from luddites to fruit flies iem5010 summer 2003 paul e. rossler, ph.d., p.e

From Luddites to Fruit FliesFrom Luddites to Fruit Flies

IEM5010 Summer 2003IEM5010 Summer 2003

Paul E. Rossler, Ph.D., P.E.Paul E. Rossler, Ph.D., P.E.

A word to the wiseA word to the wise

““Getting a new idea adopted, even when Getting a new idea adopted, even when it has obvious advantages, is often very it has obvious advantages, is often very difficult.” – Rogers (p. 1)difficult.” – Rogers (p. 1)

Overview – Part AOverview – Part A

• Key stages in the generation of Key stages in the generation of innovationsinnovations

• The innovation-decision processThe innovation-decision process– Key stagesKey stages– Attributes of innovations that explain Attributes of innovations that explain

adoption ratesadoption rates– Implications for changeImplications for change

The generation of innovations The generation of innovations generally follows six stagesgenerally follows six stages

• Essentially a communication process Essentially a communication process and, therefore, labor intensiveand, therefore, labor intensive

• Characterized by a high degree of Characterized by a high degree of uncertaintyuncertainty

Needs R D C Diffusion Conseq.

See p. 133 for full model

Innovations often result when Innovations often result when science addresses practicescience addresses practice

• A considerable degree of serendipity A considerable degree of serendipity may occur in the process (p. 156)may occur in the process (p. 156)

• Much innovation occurs when Much innovation occurs when information is exchanged about needs information is exchanged about needs and wants versus possible solutions (p. and wants versus possible solutions (p. 137)137)

R

Development is characterized Development is characterized by a high degree of uncertaintyby a high degree of uncertainty

• Must understand and anticipate problems of Must understand and anticipate problems of end users (p. 139)end users (p. 139)– Suggests high degree of end user involvementSuggests high degree of end user involvement

• Existing organizational structures often not Existing organizational structures often not conducive to this activity (pp. 139-140)conducive to this activity (pp. 139-140)

• Technology transfer is a communication Technology transfer is a communication process, a two way exchange (p. 140)process, a two way exchange (p. 140)

D

Development is characterized Development is characterized by...uncertainty (cont’d.)by...uncertainty (cont’d.)

• Three levels or degrees of transfer (p. 142)Three levels or degrees of transfer (p. 142)– KnowledgeKnowledge– Use (much more complex transfer)Use (much more complex transfer)– Commercialization (requires even more Commercialization (requires even more

intensive exchange of information)intensive exchange of information)

D

Development is characterized Development is characterized by...uncertainty (cont’d.)by...uncertainty (cont’d.)

• Process often fails in part because managers Process often fails in part because managers often underestimate effort required (p. 142)often underestimate effort required (p. 142)

• Most successful model is Ag Extension Model Most successful model is Ag Extension Model (p. 157)(p. 157)– Several other agencies have tried to copy it, but Several other agencies have tried to copy it, but

with little success (p. 159)with little success (p. 159)

D

One of the most crucial decisions One of the most crucial decisions is the decision to diffuse, to adoptis the decision to diffuse, to adopt

• Innovation gate keeping occurs in a variety of Innovation gate keeping occurs in a variety of ways (p. 148)ways (p. 148)– Decision processesDecision processes– Blanket approvalBlanket approval– RecommendationsRecommendations– Consensus developmentConsensus development– TrialsTrials

Diffusion

Decision about an innovation is Decision about an innovation is a process, occurring over timea process, occurring over time

• Period between awareness-knowledge Period between awareness-knowledge and decision is gestation period (p. 198)and decision is gestation period (p. 198)

• Distinguishing characteristic is perceived Distinguishing characteristic is perceived newness of innovation and uncertainty newness of innovation and uncertainty associated with it (p. 161)associated with it (p. 161)

Knowledge Persuasion Decision Implement. Confirmation

See p. 163 for full model

Decision about an innovation is Decision about an innovation is a process (continued)a process (continued)

• Essentially a social process (p. 165)Essentially a social process (p. 165)• How the problem is defined helps How the problem is defined helps

determine approach to its solution (p. determine approach to its solution (p. 115)115)– And ultimately the effectiveness of the And ultimately the effectiveness of the

attempted solutionattempted solution– Frequent error to overstress individual blame Frequent error to overstress individual blame

(p. 115)(p. 115)



• Stages in process matter with respect to Stages in process matter with respect to willingness, readiness, ability to change willingness, readiness, ability to change (p. 191)(p. 191)– A stereotype of later adopters can become a A stereotype of later adopters can become a

self-fulfilling prophecy (p. 118)self-fulfilling prophecy (p. 118)

• Change agent must consider where Change agent must consider where participants are in this process (p. 191)participants are in this process (p. 191)



• One distinctive problem: participants are usually One distinctive problem: participants are usually quite different from one another (pp. 19, 127-8) quite different from one another (pp. 19, 127-8) – Stage of process and level within stageStage of process and level within stage– Criteria that guide the choice of innovationsCriteria that guide the choice of innovations– Influence of social structure over decisionsInfluence of social structure over decisions– Perceived degree of innovation’s appropriateness, Perceived degree of innovation’s appropriateness,

validity, and adequacyvalidity, and adequacy– Likely consequences of the innovationLikely consequences of the innovation


Previous practice, felt needs, and Previous practice, felt needs, and norms lead to knowledge stagenorms lead to knowledge stage

• Three types: awareness, how-to, and Three types: awareness, how-to, and principles (pp. 165-166)principles (pp. 165-166)– Most change agents focus on awarenessMost change agents focus on awareness

• Possible to adopt w/o principles-Possible to adopt w/o principles-knowledge but danger of misuse greaterknowledge but danger of misuse greater

