Showing papers on "Diffusion of innovations published in 1994"

Implementation of electronic data interchange: an innovation diffusion perspective

Abstract: Electronic data interchange (EDI) has dramatically changed the manner in which interorganizational transactions are conducted. The electronic exchange of transaction documents has had a significant impact on business practices, particularly in the sales and purchase/merchandising functions of organizations. EDI brings in many benefits to the organization such as reduced costs, faster turnaround, better customer service, and in some firms strategic advantage over their competitors. Despite these benefits, firms still have problems in implementing EDI.This study, drawing upon research in innovation theory and information systems, examines the relationship between various innovation characteristics (complexity, two forms of compatibility, costs, relative advantage, and communicability) and various attributes of diffusion (adaptation, internal diffusion, external diffusion, and implementation success) of EDI in organizations. The data for the study were collected from a large-scale field survey of 201 firms in the United States that have implemented EDI. Two senior executives, one from information systems (IS) and the other from the sales/purchase function, provided matched responses to a questionnaire that measured the various research constructs.The results of the multivariate regression analyses revealed that relative advantage, costs, and technical compatibility were the major predictors of adaptation. While relative advantage and duration were important predictors of internal diffusion, technical compatibility and duration were found to be important predictors of external diffusion. Both forms of compatibility (technical and organizational) and costs were found to be important predictors of implementation success in EDI.

The effects of tacitness and tangibility on the diffusion of knowledge-based resources.

Abstract: This paper explains the diffusion of knowledge-based resources in the evolution of technology using the attributes of knowledge. I propose a set of hypotheses regarding the role of knowledge-based ...

Technology Innovativeness and Adopter Categories of Apparel/Gift Retailers: From the Diffusion of Innovations Perspective

Abstract: This study using diffusion of innovation theory examines the influence of perceived characteristics of innovation, individual characteristics, and organizational characteristics on retailers' technology innovativeness. Apparel and gift retailers from five western states (N = 804) were classified into five adopter categories: Innovators (6%), Early Adopters (8.1%), Early Majority (20.6%), Late Majority (41%), and Laggards/Non-Adopters (28.2%). Multivariate and univariate analysis of variance with Tukey's HSD test revealed that these five groups differed overall on perceived characteristics of innovation (relative advantage, compatibility, and observability), individual characteristics (information-seeking, age, education, formal computer training, gender, retail experience in years, seminar attendance, perceived profitability), and organizational characteristics (store sales volume, city size, business competitiveness, and store's actual profitability). Discussion about the differences among the groups is ...

Innovation and Diffusion in Small Firms: Theory and Evidence

Abstract: By surveying the process descriptions and quantitative studies of innovation and diffusion in a dynamic context, an inventory of small firms' strengths and weaknesses in innovation and diffusion is presented. Background information regarding the relevant characteristics of small firms is given--especially on diversity, small scale, personality, and independence. It is from these characteristics that the strength and weaknesses of small firms concerning their ability to innovate and to adopt innovations are inferred. Strengths of small businesses include: motivated management and commitment, motivated labor, appropriability, and originality of initiative. Among small firm weaknesses are: unopposed misapprehensions, limited capacity for absorption of new knowledge and technology, little spread of risk and limited synergy, and a lack of functional expertise. (SFL)

Formulating and implementing public sector innovations: the political environment of state government innovators

Abstract: INTRODUCTION For the past three decades, students of public administration have considered the development of innovations within organizations an important topic in organizational theory (e.g., Wilson, 1966; Downs, 1967; Rowe and Boise, 1974; Kingdon, 1984; Altshuler and Zegans, 1990).(1) Paralleling this interest, students of comparative state politics and policy have considered the diffusion of innovations a central element in the process of state policy formulation and agenda setting (e.g., Walker, 1969; Gray, 1973; Savage, 1985a).(2) Both bodies of literature have resulted in important and theoretically rich speculations on the propensity of certain types of organizations to engage in innovative activities and the flow of new ideas within the American federal system. However, students of administration have typically ignored the political context within which public sector innovations emerge and students of interstate policy diffusion have generally treated "innovations" as if all new approaches were essentially similar in magnitude. The analysis to follow attempts to merge these literatures by focusing on the political environment surrounding successful state government innovators in the late 1980s. The central premise of the research in that successfully implementing a public sector innovation is fundamentally a political process. While one might expect that new ideas are continually floating around state governments as they attempt to tackle increasingly complex policy problems, only those ideas that capture the attention of relevant decision-makers will eventually become an innovation. The analysis begins with a brief review of the literature regarding the political context of public sector innovation and the literature on differences among innovations that would affect political receptivity to the new approach. The research design, data gathering procedure, and operationalization of different types of innovation are then presented. Analysis is conducted assessing if different types of innovation trigger differential involvement of political actors. The analysis concludes with recommendations for future research in the area of innovation development and execution. THEORETICAL ORIENTATION AND HYPOTHESES Public officials operate in an environment deliberately established (division of labor, chain of command, administrative procedure regulations, overhead political control) to prevent their agencies from embarking on new ideas without the concurrence of other relevant actors within the decision-making environment. Previous work on the decision environment of state agencies (Wright, 1978; Brudney and Hebert, 1987; Miller, 1987) has identified a number of actors involved in agency decision-making and has found that external actor influence varies systematically, depending upon characteristics of the state, the policy responsibilities of the agency, and structural features of the agency in question. The environmental actors identified in this literature are governors, legislators, interest groups, clients, other agencies, federal officials, and professional associations. By their very nature, public sector innovations create turbulence within organizations and policy communities leading to the potential of resource and power relationship changes. However, not all innovations are the same and their differences should, theoretically, affect how they are received by external actors. In Rowe and Boise's (1974) review of innovation theory, they offer a category scheme drawn from Wilson (1966) and Knight (1967) premised on the "impact" of the innovation. Impact is defined on two dimensions: organizational impact, "the amount of organizational and/or societal space, i.e., activities and interactions, affected by an innovation;" and social impact, "the degree of radicalness, i.e., extent of change in activities and interaction, of an innovation" (Ibid., 289). From Wilson (1966) the social scope of the innovation refers to how fundamentally the innovation affects the organization's task environment. …

Patterns of competition: the diffusion of a radio broadcasting strategy.

Abstract: Organizational adoption of innovations results from the ability of the innovation to solve the organization's competitive problems, contagion from previous adopters, and the inertia of the organiza...