Managing Innovation Adoption

From Innovation to Implementation

Majharul Talukder

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2016
• ISBN:
  9781317101529
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Business
• Subtopic: Business General
• Index: Business

When Innovation is considered one of the key drivers of corporate success, why do organisations struggle to implement it? Research suggests that innovations fail due to a lack of acceptance by employees; therefore an understanding of potential adopters and the factors influencing their decisions is essential. Despite much research on adoption of innovation by an organization, very little is known about its acceptance by individuals within it. Managing Innovation Adoption is about managing technological innovation implementation at work in an effective way by presenting a new theoretical framework. Based on the theory of reasoned action (TRA), the technology acceptance model (TAM) and other conceptual frameworks, Dr Talukder's enhanced model combines factors from existing and original models to create a coherent new model. The data collected proves that it can be used to assist a broader understanding of how people in an organization adopt and use innovations. As well as contributing to academic knowledge, the author's discoveries have practical implications for organizations, managers, administrators and employees.

1
Introduction to Innovation Adoption

1.1 Background of the Problem

Innovation offers the potential for substantially improving the performance of organizations, such as businesses in the global economy. However, performance gains are often obstructed by users’ unwillingness to accept and use the available innovation. Due to the persistence and importance of this problem, explaining users’ acceptance of innovation has been a long-term study issue in organizations and information systems research (Davis, 1989). According to Frambach, Barkema, Nooteboom and Wedel (1998, p.161) “environmental conditions increasingly force organizations to innovate and bring new products to the market. As only a fraction of new products are successful, a thorough understanding of factors underlying the innovation adoption decisions by potential adopters is necessary.” Similarly, Bhattacherjee and Sanford (2006, p.805) state that “understanding IT acceptance is important because the expected benefits of IT usage, such as gain in efficiency, effectiveness or productivity, cannot be realized if individual users do not accept these systems for task performance.” Venkatesh, Morris and Ackerman (2000) note that organizational investments in information technologies have increased significantly in the past decade and these investments specifically aim to increase individual productivity, which consequently contributes to organizational productivity. While advances in innovation continue at an astronomical pace, the use of these innovations have fallen well below expectations and has been identified as one of the reasonable explanations for productivity gains from innovation investments being less than expected (Venkatesh, Morris & Ackerman, 2000). Consequently, understanding the factors influencing user acceptance of innovation in the workplace has long been a concern of scholars and practitioners (Sherif, Zmud & Browne, 2006, p.339; Venkatesh, Morris & Ackerman, 2000, p.34).

According to Bhattacherjee (1998) investment in innovation represents substantial capital budget expenditure for any organization. Management expects that innovation will be appropriately utilized by employees within the organization in order to achieve increased worker productivity, better decision making, efficiency in performing jobs or other expected benefits. However, the availability of innovation does not automatically guarantee that employees will use it. According to Bhattacherjee (1998), the ‘shelf-ware syndrome’ has been coined to describe software productivity packages sitting idle on book-shelves without being utilized by the individuals for whom they are intended. Motivating users to use innovation remains a major problem for organizations. Nelson (1990, p.79) concluded that “the adoption of new technology in the workplace has become a transition experience common to many organizations. The success of these endeavors depends on the nature of the individuals within the organization and the technology itself.” Innovation represents a social change affecting the behaviors of individuals within the organization as well as a structural change that alters the work design of the organization. The introduction of innovation in an organization requires its employees to change their attitude and behavior. Without employees’ behavior changes the organization’s plans may fail to reach its desired outcomes as they may either refuse to adopt it, or not use it to its potential (Nelson, 1990). As Youngblood (2005) put it, a “solution without the involvement of those who use the system is not a solution at all. A successful technology solution needs early and ongoing involvement of the people who use the system” (Youngblood, 2005, p.12).

