Thomas Friedman on the Flattening of the World - Research Proposal Example

OUTSOURCING AND OFFSHORING: HOW THE GLOBALIZED WORLD IS FLATTENED Thomas Friedman on the Flattening of the World Thomas Friedman outlines his analysis of technological and global breakthroughs and changes of the 21st century in his book, The World is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty First Century. He analyzed significant global changes brought out by globalization and the emerging changes that emerged along with it. His discussion is presented in a metaphorical way, in which the world is viewed as “flat” or leveled in terms of commerce and competition, one in which all competitors are of equal opportunity and footing – as in a level playing field (Friedman, 2005). A similar shift of perception is required from countries, companies, and people in believing that the world is round, not flat – figuratively, at least – if they opt to become competitive in a global market where regional, historical, and geographical divisions are increasingly becoming irrelevant. Friedman’s recounts of a journey to Bangalore, India are significant to mention in this paper, as he realized how tremendous globalization has changed core economic concepts (Bass, 2005). Globalization is suggested to have created a playing field in which the world is flattened, thereby allowing all participants to level off with one another and participate equally in the global market. He suggests that the world is “flat,” in a manner where competitive playing fields are leveled between industrial and emerging markets, which is a product of a convergence of workflow software and of personal computer with fiber-optic micro cable (ibid). He further termed this period Globalization 3.0, as differentiated from Globalization 1.0 in which the main protagonists were countries and governments, and Globalization 2.0 in which global integration is led by multinational companies (Friedman, 2005). Friedman indicates that the world is increasingly and inevitably becoming one, and if handled rightly, everyone on earth is trailed toward being better off. He describes forces that flattened the world, two of which are cited in this paper and are further discussed. Two “World Flatteners” and Reasons Why Change Continues In this paper, the two world flatteners that will be discussed are outsourcing and offshoring, which Friedman includes in his book, The World is Flat as two of the ten aspects/factors for global market change in the globalization trend. Outsourcing Friedman argues that outsourcing, which means, “certain tasks go elsewhere,” allows companies to split their service and manufacturing activities into components, each of which working in the most efficient and cost-effective manner (Friedman, 2005). Outsourcing refers to the use of resources outside an organization, which generally delegates non-core activities to an external identity (White and Tastle, 2006). Samuelson (n. d.) argues that “outsourcing is the process in which jobs in America, Britain, or Germany become much lower-paying in India, China, or Mexico.” An example of this is the natural evolution of the automotive operation in which almost all parts of the car is made by the manufacturer (ibid). Hence, the outsourcing concept has been around for quite sometime, even during the American Revolution in which Hessian mercenaries where hired to fight for them. Outsourcing gave away its biggest boost by hyper-competent and affordable contributions by Indian technicians in initially solving the Y2K computer problems. At present, outsourcing continues to change the way companies look and operate around the world, which sees through a new wave that is somewhat different, with IT job made up the first major wave of outsourced labor. More companies are sending abroad payroll, secretarial, and other jobs of “back end office” nature, indicating the flow of business process outsourcing (Bortnicker, 2008). However, outsourcing is not solely a policy of big corporations, but of individuals as well. There are now circumstances in which people hire executive assistants from foreign countries in their aim to accomplish just anything. Again, the concept was popularized by Thomas Friedman in which he talked about one company in The World is Flat, Brickwork India, specializing in overseas executive assistants (Friedman, 2005). There is a seemingly preponderance of jobs that are being outsourced to overseas locations The Ross Perot for example, is a company that outsource their payroll generation, management, and reporting for companies, so that they will be able to focus their full resources on core activities (Bortnicker, 2008). At present, the tremendous changes caused by globalization on how companies manage their resources brought about an option in which organizations may outsource at least some of their functions such as the security requirements, and custodial services that may be outsourced to a local security company and to a company that cleans buildings, respectively. Outsourcing can make the loads of work lighter and may prompt the company to focus on the core activities of their organization. This ability, along with cost cutting, has generally been the main benefits of organization in relation to outsourcing (ibid). Friedman emphasized that with the cabling of the Indian continent, massive offshore outsourcing with diverse tasks have taken place, and more of it is