (Goldhaber, Dennis, Richetto, & Wioo, 1984). The resulting audit developed by the International Communication Association (ICA) included five measurement tools: (a) questionnaire survey, (b) interviews, (c) network analysis, (d) communication experience analysis, and (e) communication diary (Goldhaber, 1993).

Results from early communication audits found that employees: (a) want to receive more than send information, (b) want a greater opportunity to voice complaints and evaluate superiors, (c) want more involvement with decision-making including more follow-up from information sent to top management, and (d) want more job related information from immediate supervisors. Employees tend to get more information than they want from the grapevine in the organization which they perceive as fast, frequently used, but not an accurate source of information. No general relationship between demographic variables and communication variables was found (Goldhaber et al., 1984).

An understanding of the benefits of the communication audit may also be gained by reviewing some of the changes and improvements made by organizations as a result of findings from the audits. According to Goldhaber (1993), some of the following recommendations have been implemented by clients as a result of audit findings: (a) adding new formal channels of communication (including communication technology); (b) development and disclosure of communication goals, policies, and objectives; (c) developing methods to improve informal communication; (d) changing the amount of information communicated about human resources, opportunities, and training; (e) improving upward input solicited by top management; (f) adding or shifting staff resources; (g) periodic monitoring and evaluation of the company's external image as perceived by significant publics.

The communication audit can be used to help organizations better understand their communication environment, provide the organization with increased awareness of current communication behavior, help remove or prevent communication barriers, and can be particularly useful in making comparisons of communication patterns in the case of restructuring. In addition, a communication audit may address communication between management and employees, interpersonal communication, public relations activity, and overall communication effectiveness (Ellis, Barker, Potter, & Pridgeon, 1993). Using the findings from a communication audit, it is possible to assess the impact of ongoing programs, identify key communication groupings, target new communication training programs, and determine what environmental or structural factors affect the organization's communication system (Goldhaber, 1993).

Although several of the changes and improvements implemented by participating organizations involved the adoption or expansion of technology, the standard ICA audit does not specifically address communication technology use within an organization. Due to budgetary constraints at AHC, the high cost of implementing new technologies, and the prevalence of technology’s use in organizations, the focus of this audit was specifically to address the uses and effects of technology on internal communication at the AHC.

According to Rogers (1995), the rate of adoption of an innovation is the speed at which members of a social system adopt the new idea or technology and may be affected by the individual’s perceptions of the characteristics of the innovation itself. New innovations must be perceived as being better than the idea they supercede and consistent with the existing values, needs, and previous experiences of the adopters. Other factors may include the perception of difficulty or ease of use, the ability to experiment with the new innovation, and the degree to which the results are observable and recognized by others.

Rogers explains time as an important element in the adoption process. This dimension follows the process through which an individual first learns of an innovation through the decision to adopt or reject it, the earlyness or lateness of the adoption, as well as the rate of adoption within a system. This process can occur at either the individual or organizational level and involves the states of (a) knowledge in which the decision making unit acquires awareness of the innovation and an understanding of how it functions; (b) persuasion in which a favorable or unfavorable impression of the innovation is formed; (c) decision in which the choice is made to adopt or reject the innovation; (d) implementation (or re-invention) when the innovation is put to use; and (e) confirmation when reinforcement is sought for an innovation decision that has been made.

The rate of adoption may be different for the same innovation within different social systems. These systems may be formal, as in the case of a governmental agency, or informal, as in interpersonal networks. These systems may be influenced by the norms that exist for members of the social system, as well as opinion leaders and change agents acting within the system (Conner, 1992). Choices to adopt or reject may be made at the individual level, as a result of a consensus among members of a system, or by a few powerful or knowledgeable individuals operating within the system. In other cases, choices to adopt or reject can only be made by individuals after a system wide decision has been made. Fastest rates of adoption are those in which authority decisions are involved.

Other explanations of technology adoption and use have been offered by Orlikowski et al. (1999) with the explanation of technology structuring. This explains that users can be influenced by their interpretation of their work, organization, and technology, as well as access to technological resources. This may lead to users shaping the technology over time to allow for customized adaptations. The initial use is more likely to be successful when promoted or endorsed by an influential individual within the organization.