• Selective exposure often plays role here Selective exposure often plays role here (p. 164)(p. 164)

Knowledge


• The slope of the curve for rate of The slope of the curve for rate of awareness is steeper than that for the awareness is steeper than that for the rate of adoption (p. 199)rate of adoption (p. 199)

Knowledge

Knowledge proceeds at a Knowledge proceeds at a more rapid rate than adoptionmore rapid rate than adoption

Time (in years)

Cum

ulat

ive

Per

cent

age

of

Ado

pter

s

Rate ofAwareness-Knowledge

Rate ofAdoption

(Based on graph shown on p. 200)

GestationPeriod


• Characteristics of innovations, as Characteristics of innovations, as perceived by individuals, help explain perceived by individuals, help explain rate of adoption (p. 15)rate of adoption (p. 15)– See p. 207 for complete modelSee p. 207 for complete model

Knowledge

Five attributes explain 49 to 87% Five attributes explain 49 to 87% of the variance in rate of adoptionof the variance in rate of adoption

1.1. Relative advantage (p. 206 ff.)Relative advantage (p. 206 ff.)

2.2. CompatibilityCompatibility

3.3. ComplexityComplexity

4.4. TrialabilityTrialability

5.5. ObservabilityObservability

Relative advantage is one of Relative advantage is one of the best predictors of adoptionthe best predictors of adoption

• Degree to which innovation is perceived as Degree to which innovation is perceived as better than idea it supersedes (p. 212)better than idea it supersedes (p. 212)

• Whether or not individual should adopt is Whether or not individual should adopt is often difficult to determine (p. 215)often difficult to determine (p. 215)

• Immediacy of reward helps explain why Immediacy of reward helps explain why preventive innovations more difficult to preventive innovations more difficult to diffuse (p. 216)diffuse (p. 216)

Relative Advantage Rate of Adoption+

Compatibility usually speeds Compatibility usually speeds (but can slow) adoption(but can slow) adoption

• Degree to which innovation is perceived Degree to which innovation is perceived as consistent with values, experiences, as consistent with values, experiences, and needs (p. 224)and needs (p. 224)

• Cannot deal with an innovation except Cannot deal with an innovation except on the basis of the familiar (p. 225)on the basis of the familiar (p. 225)

• More compatible, the less of a change More compatible, the less of a change in behavior it represents (p. 227)in behavior it represents (p. 227)

Compatibility Rate of Adoption+ /–

Compatibility usually speeds Compatibility usually speeds (but can slow) adoption (cont’d.)(but can slow) adoption (cont’d.)

• When felt needs are met, a faster rate When felt needs are met, a faster rate of adoption usually occurs (p. 228)of adoption usually occurs (p. 228)– Discovering felt needs requires high Discovering felt needs requires high

degree of empathy and rapportdegree of empathy and rapport– May seek to generate needs, but this must May seek to generate needs, but this must

be done carefullybe done carefully

Compatibility Rate of Adoption+ / –

Complexity is negatively Complexity is negatively related to rate of adoptionrelated to rate of adoption

• Degree to which innovation is perceived Degree to which innovation is perceived as difficult to understand and use (p. as difficult to understand and use (p. 242)242)

Complexity Rate of Adoption–

Trialability is positively related Trialability is positively related to rate of adoptionto rate of adoption

• Degree to which an innovation may be Degree to which an innovation may be experimented with on a limited basis (p. experimented with on a limited basis (p. 243, also p. 171)243, also p. 171)

• Early adopters perceive it as more Early adopters perceive it as more important than late adopters (p. 243)important than late adopters (p. 243)

• Later adopters tend to rely on Later adopters tend to rely on demonstrations of othersdemonstrations of others

Trialability Rate of Adoption+

Observability is positively Observability is positively related to rate of adoptionrelated to rate of adoption

• Degree to which results of innovation Degree to which results of innovation are visible to others (p. 244)are visible to others (p. 244)

• Innovations in which software aspect Innovations in which software aspect dominates have slower rate of adoption dominates have slower rate of adoption (p. 244)(p. 244)– Software or information base for the tool Software or information base for the tool

(p. 12)(p. 12)

Observability Rate of Adoption+

At the persuasion stage, the main At the persuasion stage, the main type of thinking is feelingtype of thinking is feeling

• Main outcome is favorable or unfavorable Main outcome is favorable or unfavorable attitude (p. 169)attitude (p. 169)

• Stands between knowledge and decisionStands between knowledge and decision

• Evaluation info on innovation’s attributes Evaluation info on innovation’s attributes usually sought from near peers (p. 168)usually sought from near peers (p. 168)

• Selective perception plays important role (p. Selective perception plays important role (p. 168)168)

Persuasion

At the persuasion stage, the main At the persuasion stage, the main type of thinking is feeling (cont’d.)type of thinking is feeling (cont’d.)

• Attitude-use discrepancies or KAP-gaps are Attitude-use discrepancies or KAP-gaps are common (pp. 169-170)common (pp. 169-170)– Particularly characteristic of ideas that are Particularly characteristic of ideas that are

preventive in naturepreventive in nature– Informed and possess favorable attitude, but Informed and possess favorable attitude, but

method(s) not acceptablemethod(s) not acceptable

Persuasion


• Attitude-use discrepancies or KAP-gaps Attitude-use discrepancies or KAP-gaps (continued)(continued)– Implementation a function of solution quality Implementation a function of solution quality andand

acceptanceacceptance– Quality (effective) solutions often not acceptable Quality (effective) solutions often not acceptable

solutionssolutions

Persuasion


• Interpersonal communication has greater Interpersonal communication has greater effectiveness in dealing with resistance or effectiveness in dealing with resistance or apathy (pp. 194, 197)apathy (pp. 194, 197)– Hints at labor intensive nature of changeHints at labor intensive nature of change– Mass media more important at knowledge stage Mass media more important at knowledge stage