expected to follow (Friedman, 2005). In this view, American company started to flock to India and the Philippines for technology support, as well as to Singapore, China, Korea, and Vietnam for industrial workers (White and Tastle, 2006). The concept of outsourcing involves the transfer of a non-core task from one company to another, specializing on such task, with an objective that such task will be performed more effectively and efficiently. A survey conducted in 1998 presented significant reasons that prompt companies to outsource. They include reducing and controlling operating costs, improving company focus, gaining access to world-class capabilities, free internal resources for other purposes, internal unavailability of resources, accelerating reengineering benefits, making capital funds available, risk sharing, and cash infusion (Outsourcing Institute, 1998). It is also imperative to recognize factors for successful outsourcing, such as alignment to business strategy, management support, culture, infrastructure, contracts, strategic partnership, governance, and economics (White and Tastle, 2006 in Fjermestad and Saitta, 2005). The era of globalization has created significant key roles for foreign and intra-firm outsourcing. Low-cost foreign outsourcing has proved to attract several firms, both acting as a multinational enterprise or as independent companies (Bardhan and Jaffee, 2004). The factors that lead for outsourcing to become successful are apparently also the reasons for outsourcing to continue even after the publication of Friedman’s The World is Flat. What Friedman saw was the future which globalization has put into onset, slowly but surely materializing at present into the dissolution of geographical, regional, and historical barriers into cooperating bodies toward participatory business. Globalization has been the key concept of this participatory business, delineating all barriers that used to govern countries of the world. With the global market now requiring people and nations to function in leverage, a flattened arena of market availability and functioning is shared by different countries regardless of economic status, regional origin, and culture. It is apparent that outsourcing has continued for long and remained true to the foresights of Friedman because of its eventual necessity in the market development in the globalized market. On the other hand, a different view of outsourcing is put forward by those who are against it and the globalization trend. Paul Samuelson (n. d.) believes that developed states such as America have seen to improve on costs through outsourcing, but this cannot be guaranteed in the end. Americans have been uneasy over their jobs and wages because of the advent of outsourcing, which takes away the jobs from home and provide them to the outsourced company in India, China, and the Philippines. Hence, China and India are seen to have emerged on the strength of low wages, skilled workers, and a rising technological innovation, all needed in outsourcing. It is a general rule that companies that opt to outsource seek to realize benefits and address the issues of cost savings, cost restructuring, quality improvement, knowledge, contract, operational expertise, capacity management, risk management, and focus and core competency (Norwood, et al., 2006). It is a general rule that all companies aim for profit, and one effective way to ensure this is by decreasing the labor costs of a product by employing low-wage workers. Many U.S. firms are now contracting out in developing countries in which workers there may be paid lower than their American counterpart is. However, some argue that outsourcing of jobs exploits the lower-paid workers and a contrary view holds that more people benefit from it through employment. Nike, Inc. and its Outsourcing Strategy Nike, Inc., the largest supplier of athletic shoes in the world, outsources 100 percent of its shoe production and manufactures key technical components only of its Nike Air system (Quinn and Hillmer, 1995). Nike is in a production system that is technology-and-fashion-intensive - just how athletic footwear is characterized, requiring high flexibility in both production and marketing processes (ibid). Maximum value is adopted by the company by concentrating on preproduction activities that highly involve research and development, as well as post-production activities such as marketing, distribution, and sales, which are altogether linked (ibid). Nike, Inc. utilizes a carefully developed on-site expatriate program in order to coordinate with its foreign-based suppliers and even opts to outsource the advertising component of its marketing program to Wieden & Kennedy, making it drive high on top of the recognition scale. Through most of the past decades, Nike was able to grow at a compounded 20 percent growth rate (Quinn and Hillmer, 1995). Nike, Inc. maximizes returns on internal resources by concentrating investments and energies on what it does best as a shoe enterprise. Its well-developed core competencies provide formidable barriers against present and future competitors that seek to expand into the company’s area of product interest, hence, protecting the strategic advantages of market share. Its greatest leverage is the utilization of external suppliers, innovations, investments, and specialized professional capabilities. Its adoption of outsourcing strategies is found to