Aspiration gap; Family firms; Mixed gambles; Patents; Trade secrets; Marketing
Abstract :
[en] We investigate whether family ownership is associated with a preference for patents or trade secrets. Using a sample of S&P 500 firms, we show that family ownership is negatively associated with patenting and positively associated with the usage of trade secrets. We further show that both relationships are moderated by firm performance below the aspiration level. These results can be explained with a mixed gambles behavioral agency framework. When family firms perform below their aspiration level, prospective financial gains become relatively more important as compared to current socio-emotional wealth so that patents become more and trade secrets less attractive.
Disciplines :
Strategy & innovation
Author, co-author :
HUSSINGER, Katrin ; University of Luxembourg > Faculty of Law, Economics and Finance (FDEF) > Department of Economics and Management (DEM) ; Department of Managerial Strategy and Innovation at KU Leuven, Belgium, and the Centre for European Economic Research (ZEW), Germany
Issah, Wunnam Basit; University of Luxembourg, Luxembourg, Luxembourg ; Norwich Business School, University of East Anglia, Norwich Research Park, Norwich, United Kingdom ; Chair for Family Entrepreneurship and Society, Audencia Business School, Nantes, France
External co-authors :
yes
Language :
English
Title :
Patents, trade secrets and performance aspirations in family firms
Åberg, C., Calabrò, A., Valentino, A., Torchia, M., Socioemotional Wealth and Family Firm Performance: The Moderating Role of CEO Tenure and Millennial CEO. British Journal of Management., 2024.
Almeling, D.S., Seven reasons why trade secrets are increasingly important. Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 2012, 1091–1117.
Al-Tabbaa, O., Nasr, A., Zahoor, N., De Silva, M., Socio‐emotional Wealth Preservation and Alliance Success in Family Firms: The Role of Political Instability and Alliance Management Capability. British Journal of Management 00 (2022), 1–27, 10.1111/1467-8551.12626.
Anderson, & Reeb, D. M. Founding‐family ownership and firm performance: Evidence from the S&P 500 The journal of finance 58 3 2003 1301 1328.
Anderson, R.C., Duru, A., Reeb, D.M., Investment policy in family controlled firms. Journal of Banking & Finance 36:6 (2012), 1744–1758, 10.1016/j.jbankfin.2012.01.018.
Appio, F.P., De Luca, L.M., Morgan, R., Martini, A., Patent portfolio diversity and firm profitability: A question of specialization or diversification?. Journal of Business Research 101 (2019), 255–267.
Arrow, K.J., Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention. In Readings in industrial economics. 1962, Springer, 219–236.
Arroyabe, M., Grimpe, C. and K. Hussinger (2025), Safeguarding secrets, shaping acquisitions: Trade secret protection and the role of distance between acquirer and target, Strategy Science, forthcoming.
Arundel, A., The relative effectiveness of patents and secrecy for appropriation. Research policy 30:4 (2001), 611–624.
Arundel, A., Kabla, I., What percentage of innovations are patented? Empirical estimates for European firms. Research Policy 27:2 (1998), 127–141.
Attig, N., El Ghoul, S., Guedhami, O., Zheng, X., Dividends and economic policy uncertainty: International evidence. Journal of Corporate Finance, 66, 2021, 101785.
Bannò, M., Propensity to patent by family firms. Journal of Family Business Strategy 7:4 (2016), 238–248, 10.1016/j.jfbs.2016.07.002.
Block, J., R&D investments in family and founder firms: An agency perspective. Journal of Business Venturing 27:2 (2012), 248–265.
Block, J., Miller, D., Jaskiewicz, P., Spiegel, F., Economic and technological importance of innovations in large family and founder firms: An analysis of patent data. Family Business Review 26:2 (2013), 180–199.
Block, J., Hansen, C., Steinmetz, H., Are family firms doing more innovation output with less innovation input?. 2022, A replication and extension, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice.
Bonilla, C.A., Sepulveda, J., Carvajal, M., Family ownership and firm performance in Chile: A note on Martinez et al.'s evidence. Family Business Review 23:2 (2010), 148–154.
