{"title":"Issue Information - Notes for Contributors","authors":"","doi":"10.1111/joms.12946","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12946","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48445,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management Studies","volume":"61 3","pages":"1160-1164"},"PeriodicalIF":10.5,"publicationDate":"2024-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/joms.12946","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140342962","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
We complete a meta-analytic investigation across two phases to increase understanding about team learning, an important process that is a challenge for teams to enact. In the first phase, we create a meta-analytic database of 198 independent samples (N = 15,536 teams) to summarize the strength of the relationships between learning and team antecedents and outcomes. Motivational emergent states (e.g., potency) exhibited the strongest relationship with learning, followed by affective (e.g., psychological safety) and cognitive (e.g., trust) emergent states. Our results also highlight the positive relationship between learning and various antecedents, including team structure, supportive organizational context, environmental uncertainty, cognitive diversity, and gender diversity. In the second phase, we create an additional meta-analytic database with 53 independent samples (N = 4,468 teams) to test a serial mediation model, demonstrating that psychological safety and learning serially mediate the relationships between team learning orientation and salient team outcomes (i.e., performance and innovation).
{"title":"There is No End to Learning, but How Does it Begin? A Meta-Analysis of the Team Learning Pathway","authors":"Shannon L. Marlow, Christina N. Lacerenza","doi":"10.1111/joms.13064","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.13064","url":null,"abstract":"We complete a meta-analytic investigation across two phases to increase understanding about team learning, an important process that is a challenge for teams to enact. In the first phase, we create a meta-analytic database of 198 independent samples (N = 15,536 teams) to summarize the strength of the relationships between learning and team antecedents and outcomes. Motivational emergent states (e.g., potency) exhibited the strongest relationship with learning, followed by affective (e.g., psychological safety) and cognitive (e.g., trust) emergent states. Our results also highlight the positive relationship between learning and various antecedents, including team structure, supportive organizational context, environmental uncertainty, cognitive diversity, and gender diversity. In the second phase, we create an additional meta-analytic database with 53 independent samples (N = 4,468 teams) to test a serial mediation model, demonstrating that psychological safety and learning serially mediate the relationships between team learning orientation and salient team outcomes (i.e., performance and innovation).","PeriodicalId":48445,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management Studies","volume":"42 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.5,"publicationDate":"2024-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140182027","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Ali Aslan Gümüşay, Renate E. Meyer, Markus A. Höllerer
The formation of the first Islamic bank in Germany in 2015 came with considerable tensions at the interface of the religious logic, on the one hand, and the state logic, on the other. With the Islamic religious logic being novel to the German field of banking and finance, innovative templates were established to deal effectively with the resulting tensions and conflicts. Drawing on qualitative data, we investigate how the bank, with its strong commitment to Islam, navigated such novel institutional complexity and the challenges stemming from the jurisdictional overlap. We identify four distinct compromise mechanisms in this institutionally complex situation, in which a committed actor prioritizes one logic over another: explaining, convincing, conceding and suspending. Importantly, as options, these mechanisms are situated in a cascading order of preference for the focal actor. More generally, our research posits that in any encounter between institutional logics in which the specific instantiation of a logic stems from a foreign interinstitutional system, the resulting novel institutional complexity may necessitate the development of innovative templates which, at the same time, may imply ‘stretching’ an institutional logic and, in consequence, impact the compatibility of its jurisdictional claims.
{"title":"Committed Actors, Institutional Complexity, and Pathways to Compromise: The Emergence of Islamic Banking in Germany","authors":"Ali Aslan Gümüşay, Renate E. Meyer, Markus A. Höllerer","doi":"10.1111/joms.13061","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.13061","url":null,"abstract":"The formation of the first Islamic bank in Germany in 2015 came with considerable tensions at the interface of the religious logic, on the one hand, and the state logic, on the other. With the Islamic religious logic being novel to the German field of banking and finance, innovative templates were established to deal effectively with the resulting tensions and conflicts. Drawing on qualitative data, we investigate how the bank, with its strong commitment to Islam, navigated such novel institutional complexity and the challenges stemming from the jurisdictional overlap. We identify four distinct compromise mechanisms in this institutionally complex situation, in which a committed actor prioritizes one logic over another: explaining, convincing, conceding and suspending. Importantly, as options, these mechanisms are situated in a cascading order of preference for the focal actor. More generally, our research posits that in any encounter between institutional logics in which the specific instantiation of a logic stems from a foreign interinstitutional system, the resulting novel institutional complexity may necessitate the development of innovative templates which, at the same time, may imply ‘stretching’ an institutional logic and, in consequence, impact the compatibility of its jurisdictional claims.","PeriodicalId":48445,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management Studies","volume":"25 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.5,"publicationDate":"2024-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140148234","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
New technologies are equivocal, triggering sensemaking responses from the individuals who encounter them. As an ‘epistemic technology’ AI poses new challenges to the expertise and jurisdictions of professionals. Such challenges may be interpreted quite differently, however, depending on the specialized role identities which develop within the wider professional domain. We explore the sensemaking responses of these intra‐professional groupings to the challenges posed by AI through an empirical study of professionals playing different roles (front‐line, hybrid and field‐level) in the field of radiology within NHS England. We found that these intra‐professional groupings sought to make sense of AI through a triadic view focused on the interplay of professional, client and technology. This sensemaking, arising from different jurisdictional contexts, led individual professionals to perceive that their agency was diminished, complemented or enhanced as a result of the introduction of AI. Our findings contribute to the literature on professions and AI by showing how intra‐professional differences affect sensemaking responses to AI as a jurisdictional contestant.