decrease risks, shorten production cycle, lower investment, and create better responsiveness to customer needs, resulting in tremendous sales and recognition scale. In this way, Nike is able to leverage its resources. Outsourcing has resulted in tremendous results for Nike, as it is able to concentrate its own resources on a set of core competencies where it can provide unique value for customers and at the same time achieve definable preeminence for its growth (Amey, et al., n.d.). In addition, it has strategically outsourced other activities involving several traditionally considered areas, integral to any organization for which it has neither a special capability nor a critical strategic need (ibid). The principle of outsourcing in Nike involves designing their products in the U.S. and sub-contracting manufacturers in India, China, Indonesia, and South Korea who in turn will do the rest of the production process (Amey, et al., n. d.). Bringing jobs and money to developing nations is viewed as a positive stance, specifically for workers who work in a sub-contracting manufacturer, like Nike, for outsourcing. The Nike Corporation has appeared to be the target of much of the animosity associated with the globalization process, which has caused increased monetary, commodity, and information flows across the world (Amey, et al., n.d.). The problems encountered by the enterprise in terms of outsourcing include circumventing U.S. law and placing the burden of responsibility upon the country of production wherein outsourcing activities take place (Klein, 2001). Moreover, the company encountered a worldwide scrutiny concerning labor practices, particularly on low wages and decided to transfer their production in another country, apparently a demonstration of what Friedman termed “offshoring” (ibid). One of the challenges it faced is actively discouraging outsourcing to unionized factories, with its initial stance of providing poor wages to workers (Amey, et al., n.d.). Poor young women in Indonesia manufacture Nike shoes and flock from their homes to the Nike factories for a wage 20 percent less than the set minimum physical need for a single adult, placed at around $2.25 per day (Christensen, n. d.). This would show that Nike’s factory workers in the outsourced country like Indonesia find it hard to get by. Moreover, it was estimated that $800, 000 in wages were taken by the company from these workers during the same period that it raked in a net profit of $1.4 billion (ibid). The process of outsourcing as utilized by Nike has apparently assured itself that the workers remain powerless, as the company continues to rake in big profits (Klein, 2001). However, Nike’s maintenance of low wages with workers even in its outsourcing techniques is compensated by its public education, to which a large part of its work has been dedicated (ibid). More recently, the company introduced No Sweat tags as opposed to using ‘sweat shops,’ a campaign that ensured continuous employment of the world’s leading advertising agencies in order to combat negative public perception. It may be noticed that Nike’s current problems directly involving low wages were only a continuation of its earlier trend involving labor practices. It is true that by outsourcing techniques, a company is able to share risks with an outsourcing firm, and the public perception against Nike in terms of low wages was somehow reduced by this sharing, alongside employing other strategies to unmark poor public perception. Through an outsourcing strategy, Nike’s labor costs has comprised 5 percent of its total product costs in which its biggest portion of operating costs such as research and development, logistics, product design, and marketing are still kept in the mother company (Yang, 2004). The advantages for Nike of outsourcing production to developing nations involve alleviating pressure to increase prices. This increase in prices is within the corresponding reputation of Nike shoes, being known as expensive. Apparently, outsourcing becomes a very basic and a usual business activity for huge firms when they need to look for new resources in a quest for maintaining competitive advantage. It is hence, clear that the world has flattened in terms of outsourcing. In the Nike experience, the strategy gave it an opportunity to outsource its workers from outside alongside portions of its operations; hence creating jobs for the outsourced company. Offshoring If outsourcing is the practice of subcontracting manufacturing work to outside companies or firms, offshoring is the practice of outsourcing, aiming to take advantage of the lower-cost labor in another country (Ho, et al., 2005). Friedman argues that offshoring, which indicates “whole factories or businesses go elsewhere,” is outsourcing to another country or another continent. There is currently a widespread movement of positions and corporate functions to offshore locations (White and Tastle, 2006). It is said that offshoring is indeed one of the symptoms of the expanding globalization process and involves transfer of certain services supporting the fundamental activity of a company (Nesterak and Hobora, 2004). With the advent of globalization, more and more European counties trail the path to offshore some or all of their operations. In this regard, foreign direct investment increases, which involve transfer of operating capacity for functions like production and