Boot, A., Vladimirov, V., Disclosure, patenting, and trade secrecy. Journal of Accounting Research 63:1 (2025), 5–56.
Bos, B., Broekhuizen, T.L.J., de Faria, P., A dynamic view on secrecy management. Journal of Business Research 68:12 (2015), 2619–2627, 10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.04.009.
Bromiley, P., Harris, J.D., A comparison of alternative measures of organizational aspirations. Strategic Management Journal 35:3 (2014), 338–357, 10.1002/smj.2191.
Cabral, J. J., Kumar, M. V. S., & Park, H. D. (2024). The value of a reputation for sustaining commitment in interfirm relationships: The inclusion of corporate venture capitalists in investment syndicates. Journal of Business Venturing, 39(3), 106391.
Cascino, S., Pugliese, A., Mussolino, D., & Sansone, C. (2010). The influence of family ownership on the quality of accounting information. Family Business Review, 23(3), 246-265.
Ceipek, R., Hautz, J., De Massis, A., Matzler, K., Ardito, L., Digital transformation through exploratory and exploitative internet of things innovations: The impact of family management and technological diversification. Journal of Product Innovation Management 38:1 (2021), 142–165.
Chen, S., Chen, X., Cheng, Q., Shevlin, T., Are family firms more tax aggressive than non-family firms?. Journal of Financial Economics 95:1 (2010), 41–61.
Chirico, F., Criaco, G., Baù, M., Naldi, L., Gomez-Mejia, L.R., Kotlar, J., To patent or not to patent: That is the question. Intellectual property protection in family firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 44:2 (2020), 339–367, 10.1177/1042258718806251.
Choudhury, A., Jandhyala, S., & Nandkumar, A. (2025). Economic nationalism and the home court advantage. Strategic Management Journal, 46(1), 1-272.
Chrisman, J.J., Patel, P.C., Variations in R&D investments of family and nonfamily firms: Behavioral agency and myopic loss aversion perspectives. Academy of management Journal 55:4 (2012), 976–997.
Cohen, W. M., Nelson, R. R., & Walsh, J. P. (2000). Protecting their intellectual assets: Appropriability conditions and why US manufacturing firms patent (or not).
Crass, D., Garcia Valero, F., Pitton, F., Rammer, C., Protecting innovation through patents and trade secrets: Evidence for firms with a single innovation. International Journal of the Economics of Business 26:1 (2019), 117–156.
Cyert, R.M., March, J.G., A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ 2:4 (1963), 169–187.
Czarnitzki, D., Toole, A.A., Patent protection, market uncertainty, and R&D investment. The Review of Economics and Statistics 93:1 (2011), 147–159.
Czarnitzki, D., Hussinger, K., Leten, B., How valuable are patent blocking strategies?. Review of Industrial Organization 56:3 (2020), 409–434.
Dal Maso, L., Basco, R., Bassetti, T., Lattanzi, N., Family ownership and environmental performance: The mediation effect of human resource practices. Business Strategy and the Environment 29:3 (2020), 1548–1562.
de Faria, P., Sofka, W., Knowledge protection strategies of multinational firms—A cross-country comparison. Research Policy 39:7 (2010), 956–968, 10.1016/j.respol.2010.03.005.
Delerue, H., Lejeune, A., Managerial secrecy and intellectual asset protection in SMEs: The role of institutional environment. Journal of International Management 17:2 (2011), 130–142, 10.1016/j.intman.2010.10.002.
De Massis, A., Ding, S., Kotlar, J., Wu, Z., Family involvement and R&D expenses in the context of weak property rights protection: An examination of non-state-owned listed companies in China. The European Journal of Finance 24:16 (2018), 1506–1527.
De Rassenfosse, G., Jaffe, A.B., Are patent fees effective at weeding out low‐quality patents?. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy 27:1 (2018), 134–148.
Ding, R., Sainani, S., Zhang, Z.J., Protection of trade secrets and corporate tax avoidance: Evidence from the inevitable disclosure doctrine. Journal of Business Research 132 (2021), 221–232.
Duran, P., Kammerlander, N., Van Essen, M., Zellweger, T., Doing more with less: Innovation input and output in family firms. Academy of management Journal 59:4 (2016), 1224–1264.