(p. 195)(p. 195)• Can lead to changes in weakly held attitudes (p. 194)Can lead to changes in weakly held attitudes (p. 194)

Persuasion

Attitudes lead to adoption or Attitudes lead to adoption or rejection decisionsrejection decisions

• Four types: optional, collective, Four types: optional, collective, authority, contingent (pp. 28-30)authority, contingent (pp. 28-30)– Fastest adoption rate occurs through Fastest adoption rate occurs through

authority decisionsauthority decisions– Authority decisions may be circumvented Authority decisions may be circumvented

during implementationduring implementation

Decision

Attitudes lead to adoption or Attitudes lead to adoption or rejection decisions (continued)rejection decisions (continued)

• Rationality not easily measured; difficult to Rationality not easily measured; difficult to determine whether an individual should adopt determine whether an individual should adopt (p. 215)(p. 215)

• Each stage in the process is a potential Each stage in the process is a potential rejection point (p. 171)rejection point (p. 171)

• Innovations that can be divided for trial are Innovations that can be divided for trial are generally adopted more rapidly (p. 171)generally adopted more rapidly (p. 171)

Decision

Attitudes lead to adoption or Attitudes lead to adoption or rejection decisions (continued)rejection decisions (continued)

• Individual innovation decisions are Individual innovation decisions are idiosyncratic and particularistic (p. 111)idiosyncratic and particularistic (p. 111)– Failure to understand this contributes to Failure to understand this contributes to

pro-innovation bias (p. 100)pro-innovation bias (p. 100)• Regard adoption as rational, rejection as wrong Regard adoption as rational, rejection as wrong

or stupidor stupid

– The innovation may not be appropriate for The innovation may not be appropriate for late adopters or laggards (p. 117)late adopters or laggards (p. 117)

Decision

Implementation involves overt Implementation involves overt behavior changebehavior change

• Up to this point, the process is strictly a Up to this point, the process is strictly a mental exercise (p. 172)mental exercise (p. 172)

• Getting a new idea adopted, even when Getting a new idea adopted, even when it has obvious advantages, is often very it has obvious advantages, is often very difficult (p. 1)difficult (p. 1)

Implement.

Implementation involves overt Implementation involves overt behavior change (cont’d.)behavior change (cont’d.)

• Problems of implementation more Problems of implementation more serious when adopter is an organization serious when adopter is an organization (p. 173)(p. 173)– Organizational structure provides stability Organizational structure provides stability

and continuityand continuity

Implement.

Implementation involves overt Implementation involves overt behavior change (cont’d.)behavior change (cont’d.)

• Reinvention is quite commonReinvention is quite common– The adoption of an innovation by A often The adoption of an innovation by A often

looks different than its adoption by B (p. looks different than its adoption by B (p. 173)173)

– Allows innovation to fit more appropriately Allows innovation to fit more appropriately to local situations (p. 177)to local situations (p. 177)

Implement.

The last stage decides whether The last stage decides whether the right decision was madethe right decision was made

• Often difficult to change prior decision Often difficult to change prior decision (p. 181)(p. 181)

• Individuals tend to seek information they Individuals tend to seek information they expect to support or confirm decision expect to support or confirm decision made (p. 168)made (p. 168)

Confirmation

The last stage decides whether the The last stage decides whether the right decision was made (cont’d.)right decision was made (cont’d.)

• Rejection, discontinuance, and re-invention Rejection, discontinuance, and re-invention occur frequentlyoccur frequently– Such behavior may be rational and appropriateSuch behavior may be rational and appropriate

• Some research studies have found as many Some research studies have found as many discontinuers as first-time adopters (p. 182)discontinuers as first-time adopters (p. 182)– Later adopters more likely to discontinue Later adopters more likely to discontinue

innovation than early adopters (p. 183)innovation than early adopters (p. 183)

Confirmation

The last stage decides whether the The last stage decides whether the right decision was made (cont’d.)right decision was made (cont’d.)

• Discontinuance is one of two types, Discontinuance is one of two types, replacement and disenchantment (p. replacement and disenchantment (p. 182)182)

• Disenchantment due to misuse seems Disenchantment due to misuse seems more common among later adopters (p. more common among later adopters (p. 183)183)

Confirmation

SummarySummary

• Much innovation occurs when Much innovation occurs when information is exchanged about needs information is exchanged about needs and wants versus possible solutionsand wants versus possible solutions

• Technology transfer often fails in part Technology transfer often fails in part because managers often underestimate because managers often underestimate effort requiredeffort required

Summary (continued)Summary (continued)

• One of the most crucial decisions in the One of the most crucial decisions in the overall process is the decision to overall process is the decision to diffuse, to adoptdiffuse, to adopt

• Decision about an innovation is a Decision about an innovation is a process, occurring over timeprocess, occurring over time– Distinguishing characteristic is perceived Distinguishing characteristic is perceived

newness of innovation and uncertaintynewness of innovation and uncertainty associated with itassociated with it


• Stages in process matter with respect to Stages in process matter with respect to willingness, readiness, ability to changewillingness, readiness, ability to change– Change agent must consider where Change agent must consider where

participants are in this processparticipants are in this process• One distinctive problem: participants are One distinctive problem: participants are

usually quite different from one anotherusually quite different from one another


• Individual innovation decisions are Individual innovation decisions are idiosyncratic and particularisticidiosyncratic and particularistic

• Relative advantage, compatibility, Relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, trialability, and observability complexity, trialability, and observability explain 49 to 87% of the variance in rate explain 49 to 87% of the variance in rate of adoptionof adoption