Researchers have found an abundant array of available communication channels from which to choose. Daft and Lengel (1984) proposed that media selection is linked to uncertainty or the amount of equivocality confronting the person. To communicate equivocal information, "information rich" channels will be rationally selected for use. They described a hierarchy of media richness spanning from the highest level of face-to-face communication, followed by video-conferencing, telephone, email, memos, and letters, with flyers and bulletins described as the most lean. Later research from Trevino, Daft, and Lengel (1990) identified three factors that influence managers' media choices including the (a) equivocality of the message, (b) contextual determinants, and (c) symbolic meaning conveyed by the choice of a particular medium. According to their research, managers are more likely to choose a richer medium such as face-to-face communication when communicating highly equivocal messages, negotiating meanings, and creating solutions. Their choices are also influenced by the distance from the communication partner or partners as well as the time pressures associated with the message delivery or response. A critical mass of users is also a necessary component of choice.

Steinfield (1986) found that access to communication partners had an effect on media choice. People were more likely to use email to communicate with people outside their own workgroup, as access to immediate co-workers could be accomplished more easily face-to-face. Markus (1990) extended the concept to include access to the media itself, such as access to a computer, an account, and a network, as well as the number of other active users of a particular medium.

Markus, Bikson, El-Shinnawy, and Soe (1992) found evidence that email (a lean medium) was used by managers in organizations to communicate equivocal information, and suggested the need to consider a variety of factors beyond media richness. According to their findings, managers may use email as a tool to handle the sheer quantity of messages received, viewing it as a personal convenience. Access to the technology itself was also a factor, influencing the managers' choice to use the technology to send messages as well as influencing the choices of others in communicating with the managers.

While mixed support has been found for rational choice theories, others have offered explanations based on experience and knowledge (King & Xia, 1999), as well as the social influence of others (Fulk, Schmitz, & Steinfield, 1990). According to social influence theory, media choices may be influenced by comments from others, vicarious learning experiences, technology use by others, and existing group norms.

The sample for the study included the nineteen employees (males = 5, females = 14 ) of the AHC. Management of the AHC agreed to the study and also exercised preliminary approval of the survey instrument and focus group protocol. Of the employees, 68% are full time (N=13), with the average length of employment being slightly more than three years. Thirty-one percent of the employees hold a postgraduate degree, with all employees having completed at least some college work. Not all employees currently have access to each of the technologies listed in the survey. Table 1 shows the distribution of access.

Table 1

Survey questionnaires were distributed to all nineteen employees of the AHC. Of these, thirteen surveys were returned and used as the basis for the study, yielding a response rate of 68%. In addition to the surveys, focus groups were attended by 74% of (N=14) of the AHC employees.

The survey questionnaire used was an adaptation of the communication audit developed by the International Communication Association (ICA) in 1971. The validity of the ICA Communication Audit scales was based on three items: (a) self-evident relationship to organizational communication, (b) their ability to predict organizational outcomes, (c) consistency with previously validated measures of organizational communication (Goldhaber, 1993). Adaptations of the original ICA audit were based on the model used by the University of Texas Communication Assessment Team in 1999, incorporating a directed focus on the use of technology within the AHC organization.

Draft survey questions were reviewed by AHC Public Services Supervisor and were adjusted to (a) meet the needs of AHC for information and (b) adjust terminology to be specific to the vernacular used at AHC.

The resulting survey questionnaire included seven sections: (a) amount of information sent and received from others on work related topics; (b) amount of information sent and received now and the amounts preferred using specific channels; (c) timeliness of information received from key sources; (d) communication channel preferred for types of tasks; (e) specific communication partners with whom information is sent and received; and (f) quality and timeliness of information sent and received from communication partners. The final section requested demographic information includng length of employment, level of education, and gender. Broad demographic questions were posed with careful attention to the guarantee of confidentiality, particularly since one of the researchers is a member of the staff at AHC.

Given the small size of the group, the results were not expected to be gereralizable to a larger population. However, the data was expected to objectively yield information identifying current communication patterns at AHC.

Focus group interviews are particularly useful when investigating decisions that people make in a social context where people can consider their own views in the context of the views of others (Patton, 1990). It is also valuable to combine interview data with questionnaire data when performing communication audits to provide employees with an opportunity to discuss issues that were not directly addressed on the questionnaire (Scott, Shaw, Timmerman, Volker, & Quinn, 1999).

Two focus group interviews were conducted with AHC staff during regular staff meeting times (N=14). Each session contained three sections: an introduction and icebreaker to bring an initial framing to the discussion; a guided discussion to learn more about the relationships between communication tasks and communication channels within AHC; and a nominal group technique that addressed the question of problem areas and practical suggestions for improvement of the communication systems. To keep her position at AHC from inhibiting the group's discussion, the staff researcher did not participate in the focus group.

