Summary of the book by Everett Rogers

1. Diffusion of Innovations
History and Concepts
1Diffusion of Innovation - An Introduction 7/17/2013
Source: Rogers, E. 1995. Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press

2. Discussion Topic
2
1. Elements of Diffusion of an Innovation
2. The Beginnings of Diffusion Research
3. Landmarks in Diffusion Innovation Research
4. Trends in Diffusion Innovation Research Traditions
5. Criticisms of Diffusion Research
6. Stages in the Innovation-Decision Process
7. Replication versus Re-invention
8. The Change Agent
9. Centralized and Decentralized Diffusion Systems
10. Innovation in Organizations
7/17/2013Diffusion of Innovation - An Introduction

3. Elements of Diffusion of an Innovation
3
Diffusion of an innovation is defined as the process by which that innovation “is
communicated through certain channels over time among the members of a social
system” (Rogers, 1983)
There are 4 key elements in the diffusion process:
1. Innovation: Any idea, object, or practice that is perceived as new by members
of the social system
2. Channels of Communication: Means by which information is transmitted to or
within the social system
3. Time: rate at which innovation is diffused or the relative speed with which it is
adopted by members of the social system
4. Social System: Individuals, organizations, or agencies that share a common
“culture” and are potential adopters of the innovation
7/17/2013Diffusion of Innovation - An Introduction

4. Attributes of Innovations
4
The characteristics of innovations, as perceived by individuals, help to explain their
different rates of adoption
1. Relative Advantage: Degree to which an innovation is perceived as better than the idea it
supersedes.
2. Compatibility: Degree to which an innovation is perceived as being consistent with the
existing values, past experiences, and needs of potential adopters.
3. Complexity: Degree to which an innovation is perceived as difficult to understand and use.
4. Trialability: Degree to which an innovation may be experimented with on a limited basis.
5. Observability: Degree to which the results of an innovation are visible to others
6. Re-inventability: Degree to which an individual‟s use of a new idea departs from the core or
“mainline” version of innovation promoted by a change agency (Eveland et al., 1977)
Innovations that are perceived by individuals as having greater relative
advantage, compatibility, trialability, observability, re-inventability and has less complexity
will be adopted more rapidly than other innovations
7/17/2013Diffusion of Innovation - An Introduction

5. Communication Channels
5
Communication is the process by which participants create and share information with one
another in order to reach a mutual understanding
1. The communication process involves: (a) innovation, (b) an individual or unit of adoption that
has knowledge of, or experience using the innovation, (c ) another individual or unit that does
not have the knowledge of, or experience with the innovation, and (d) a communication
channel connecting the two units
2. The communication channels used may be: (a) mass media (such as
radio, television, newspapers which enable one or a few individuals to reach an audience of
many), (b) interpersonal (such as face-to-face exchange), or (c ) interactive communication
(via internet)
3. Another principle of communication is homophily (degree to which two or more individuals are
similar – i.e. belong to the same group, have similar interests, etc.). When homophily is
present, communication is likely to have greater effects in terms of knowledge gain.
However, the most distinctive problems in the diffusion of innovations is that participants are
usually quite heterophilous.
Diffusion investigations show that individuals do not evaluate an innovation on the basis of
scientific studies of its consequences, instead most depend mainly upon subjective evaluation of
an innovation that is conveyed to them from other individuals who have already adopted the innovation.
7/17/2013Diffusion of Innovation - An Introduction

6. Time
6
Time Dimension is involved in diffusion in:
1. The innovation- decision process: 5 step process through which an individual (or
other decision making unit) passes from first knowledge of an innovation: (i)
knowledge, (ii) persuasion, (iii) decision, (iv) implementation, and (v) confirmation.
Individuals vary in the length of time required to pass through the innovation-decision
process.
2. Innovativeness is the degree to which an individual or other unit of adoption is
relatively earlier in adopting new ideas than other members of a social system. There
are 5 adopter categories on the basis of their innovativeness: (i) innovators, (ii) early
adopters, (iii) early majority, (iv) late majority, and (v) laggards.
3. The rate of adoption is the relative speed with which an innovation is adopted by
members of a social system
7/17/2013Diffusion of Innovation - An Introduction