• Attitude-use discrepancies or KAP-gaps Attitude-use discrepancies or KAP-gaps are commonare common


• Getting a new idea adopted, even when Getting a new idea adopted, even when it has obvious advantages, is often very it has obvious advantages, is often very difficultdifficult– Existing organizational structures often not Existing organizational structures often not

conducive to innovationconducive to innovation– Preventive innovations more difficult to Preventive innovations more difficult to

diffuse diffuse – Innovations in which software aspect Innovations in which software aspect

dominates have slower rate of adoptiondominates have slower rate of adoption


• Interpersonal communication has Interpersonal communication has greater effectiveness in dealing with greater effectiveness in dealing with resistance or apathyresistance or apathy

• Rejection, discontinuance, and re-Rejection, discontinuance, and re-invention occur frequentlyinvention occur frequently– Disenchantment due to misuse seems Disenchantment due to misuse seems

more common among later adoptersmore common among later adopters– Reinvention allows innovation to fit more Reinvention allows innovation to fit more

appropriately to local situationsappropriately to local situations

Overview – Part BOverview – Part B

• S-shaped curves and concept of critical S-shaped curves and concept of critical massmass

• Five ideal types based on degree of Five ideal types based on degree of innovativenessinnovativeness

• Role of change agents and opinion Role of change agents and opinion leadersleaders

• The innovation process itselfThe innovation process itself• Consequences of innovationsConsequences of innovations

Diffusion curves tendDiffusion curves tendto be S-shapedto be S-shaped

• Curve is both innovation-specific and Curve is both innovation-specific and system-specific (p. 260)system-specific (p. 260)

• Demonstration tends to be effective Demonstration tends to be effective strategy in early stages of curve (p. 355)strategy in early stages of curve (p. 355)– Experimental demonstrations to evaluate Experimental demonstrations to evaluate

effectiveness (p. 356)effectiveness (p. 356)– Exemplary demonstrations to persuade Exemplary demonstrations to persuade

potential adopterspotential adopters

Diffusion curves tendDiffusion curves tendto be S-shapedto be S-shaped

• The part of the curve from 10% to 20% The part of the curve from 10% to 20% adoption is where process takes off (p. adoption is where process takes off (p. 259, p. 324)259, p. 324)– Interpersonal networks become active in Interpersonal networks become active in

spreading subjective evaluationsspreading subjective evaluations– Critical mass occurs and further rate of Critical mass occurs and further rate of

adoption becomes self-sustaining (pp. 313, adoption becomes self-sustaining (pp. 313, 339-40)339-40)

Five ideal types based on Five ideal types based on degree of innovativenessdegree of innovativeness

• Innovators (roughly 2.5% of all Innovators (roughly 2.5% of all adopters)adopters)– 2 std. dev. below mean time to adoption2 std. dev. below mean time to adoption

• Early adopters (13.5% of adopters)Early adopters (13.5% of adopters)– Has the greatest degree of opinion Has the greatest degree of opinion

leadershipleadership– Between 1 and 2 std. dev. below mean Between 1 and 2 std. dev. below mean

time to adoptiontime to adoption

See p. 262 for model

Five ideal types based on degree Five ideal types based on degree of innovativeness (cont’d.)of innovativeness (cont’d.)

• Early majority (roughly 1/3 of adopters)Early majority (roughly 1/3 of adopters)– Seldom hold positions of opinion leadershipSeldom hold positions of opinion leadership– Follow with “deliberate willingness”Follow with “deliberate willingness”– Provide important link in diffusion processProvide important link in diffusion process

• Late majority (roughly 1/3 of adopters)Late majority (roughly 1/3 of adopters)– Skeptical; pressure of peers is necessarySkeptical; pressure of peers is necessary– Between mean time of adoption and 1 std. Between mean time of adoption and 1 std.

dev. above itdev. above it


Five ideal types based on degree Five ideal types based on degree of innovativeness (cont’d.) of innovativeness (cont’d.)

• Laggards (16% - little under 1/5)Laggards (16% - little under 1/5)– Form a fairly homogenous categoryForm a fairly homogenous category– Point of reference is the pastPoint of reference is the past– Suspicious of both innovations and change Suspicious of both innovations and change

agentsagents– Tend to have limited resourcesTend to have limited resources


% D

eplo

ymen

t

100%

Fre

qu

en

cy D

istr

ibu

tio

n Rational Sub-groups

Time

CriticalMass

Achieved

Pioneers

EarlyAdaptors

Laggards

EarlyMaturity

2.5% 13.5% 34% 34% 16%

LateMaturity

© Copyright 1999, 2000 by Business Systems Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.

Network interconnectedness Network interconnectedness is related to innovativenessis related to innovativeness

• Diffusion is highly social in nature (p. 322)Diffusion is highly social in nature (p. 322)– Heart of diffusion process is imitation by Heart of diffusion process is imitation by

potential adopters of their near peers’ (p. 304)potential adopters of their near peers’ (p. 304)

• However, ingrown system is extremely poor However, ingrown system is extremely poor net in which to catch new information (p. net in which to catch new information (p. 310)310)– Informational strength lies more often than not Informational strength lies more often than not

in weak network ties (p. 309)in weak network ties (p. 309)

Earlier adopters have different Earlier adopters have different personalities than later adopterspersonalities than later adopters• Greater empathy (pp. 272-3)Greater empathy (pp. 272-3)

• Less dogmaticLess dogmatic

• Greater ability to deal with abstractionsGreater ability to deal with abstractions

• Greater rationality (use of most effective Greater rationality (use of most effective means to reach a given end)means to reach a given end)

• Greater intelligenceGreater intelligence

Earlier adopters have different Earlier adopters have different personalities... (cont’d.)personalities... (cont’d.)

