Description
Case 2- Organization Culture for Total Quality Management
Please Review the case and respond to the following questions:
Do you agree with the study findings? Please discuss.
Based on this study, what do you think is the culture of your organization and why?
Do you believe your organization has or can implement TQM successfully? Please discuss.
Review and comment on other submissions.
Other Discussion Questions
Discuss the difference between MBNQA and ISO 9000
Do you see any relationship between MBNQA and ISO 14000? Please elaborate.
The growth of ISO 14000 has been much slower than ISO 9000. What are the factors underlying this difference?
Can ISO 9000 certification help a software organization achieve CMMi level 3 or higher? Please elaborate.
If your organization has won a quality award or is certified to any quality standards, please share your experience.
Unformatted Attachment Preview
UMGC Library OneSearch
1/19/24, 6:44 PM
Record: 1
Title: Organizational culture for total quality management.
Authors: Gimenez-Espin, JuanAntonio
Jiménez-Jiménez, Daniel
Martínez-Costa, Micaela
Source: Total Quality Management & Business Excellence; Jun2013, Vol. 24
Issue 5/6, p678-692, 15p, 3 Charts
Publication Year: 2013
Subject Terms: CORPORATE culture
TOTAL quality management
MULTILEVEL models
REGRESSION analysis
ORGANIZATIONAL structure
ORGANIZATIONAL performance
ADAPTABILITY (Personality)
EMPIRICAL research
BUSINESS enterprises
Geographic Terms: SPAIN
Author-Supplied Keywords: organisational culture
postal survey
quality management
Abstract: This study aimed to find empirical evidence about the organisational
culture that fits best with a total quality management (TQM) system.
Based on the classification developed by Cameron and Quinn
(1999), we propose an alternative type of culture: the ‘mixed culture’
or ‘culture for quality’, which would be between adhocratic and clan
cultures. It would have a double orientation – external and internal –
and it would promote flexibility. The results of an empirical study of
451 companies were analysed using hierarchical linear regression
methodology. The measurement of constructs used in this research
was based on a review of the literature. Empirical evidence was
found for the positive impact of adhocratic culture on TQM. Contrary
to expectations, the clan culture has no significant effect on TQM. In
addition, the mixed culture or ‘culture for quality’ is the most
appropriate for a TQM system. The expected effect of controloriented cultures was also found. In this case, both the market
culture and the hierarchical culture have a negative effect on the
quality management system. Finally, it was found that TQM has a
https://eds-p-ebscohost-com.ezproxy.umgc.edu/eds/delivery?sid=a…fvid%3d1%26sid%3daf79bc81-65a3-439d-999f-bcf8ee1c5926%2540redis
Page 1 of 20
UMGC Library OneSearch
1/19/24, 6:44 PM
significant positive effect on business performance. This effect is
consistent with the literature reviewed. Consequently, managers
must know the rules, values and customs that actually exist in their
organisations as well as those that are more consistent with quality
management. Companies with a quality orientation should promote
the values and beliefs of the clan and adhocracy cultures.
[ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]
Copyright of Total Quality Management & Business Excellence is the
property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed
to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder’s
express written permission. However, users may print, download, or
email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No
warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer
to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.
(Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
ISSN: 14783363
DOI: 10.1080/14783363.2012.707409
Accession Number: 87821049
Database: Complementary Index
Organizational culture for total quality management.
This study aimed to find empirical evidence about the organisational culture that fits best with a total quality
management (TQM) system. Based on the classification developed by Cameron and Quinn (1999), we
propose an alternative type of culture: the ‘mixed culture’ or ‘culture for quality’, which would be between
adhocratic and clan cultures. It would have a double orientation – external and internal – and it would
promote flexibility. The results of an empirical study of 451 companies were analysed using hierarchical
linear regression methodology. The measurement of constructs used in this research was based on a
review of the literature. Empirical evidence was found for the positive impact of adhocratic culture on TQM.
Contrary to expectations, the clan culture has no significant effect on TQM. In addition, the mixed culture or
‘culture for quality’ is the most appropriate for a TQM system. The expected effect of control-oriented
cultures was also found. In this case, both the market culture and the hierarchical culture have a negative
effect on the quality management system. Finally, it was found that TQM has a significant positive effect on
business performance. This effect is consistent with the literature reviewed. Consequently, managers must
know the rules, values and customs that actually exist in their organisations as well as those that are more
consistent with quality management. Companies with a quality orientation should promote the values and
beliefs of the clan and adhocracy cultures.