Organizational innovations that need to be incorporated in the work processes of an organization are of little value if they are not adopted by employees (Frambach & Schillewaert, 2002). Employees must actually use an innovation to realize the intended benefits. According to Rogers’s (2003) model of innovation adoption, innovation passes through a set of stages before it is implemented by people. Individuals develop the ability to formulate attitudes, make decisions, implement and confirm whether or not innovations should be practiced. Despite an organizational decision to adopt an innovation, its actual usage depends on how employees implement an innovation. Therefore, it is important to examine the adoption of innovations by employees within organizations because if there is no acceptance among employees, the desired benefits cannot be realized and the organization may eventually abandon the innovation. People, by nature will resist change unless they can be convinced that they can directly benefit from the change (Ajzen, 1991). New technologies are rapidly replacing old ones by providing more powerful tools, efficiency and speed for users. “Their adoption can be successful, however, only when the employees accept and effectively use them, which means an organization should understand the acceptance process and factors that are essential in making this process effective” (Lee, Kim, Rhee & Trimi, 2006, p.470).

Although innovation adoption has been studied extensively, drivers of adoption and research on individual innovation acceptance remains limited (Frambach & Schillewaert, 2002). Designing an effective approach for increasing end-user acceptance and subsequent use of innovation continues to be a fundamental challenge that has not always provided straight-forward solutions. “While advances in hardware and software capabilities continue at an extraordinary pace, the problem of underutilized systems remains” (Kukafka, Johnson, Linfante & Allegrante, 2003, p.218). The current literature indicates that we know relatively little about the ways in which individuals adopt and the factors that influence individual adoption of innovation (Bhattacherjee, 1998; Frambach & Schillewaert, 2002; van Everdingen & Wierenga, 2002; Venkatesh & Davis, 2000). Hence, further research is required regarding the role of organizational, individual and social processes affecting individual adoption of innovation (Frambach & Schillewaert, 2002; Schepers & Wetzels, 2007; Yi, Jackson, Park & Probst, 2006). This study is designed to fill that gap. The identification of these factors is important to organizations that want to create a work environment that is conducive to individual adoption of innovation and thereby gain the expected benefits from the innovation.

From an empirical study conducted in South Australia, this study proposes a new theoretical framework and develops an advanced research model of innovation adoption taking into account the strength and limitations of previous innovation acceptance models such as the theory of reasoned action (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980), the technology acceptance model (Davis, 1989) and the conceptual framework provided by Frambach and Schillewaert (2002) while introducing several modifications, which were not in these earlier models. The new theoretical framework and improved model will help greater learning in innovation adoption and facilitate an understanding of the factors affecting individuals’ adoption of innovation. Theoretically, such research will enrich the innovation acceptance literature by addressing a construct that combines innovation adoption issues into a coherent model. The combination of variables and the testing of a wide range of factors in this study represent a novel approach to the understanding of an individual’s adoption of innovation. In addition, this research examines moderating factors that influence the process of innovation adoption, a previously unexplored area of research. In the case of practitioners, this research can help managers to identify and benchmark strategies to motivate innovation adoption in their organizations and customize these strategies to best fit the unique characteristics of their organizational users.

1.2 Research Questions

The implementation of an innovation in an organization when it has committed to it often happens slowly. This being the case, this study seeks to analyze the following:

1. What is the impact of organizational factors – training, managerial support and incentives – on individual adoption of innovation?

2. Do individual factors – perceived usefulness, personal innovativeness, prior experience, image and enjoyment of innovation – affect individuals’ adoption of innovation?

3. What is the impact of social factors – peers and social network – on individual adoption of innovation?

1.3 Study’s Rationale

1. The study will develop a new model and extend previous research by investigating multiple factors in individual adoption of innovation.

2. Findings of the study will contribute to the existing knowledge in the context of factors affecting the use and continued use of innovation.

3. The study will help organizations understand the determinants and the process of innovation adoption by individuals within an organization.

4. The results of the study will help organizations understand what changes are needed in organizational policies and strategies in order to develop and promote the adoption of innovation and consequently improve the wellbeing of employees as well as productivity of the organization.

5. The study will provide better understanding of employees’ adoption of innovation and thereby increase the level of innovation usage in the organization.

The research contributes to knowledge and promotes the adoption of innovations by individual employees within organizations.