• More favorable attitude toward changeMore favorable attitude toward change

• Better able to cope with uncertaintyBetter able to cope with uncertainty

• More favorable attitude toward scienceMore favorable attitude toward science

• Less fatalisticLess fatalistic

• Higher aspirationsHigher aspirations

Change agents should use different Change agents should use different campaigns with each categorycampaigns with each category• Campaigns are deliberate plans for Campaigns are deliberate plans for

bringing about change (pp. 275-6, 344)bringing about change (pp. 275-6, 344)– Intended to bring about certain specific Intended to bring about certain specific

effectseffects– Usually aimed at a specific audience and Usually aimed at a specific audience and

carried out during a specific time periodcarried out during a specific time period– Usually envisions a set of activities and Usually envisions a set of activities and

messagesmessages

A change agent can play 7 roles in A change agent can play 7 roles in the innovation process (p. 336 ff)the innovation process (p. 336 ff)

• Develops a need for changeDevelops a need for change

• Establishes an information-exchange Establishes an information-exchange relationshiprelationship– Client must accept change agent before Client must accept change agent before

they will accept innovation promotedthey will accept innovation promoted

• Diagnoses problemsDiagnoses problems– Must view situation emphatically from Must view situation emphatically from

client’s perspectiveclient’s perspective

A change agent can play 7 A change agent can play 7 roles (cont’d.)roles (cont’d.)

• Creates an intent in the client to changeCreates an intent in the client to change

• Translates intent into actionTranslates intent into action– Can only operate indirectly hereCan only operate indirectly here

• Stabilizes adoption and prevent Stabilizes adoption and prevent discontinuancediscontinuance– Reinforcing new behaviorReinforcing new behavior

A change agent can play 7 A change agent can play 7 roles (cont’d.)roles (cont’d.)

• Achieves a terminal relationshipAchieves a terminal relationship– Requires long range approach to changeRequires long range approach to change– Goal is self-reliance, the client’s ability to Goal is self-reliance, the client’s ability to

evaluate potential innovations themselves evaluate potential innovations themselves (p. 357)(p. 357)• Seldom reached by most change agentsSeldom reached by most change agents

Factors in change agent Factors in change agent successsuccess

• Amount of effort spent in Amount of effort spent in communication activities (p. 339)communication activities (p. 339)– More effective communication occurs when More effective communication occurs when

client and change agent similar (p. 346)client and change agent similar (p. 346)

• Timing of contact relative to stage of Timing of contact relative to stage of diffusiondiffusion

• Client-centered orientation (p. 340)Client-centered orientation (p. 340)

Factors in change agent Factors in change agent successsuccess

• Degree to which innovation is related to Degree to which innovation is related to client needs (pp. 340-1)client needs (pp. 340-1)

• Degree of empathy with clients (p. 342)Degree of empathy with clients (p. 342)– Technical expertise may not be the most Technical expertise may not be the most

important quality in client’s eyes (p. 351) important quality in client’s eyes (p. 351)

• Degree of safety credibility (p. 352)Degree of safety credibility (p. 352)

The innovativeness-needs The innovativeness-needs paradoxparadox

• The individuals or units in a system who The individuals or units in a system who most need the benefits of the new idea most need the benefits of the new idea are generally the last to adopt it (pp. are generally the last to adopt it (pp. 275, 347)275, 347)– Change agents often follow a strategy of Change agents often follow a strategy of

least resistanceleast resistance

Behavior of opinion-leaders helps Behavior of opinion-leaders helps determine rate of adoptiondetermine rate of adoption

• Degree to which an individual is able Degree to which an individual is able informally to influence others (p. 281)informally to influence others (p. 281)

• Usually different sets of opinion leaders in Usually different sets of opinion leaders in a system (p. 288)a system (p. 288)– Tendency to seek info and advice from Tendency to seek info and advice from

leaders perceived as more technically leaders perceived as more technically competent (p.289)competent (p.289)• But not too much greater!But not too much greater!

Behavior of opinion-leaders helps Behavior of opinion-leaders helps determine rate of adoption (cont’d.)determine rate of adoption (cont’d.)

• Not necessarily innovators (pp. 294, Not necessarily innovators (pp. 294, 354)354)– Sometimes they are, but often they are notSometimes they are, but often they are not

• Depends on whether or not norms favor Depends on whether or not norms favor changechange

– Change agents often err in selecting Change agents often err in selecting opinion leaders who are too innovative (p. opinion leaders who are too innovative (p. 295)295)

Behavior of opinion-leaders helps Behavior of opinion-leaders helps determine rate of adoption (cont’d.)determine rate of adoption (cont’d.)

• Must continually look over her or his Must continually look over her or his shoulder to followers (p. 296) shoulder to followers (p. 296) – Relationship of respect is a delicate Relationship of respect is a delicate

balance balance – Typically will hold back in adopting high-Typically will hold back in adopting high-

uncertainty innovations (p. 297) uncertainty innovations (p. 297)

Organizations vary with respect to Organizations vary with respect to their innovativenesstheir innovativeness

1.1. Centralization (Centralization (–)–)

2.2. Complexity (+)Complexity (+)

3.3. Formalization Formalization ((–)–)

4.4. Interconnectedness (+)Interconnectedness (+)

5.5. Organizational slack (+)Organizational slack (+)

6.6. Size (+)Size (+)

Weak relationships Weak relationships tend to be foundtend to be found

• Related to innovation in in two Related to innovation in in two directionsdirections– In one direction during the initiation phaseIn one direction during the initiation phase– In the opposite direction during the In the opposite direction during the

implementation phaseimplementation phase

Innovation process consists of two Innovation process consists of two phases and a usual sequencephases and a usual sequence