Descriptive statistics were calculated for all sections of the survey questionnaire, with discrepancy (difference between current and desired states) value calculated for section 1 (Information Received and Information Sent), section 2 (Communication Channel Use), section 5 (Sources of Information, and section 6 (Quality of Communication). For section 1, a rotated component analysis of the discrepancy values (eigenvalues greater than one) yielded three factors for Information Received (accounting for 63% of the variance): global information, personal information, and policy and procedure information. Factor analysis on Information Sent yielded three factors, but all three values were too low to merit further consideration.

Discrepancy values from section 2 were subjected to factor analysis yielding three primary groups identified as traditional media, electronic media, and one-on-one communication. These factors accounted for 97% of the variance. Group 1, traditional media, included group meetings, phone, voice mail, and clipboard. Group 2, electronic, included email, public website, intranet website, and The Update electronic newsletter. The third group was one-on-one communication. Limited responses for pagers, cell phones and mobile phones, policies and procedures, written memos and notes, and fax, failed to load into a factor analysis clearly or definitively (see appendix Table S2 for those that did load).for use in reporting.

Data from the focus groups were analyzed using two iterations of coding, with a focus on motivations for communication channel selection and the groups’ views of communication and communication technologies. Coding enabled the researchers to recognize qualitative data, and interpret the data set through making selections from the data (Coffey & Atkinson, 1996).

Research question one concerns the concepts of communication system among employees at AHC. Focus group data indicated that the AHC staff views communication tasks as being interpersonal in nature: may be expressed through a variety of channels; includes sharing information, ideas, and feelings; functions as a way of getting a clear understanding between people; and provides for coordination of activities. They are aware of the need for clarity in communication and the importance of the receiver as well as the sender's message.

In their list of images of ideal communication systems, both focus groups were concerned with the quality of communication and how that communication was accomplished. General trends concerning the quality of communication included a high value for honesty, respect, openness, understanding, access, and consistency. Other feedback addressed the means of communication including universal access to communication devices and communication services (such as email and voice mail), and consensus on how to best use the communication technologies. Additional feedback addressed a desire for increased two-way communication.

The images of ideal communication processes indicated their desire for higher levels of job task efficiencies, adequate levels of staffing, and quality in management. The groups also expressed images of higher efficiencies in communication, using words such as "relevant," "quickly," and "cogent".

Research question two examined the patterns of communication channel use at AHC, while research question six examined channel selection criteria. Results from the questionnaire indicate most information is conveyed through the use of the traditional channel of group meetings (mean 3.85; median 4.00; mode 4.00; SD .80 shown in Appendix B, Table S2.1), with electronic mail (email) used as a source for nearly the same amount (mean 3.70; median 4.0; mode 4.0; SD 1.25 shown in Appendix B, Table S2.1). The strongest indication of a desire for less use of a particular channel was for group meetings, a traditional media, (discrepancy mean .54, median 1.00, mode 0.00, SD .75 shown in Appendix B, Table S2.1), while there is a slight preference for more use of email (discrepancy mean -.30, mode 0.00, mode -1.00, SD .94 shown in Appendix B, Table S2.1). Limited responses to questions concerning pagers and cellular/wireless phones did not provide adequate data for meaningful consideration.

Of the remaining channels, the electronic newsletter was indicated as carrying the least amount of information (mean 2.50, median 2.50, mode 1.00, SD 1.35 shown in Appendix B, Table S2.1), yet was indicated as having the strongest desire for more use (discrepancy mean -0.40, median -0.50, mode -2.00, SD 1.20 shown in Appendix B, Table S2.1).

Staff views email as their most timely channel (mean 4.30, median 4.50, mode 5.00, SD .82 shown in Appendix B, Table S2.1), followed by telephone (mean 3.90, median 4.00, mode 4.00, SD .57 shown in Appendix B, Table S2.1) and voice mail (mean 3.86, median 4.00, mode 4.00, SD .69 shown in Appendix B, Table S2.1). Mobile phone and pager channels were viewed as untimely or very untimely (median less than 3.00).

Overall, results from the questionnaire indicated that employees want to receive more information through electronic channels such as email, public website, intranet website, and The Update electronic newsletter, and they want less information through traditional channels such as group meetings, telephone, voice mail, and clipboards. The only exception in the data is with desired information received through electronic clipboard, and this may be explained by a lack of awareness of that channel.