{"title":"The AI of the Beholder: Intra‐Professional Sensemaking of an Epistemic Technology","authors":"Harry Scarbrough, Yaru Chen, Gerardo Patriotta","doi":"10.1111/joms.13065","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.13065","url":null,"abstract":"New technologies are equivocal, triggering sensemaking responses from the individuals who encounter them. As an ‘epistemic technology’ AI poses new challenges to the expertise and jurisdictions of professionals. Such challenges may be interpreted quite differently, however, depending on the specialized role identities which develop within the wider professional domain. We explore the sensemaking responses of these intra‐professional groupings to the challenges posed by AI through an empirical study of professionals playing different roles (front‐line, hybrid and field‐level) in the field of radiology within NHS England. We found that these intra‐professional groupings sought to make sense of AI through a triadic view focused on the interplay of professional, client and technology. This sensemaking, arising from different jurisdictional contexts, led individual professionals to perceive that their agency was diminished, complemented or enhanced as a result of the introduction of AI. Our findings contribute to the literature on professions and AI by showing how intra‐professional differences affect sensemaking responses to AI as a jurisdictional contestant.","PeriodicalId":48445,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management Studies","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.5,"publicationDate":"2024-03-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140148216","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
New ventures in an innovation ecosystem can not only receive benefits, but also face challenges. It is important to examine defence mechanisms that new ventures can employ for their healthy development in the innovation ecosystem. Based on resource dependence theory, combining with arguments from innovation ecosystems literature, this paper proposes that new ventures’ technological alliances with core competitors of ecosystem investors can be used as a social defence in ecosystem venturing. Furthermore, we investigate the moderator effects of technological interdependence – technological similarity and technological complementarity on the impacts of such a defence mechanism. Using longitudinal information of 4903 investor-investee dyads in ecosystem venturing, we find that (1) technological alliances with core competitors of the ecosystem investor has a positive relationship to venture performance, and (2) such relationship is negatively moderated by technological complementarity. Our findings provide important implications for research on innovation ecosystems and resource dependence theory.
{"title":"How do New Ventures Thrive in Ecosystem Venturing: The Impacts of Alliance Strategy and Technology Interdependence","authors":"Xiafei Chen, Yi Yang, Jiang Wei","doi":"10.1111/joms.13063","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.13063","url":null,"abstract":"New ventures in an innovation ecosystem can not only receive benefits, but also face challenges. It is important to examine defence mechanisms that new ventures can employ for their healthy development in the innovation ecosystem. Based on resource dependence theory, combining with arguments from innovation ecosystems literature, this paper proposes that new ventures’ technological alliances with core competitors of ecosystem investors can be used as a social defence in ecosystem venturing. Furthermore, we investigate the moderator effects of technological interdependence – <i>technological similarity</i> and <i>technological complementarity</i> on the impacts of such a defence mechanism. Using longitudinal information of 4903 investor-investee dyads in ecosystem venturing, we find that (1) technological alliances with core competitors of the ecosystem investor has a positive relationship to venture performance, and (2) such relationship is negatively moderated by technological complementarity. Our findings provide important implications for research on innovation ecosystems and resource dependence theory.","PeriodicalId":48445,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management Studies","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.5,"publicationDate":"2024-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140072626","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Jeremy Aroles, Kevin Morrell, Edward Granter, Yin Liang
Though it is widely understood that the past can be an important resource for organizations, less is known about the micro‐level skills and choices that help to materialize different representations of the past. We understand these micro‐level skills and choices as a practice: ‘memory work’ – a banner term gathering various activities that provide the scaffolding for a shared past. Seeking to learn from a context where memory work is central, we share insights from a quasi‐longitudinal study of UK museum employees. We theorize three ideal‐typic regimes of memory work, namely representing, re‐presenting and producing the past, and detail the micro‐practices through which these regimes are enacted. Through explaining the key features of memory work in this context, our paper offers novel, broader insights into the relationship between occupations and memory work, showing how occupations differ in their understanding of memory and how this shapes their memory work.