transportation (Gampenrieder, 2006). Offshore strategies provide companies the capabilities to aim for distinctive, sustainable, and competitive advantages, which require relocation of operating capacity, as well as periodic adjustment (ibid). Apparently, the prevalence of offshoring in today’s businesses provide the advantages of cost reduction, growth of efficiency in management of resources, improved utilization of resources, and growth of competitiveness (Nesterak and Hobora, 2004). Friedman’s idea of dissolution of divisions – historical, geographical, and cultural – is apparently seen at present in the offshore process wherein important company tasks are transferred, such as telephone customer service, human resources management, or settlement of accounts of bank transactions to countries with quite different culture. Complete reconstruction of organizational structures through reduction of vertical links’ chain has taken place as both a cause and effect of offshoring (ibid). The considerations of international offshoring require two trends that call for attention – the rise of China as the world’s manufacturer and the rapid growth of traded services involving technology-intensive processes and employing high-paid white-collar workers (Trefler, 2005). Again, this is a demonstration of flattening of the world taking effect. Firms have yet to consider their sourcing possibilities in the advent of globalization, in which they have to be more competitive in the global transaction. International trade provides lower prices to consumers and at the same time offers new opportunities for producers – both workers and firms – in their quest for expansion into foreign markets (ibid). A good example of a nation that is now into offshoring is India, which was unheard of for exporting high-value services. At present, finding an Indian software programmer customizing sophisticated software applications for worldwide businesses has become a common scenario. This sight is only congruent to Friedman’s foresight of a flat world in which all nations are leveled in the global market, destroying all barriers that used to divide them such as race, culture, history, regional affiliation, and geography. A symbiotic relationship occurs in the offshoring process, since both ways are benefiting from it, in which transfer of jobs is definitely in the best interest of other countries as a rise in employment occurs, as well as in the financial best interest of the company initiating the offshoring (ibid). Offshoring became a means to reduce the burn rate of capital wherein new firms emerged as intermediaries, making it easier for small and medium–sized companies to send their work offshore. Further, the onset of computerization made work processes to be digitalized, giving way for routine, and work that is specifically broken into separable tasks by skill set (Aspray, et al., 2006). In ramping up the globalization knowledge, it is important to determine the two obvious types of offshoring - the offshore supplier model and the wholly owned captive center (Vashistha and Vashistha, 2004). Using an offshore supplier brings in advantages that are characteristic of offshore outsourcing, such as low cost and concentration on the core business of the firm (ibid). In this regard, the Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) relationship may be established, in which a single entity builds the entire offshore center and then transferred to another –usually the foreign buyer involved in the offshore activity. This offshore BOT used not to be existent prior to the advent of globalization, which is now prevalent in the global market. It is noteworthy to mention that developed nations are the primary countries that send work offshore, and the United States followed by United Kingdom are the largest offshorers, without disregarding other countries that send work offshore as well, such as Australia, India, Japan, and Korea (Aspray, et al., 2006). At present, Friedman’s foresight on offshore strategy has brought about four categories, such as (1) those having a large capacity of highly educated workers and have a low wage scale (e.g. India and China), (2) those having special language skills (e.g. Philippines), (3) those having geographic proximity, and (4) special high-end skills (e.g. Israel) (ibid). The field of information technology has rapidly called for the need to outsource, as it immediately saw the benefits that offshoring can provide to an IT company. There are certain activity areas in which offshoring produces cost reduction, thereby creating tremendous and advantageous benefits to the company. These are on the aspects of provision and costs of goods and services that are being purchased, introducing common procedures and reports, precise cost calculation in time approximate to a real one, reduction of production and sale costs, reduction of human resources costs, and flexibility of planning processes (Nesterak and Hobora, 2004). Apparently, change continues about offshoring even after Friedman’s The World is Flat due to the inevitability of reaching out to outside borders so that tasks may be lighter and the firm may focus on its core activities, such as the production or manufacturing process. Just like outsourcing, offshoring transfers integral jobs to other countries in the light of these purposes as the company threads toward a more effective global market system. The savings in