Keywords: quality management; organisational culture; postal survey
1. Introduction
https://eds-p-ebscohost-com.ezproxy.umgc.edu/eds/delivery?sid=a…vid%3d1%26sid%3daf79bc81-65a3-439d-999f-bcf8ee1c5926%2540redis
Page 2 of 20
UMGC Library OneSearch
1/19/24, 6:44 PM
Over recent decades, total quality management (TQM) has been described in numerous publications (Bou
Llusar, Escrig Tena, & Roca Puig, [ 9]; El Shenawy, Baker, & Lemak, [33]; Hendricks and Singhal, [42];
Terziovski & Samson, [86]) as a management tool which provides companies a competitive advantage and
allows them to generate higher profits.
The literature has defined the concept and dimensions of TQM and distinguished the more technical and
intangible aspects, such as the culture required to make the system work. Indeed, organisational culture is
one of the most important variables in the success or failure of TQM implementation (Dean and Bowen,
[22]; De Cock, [25]; Deming, [27]; Juran, [51], [50]; Kujala & Lillrank, [54]; Metri, [62]; Nasserowski &
Coleman, [67]; Powell, [74]; Tata & Prasad, [85]). As noted by Tata and Prasad [85], organisational culture
and structural factors are the most significant determinants of the success of TQM. In fact, the literature
suggests that only a third of TQM programmes are successful, and that the others fail mainly because of a
mismatch of these two variables, cultural and structural factors (Burdett, [12]; Ehigie & McAndrew, [32];
Grant, Shani, & Krishnan, [39]).
Organisational culture has also been a major topic of research, involving many classifications and
definitions. Among these, the typology of Cameron and Quinn [13] is one of the most important (Henri, [43]).
Those authors rely on the ‘Competing Values Framework’ proposed by Quinn [77] to create what they call ‘a
tool for the assessment of organizational culture’, with four types of cultures: clan, adhocracy, market and
hierarchy. These four cultures are defined according to two dimensions.
One dimension shows how far the organisation has a focus on control, stability and order. This dimension
provides a scale from those organisations or units that emphasise mechanical stability, predictability and
order to those which are functional with high levels of flexibility, change and adaptability. The second
dimension shows the tendency towards the interior (integration of units) or exterior (stimulating
differentiation and rivalry).
The aim of this study was to analyse precisely what kind of culture is best suited to a TQM system, using an
empirical study to demonstrate the links. To do this, we first discuss the relevant literature in the fields of
TQM and organisational culture to identify the kind of culture that can be expected to promote the success
of a TQM system, based on previous studies, and we then test for a positive relationship between TQM and
organisational performance. We discuss the methodology used to conduct the empirical study. The third
part of this paper analyses the results and presents the conclusions and limitations of the study and
sketches possible lines for future research.
There is little empirical evidence to support the effect that the culture can have on TQM implementation and
most papers focus only on traditional classification of the organisational culture. We have drawn on
previous studies based on the model of Cameron and Quinn [13] who also proposed additional cultures
(Deshpandé, Farley, & Webster, [28]; Lau & Ngo, [58]; Moorman, [63]; Obenchain & Johnson, [69]; Stock,
McFadden, & Gowen, [84]). Our results partially support the findings of other authors, such as Zu, Robbins,
and Fredendall [93], Dellana and Hauser [24] and Chang and Wiebe [17], except for the findings related to
clan culture.
https://eds-p-ebscohost-com.ezproxy.umgc.edu/eds/delivery?sid=a…vid%3d1%26sid%3daf79bc81-65a3-439d-999f-bcf8ee1c5926%2540redis
Page 3 of 20
UMGC Library OneSearch
1/19/24, 6:44 PM
2. Literature review
As a prelude to the study of the relationship between organisational culture and TQM, it is first necessary to
briefly present the literature on each of these concepts to identify the state of the art in the research that
specifically examines this relationship.