Agenda-Setting

MatchingRedefining

RestructuringClarifying Routinizing

I. Initiation II. Implementation

Decision

Note: Complete model shown on p. 392

Innovation goes on all the time in organizations (p. 376)

This process can be This process can be centralized or decentralizedcentralized or decentralized

• Fundamental assumption of Fundamental assumption of decentralized system is that users have decentralized system is that users have ability to make sound decisions (p. 365)ability to make sound decisions (p. 365)– Best when users are highly educated and Best when users are highly educated and

technically competent ortechnically competent or– When innovation does not involve a When innovation does not involve a

sophisticated level of technologysophisticated level of technology

See table on p. 366 for characteristics of these two systems

The decision to adopt leads to The decision to adopt leads to implementation activities implementation activities

• Four types: Optional, collective, authority, Four types: Optional, collective, authority, contingent (pp. 28-30, 372-3)contingent (pp. 28-30, 372-3)– Fastest adoption rate occurs through Fastest adoption rate occurs through

authority decisionsauthority decisions– Authority decisions may be circumvented Authority decisions may be circumvented

during implementationduring implementation

Agenda setting is continuously Agenda setting is continuously underway in organizationsunderway in organizations

• General organization problems that General organization problems that maymay create a perceived need for innovation create a perceived need for innovation (p. 393)(p. 393)– Gap between expectations and resultsGap between expectations and results

• Driven less by problems than by Driven less by problems than by solutions solutions – Probability of finding solution that matches Probability of finding solution that matches

a specific problem is smalla specific problem is small

Agenda setting is continuously Agenda setting is continuously underway in organizations (cont’d.) underway in organizations (cont’d.)

• Innovations often bubble up from Innovations often bubble up from operational levels (p. 364)operational levels (p. 364)

• Gauging the optimum rate of change in Gauging the optimum rate of change in a system is very difficult to do (p. 425)a system is very difficult to do (p. 425)– Stable equilibriumStable equilibrium– DynamicDynamic– DisequilibriaDisequilibria

Matching is bothMatching is bothplanned and designedplanned and designed

• Fitting a problem from the organization’s Fitting a problem from the organization’s agenda with an innovation (p. 394)agenda with an innovation (p. 394)

• A kind of reality or feasibility testingA kind of reality or feasibility testing

• Entails thinking about anticipated Entails thinking about anticipated problems if implementedproblems if implemented– And performing a realistic (subjective) cost-And performing a realistic (subjective) cost-

benefit analysisbenefit analysis

Redefining/restructuring occurs Redefining/restructuring occurs when innovation is re-inventedwhen innovation is re-invented• Implementation amounts to a mutual Implementation amounts to a mutual

adaptation (pp. 372, 395)adaptation (pp. 372, 395)– Of the innovationOf the innovation– And the organization And the organization

• Implementation is inhibited when users Implementation is inhibited when users are provided no opportunities to re-are provided no opportunities to re-invent (p. 396)invent (p. 396)

Redefining/restructuring Redefining/restructuring (cont’d.)(cont’d.)

• The more radical the innovation, the The more radical the innovation, the greater the uncertainty and difficulty (p. greater the uncertainty and difficulty (p. 397)397)– Three type of uncertaintyThree type of uncertainty

• TechnicalTechnical• FinancialFinancial• SocialSocial

Redefining/restructuring Redefining/restructuring (cont’d.)(cont’d.)

• High-powered champion often required High-powered champion often required for innovations that are costly, visible, or for innovations that are costly, visible, or radical (p. 398)radical (p. 398)

Clarifying occurs as the innovation Clarifying occurs as the innovation is put into more widespread useis put into more widespread use• When new idea implemented, it has little When new idea implemented, it has little

meaning to organization’s members (p. meaning to organization’s members (p. 399)399)

• Meaning constructed over time through Meaning constructed over time through social process of human interactionsocial process of human interaction

• Too-rapid implementation at this stage Too-rapid implementation at this stage often leads to disastrous resultsoften leads to disastrous results

When innovation loses its separate When innovation loses its separate identity, it has been made routineidentity, it has been made routine

• Organization’s members no longer think Organization’s members no longer think of innovation as new (p. 399)of innovation as new (p. 399)

Implementation should lead to Implementation should lead to the desired effectsthe desired effects

• Form and function of an innovation can Form and function of an innovation can be anticipatedbe anticipated– Its meaning to participants often cannot be Its meaning to participants often cannot be

(p. 422)(p. 422)

• The effects of an innovation cannot be The effects of an innovation cannot be managed to separate the desirable from managed to separate the desirable from the undesirable consequences (p. 414)the undesirable consequences (p. 414)

Implementation should lead to Implementation should lead to the desired effects (cont’d.)the desired effects (cont’d.)

• No innovation comes without strings No innovation comes without strings attached (p. 419)attached (p. 419)– A system is like a bowl of marblesA system is like a bowl of marbles

• The desirable, direct, and anticipated The desirable, direct, and anticipated consequences of an innovation usually consequences of an innovation usually go together (p. 421)go together (p. 421)– As does their oppositesAs does their opposites

SummarySummary

• Most diffusion follows a S-shaped curveMost diffusion follows a S-shaped curve– Demonstration tends to be effective Demonstration tends to be effective

strategy in early stages of curve (p. 355)strategy in early stages of curve (p. 355)– The part of the curve from 10% to 20% The part of the curve from 10% to 20%

adoption is where process takes offadoption is where process takes off

• Adopters are one of five ideal types, Adopters are one of five ideal types, differing in their degree of differing in their degree of innovativenessinnovativeness


• Change agents should use different Change agents should use different campaigns with each categorycampaigns with each category