Eddleston, K.A., Mulki, J.P., Differences in family-owned SMEs’ ethical behavior: A mixed gamble perspective of family firm tax evasion. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 45:4 (2021), 767–791.
Edris, S., Belderbos, R., & Gilsing, V. (2022). R&D collaborations with common partners and knowledge leakage to rivals: The role of IP litigation. In Academy of Management Proceedings (Vol. 2022, No. 1, p. 17342). Briarcliff Manor, NY 10510: Academy of Management.
Edris, S., Belderbos, R., Gilsing, V., Types of common R&D partners and knowledge leakage to rivals: The role of IP litigation reputation. Technovation, 131, 2024, 102955.
Erdogan, I., Rondi, E., De Massis, A., Managing the tradition and innovation paradox in family firms: A family imprinting perspective. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice., 44:1 (2020), 20–54.
Ettredge, M., Guo, F., Li, Y., Trade secrets and cyber security breaches. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy 37:6 (2018), 564–585.
Eugster, N., Wang, Q., Large blockholders and stock price crash risk: An international study. Global Finance Journal, 55, 2023, 100799.
European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO). (2017). Protecting Innovation Through Trade Secrets and Patents: Determinants for European Union Firms. https://www.euipo.europa.eu.
Fernhaber, S.A., Patel, P.C., How do young firms manage product portfolio complexity? The role of absorptive capacity and ambidexterity. Strategic Management Journal 33:13 (2012), 1516–1539.
Floros, I.V., Sivaramakrishnan, K., Zufarov, R., Proprietary costs and the equity financing choice. Review of Accounting Studies, 2023, 1–44.
Foss, K., Foss, N.J., Resources and transaction costs: How property rights economics furthers the resource‐based view. Strategic Management Journal 26:6 (2005), 541–553.
Gentry, R., Dibrell, C., Kim, J., Long–term orientation in publicly traded family businesses: Evidence of a dominant logic. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 40:4 (2016), 733–757.
Gimenez-Fernandez, E.M., Beukel, K., Tyler, B.B., Spielmann, N., Cerrato, D., Discua Cruz, A.F., Minciullo, M., Should we patent it or keep it a secret?. 2020, The moderating role of proactive orientation in family versus non-family SMEs, International Small Business Journal.
Glaeser, S., The effects of proprietary information on corporate disclosure and transparency: Evidence from trade secrets. Journal of Accounting and Economics 66:1 (2018), 163–193, 10.1016/j.jacceco.2018.04.002.
Glaeser, S. (2023). Updated trade secret data from Glaeser (2018) Retrieved 05/2023 from. https://stephenglaeser.web.unc.edu/data/.
Gómez-Mejía, L.R., Haynes, K.T., Núñez-Nickel, M., Jacobson, K.J., Moyano-Fuentes, J., Socioemotional wealth and business risks in family-controlled firms: Evidence from Spanish olive oil mills. Administrative Science Quarterly 52:1 (2007), 106–137.
Gomez-Mejia, L.R., Makri, M., Kintana, M.L., Diversification decisions in family‐controlled firms. Journal of management studies 47:2 (2010), 223–252.
Gomez-Mejia, L.R., Campbell, J.T., Martin, G., Hoskisson, R.E., Makri, M., Sirmon, D.G., Socioemotional wealth as a mixed gamble: Revisiting family firm R&D investments with the behavioral agency model. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 38:6 (2014), 1351–1374.
Gómez-Mejía, L.R., Cruz, C., Berrone, P., De Castro, J., Ties that bind: Socioemotional wealth preservation in family firms. Academy of Management Annals 51:4 (2016), 409–411.
Gomez-Mejia, L.R., Patel, P.C., Zellweger, T.M., In the horns of the dilemma: Socioemotional wealth, financial wealth, and acquisitions in family firms. Journal of Management 44:4 (2018), 1369–1397.
Gómez-Mejía, L.R., Sanchez-Bueno, M.J., Miroshnychenko, I., Wiseman, R.M., Muñoz-Bullón, F., De Massis, A., Family Control, Political Risk and Employment Security: A Cross‐National Study. Journal of management studies., 2023.