costs and the enhanced efficiency of several firms in terms of offshoring activities have domestically emancipated resources for investment. Jobs significantly involved offering high-skilled services such as the functions of some banks and accounting firms, pharmaceutical companies, biotechnology, and other areas of the economy (Ho, et al., 2005). A more beneficial manner by which to view offshoring is in terms of its identifiable effects in which firms take advantage of its benefits while working to reduce real costs (ibid). Similarly, the effects of offshoring on the recipient country show significant data, such as the case of India, showing that both its economic policies and realities that serve to draw jobs from abroad have costs as well (ibid). Moreover, offshore relationships involve several types, and one fast growing one is one in which a third party, rather than the company itself, is the one building and maintaining the offshore presence. The move towards offshoring is apparently a natural progression aimed at either improving the profit margin to the third-party outsourcer or decreasing the cost to the client, or both of these (Vashistha and Vashistha, 2004). On the other hand, several recent press discussions have emphasized on the number of jobs lost to offshoring, leaving the workers in an offshorer unsecured with their own employment. Critics study this as a form of globalization itself, in which offshoring may somehow benefit the offshored country, with an aim for lower production costs through cheap labor. Friedman’s forecasts about globalization and flattening of the earth through offshoring remains true, in which leverage is established among participating countries and companies. The offshored nation is seen to become “more economically empowered” even with a low production cost and low labor cost, since that is better than no jobs at all. While this is happening among the developing nations, which are targets of offshore activities, the developed ones are unburdened with risks and costs. The world flattens in this concern. Accenture: Working on Offshore Activities Accenture, a British company, is an example of a business in which it allows its client companies to leverage low-priced labor in Eastern Europe and China, without having to go through the pains and risks of pioneering in those markets. In 2005, it employed 19, 000 people in China, India, and the Philippines with its offshore strategy. It has dramatically expanded its global delivery network by actively recruiting key locations throughout its global delivery network with the aim of defending and extending its position in the marketplace (Ilet, 2005). Its chief operating officer, Steve Rohleder, emphasized that if they get into a situation in which a specific location (e.g. India) has reached saturation from salary and cost structure standpoints, the company has the flexibility to grow a different location. This location is not limited to China or the Philippines alone, but may also be expanded in Eastern Europe and Latin America (ibid). In 2005, its net revenue for its fiscal third quarter year has mounted to $ 4.08bn, which was considered the highest in the company’s history (Ilet, 2005) – coinciding with its offshore efforts. Accenture gains economies of scale by servicing multiple clients from the same facilities or nearby and consequently accepts the risks of establishing offshore centers (ibid). Accenture is already using offshoring to reduce the costs of supporting their applications, reduce total cost ownership, and leverage the skills of their service providers so that the entire company may be consequently propelled toward high performance (Accenture, 2007). Application development and maintenance has been the biggest line item in Accenture’s IT budget, considering a central focus in its ongoing effort to drive cost out (ibid). Hence, in search of an immediate relief, the company has turned in to offshoring its IT work, in which labor arbitrage advantages has significantly caused rapid results. This is so since offshoring creates a high-value approach to application, built on a foundation of labor arbitrage (ibid). In its pursuit to reduce cost through offshoring, Accenture seeks for a high-value approach to application outsourcing. It believes that if companies want to attain high performance through an application outsourcing strategy, a fundamentally different operating model is a necessity. The company’s recent High Performance IT Research made pressures on the IT function more headstrong, such as creating greater value from IT investments, improving customer satisfaction, and delivering more business functionality faster. However, the cost savings from offshoring its applications became an easy task for Accenture in the light of all the aforementioned, taking the IT organization only so far (Accenture, 2007). Moreover, Accenture foresees that in the next era of application outsourcing, it will correspondingly achieve lower total cost of ownership for its applications along with lower labor costs. The issue laid in its offshoring its applications involves not only buying capacity, but leveraging the skills and expertise of a service provider as well, which acts as a business partner. Not only does Accenture foresee saving money in terms of offshoring, but also producing business value as well (ibid). In the Accenture experience, offshoring labor in low-cost countries