2.1 Total quality management
TQM has been considered as an important mechanism for promoting the smooth running of companies and
attaining a competitive advantage. This importance has guided researchers to study this management
philosophy and analyse how to implement it successfully (Ehigie & McAndrew, [32]). According to Flynn,
Schroeder, and Sakakibara [35], TQM can be defined as an integrated effort to achieve and maintain highquality products based on the maintenance of continuous process improvement and error prevention at all
levels and in all functions of the organisation with the aim of reaching and even exceeding customer
expectations. As these and other authors show (Ahire, Golhar, & Waller, [ 2]; Anderson, Rungtusanatham, &
Schroeder, [ 4]; Black & Porter, [ 8]), TQM is a multidimensional concept. Within its component dimensions,
the researchers emphasise two types of elements. The first are the more technical aspects of quality
management and the second are the intangible aspects. In the first category are, for example, the statistical
control techniques or Ishikawa’s tools for problem-solving. The intangible elements include leadership,
corporate culture, management commitment, the ‘open’ organisation, teamwork and empowerment. These
two categories are commonly known as ‘hard’ (techniques) and ‘soft’ (intangibles) (Bou-Llusar, Escrig-Tena,
Roca-Puig, & Beltrán-Martín, [10]; Fotopoulos & Psomas, [36]). The general conclusion of these works is
that the most influential dimensions are those that Powell [74] and Abdullah, Uli, and Tarí [ 1] describe as
intangibles: leadership, organisational skills and culture, management commitment, open organisation and
empowerment.
2.2 Organisational culture
Organisational culture is one of the key elements for implementing TQM practices. Some researchers have
focused their efforts on studying this concept.
First, the concept of ‘culture’ exists at various levels, including national culture and organisational culture
(Catanzaro, Moore, & Marshall, [16]). The last has frequently been defined generically as, ‘the set of norms,
beliefs and values shared by members of the organization’ (e.g. Cameron & Quinn, [13]; Detert, Schroeder,
& Mauriel, [30]; Stock et al., [84]; Yu, [92]). However, organisational culture is a broad concept and,
according to De Long and Fahey [26], it would imply different levels, such as values, rules and practices.
Furthermore, organisational culture affects members of an organisation by influencing behaviour and
performance outcomes, and the organisation’s external environment (George, Sleeth, & Siders, [38]).
Many types of organisational culture have been described since this concept first appeared in the literature
(e.g. Frohman, [37]; ÓRelly, Chatman, & Caldwell, [70]; Schein, [80]). Given the need to use a model for
classifying types of culture and studying their effect on TQM, we have chosen to use the competing values
model of Cameron and Quinn [13]. This model defines a widely accepted typology of organisational cultures
that has been used in many empirical studies (Deshpandé et al., [28]; Lau & Ngo, [58]; Obenchain &
https://eds-p-ebscohost-com.ezproxy.umgc.edu/eds/delivery?sid=a…vid%3d1%26sid%3daf79bc81-65a3-439d-999f-bcf8ee1c5926%2540redis
Page 4 of 20
UMGC Library OneSearch
1/19/24, 6:44 PM
Johnson, [69]; Stock et al., [84]; Zu et al., [93]). The definition of culture in this model is accomplished
through two dimensions extracted from the 39 performance indicators developed by Campbell [14]. The first
dimension relates to the orientation of the company to stability versus flexibility, according to the importance
given to control and order (stability) or innovation and dynamism to adapt to environmental changes
(flexibility). The second dimension refers to the orientation of the company, which may be external, when it
is primarily concerned about customers, competitors and the environment, or internal, when the focus is on
the people, products and processes of the organisation.
By combining these two dimensions or competing values, Cameron and Quinn [13] propose four types of
culture: clan, adhocratic, hierarchy and market. Clan culture is based on flexibility and internal focus. In it,
the organisation acts like a family, promoting teamwork, commitment and involvement. Adhocratic culture
fosters flexibility, but its orientation is external. Its objectives include creativity, risk taking, individuality and
initiative. Market culture looks for an external perspective through which to differentiate it from competitors,
intended to produce a market leader, but uses stability and control to achieve its goals of internal and
external competitiveness and productivity. Finally, hierarchical culture is based on stability and control along
with an internal focus. It is characterised by a large number of standards with the objective of achieving
efficiency, process standardisation, product standardisation and so on.