Graves, C., Shan, Y.G., An empirical analysis of the effect of internationalization on the performance of unlisted family and nonfamily firms in Australia. Family Business Review 27:2 (2014), 142–160.
Greve, H.R., A Behavioral Theory of Firm Growth: Sequential Attention to Size and Performance Goals. The Academy of Management Journal 51:3 (2008), 476–494, 10.2307/20159522.
Grimpe, C., Hussinger, K., Pre-empted patents, infringed patents and firms' participation in markets for technology. Research Policy 43:3 (2014), 543–554.
Hall, B.H., Patents and patent policy. Oxford Review of Economic Policy 23:4 (2007), 568–587, 10.1093/oxrep/grm037.
Hall, B.H., Mairesse, J., Exploring the relationship between R&D and productivity in French manufacturing firms. Journal of Econometrics 65:1 (1995), 263–293.
Hall, B.H., Jaffe, A., Trajtenberg, M., Market value and patent citations. RAND Journal of economics, 2005, 16–38.
H. Hall C., Rogers, M., & Sena, V. The choice between formal and informal intellectual property: A review Journal of Economic Literature 52 2 2014 375 423.
Hannah, D.R., Should I keep a secret? The effects of trade secret protection procedures on employees' obligations to protect trade secrets. Organization Science 16:1 (2005), 71–84.
Hannah, D.R., An examination of the factors that influence whether newcomers protect or share secrets of their former employers. Journal of Management Studies 44:4 (2007), 465–487.
Harabi, N., Appropriability of technical innovations an empirical analysis. Research Policy 24:6 (1995), 981–992.
He, Q., Leung, H., Qiu, B., & Zhou, Z. (2025). The effect of social media on corporate innovation: Evidence from Seeking Alpha coverage. Management Science, forthcoming.
Hou, Q., Chen, Z., Teng, M., Today's baton and tomorrow's vision: The effect of strengthening patent examination system on corporate innovation strategies. Journal of Business Research 144 (2022), 614–626.
Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, P., Puumalainen, K., Nature and dynamics of appropriability: Strategies for appropriating returns on innovation. R&D Management 37:2 (2007), 95–112.
Hussinger, K., Is silence golden? Patents versus secrecy at the firm level. Economics of Innovation and New Technology 15:8 (2006), 735–752.
Hussinger, K., Issah, A.-B., Firm Acquisitions by Family Firms: A Mixed Gamble Approach. Family Business Review 32:4 (2019), 354–377, 10.1177/0894486519885544.
Hussinger, K., Issah, W., Trade Secret Protection and R&D Investment of Family Firms. Family Business Review 35:4 (2022), 361–382.
Hussinger, K., Issah, W.B., Early patent disclosure and R&D investment in family firms. British Journal of Management 35 (2024), 1580–1591.
Iyer, D.N., Miller, K.D., Performance feedback, slack, and the timing of acquisitions. Academy of management Journal 51:4 (2008), 808–822.
Jin, P., Mangla, S.K., Song, M., The power of innovation diffusion: How patent transfer affects urban innovation quality. Journal of Business Research 145 (2022), 414–425.
Kahneman, D., Tversky, A., Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47:2 (1979), 263–291.
Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J.L., Thaler, R.H., Anomalies: The endowment effect, loss aversion, and status quo bias. Journal of Economic Perspectives 5:1 (1991), 193–206.
Kang, H., Lee, W., How innovating firms manage knowledge leakage: A natural experiment on the threat of worker departure. Strategic Management Journal 43:10 (2022), 1961–1982.
Kellermanns, F.W., Eddleston, K.A., Zellweger, T.M., Article commentary: Extending the socioemotional wealth perspective: A look at the dark side. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 36:6 (2012), 1175–1182.
Kogan, L., Papanikolaou, D., Seru, A., Stoffman, N., Technological innovation, resource allocation, and growth. the Quarterly journal of Economics 132:2 (2017), 665–712.