• Behavior of opinion-leaders helps Behavior of opinion-leaders helps determine rate of adoptiondetermine rate of adoption


• Characteristics of organizational Characteristics of organizational innovativeness work in one direction innovativeness work in one direction during initiationduring initiation– And the other direction during And the other direction during

implementationimplementation

• Innovation process consists of initiation Innovation process consists of initiation and implementation, occurring in a and implementation, occurring in a usual sequence of eventsusual sequence of events


• The effects of an innovation cannot be The effects of an innovation cannot be managed to separate the desirable from managed to separate the desirable from the undesirable consequencesthe undesirable consequences

Part C - A brief case studyPart C - A brief case study

• Implementation knowledge in MISImplementation knowledge in MIS

• A look at the general experience with A look at the general experience with Enterprise Resource Planning SystemsEnterprise Resource Planning Systems

A rough description of ERP A rough description of ERP systemssystems

• ““Pre-coded” applications include SAP, Pre-coded” applications include SAP, Oracle, Baan, JDEdwards, PeopleSoftOracle, Baan, JDEdwards, PeopleSoft

• Designed around the flow of informationDesigned around the flow of information

• Typically make use of centralized Typically make use of centralized databases with decentralized controldatabases with decentralized control

• Affect everything from order capture to Affect everything from order capture to procurement, production to distribution procurement, production to distribution

A rough description of ERP A rough description of ERP systems (cont’d.)systems (cont’d.)

• Allow the same piece of data to be Allow the same piece of data to be collected and shared in real timecollected and shared in real time

• Incorporate the latest and best Incorporate the latest and best information technologies availableinformation technologies available

• Enable managers to base decisions on Enable managers to base decisions on global, not local, performance metricsglobal, not local, performance metrics

InstallInstallERPERP

Enhanced Enhanced AnalysisAnalysis

BetterBetterDecisionsDecisions

More More TimelyTimely

InformationInformation

Better Better Quality Quality


The idea behind an ERP has The idea behind an ERP has a powerful, seductive appeala powerful, seductive appeal

InstallInstallERPERP

Enhanced Enhanced AnalysisAnalysis

BetterBetterDecisionsDecisions

Capacity toCapacity toProcess Info.Process Info.

RewardRewardSystemSystem

DecisionDecisionProcessProcess

Propensity toPropensity toMeddleMeddle

Info. SourceInfo. SourcePreferencePreference

Availability ofAvailability ofTimeTime

More TimelyMore TimelyInformationInformation

Better Better Quality Quality


The real world tends to be a The real world tends to be a bit messierbit messier

Kolb/Frohman Model applied Kolb/Frohman Model applied to MIS Implementationto MIS Implementation

Source: S. Alter and M. Ginzberg, "Managing uncertainty in MIS implementation," Source: S. Alter and M. Ginzberg, "Managing uncertainty in MIS implementation," Sloan Sloan Management RevewManagement Revew, Fall 1978, pp. 23-31., Fall 1978, pp. 23-31.

Risk factors during Risk factors during implementationimplementation

Source: S. Alter and M. Ginzberg, "Managing uncertainty in MIS implementation," Source: S. Alter and M. Ginzberg, "Managing uncertainty in MIS implementation," Sloan Sloan Management RevewManagement Revew, Fall 1978, pp. 23-31., Fall 1978, pp. 23-31.

Individuals and groups who Individuals and groups who change move through stageschange move through stages

(Based on Morris)(Based on Morris)

ScoutingScouting, targeting, targeting, diagnosisdiagnosis

Stress relief, Stress relief, catharsiscatharsis

Self- Self- awarenessawareness

Self- Self- evaluationevaluation

Self-designed Self-designed changechange

Trying out Trying out the new the new behaviorbehavior

Reinforcing Reinforcing new new

behaviorbehavior

Their progression, however, is Their progression, however, is usually not one way or linearusually not one way or linear

(Based on Morris)(Based on Morris)

ScoutingScouting, targeting, targeting, diagnosisdiagnosis

Stress relief, Stress relief, catharsiscatharsis

Self- Self- awarenessawareness

Self- Self- evaluationevaluation

Self-designed Self-designed changechange

Trying out Trying out the new the new behaviorbehavior

Reinforcing Reinforcing new new

behaviorbehavior

The right mode must be The right mode must be matched to the right stagematched to the right stage

StageStage• Scouting, targetingScouting, targeting• Stress relief, catharsisStress relief, catharsis• Self-awarenessSelf-awareness• Self-evaluationSelf-evaluation• Self-designed changeSelf-designed change• Trying out new behaviorTrying out new behavior• Reinforcing new Reinforcing new

behaviorbehavior

ModeMode• Acceptant listenerAcceptant listener• Expert solution providerExpert solution provider• Teacher, skill developerTeacher, skill developer• Group process Group process

coordinatorcoordinator• Data gathererData gatherer• ChallengerChallenger• Collaborator, team Collaborator, team

membermember

The majority of ERP projects The majority of ERP projects are difficultare difficult

• Significant budget overruns are Significant budget overruns are common due to software complexity common due to software complexity and disparate databasesand disparate databases


• Hardware and software costs tend to be Hardware and software costs tend to be known to a far greater extent than are known to a far greater extent than are the difficult to calculate costs associated the difficult to calculate costs associated with changing the way people workwith changing the way people work


• Because an ERP system often can’t be Because an ERP system often can’t be zero-based, it creates a need for a great zero-based, it creates a need for a great many people tomany people to– Accept the new systemAccept the new system– Learn new or different skills in order to use Learn new or different skills in order to use

itit– Become comfortable enough with it so that Become comfortable enough with it so that

it functions at some level of acceptable it functions at some level of acceptable performanceperformance