2.3 Organisational culture and TQM
Although the importance of organisational culture for TQM has been widely suggested in the literature, this
relationship raises some questions. First, Cameron and Quinn [13] point out that those competing values
that could help the organisation to implement a TQM system could be present in each culture:
empowerment, teamwork, employee involvement, HR development, open communication (clan culture);
creating new standards, developing products, continuous improvement, customer orientation, finding
creative solutions (adhocracy culture); error detection, control processes, systematically solving problems,
apply quality tools, measurement (hierarchical culture); measuring consumer preferences, productivity
gains, involving customers and suppliers, increasing competitiveness, creating collaborators (market
culture). This implies the need for all types of culture.
However, other authors have studied the cultural factors that are most suited to the implementation of a
TQM system (Prajogo & McDermott, [75]). Among them, Irani, Beskese, and Love [47], Anderson et al.
(1994) and Detert et al. (2000) believe that organisations with clan culture are the most favourable to
implementing a TQM programme successfully. Similarly, Page and Curry [72] and Lakhe and Mohanty [57]
emphasise that in order to implement TQM successfully, the organisational culture must change and be
characterised by its customer orientation, the support of senior management, employee engagement and
internal guidance, variables that are present in the clan culture (Buch & Rivers, [11]; Naor, Goldstein,
Linderman, & Schroeder, [66]; Prajogo & McDermott, [75]; Schneider, Brief, & Guzzo, [81], [82]; Waldman,
[88]). Moreover, the clan culture has an internal focus that favours TQM (Cartwright, [15]; Prajogo &
McDermott, [75]; Webley & Cartwright, [90]). Furthermore, Neal, West, and Patterson [68] indicate that the
organisational climate favours training and motivation, variables that form part of the clan and adhocratic
cultures. This will support the success of a TQM system, according to Yeo and Neal [91], Arthur ([ 5]),
https://eds-p-ebscohost-com.ezproxy.umgc.edu/eds/delivery?sid=a…vid%3d1%26sid%3daf79bc81-65a3-439d-999f-bcf8ee1c5926%2540redis
Page 5 of 20
UMGC Library OneSearch
1/19/24, 6:44 PM
Delery and Doty [23] and Osterman [71]. Finally, clan culture fosters employee and senior management
commitment, customer orientation, continuous improvement and motivation and training of workers (Ahire
et al., [ 2]; Anderson et al., [ 4]; Black & Porter, [ 8]; Dean & Bowen, [22]; Naor et al., [66]).
In the case of adhocratic culture, in addition to the previous characteristics, the anticipation of customer
needs, continuous innovation that has a positive relationship with information availability (Damanpour, [21];
Kanji & Asher, [52]) and flexibility might facilitate the success of TQM. In this respect, Douglas and Judge
[31] found empirical evidence that the great inquisitiveness (external orientation) of the adhocratic culture
has a positive relationship with TQM implementation and success. Also, adhocracy promotes continuous
innovation, a highly educated workforce, great autonomy and motivation and availability of useful
information (Flynn et al., [35]; Lo, [59]; ÓRelly et al., [70]). Some studies indicate that organisations with
adhocratic culture that use quality systems obtain better results (Lagrosen & Lagrosen, [56]).
Other studies have shown that customer orientation and continual improvement, two of the variables
present in both clan and adhocratic cultures, and not present in market and hierarchical cultures, are those
that have a major effect on TQM success (Jabnoun & Sedrani, [48]). Given the various dimensions of TQM
(Flynn et al., [35]; Mehra, Hoffman, & Sirias, [61]; Saraph, Benson, & Schroeder, [79]) the clan and
adhocratic cultures contain most of them.
Similarly, Mosadegh Rad [64] found that bureaucratic cultures, in which control is important, such as the
hierarchical and the market culture, were characterised by TQM programmes that had little success. There
is empirical evidence that indicates a negative relationship between formalisation and hierarchy on the one
hand and innovation on the other (Aiken, Bacharach, & French, [ 3]; Damanpour, [21]; Pierce & Delbecq,
[73]). Therefore, given that innovation is required to achieve customer orientation, and therefore this
variable is essential in TQM, we would expect a negative relationship between these types of culture, in
which control and formalisation are important, and TQM success. The market culture has an orientation
towards fixed objectives and the search for the lowest transaction costs with respect to suppliers, customers
and workers, which may adversely affect the successful implementation of TQM.