Evaluation of the focus groups' data indicate that staff members are aware that they choose specific channels when initiating communication with other staff members.

Channel choices were influenced by time, including the urgency of getting information to or from a recipient, and the time involved in composing and conducting the communication. Email was viewed as both being an efficient method to focus and limit time spent on communication as well as being more time intensive than telephone or informal face-to-face meetings. The availability of communication recipients also had an impact on choice. Choices are made based on whether the recipient is working on the same shift and is immediately available or is working on a different shift and not immediately available. In these situations, either asynchronous communication or traditional communication occurred through the use of written memos/letters/notes.

Results from summary variables were consistent with these findings and are shown below in Table 2. The calculated mean for the amount of traditional communication channels use is higher than for electronic or one-on-one meetings, as summarized in Table 2. However, the standard deviation for the amount of use of electronic communication channels is higher than traditional channels and one-on-one meetings indicating more variations in use of the electronic channels. Calculations indicate that traditional channels are the most used, and electronic channel use is the more varied between individuals within the organization.

Table 2

Research question three examined the patterns between communication partners at AHC. Summary variables were created based on the proximity of the communication partners, classified as being those within the AHC building, those in the Library hierarchy, and other communication partners. Summary data patterns are summarized in Table 3. Staff sends and receives the highest levels of communication from those communication partners who are physically proximate; AHC Partners.

Table 3

Data also indicates that staff members receive greater amounts of information than they send, with the single exception being communication with Library Administration-Volunteer Services. With this partner, staff receives little information. A third finding is that the least amount of information is sent by AHC staff members to the Library Administration-Director & Associate Director. The highest amounts of information sent is to AHC Immediate Supervisor partners. Finally, very little information is sent or received from Support Groups and Organizations.

In general, staff members want to receive more communication across the board. (Note: Table S3 in the appendix indicates a strong desire for an increased amount of information from Library Administration partners). with the exception of communication from Library Administration – Training from whom they want the same amount or slightly less (discrepancy mean .35, median 0.00, mode 0.00, SD .74). See detailed data in Appendix B, Table S2.1.

Research question four examined the patterns of communicating about work related task. In the questionnaire, section four examined four categories of tasks: routine job information (Job), problems and solutions (P&S), requests for information (RI), and activity coordination (AC). For most types of communication tasks, staff members convey information in meetings. Exceptions include making announcements or setting or changing meeting or training times which use electronic channels. One-on-one meetings are shown to have the highest use when communicating about problems and solutions, requests for information, and activity coordination.

Descriptive data for channel preferences based on communication tasks categories grouped under traditional, electronic, and one-on-one categories is shown in Table 4:

Table 4

Factor analysis on section three of the questionnaire identified three summary variables of communication tasks: Global Information (questions 6-10), Personal Information (questions 2-3, 12) and Policy and Procedure Information (questions 4, 5, 13).

AHC staff receives more policy and procedure information and personal information than information that is global in nature (See Table 5). The discrepancy mean of negative 1.22 indicates that employee's strongest desire is for more global information. The amount of information received on personal information and policies and procedures has a low discrepancy between currently received and desired.

Table 5

The final research question examined the influences affecting the rate of adoption of new technologies at AHC. In the focus groups, staff members were varied in their reported adoption of new communication channels. The survey data also indicates a larger variation in communication technology use (see Table 2, Appendix B). For example, only six of the respondents answered questions about electronic clipboard use. Two of those not answering indicated in write-in comments that they did not know of the existence of this channel.

Length of employment at AHC appears to influence adoption of new communication channels. Electronic channel use is linked to years of experience in AHC, with experienced staff reporting more likely to report a higher use of the electronic channels, particularly use of the electronic clipboard. They also indicate a smaller discrepancy between the current amount of use and their desired amount of use of electronic channels overall. The entire staff, regardless of their years of experience, desire more use of electronic communication channels other than electronic mail (see Table 6).

Length of employment was reported using three categories, up to three years, three to ten years, and beyond ten years. Of the eleven responses shown, 55% fell into the second category (N=6), with 45% being employed from one to three years (N=5).