1.4 Study’s Contribution to Knowledge

Development of a theoretical construct that correlates

individual innovation adoption issues into a coherent model.

The combination of variables in this study goes beyond previous research in an attempt to bring together all the relevant factors that may influence adoption into a coherent model. It examines the relationship between individual adoption and the factors that affect and determine the adoption and continued use of an innovation by individual employees within an organization. This research involves the combination of multiple variables, found in different innovation adoption-related studies, into a single-study context. Organizational, individual and social factors influence individual attitudes that consequently lead to individual adoption. In short, this study addresses numerous factors, tests whether they are significant and assesses differences between the factors; thereby contributing to knowledge and the broader theoretical understanding of the phenomenon.

1.5 Study’s Contribution to Practice

Promotion of management awareness, understanding and

support of innovation adoption by individual employees.

In addition to being of academic interest, the results of this research will be useful for various groups of practitioners engaged in introducing innovation in an organization. With the trend towards end-user applications, these findings will be crucial for guiding management toward more effective adoption and usage of innovation in an organization. The study will help to identify the extent to which the innovation can be used to support organizational needs and improve the work environment within the organization. Furthermore, it will determine the factors that affect individuals to adopt innovation. For management, this research may help to reduce innovation implementation-related cost and enable faster and more efficient individual uptake of innovation in the organization.

1.6 Conclusion

This chapter has provided background information on the research effort, research questions and the study’s contribution to knowledge and practice. Chapter 2, which presents a literature review, will examine various studies dealing with different aspects of adoption of innovation within an organization, theoretical foundations and relevant factors that affect individuals’ adoption of innovation.

2
Innovation Adoption by Individual Employees

2.1 Introduction

The purpose of this chapter is to present a review of related literature on the issue of individual employees’ adoption of innovation in an organization. The chapter provides an analysis of the definitions of innovation, innovation adoption and implementation, the theoretical framework, the relevant factors that influence adoption of innovation and conclusion.

This chapter explains the various definitions of innovation and the problems with information innovation adoption and implementation. It includes three theoretical and conceptual models – the theory of reasoned action, the technology acceptance model and the conceptual framework provided by Frambach and Schillewaert (2002) to develop an advanced research model of individual innovation adoption. The chapter then discusses relevant factors that influence adoption of innovation. The chapter particularly focuses on three organizational factors – training, managerial support and incentives; five individual factors – perceived usefulness, personal innovativeness, prior experience, image and enjoyment with innovation and two social factors – peers and social network which affect individuals’ adoption of innovation. The chapter also discusses demographic factors that influence individuals’ attitude toward innovation adoption.

2.2 Definitions of Innovation

There are various definitions of innovation that appear in the literature. The purpose of this section is to explain and compare the major definitions.

Rogers (2003, p.12) defines “innovation as an idea, practice or object that is perceived as new by an individual or other unit of adoption. If an idea or object seems new to the individual, it is considered as an innovation.” Furthermore, according to Rogers (2003, p.12), “the concept of newness in an innovation need not just involve new knowledge. An individual may have known of an innovation for some time but not yet developed a favorable or unfavorable attitude toward it.” He argues that “the newness aspect of an innovation can be expressed in terms of knowledge, persuasion or a decision to adopt” (Rogers, 2003, p.12).

Afuah (2003) states that innovation is the use of a new technological system that offers a better and improved service. The outcome of the new system is more efficiency and that it is new to the employees. According to Higgins (1995, p.9), “innovation is the development of something new that has significant value to an individual, a group, an organization, an industry or a society.” This definition explains that an innovation is something – an object or a system – that has significant value to individuals or to organizations. Organizations intend that individual employees will adopt an innovation that consequently will enhance work efficiency, gain competitive advantage and maintain superior management systems. Holt (1983) makes similar claims that innovation is a process, which uses knowledge and information to create or introduce something that is new and useful to individuals or to organizations.