There are also studies showing that hierarchical status does not lead to successful TQM implementation
(Kumar & Sankaran, [55]; Sinha, [83]; Tata & Prasad, [85]; Walumbwa & Lawber, [89]) and that cultures with
high bureaucracy do not encourage TQM because of their lack of customer orientation (Lagrosen &
Lagrosen, [56]). On the other hand, since the hierarchical culture emphasises the normalisation of
processes and standardisation of products, we might expect this culture to promote quality management.
However, these factors may be more related to the implementation of ISO 9000 standards than to the
implementation of a TQM programme. In this regard, Powell [74] believes that TQM tools and techniques
(the ‘hard’ aspects of a TQM system) are not conducive to company success, as this depends on difficult-toimitate variables, such as open culture, autonomy of workers and management commitment, which are
found mainly in clan and adhocratic cultures, as indicated above.
In summary, we propose that organisational culture influences TQM, but its effect depends on the type of
culture:
https://eds-p-ebscohost-com.ezproxy.umgc.edu/eds/delivery?sid=a…vid%3d1%26sid%3daf79bc81-65a3-439d-999f-bcf8ee1c5926%2540redis
Page 6 of 20
UMGC Library OneSearch
1/19/24, 6:44 PM
H1: Organizational culture is related to TQM.
H1a: The clan culture has a positive relationship with TQM.
H1b: The adhocratic culture has a positive relationship with TQM.
H1c: The market culture is negatively associated with TQM.
H1d: The hierarchical culture is negatively associated with TQM.
After reviewing the existing literature, it has been concluded that clan and adhocratic cultures are those
most suited to a TQM system. As we indicated in the previous sections, the concept of culture is an open
term (Frohman, [37]; Hofstede, [44]; ÓRelly et al., [70]; Schein, [80]). However, our point of view is that this
classification of cultures is not flexible enough for the purpose of this paper. We consider that the clan
culture, even though it contains some elements that favour TQM, such as teamwork, lacks external
orientation, which is fundamental for customer orientation, one of the most relevant dimensions in TQM.
Consequently, we propose a fifth type of culture that would fall somewhere between the clan and adhocratic
cultures, and would have an internal and external perspective combined with flexibility.
This process allows us to consider an ‘intermediate culture’ that shares the variables included in both clan
and adhocratic cultures (Deshpandé et al., [28]; Lau & Ngo, [58]; Moorman, [63]; Obenchain & Johnson,
[69]; Stock et al., [84]). We will call this the ‘mixed culture’ (culture for TQM). Thus, the second hypothesis
we propose is as follows:
H2: A mixed culture (culture for TQM) has a positive relationship with TQM.
2.4 TQM and company performance
Although the main objective of this research is to examine the relationship between organisational culture
and TQM, the underlying hypothesis is that TQM contributes to improving the organisational performance of
companies. Thus, in this paper, we also intend to confirm the results of previous studies that found a
positive effect of TQM on company performance with a different data set in a different context, by way of
replication. As noted above, there are some studies that have examined the effect of implementing a TQM
system on business results, and these have generally concluded that TQM companies have a competitive
advantage (Bou Llusar et al., [ 9]; Choi & Eboch, [19]; El Shenawy et al., [33]; Feng, Prajogo, Chuan Tan, &
Shoal, [34]; Hendricks and Singhal, [42]; Powell, [74]; Terziovski & Samson, [86]). Consequently, our
intention is to confirm the following hypothesis:
H3: TQM has a positive relationship with organizational performance.
3. Methodology
3.1 Data collection
https://eds-p-ebscohost-com.ezproxy.umgc.edu/eds/delivery?sid=a…vid%3d1%26sid%3daf79bc81-65a3-439d-999f-bcf8ee1c5926%2540redis
Page 7 of 20
UMGC Library OneSearch
1/19/24, 6:44 PM
The target population consists of Spanish companies located in the southeast of the country, with 50 or
more workers, that are included in the Sistema de Análisis de Balances Ibéricos database (which contains
financial information for 480,000 Spanish companies, with up to 10 years of data, updated daily). The
overall study population consists of 1600 companies.
The information collection was carried out using a personal interview with the general managers of the
companies in the population, using a pre-structured questionnaire with closed questions.