7. Social System
7
Social System is a set of interrelated units that are engaged in joint problem solving to
accomplish a common goal
1. A system has structure – patterned arrangements of the units in a system, which gives
stability and regularity to individual behavior in a system. For example, norms are the
established behavior patterns for the members of a social system
2. Opinion leaders – the degree to which an individual is able to influence informally other
individuals‟ attitudes or behavior in a desired way with relative frequency. A change agent is
am individual who attempts to influence clients‟ innovation-decisions in a direction that is
deemed desirable by a change agency.
3. Innovation-decisions – three main types: (i) optional innovation – decision (choices to
adopt or reject an innovation that are made by an individual independent of the decisions of
other members of the system, (ii) collective innovation – decision (choices to adopt or reject
an innovation that are made by consensus among the members of a system, and (iii)
authority innovation – decision (choices to adopt or reject an innovation that are made by
relatively few members in a system who possess power, status or technical expertise
4. Consequences – the changes that occur to an individual or a social system as a result of
the adoption or rejection of an innovation
7/17/2013Diffusion of Innovation - An Introduction

8. The Beginnings of Diffusion Research
8
Gabriel Tarde (1843 –
1904), born in France was one
of the forefathers of Sociology
and Social Psychology and far
ahead of his time in thinking
about diffusion. What he called
“imitation” is today called
“adoption” of an innovation.
Tarde introduced the S-shaped
curve and opinion leadership
7/17/2013
Georg Simmel (1858 –1918)
was a German sociologist
and among his interests were
the concept of a stranger (a
member of a system who is
not strongly attached to the
system). Later
scholars, stimulated by
Simmel‟s concept of the
stranger, derived such
concepts as social
distance, heterophily, and
cosmopoliteness.
Diffusion of Innovation - An Introduction

9. British and German-Austrian Diffusionists
9
The British school of diffusionism was an
archaeological and anthropological movement which
believed that ancient Egypt was the source of all
human culture. According to this school of thought
culture cannot have its origin in every parts of the
world. All the people of the world are not capable of
invention and creation. But people can imitate
others cultures. According to them, it is only the
ancient Egypt where there is favorable conditions
for the origin of the culture. Hence, the British
school of thought that accepts that Egypt is the
place of the origin of all cultures is called 'Pan
Egyptian Theory".
Sir Grafton Elliot Smith, (1871 – 1937) was a
proponent of the hyperdiffusionist view of prehistory.
7/17/2013
The main contributions of the Austro-German school of Diffusionism
were that of Wilhelm Schimdt, Leo Frobenius and Fritz Graebner.
Wilhelm Schmidt (1868-1954), theorized on a conjectural universal
development that, based on historical-geographical areas of
diffusion, could determine the (judgmental) classification of various
populations and cultures based on their being „primitive‟ or „civilized‟.
In 1897/1898 Leo Frobenius (1873 – 1938) defined several "culture
areas" (Kulturkreise), cultures showing similar traits that have been
spread by diffusion or invasion.
Fritz Graebner (1877 – 1934) advanced the theory of diffusion of
culture (Kulturkreise), which postulated diffusions of primitive culture
spheres derived from a single archaic type which became the basis of
a culture-historical approach to ethnology
Diffusion of Innovation - An Introduction

10. The Anthropology Research Tradition
107/17/2013
Franz Boas (1858-1942)
was a pioneering
German anthropological
field worker who based
many of his concepts on
experiences gained
while working in the
field. He believed the
cultural inventory of a
people was cumulative
and was the result of
diffusion.
Clark Wissler (1870-1947)
paid emphasis on
intercultural diffusion
through the study of
diffusion of horses from
Spanish explorers to
American Indian tribes in the
West, and the spread of
corn growing from the
American Indians to
European settlers.
Diffusion of Innovation - An Introduction