According to Zaltman, Duncan and Holbek (1973, p.8), “innovation can be defined as an idea, practice, or material artifact perceived to be new by the relevant unit of adoption.” They argued that innovation is any new system or program, which is new to individuals or organizations who are adopting it no matter how old the system may be or how many other organizations may have adopted it. The length of time the system has been in existence and the number of other organizations that have adopted it does not directly affect its newness to the organization or to the individuals considering its adoption (Zaltman, Duncan & Holbek, 1973). They state that “this does not imply that each new idea or system or technology adopted by an organization is necessarily new to society. A particular new technology may be new only to an organization or to individuals who are adopting it” (1973, p.11). The idea is also supported by Rogers (2003). The key point in this definition is that any technology or system is considered an innovation if it is new to the individual who plans to adopt it even though the technology has been in existence for a long time.

Although the Zaltman, Duncan and Holbek (1973) definition and arguments are plausible, logical and relevant to this study, from the above definitions a more comprehensive definition of innovation can be derived. Accordingly, innovation can be defined as something – an idea or a system or a technology which is new or significantly improved, which can be implemented or adopted by an organization or individual to create added value, improve performance or efficiencies of activities in an organization. From this definition, it can be said that innovation is something that adds value to an organization and it will only be regarded as innovation when it can be implemented. A new abstract idea or a new technology cannot be considered an innovation if it cannot be incorporated into daily activities of an organization. Note that to assimilate or incorporate innovation into organizational activities, it requires substantial efforts from all elements of the organization, especially the involvement of employees who will be using the targeted innovation.

2.3 Types of Innovation

Today’s world is characterized by profound social, economic and technological changes. “Change is ubiquitous and pervasive, and innovation facilitates the process of adaptation to many of these changes” (Gopalakrishnan & Damanpour, 1997, p.15). Innovation plays a role in nurturing the economy, in enhancing and sustaining high performance of organizations, in building competitiveness, in creating better quality, and in improving standards and efficiency (Gopalakrishnan & Damanpour, 1997). Innovations have usually been categorized by researchers into a set of contrasting types each providing insight to our understanding of the innovation process. Three of the most popular typologies are based on distinctions between administrative and technical innovation, product and process innovation and radical and incremental innovation (Gopalakrishnan & Bierly, 2001; Gopalakrishnan & Damanpour, 1997).

Administrative and technical innovations reflect a more general distinction between social and technical system of an organization (Damanpour, 1996). “Technical innovations include products, process and technologies used to produce or render services related to the basic work activity of an organization” (Gopalakrishnan & Bierly, 2001, p.109). Technical innovations would be adopted in an organization, as they are perceived to be relatively more advantageous than administrative innovations (Damanpour, 1996). On the other hand, “administrative innovations pertain to organizational structures, administrative processes and human resources; these innovations are indirectly related to basic work activity of the organization and are more directly related to its management” (Gopalakrishnan & Damanpour, 1997, p.19). Administrative innovations are primarily adopted in larger and structurally more complex organizations to control and coordinate differentiated units. Technical innovations usually occur in the technical core where as administrative innovations are more often initiated in the administrative core of an organization (Gopalakrishnan & Bierly, 2001).

Product and process innovations are distinct, based on different areas and activities that each of them affect within the organization (Gopalakrishnan & Bierly, 2001). According to Gopalakrishnan and Damanpour (1997, p.18), “process innovations are tools, devices and knowledge in throughput technology that mediate between inputs and outputs and are new to an industry, organizations or sub-units.” While product innovations are outputs or services that are introduced for the benefits of customers, employees or clients (Gopalakrishnan & Damanpour, 1997), studies found that...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Dedication
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• List of Figures
• List of Tables
• Acknowledgements
• Preface
• Chapter 1 Introduction to Innovation Adoption
• Chapter 2 Innovation Adoption by Individual Employees
• Chapter 3 Theories of Innovation Adoption
• Chapter 4 Advanced Research Model of Innovation Adoption
• Chapter 5 Research Methods and Analytical Framework
• Chapter 6 Impact of Organizational, Individual and Social Factors
• Chapter 7 Perception of Professionals and Management Personnel
• Chapter 8 Conclusion and Implications
• References
• Index