The total number of valid questionnaires returned was 451, which represents 25.2% of the total population.
From these responses, 251 correspond to industrial enterprises (55.6%) and 200 to service companies
(44.3%). The representativeness of the sample was tested against the total population, both in terms of its
composition by sector and by size of business and results. No significant differences were found between
those two groups, suggesting no response bias.
3.2 Variables
3.2.1 Total quality management
TQM is a multidimensional construct (Ahire et al., [ 2]; Black & Porter, [ 8]; Dean & Bowen, [22]; Flynn et al.,
[35]; Saraph et al., [79]). It includes dimensions such as leadership, quality information, process control,
continual improvement, training in quality tools and teamwork, maintaining relationships with suppliers
based on quality and customer orientation.
Based on this premise, we have developed a scale to measure quality management consisting of eight
items. These items use a five-point Likert scale. After verifying their reliability (Cronbach’s α = 0.90), we
proceeded to create a new variable as the mean of these indicators.
3.2.2 Organisational culture
Our measure of organisational culture is based on the Organizational Culture Assessment Instrument
developed by Cameron and Quinn [13]. This measure has been used in previous research on
organisational culture (Deshpandé et al., [28]; Lau & Ngo, [58]; Muijen et al., [65]) and some authors have
validated it (Howard, [45]; Quinn & Spreitzer, [76]). For each of these cultural traits, the instrument identifies
four items related to the four types of culture. In this case, the manager must allocate 100 points among the
four responses, which is to say, among the four types of culture. Finally, the type of culture is calculated as
the average score on the items for each cultural trait for each type of culture.
3.2.3 Performance
There is no single measure for performance (Becker & Gerhart, [ 7]), and consequently it is necessary to
use several indicators, so that each provides a partial view of overall performance. Variables like market
share, profitability, quality improvement and product success are frequently used in similar studies (Han,
Kim, & Srivastava, [41]). Since there is evidence for the high correlation between subjective and objective
measures of performance (Dess & Robinson, [29]), we have used the method proposed by Quinn and
Rohrbaugh [78] and Quinn [77] for measuring the organisational performance through 12 items taken from
https://eds-p-ebscohost-com.ezproxy.umgc.edu/eds/delivery?sid=a…vid%3d1%26sid%3daf79bc81-65a3-439d-999f-bcf8ee1c5926%2540redis
Page 8 of 20
UMGC Library OneSearch
1/19/24, 6:44 PM
the four models suggested by these authors. Each item was rated on a five-point Likert scale. The ‘global
performance’ variable has been defined as the average of previous scales and used as a benchmark for the
overall company performance (Cronbach’s α = 0.76).
3.2.4 Control variables
After having reviewed the literature, we have included as control variables the firm size, age and sector.
These measures have been identified in the literature related to TQM, and are typically measured as the
size of the company defined as the average number of employees (Hurtle & Hult, [46]), age measured as
the number of years that the company has been operating in the market (De Long & Fahey, [26]; Yu, [92])
and sector defined by a dummy variable whose value is zero when the firm belongs to the service sector
and unity for manufacturing (Powell, [74]; Stock et al., [84]).
Table 1 presents the main descriptive statistics of the variables used in this research.
Table 1. Descriptive statistics.
MeanSD
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1. TQM
3.4 0.848 1
2. Clan
34.7 16.232 0.009 1
3. Adhocratic 20.8 10.246 0.240*** −0.205***1
4. Market
19.2 10.945 −0.114**−0.590***−0.037 1
5. Hierarchy
25.4 14.183 −0.092* −0.539***−0.459***−0.067 1
6. Mixed
28.5 12.215 0.250*** 0.635*** 0.380*** −0.449***−0.653***1
7. Sector
0.6 0.497 0.096** −0.026 0.056
−0.035 0.013
−0.026 1
8. Age
21.9 15.267 0.051 0.007
0.047
−0.116** 0.046
0.002 0.082* 1
9. Size
70.7 180.4710.106** −0.115** 0.054
0.121*** −0.001 −0.038 0.017 0.105**1
10. Performance3.77 0.501 0.359*** 0.158*** 0.209*** −0.122***−0.234***0.295***−0.041−0.019 0.0311
*p
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