Table 6

Findings show that staff members indicate a desire for additional information to be sent and received via electronic means, particularly email. Email is indicated as being a timely source of information and is used as frequently as group meetings as a source of information. The main differences concern employees’ attitudes towards the two media. Although group meetings carry the highest amount of information for AHC staff, these meetings are the least desired communication channel, with a strong preference shown for increased use of email. These numbers remained high even with the lack of universal access to email accounts. This finding, combined with information revealed in the focus groups about the attitudes concerning email use, reflect the symbolic nature of email access, with the staff indicating its access as a form of recognition and status. Positive results should be seen with the implementation of email accounts for all employees, as this research indicates that usage should remain high and an increase in morale could result. Management could use this opportunity to encourage electronic communication for conveying information, especially routine job information, as well as consciously reducing group meeting time spent conveying information that could be available electronically.

Employees also have a desire for more information from Library Administration, who should be encouraged to initiate and maintain increased communication, particularly about Volunteer Services and Public Relations. The exception concerns information received about training, as employees indicated a desire for less information on that topic. Communication with those in close proximity appears to be at an appropriate level.

One-on-one meetings, group meetings, and email are seen as effective channels for discussing problems and solutions and coordinating activities. Although staff members express some concern about discussing complex issues through the use of email, they found it useful for record retention and use as an audit trail.

Another area that could be more beneficial is the use of the electronic clipboard and electronic newsletter as means for providing current information and discussing problems and solutions. Results from both survey data and focus groups indicated a low level of awareness for this channel, with a high level of interest in increased use. Recommendations include announcements through both traditional and electronic channels to raise awareness of this new communication avenue. Part of the challenge in the diffusion of new technologies involves the knowledge and awareness of the communication channel itself. Only through this awareness can evaluation and potential adoption take place Once awareness has been achieved, next steps would include providing training and opportunities to use the technology.

Findings indicate the AHC staff has a proactive view concerning overall communication and are sensitive to the communication requirements of the receivers of their messages. They indicate a strong awareness of the interpersonal nature of their communication and differentiate between communication channels and content of the messages conveyed. Staff concerns go beyond the use of technology to issues of openness, appreciation, respect, and equality.

This study indicates that the lack of technological tools may have a relationship with perceptions of lack of respect and equal standing in the organization. In the same way that teleworkers may perceive themselves as "left out," because they are not physically present in the workplace, employees who have fewer points of access to communication channels may perceive themselves to be left out (Scott & Timmerman 1999). This digital office divide is worthy of further study.

Results from this communication audit mirror the findings from early communication audits (Goldhaber et al., 1984) in that (a) AHC staff members report that they receive more information than they send (b) want a greater opportunity to evaluate the performance of their superiors (c) want more information about Library and AHC decisions that affect their jobs, and (d) in general more information is wanted overall. These data indicate that sufficient information is being received from immediate supervisors.

The researchers are confident of the results presented here, but due to the size and non-randomness of the sample, statistical tests were not run using these data. The study reflects only 68% response rate at the AHC. Further study at the AHC should encourage fuller participation.

In future study with the AHC, definitions of the terminology used should be offered in advance and it is recommended that an assessment to determine which categories of staff have access to what tools in the organization be conducted prior to the delivery of the questionnaire. The survey instrument may have lacked a clear definition of several communication channels, thus resulting in some responses being ignored or misinterpreted. The researchers recommend that the focus group precede the delivery of the questionnaire.

One area that has been shown to be of interest is the concept of the digital divide as it may exist within organizations. Not only is this a concern for employee's communication, it also may represent the perception of a power differential among employees, and could have an effect on employee satisfaction and retention. Another concern is the methodological process of extending the communication audit to include technology. There is a strong possibility that results gained through this research could have benefited by an initial audit of the level of individual employee's access to technology. An awareness of the varying levels of access may have allowed for a more thorough study of the impact of technology use or deprivation.

This study found additional empirical evidence for theories of communication channel selection. The data shows some support for communication channel selection based on (a) equivocality of the message, (b) contextual determinants, and (c) symbolic meaning conveyed by the choice of a particular medium. AHC staff reported a preference to use richer communication channels for equivocal messages and the use of electronic channels at AHC is symbolic of organizational status. In addition, AHC staff indicated that channel selection is at least partially based on their distance from the communication partners, and on time pressures associated with message delivery or response.

This study represents a communication assessment of a small group of employees working in a single location. The Austin History Center could, however, be considered a subgroup of a larger entity, the Austin Public Library.

As many communication audits examine larger organizations that may operate from multiple locations, it may be of interest to examine the similarities or differences that may exist when the majority of employees are operating in close proximity to one another within the larger organization. The Austin Public Library may want to consider conducting a communication audit as a large organization with multiple locations or consider conducting a number of subgroup audits similar to what was conducted at the Austin History Center.

References