Kogan, L., Papanikolaou, D., Seru, A., & Stoffman, N. (2023). KPSS2017 /Technological-Innovation-Resource-Allocation-and-Growth-Extended-Data Retrieved 05/2023 from https://github.com/KPSS2017/Technological-Innovation-Resource-Allocation-and-Growth-Extended-Data.
Levin, R.C., Klevorick, A.K., Nelson, R.R., Winter, S.G., Gilbert, R., Griliches, Z., Appropriating the returns from industrial research and development. Brookings papers on economic activity 1987:3 (1987), 783–831.
Liebeskind, J.P., Keeping organizational secrets: Protective institutional mechanisms and their costs. Industrial and Corporate Change 6:3 (1997), 623–663.
Lim, S.-Y., Jeong, S.-H., Multi-founding family firms: Effects on firm governance, innovation, and performance. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 2025 forthcoming.
Linton, K., The importance of trade secrets: New directions in international trade policy making and empirical research. J. Int'l Com. & Econ., 1, 2016.
Lozano-Reina, G., Sánchez-Marín, G., Baixauli-Soler, J.S., Say-on-Pay voting dispersion in listed family and non-family firms: A panel data analysis. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 13(1), 2022, 100423.
Martin, G., Gomez-Mejia, L., The relationship between socioemotional and financial wealth: Re-visiting family firm decision making. Management Research: Journal of the Iberoamerican Academy of Management 14:3 (2016), 215–233.
Martin, G.P., Gomez-Mejia, L.R., Wiseman, R.M., Executive stock options as mixed gambles: Revisiting the behavioral agency model. Academy of management Journal 56:2 (2013), 451–472.
Marx, M., Strumsky, D., Fleming, L., Mobility, skills, and the Michigan non-compete experiment. Management Science 55:6 (2009), 875–889.
McConnel, J., & Servaes, H. (1990). H, S.(1990). Additional Evidence on Equity Ownership and Corporate Value. Journal of Financial Economics, 27(2), 595-692.
Mezzanotti, F., & Simcoe, T. (2023). Innovation and appropriability: Revisiting the role of intellectual property.
Michiels, A., Voordeckers, W., Lybaert, N., Steijvers, T., CEO compensation in private family firms: Pay-for-performance and the moderating role of ownership and management. Family Business Review 26:2 (2013), 140–160.
Miller, D., Steier, L., Le Breton-Miller, I., Lost in time: Intergenerational succession, change and failure in family business. Journal of Business Venturing 18 (2003), 513–531.
Miroshnychenko, I., De Massis, A., Three decades of research on corporate governance and R&D investments: A systematic review and research agenda. R&D Management 50:5 (2020), 648–666.
Miroshnychenko, I., De Massis, A., Miller, D., Barontini, R., Family business growth around the world. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 45:4 (2021), 682–708.
Miroshnychenko, I., Vocalelli, G., De Massis, A., Grassi, S., Ravazzolo, F., The COVID-19 pandemic and family business performance. Small Business Economics, 2023, 1–29.
Morikawa, M., Innovation in the service sector and the role of patents and trade secrets: Evidence from Japanese firms. Journal of the Japanese and International Economies 51 (2019), 43–51.
Muñoz-Bullón, F., Sanchez-Bueno, M.J., De Massis, A., Combining internal and external R&D: The effects on innovation performance in family and nonfamily firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 44:5 (2020), 996–1031.
Nieto, M.J., Santamaria, L., Fernandez, Z., Understanding the Innovation Behavior of Family Firms. Journal of Small Business Management 53:2 (2015), 382–399, 10.1111/jsbm.12075.
Park, M., Wu, S., & Funk, R. J. (2025). Regulation and innovation revisited: How restrictive environments can promote destabilizing new technologies. Organization Science, forthcoming.
Patel, P.C., Chrisman, J.J., Risk abatement as a strategy for R&D investments in family firms. Strategic Management Journal 35:4 (2014), 617–627.
Peng, C.-H., Wu, L.-L., Wei, C.-P., Chang, C.-M., Intrafirm network structure and firm innovation performance: The moderating role of environmental uncertainty. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 69:4 (2020), 1173–1184.
Png, I.P.L., Law and Innovation: Evidence from State Trade Secrets Laws. Review of Economics and Statistics 99:1 (2017), 167–179, 10.1162/REST_a_00532.