• Management finds the hardware and Management finds the hardware and software are installed easily enough, but software are installed easily enough, but then find themselves hard at work trying then find themselves hard at work trying to gain the understanding, commitment, to gain the understanding, commitment, and eventual ownership on the part of and eventual ownership on the part of day-to-day usersday-to-day users

The nature of ERP systems often The nature of ERP systems often helps foster resistancehelps foster resistance

• Relative advantage?Relative advantage?– The legacy system being replaced works The legacy system being replaced works

(more or less)(more or less)• Those who interface with it have achieved a Those who interface with it have achieved a

certain level of comfort with its usecertain level of comfort with its use• It essentially threatens no one’s power or It essentially threatens no one’s power or

influence or employment securityinfluence or employment security

– Often occurs in conjunction with Often occurs in conjunction with reengineeringreengineering


• Compatibility? Compatibility? – Decision to adopt often made by someone Decision to adopt often made by someone

other than those who must make it other than those who must make it functionalfunctional

– Little or no room for tailoringLittle or no room for tailoring– Data and (in many cases) time intensiveData and (in many cases) time intensive

• Complexity?Complexity?– Substantial amount of time and effort Substantial amount of time and effort

required for installation, userequired for installation, use


• Trial-ability? Trial-ability? – High, front-loaded cost makes it unlikely High, front-loaded cost makes it unlikely

that even a bad system will be discardedthat even a bad system will be discarded

• Observe-ability?Observe-ability?– Involves working harder at first in order to Involves working harder at first in order to

work smarterwork smarter

Difficult to distinguish honest Difficult to distinguish honest failure from subtle resistancefailure from subtle resistance

• Any organization-wide effort will Any organization-wide effort will encounter different learning curvesencounter different learning curves

• Making the distinction between who is Making the distinction between who is trying, who is not, is a very labor trying, who is not, is a very labor intensive processintensive process

• When schedules slip, resistance, not a When schedules slip, resistance, not a bad schedule, tends to be blamedbad schedule, tends to be blamed

Attempts to improve via technology Attempts to improve via technology teach a lesson about changeteach a lesson about change

• An organization can spend money a lot An organization can spend money a lot faster than can most people in the faster than can most people in the system make effective use of what the system make effective use of what the money was spent onmoney was spent on

• In other words, it’s the users’ throughput In other words, it’s the users’ throughput capacity that matters, not the installers’capacity that matters, not the installers’– A bottleneck that no amount of A bottleneck that no amount of

management commitment, staff support, or management commitment, staff support, or resources is going to hurry beyond a resources is going to hurry beyond a certain speedcertain speed

The key challenge is not design or The key challenge is not design or installationinstallation

• Making a new technology or process or Making a new technology or process or structure available for use is not the structure available for use is not the same as its effective usesame as its effective use

• The ability to implement a change to the The ability to implement a change to the point of local functionality (at a point of local functionality (at a minimum) to system-wide optimality (at minimum) to system-wide optimality (at best) is what’s keybest) is what’s key

All implementation is localAll implementation is local

• Organizations or groups are a lot like Organizations or groups are a lot like onionsonions

• However, peel away the layers and a However, peel away the layers and a unique mix of history, circumstances, unique mix of history, circumstances, and personalities emergeand personalities emerge

• Improvement phenomenon are not Improvement phenomenon are not easily or readily generalized from one easily or readily generalized from one setting to the nextsetting to the next

Implementation, however, often Implementation, however, often follows a field of dreams approachfollows a field of dreams approach

• Install the good idea, make it Install the good idea, make it operational, and the desired results will operational, and the desired results will comecome

• Installation – or solving the Stage 1 Installation – or solving the Stage 1 Problem - is one thing, what happens Problem - is one thing, what happens next is anothernext is another

• The Stage 2 Problem deals with what The Stage 2 Problem deals with what happens nexthappens next

Getting a handle on ERP’s Getting a handle on ERP’s track record proves difficult track record proves difficult

““Implemented” Implemented” ERPERP

Didn’t Install Didn’t Install ERPERP

Didn’t ImproveDidn’t Improve Got BetterGot Better

PerformancePerformance

History of IT-based initiatives History of IT-based initiatives parallels general experienceparallels general experience

• More efforts fail than succeedMore efforts fail than succeed

• Those that do succeed usually do a Those that do succeed usually do a better job at delivering all the costs than better job at delivering all the costs than they do at delivering all the benefitsthey do at delivering all the benefits

• Everything that has been tried to Everything that has been tried to improve performance works improve performance works somewhere; nothing works everywheresomewhere; nothing works everywhere

Perceptions of failure (often) not Perceptions of failure (often) not based on whether ERP “worked”based on whether ERP “worked”

• Rather, usually based in the gap Rather, usually based in the gap between expectations and realitybetween expectations and reality

• Substantial underestimation of the cost, Substantial underestimation of the cost, time, and frustration to functionalitytime, and frustration to functionality

• In many cases, once functionality is In many cases, once functionality is reached, a merger occursreached, a merger occurs

ERP adoption has probably ERP adoption has probably reached a tipping point reached a tipping point

• Even if they are, or eventually prove Even if they are, or eventually prove themselves to be, a bad idea…themselves to be, a bad idea…– Little can be done now to dissuade most Little can be done now to dissuade most

organization’s top management from organization’s top management from adopting themadopting them

• The challenge, therefore, is increasing The challenge, therefore, is increasing the probability of effective usethe probability of effective use– To the level of system-wide functionality (at To the level of system-wide functionality (at

a minimum) or optimality (at best)a minimum) or optimality (at best)

from luddites to fruit flies iem5010 summer 2003 paul e. rossler, ph.d., p.e

Documents