{"title":"Representing, Re‐presenting, or Producing the Past? Memory Work amongst Museum Employees","authors":"Jeremy Aroles, Kevin Morrell, Edward Granter, Yin Liang","doi":"10.1111/joms.13059","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.13059","url":null,"abstract":"Though it is widely understood that the past can be an important resource for organizations, less is known about the micro‐level skills and choices that help to materialize different representations of the past. We understand these micro‐level skills and choices as a practice: ‘memory work’ – a banner term gathering various activities that provide the scaffolding for a shared past. Seeking to learn from a context where memory work is central, we share insights from a quasi‐longitudinal study of UK museum employees. We theorize three ideal‐typic regimes of memory work, namely representing, re‐presenting and producing the past, and detail the micro‐practices through which these regimes are enacted. Through explaining the key features of memory work in this context, our paper offers novel, broader insights into the relationship between occupations and memory work, showing how occupations differ in their understanding of memory and how this shapes their memory work.","PeriodicalId":48445,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management Studies","volume":"47 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.5,"publicationDate":"2024-02-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140018945","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Fatemeh Askarzadeh, Krista Lewellyn, Stav Fainshmidt, William Q. Judge
Despite mounting societal demands for increased female representation on corporate boards, some firms underconform to institutional expectations, exhibiting significantly lower female board representation than their country peers. We argue that a firm's entrepreneurial orientation is positively viewed by stakeholders, providing its corporate leaders with greater latitude to deviate from governance norms. Drawing from social role theory regarding beliefs about the association between entrepreneurial success and typical male traits, we propose that this substitutive legitimacy drives corporate leaders of firms with an entrepreneurial orientation to underconform due to a desire to maintain their firm's orientation. However, the history of female leadership in the firm and disclosure about environmental and social activities moderate the effect of entrepreneurial orientation on underconformity to female board representation norms. A generalized estimating equations analysis of 8410 firm‐year observations in 16 countries from 2012 to 2018 supports our predictions. Our study offers a novel explanation of heterogeneity in female board representation, informs theory of organizational non‐conformity to institutional norms, and highlights potentially unintended consequences of entrepreneurial orientation.
{"title":"Entrepreneurial Orientation and Underconformity to Female Board Representation Norms","authors":"Fatemeh Askarzadeh, Krista Lewellyn, Stav Fainshmidt, William Q. Judge","doi":"10.1111/joms.13062","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.13062","url":null,"abstract":"Despite mounting societal demands for increased female representation on corporate boards, some firms underconform to institutional expectations, exhibiting significantly lower female board representation than their country peers. We argue that a firm's entrepreneurial orientation is positively viewed by stakeholders, providing its corporate leaders with greater latitude to deviate from governance norms. Drawing from social role theory regarding beliefs about the association between entrepreneurial success and typical male traits, we propose that this substitutive legitimacy drives corporate leaders of firms with an entrepreneurial orientation to underconform due to a desire to maintain their firm's orientation. However, the history of female leadership in the firm and disclosure about environmental and social activities moderate the effect of entrepreneurial orientation on underconformity to female board representation norms. A generalized estimating equations analysis of 8410 firm‐year observations in 16 countries from 2012 to 2018 supports our predictions. Our study offers a novel explanation of heterogeneity in female board representation, informs theory of organizational non‐conformity to institutional norms, and highlights potentially unintended consequences of entrepreneurial orientation.","PeriodicalId":48445,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management Studies","volume":"23 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.5,"publicationDate":"2024-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140032716","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The author teams in this Point-Counterpoint (PCP) put forward contrasting views regarding the benefits – or otherwise – of using commercially generated corporate ‘big data’ algorithms to inform scholarly research. In this editorial, I reflect on the lines of reasoning for, and against, whether such data offers a reliable means of building new theory. Are academics who refuse to mine and analyse corporately owned big data taking sensible steps to manage scholarly integrity? Or are they Luddites? I invite readers to consider these timely and provocative PCP articles and to consider the implications, for management studies, of the key arguments presented.