Rahman, D., Kabir, M., Oliver, B., Does exposure to product market competition influence insider trading profitability?. Journal of Corporate Finance, 66, 2021, 101792.
Ref, O., Shapira, Z., Entering new markets: The effect of performance feedback near aspiration and well below and above it. Strategic Management Journal 38:7 (2017), 1416–1434, 10.1002/smj.2561.
Ref, O., Feldman, N.E., Iyer, D.N., Shapira, Z., Entry into new foreign markets: Performance feedback and opportunity costs. Journal of World Business, 56(6), 2021, 101258.
Rios, L.A., On the origin of technological acquisition strategy: The interaction between organizational plasticity and environmental munificence. Strategic Management Journal 42:7 (2021), 1299–1325.
Sampat, B.N., A survey of empirical evidence on patents and innovation. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper, No. 25383, 2018.
Saridakis, C., Angelidou, S., Woodside, A.G., How historical and social aspirations reshape the relationship between corporate financial performance and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Research, 157, 2023, 113553.
Scherer, F.M., Corporate inventive output, profits, and growth. journal of political economy 73:3 (1965), 290–297.
Scherer, F.M., Firm size, market structure, opportunity, and the output of patented inventions. The American Economic Review 55:5 (1965), 1097–1125.
Shackelford B, Jankowski J; National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics (NCSES). 2021. Three-Quarters of U.S. Businesses that Performed or Funded R&D Viewed Trade Secrets as Important in 2018. NSF 21-339. Alexandria, VA: National Science Foundation.
Shim, J., Okamuro, H., Does ownership matter in mergers? A comparative study of the causes and consequences of mergers by family and non-family firms. Journal of Banking & Finance 35:1 (2011), 193–203.
Shou, Y., Shan, S., Chen, A., Cheng, Y., Boer, H., Aspirations and environmental performance feedback: A behavioral perspective for green supply chain management. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 40:6 (2020), 729–751.
Somaya, D., Patent Strategy and Management. Journal of Management 38:4 (2012), 1084–1114, 10.1177/0149206312444447.
Sussman, L., Disclosure, leaks, and slips: Issues and strategies for prohibiting employee communication. Business Horizons 51:4 (2008), 331–339.
Titus, V. Jr, Parker, O., Covin, J., Organizational aspirations and external venturing: The contingency of entrepreneurial orientation. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 44:4 (2020), 645–670.
Tyler, B.B., Caner, T., New product introductions below aspirations, slack and R&D alliances: A behavioral perspective. Strategic Management Journal 37:5 (2016), 896–910.
Umans, I., Lybaert, N., Steijvers, T., Voordeckers, W., Laveren, E., Performance below and above aspirations as an antecedent of succession planning in family firms: A socio-emotional wealth mixed gamble approach. Review of Managerial Science 18:5 (2024), 1427–1458.
Villalonga, B., Amit, R., Family ownership. Oxford Review of Economic Policy 36:2 (2020), 241–257.
Wadhwa, A., Bodas Freitas, I.M., Sarkar, M., The paradox of openness and value protection strategies: Effect of extramural R&D on innovative performance. Organization Science 28:5 (2017), 873–893.
Wales, W.J., Patel, P.C., Parida, V., Kreiser, P.M., Nonlinear effects of entrepreneurial orientation on small firm performance: The moderating role of resource orchestration capabilities. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal 7:2 (2013), 93–121.
Wang, Y., Trade secrets laws and technology spillovers. Research Policy, 52(7), 2023, 104794.
Williams, R.I. Jr, Pieper, T.M., Kellermanns, F.W., Astrachan, J.H., Family firm goals and their effects on strategy, family and organization behavior: A review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews 20 (2018), S63–S82.
Wiseman, R.M., Gomez-Mejia, L.R., A behavioral agency model of managerial risk taking. Academy of Management Review 23:1 (1998), 133–153.
Xu, K., Hitt, M.A., Dai, L., International diversification of family-dominant firms: Integrating socioemotional wealth and behavioral theory of the firm. Journal of World Business, 55(3), 2020, 101071.