11. Landmarks in Innovation Diffusion Research
11
Bryce Ryan and Neal C. Gross (1943)
investigated the diffusion of hybrid seed
corn among Iowa farmers. In fact, Rogers
(1996) mentioned the study of Ryan and
Gross became a milestone in diffusion
paradigm. Ryan and Gross sought to
explain how the hybrid seed corn came to
attention and which of two channels
(i.e., mass communication and interpersonal
communication with peers) led farmers to
adopt the new innovation. They found that
each channel has different functions. Mass
communication functioned as the source of
initial information, while interpersonal
networks functioned as the influence over
the farmers‟ decisions to adopt (p. 125).
One of the most important findings in this
study is that “the adoption of innovation
depends on some combination of well-
established interpersonal ties and habitual
exposure to mass communication” (p. 127).
According to Rogers (1995), Ryan and
Gross also made a contribution by
identifying the five major stages in the
adoption process, which were
awareness, interest, evaluation, trial, and
adoption. After Ryan and Gross‟s hybrid
corn study, about 5,000 papers about
diffusion were published in 1994
(Rogers, 1995).
7/17/2013
James S. Coleman, Elihu Katz, and Herbert
Menzel (1966) conducted a study on the
diffusion of tetracycline, a new medical drug.
The Pfizer drug company invented this
successful new drug and wanted to investigate
the effectiveness of their tetracycline
advertisements, which were placed in medical
journals. The company asked three professors
at Columbia University to find out how
physicians adopted the new innovation and
how mass communication influenced this
adoption process. They conducted a survey to
gather accurate and reliable data. Coleman et
al. (1966) asked their respondents to list their
interpersonal connections in order to
investigate the effect of interpersonal network
links with the new drug adoption.
One of the most important findings was that
doctors who had more interpersonal networks
adopted the new medical drug more quickly
than those that did not. This meant that
interpersonal communication channels with
peers had a strong influence on the adoption
process. Rogers (1996) noted that this
Columbia University study is “one of the most
influential diffusion studies in showing that the
diffusion of an innovation is essentially a social
process that occurs through interpersonal
networks” (p. 419).
Raymond Bowers (1938) focused on the
innovation-decision process and utilized
primary data from Respondents. Bowers
used a diffusion equation to guide his study
of the spread of the use of ham radios in the
United States.
Rogers (1995) pointed out that Bowers‟
study provided the first evidence that later
adopters of innovations are most influenced
by personal feedback from the earlier
adopters than they are by mass media
promotion of innovations.
Diffusion of Innovation - An Introduction

12. From independent to Integrated
12
1940s and 1950s Diffusion of innovation research began in a series of
independent studies based on discipline
1962 Rogers in his book “Diffusion of Innovations”
described a general diffusion model
Mid 1960s Onwards Boundaries between diffusion research traditions
began to break down – a more cross-disciplinary
viewpoint emerged
7/17/2013Diffusion of Innovation - An Introduction

13. Trends in Diffusion Research Traditions
137/17/2013
Main Dependent Variable Independent Variables Unit of Analysis
1
Earliness of knowing about an
innovation by members of a
social system
Characteristics of members (e.g. cosmopoliteness,
communication channel behavior)
Members of the social system
(usually individuals)
2
Rate of adoption of different
innovations in a social system
Attributes of innovations (e.g. complexity, compatibility, etc.)
as perceived by members of a system
Innovations
3
Innovativeness of members of
a social system (the members
may be individuals or
organizations)
Characteristics of members of a social system (e.g.
cosmopoliteness, communication channel behavior,
resources, social status, contact with change agents);
system-level variables
Members of the social system
(usually individuals or
organizations)
4
Opinion leadership in diffusing
innovations
Characteristics of members of a social system (e.g.
cosmopoliteness), system norms and other system
variables; communication channel behavior
Members of the social system
(usually individuals)
5 Diffusion networks
Patterns in the network links between tow or more
members of a system
Dyadic network links
connecting pairs of individuals
(or organizations) in a system
6
Rate of adoption of
innovations in different social
systems
System norms; characteristics of the social system (e.g.
concentration of opinion leadership); change agent
variables (e.g. their strategies of change); types of
innovation-decisions
Social system
7
Communication channel use
(e.g. whether mass media or
interpersonal)
Innovativeness and other characteristics of members of a
social system (e.g. cosmopoliteness), system norms;
attributes of innovations
Members of systems (or the
innovation-decision)
8
Consequences of an
innovation
Characteristics of members; the nature of the social system;
the nature and use of the innovation
Members or social systems or
innovations
Diffusion of Innovation - An Introduction

14. Criticisms of Diffusion Research
14
1. Pro-innovation bias is the implication in diffusion research that an innovation
should be diffused and adopted by all members of a social system, that it should
be diffused more rapidly, and that the innovation should be neither re-invented
nor rejected
2. The individual-blame bias, the tendency to hold an individual responsible for his
or her problems, rather than the system of which the individual is a part
3. The recall problem in diffusion research, which may lead to inaccuracies when
respondents are asked to remember the time at which they adopted a new idea
4. The issue of equality in the diffusion of innovations, as socio-economic gaps
among the members of a social system
7/17/2013Diffusion of Innovation - An Introduction