{"title":"Caught in a Landslide? Exploring how Far the Increasing Focus on Big Data Benefits or Damages Theoretical Development in Management Studies","authors":"Caroline Gatrell","doi":"10.1111/joms.13058","DOIUrl":"10.1111/joms.13058","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The author teams in this Point-Counterpoint (PCP) put forward contrasting views regarding the benefits – or otherwise – of using commercially generated corporate ‘big data’ algorithms to inform scholarly research. In this editorial, I reflect on the lines of reasoning for, and against, whether such data offers a reliable means of building new theory. Are academics who refuse to mine and analyse corporately owned big data taking sensible steps to manage scholarly integrity? Or are they Luddites? I invite readers to consider these timely and provocative PCP articles and to consider the implications, for management studies, of the key arguments presented.</p>","PeriodicalId":48445,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management Studies","volume":"61 6","pages":"2719-2723"},"PeriodicalIF":7.0,"publicationDate":"2024-02-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/joms.13058","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139979896","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Experts increasingly refine their expertise into specialties as they labour in and around organizations. Yet, previous research assumes that experts are organized in the workplace in ways that passively accommodate or mirror pre‐existing specialties and focuses on organizational structures that codify the content of experts’ knowledge as an encroachment. Drawing on a qualitative field study in an aeronautical organization's engineering unit, this paper examines the organizational structures that chart the area of experts’ knowledge, i.e., their specialties. The findings show that organizational structures are generative, defining the contours of existing expertise and catalysing the formation of new ones (generating). However, organizational structures also encode criteria that implicitly rank some forms of expertise over others, thereby reinforcing status hierarchies (grading), and misalignment across organizational structures renders some forms of expertise invisible (ghosting). By showing the active role of organizational structures in shaping expertise rather than simply housing it, this paper contributes to our understanding of expertise development as well as status dynamics and access to resources among experts. Further, the paper reveals how misalignments across multiple organizational structures may impact the management of knowledge and human capital.
{"title":"Generating, Grading, and Ghosting: How Organizing Experts Shapes Expertise","authors":"Pedro Monteiro","doi":"10.1111/joms.13056","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.13056","url":null,"abstract":"Experts increasingly refine their expertise into specialties as they labour in and around organizations. Yet, previous research assumes that experts are organized in the workplace in ways that passively accommodate or mirror pre‐existing specialties and focuses on organizational structures that codify the content of experts’ knowledge as an encroachment. Drawing on a qualitative field study in an aeronautical organization's engineering unit, this paper examines the organizational structures that chart the area of experts’ knowledge, i.e., their specialties. The findings show that organizational structures are generative, defining the contours of existing expertise and catalysing the formation of new ones (<jats:italic>generating</jats:italic>). However, organizational structures also encode criteria that implicitly rank some forms of expertise over others, thereby reinforcing status hierarchies (<jats:italic>grading</jats:italic>), and misalignment across organizational structures renders some forms of expertise invisible (<jats:italic>ghosting</jats:italic>). By showing the active role of organizational structures in shaping expertise rather than simply housing it, this paper contributes to our understanding of expertise development as well as status dynamics and access to resources among experts. Further, the paper reveals how misalignments across multiple organizational structures may impact the management of knowledge and human capital.","PeriodicalId":48445,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management Studies","volume":"6 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.5,"publicationDate":"2024-02-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139945896","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Daniel Muzio, Elena Dalpiaz, Dennis Jancsary, Christine Moser, Stephan Leixnering, Markus Höllerer, Nelson Phillips, Martin Kornberger, Renate Meyer
The symbol is one of the key concepts in organization and management scholarship. Yet as indicated by the authors in this debate, it has not been adequately conceptualized and as such it remains rather blunt and opaque. In what is the first systematic conceptual debate on this topic, the authors of this Point-Counterpoint debate seek to address this issue. The respective essays, despite marked differences in their approaches, offer novel and thought-provoking accounts of what the symbol is and how it works. Taken together, these contributions offer a series of exciting new avenues to guide and redirect future research in this area.
{"title":"Organizations, Institutions, and Symbols: Introduction to a Point-Counterpoint Conversation","authors":"Daniel Muzio, Elena Dalpiaz, Dennis Jancsary, Christine Moser, Stephan Leixnering, Markus Höllerer, Nelson Phillips, Martin Kornberger, Renate Meyer","doi":"10.1111/joms.13060","DOIUrl":"10.1111/joms.13060","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The symbol is one of the key concepts in organization and management scholarship. Yet as indicated by the authors in this debate, it has not been adequately conceptualized and as such it remains rather blunt and opaque. In what is the first systematic conceptual debate on this topic, the authors of this Point-Counterpoint debate seek to address this issue. The respective essays, despite marked differences in their approaches, offer novel and thought-provoking accounts of what the symbol is and how it works. Taken together, these contributions offer a series of exciting new avenues to guide and redirect future research in this area.</p>","PeriodicalId":48445,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management Studies","volume":"61 8","pages":"3786-3792"},"PeriodicalIF":7.0,"publicationDate":"2024-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/joms.13060","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139945898","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：