remains a key component. The company’s strategies in offshoring its IT applications are delved on a benchmark in which the value of labor arbitrage is seen in high performers who offshore as much as 80 percent of their application and maintenance work, and continue to target at least 25 percent cost reductions. In order to attain this, Accenture undertakes the so-called industrializing delivery, which is a development of a repeatable and predictable delivery approach involving the optimization of the management of multi-location work. Through leveraging scale across clients, driving productivity, and enabling delivery excellence through a highly specialized workforce, additional cost savings of up to 25 percent is attained. Aside from industrializing delivery, Accenture also transforms business processes, in which the benefits of offshoring are articulated through increased inventory turns, improved customer retention, faster connections to suppliers, to name a few (ibid). The offshoring strategies it adopted are aimed towards creating higher expectations in terms of application development and maintenance. Accenture was also able to outpace its competitors by leveraging the capabilities of its service providers, in which a strategic relationship that leverages a provider’s technology and delivery capabilities is established (Accenture, 2007). It also includes their business and industry acumen and culture of innovation. Accenture’s offshoring stances are grounded on the belief that “if business applications are the energy of a company, application outsourcing is the transformer” (ibid). It is pleased with the savings realized through offshoring its applications, for purposes of application development and maintenance. Its application offshoring is focused on building upon the value generated from labor arbitrage, optimizing the application portfolio, and reinventing IT function so that the entire enterprise may be propelled toward high performance. Clearly enough, the flattening of the world is seen in the offshore activities of Accenture in which other countries – India, China, Philippines, and those in Eastern Europe – participate in the global IT business. References Accenture (2007) Outsourcing: you’re offshoring. Now what? Accenture. Amey, M., Brazel, T., Chorley, C. and Stead, T. (n.d.). Nike: leading the corporate responsibility movement. Retrieved on June 14, 2008 from http://www.ssn.flinders.edu.au/global/glob1002/2002book/globalisation%20website/converted/whatsit.html Aspray, W., Mayadas, F., and Vardi M. (eds.) (2006). Globalization and offshoring of software. A Report of the ACM Job Migration Task Force. Association for Computing Machinery. Bardhan, A. and Jaffee, D. (2004). On intra-firm trade and multinationals: foreign outsourcing and offshoring in manufacturing. University of California. Bortnicker, C. (2008). American jobs: the changing face of outsourcing. Retrieved on June 14, 2008 from http://www.minyanville.com/articles/hoofy-india-boo-Outsource-business-bco/index/a/16263 Christensen, E. (n. d.) International outsourcing and Nike. Retrieved on June 18, 2008 from http://www.lclark.edu/~soan221/96/nike.html Fjermestad, J. and Saitta, J. (2005). A strategic management framework for IT outsourcing a review of the literature and the development of a Success Factors Model. Journal of information Technology Cases and Applications. Friedman, T. (2005). The world is flat: a brief history of the twenty-first century. Farrar, Strauss, and Giroux. Gampenrieder, E. (2006) Supply chain Management viewpoint – Moving east: offshoring operations to achieve global high performance. Accenture. Ho, L., Torres, M., and Vu, P. (2005). Dynamics of outsourcing: offshoring, insourcing, and a case study – India. Retrieved on June 14, 2008 from Ilet, D. (2005) Accenture rides offshoring wave. Retrieved on June 18, 2008 from http://news.zdnet.co.uk/itmanagement/0,1000000308,39208857,00.htm Klein, N. (2001). No logo. Harper Collins Publishers, London. Nesteral, J. and Hobora, D. The evolution of offshoring services in Central Europe. Retrieved on June 14, 2008 from http://64.233.179.104/scholar?hl=en&lr=&q=cache:UrGNV4Sa5y4J:www.opf.slu.cz/kfi/pb2000/cz/2004/proceedings_2004.pdf%23page%3D76+Offshoring+and+Accenture Norwood, et al. (2006) Offshoring: an elusive phenomenon. National Academy of Public Administration. Outsourcing Institute (1998). Top ten reasons for successful outsourcing. Survey of Current and Potential Outsourcing End-Users, The Outsourcing Institute Membership. Retrieved on June 14, from Quinn, J. and Hillmer, F. (1995). Strategic outsourcing. The McKinsey Quarterly, No. 1. Samuelson, P. (n. d.) Paul A. Samuelson: Anti-globalization and outsourcing. Retrieved on June 18, 2008 from http://alpha.dickinson.edu/departments/econ/webring/Economics/IntroMacro1.3/econ%2017/paul%20a%20samuelson.htm Trefler, D. (2005). Policy responses to the new offshoring: think globally, invest locally. Industry Canada’s March 30, 2005 Roundtable on Offshoring. Vashistha, A. and Vashistha A. (2004).The offshore nation: the rise of services globalization. Retrieved on June 14, 2008 from Warren Bass (April 3, 2005). The Great Leveling. Washington Post. Retrieved on 2007-09-06. White, B. and Tastle, W. (2006). The IS model curriculum and outsourcing: a call for revision. Proc ISECON, Dallas. Yang, S. (2004) Nike on global economics. Global Business Leaders. Vol. 1 (6). Read More