15. A Model of Five Stages in the
Innovation-Decision Process
157/17/2013
When the individual is
exposed to the
innovation‟s existence
and gains an
understanding of how it
functions
When the individual
forms a favorable or
unfavorable attitude
toward the innovation
When the individual
engages in activities that
leads to a choice to adopt
or reject the innovation
When the individual puts an
innovation into use
When the individual seeks
reinforcement for an innovation-
decision already made but may
reverse the decision if exposed to
conflicting messages about it

16. Replication Versus Re-invention
167/17/2013
The nature of the utilization of knowledge in Diffusion of Innovation is further complicated by contrasting straightforward
adoption (replication) versus reinvention (adaptation).
Early diffusion studies assumed that adoption of an innovation meant the exact copying or imitation of how the innovation had
been used previously in a different setting.
However, following the work of Charters and Pellegrin (1972) the accepted wisdom now recognizes the concept of
reinvention – defined as the degree to which an innovation is changed or modified by a user in the process of its adoption
and implementation (Rogers, 1995).
Some of the drivers of reinvention are listed below, much of which occurs at the implementation stage of the innovation-
decision process (Rogers, 1995, p: 187):
1. Reinvention can occur because of adopters‟ lack of full knowledge about the innovation.
2. Relatively complex innovations are more likely to be reinvented and simplified.
3. An innovation that is an abstract concept or a tool with many possible applications is more likely to be reinvented.
4. When an innovation is implemented in order to solve a wide range of problems, reinvention is more likely to occur.
5. Local pride of ownership may be a cause of reinvention.
6. Reinvention may be encouraged by a change agency
7. Re-invention occurs when an innovation must be adapted to the structure of the organization that is adopting iot
8. Re-invention may be more frequent later in the diffusion proces, as later adopters profit from experiences gained from
early adopters
Another term for re-invention is its opposite “fidelity” (Emshoff and Blakely, 1987; Lewis and Seibold 1996; Emshoff et. al., 2002)

17. The Change Agent
177/17/2013
Change agents as Linkers (p. 368)
 The main role of the change agent is to facilitate the flow of innovations from a change agency to an audience of
clients
 Change agents usually possess a high degree of expertise regarding the innovations that are being diffused
The sequence of Change Agent Roles
1. To develop a need for change on the part of clients
2. To establish an information exchange relationship
3. To diagnose problems
4. To create an intent to change in the client
5. To translate intentions into action
6. To stabilize adoption and prevent discontinuance
7. To achieve a terminal relationship with clients
A Change Agent‟s relative success in securing the adoption of innovations by clients is positively related to:
1. The extent of the change agent‟s effort in contacting clients
2. A client orientation rather than a change agency orientation
3. The degree to which the diffusion program is compatible with clients‟ needs
4. The change agent‟s empathy with clients
5. His or her homophily with clients
6. Credibility in the clients‟ eyes
7. The extent to which he or she works through opinion leaders
8. Increasing clients‟ ability to evaluate innovations

18. Centralized and Decentralized
Diffusion Systems
187/17/2013
Characteristics of Diffusion
Systems
Centralized Diffusion System Decentralized Diffusion System
1
Degree of centralization in
decision making and power
Overall control of decisions by top
administrators and technical SMEs
Wide sharing of power and control among the
members of the diffusion system; client control by
local systems
2 Direction of diffusion
Top-down diffusion from experts to local
users of innovations
Peer diffusion of innovations through horizontal
networks
3
Who decides which innovation
to diffuse?
Top administrators and technical SMEs
Local units decide which innovations should diffuse
on the basis of their informal evaluations of the
innovations
4
Importance of the clients‟
needs in driving the diffusion
process
An innovation-centered approach A problem-centered approach
5 Amount of re-invention
A low degree if local adaptation and re-
invention of the innovations as they
diffuse among adopters
A high degree of local adaptation as they diffuse
among adopters

19. Innovation in Organizations
197/17/2013
The innovation-decision process in organizations is complex (p. 403)
 Implementation involves a number of individuals, perhaps including both champions and opponents of the new
idea, each of whom plays a role in the innovation-decision.
 Implementation amounts to mutual adaptation in which both the innovation and the organization change in
important ways
At first, innovation in organizations was mainly studies by correlating independent variables with organizational
innovativeness. Studies in organizational innovativeness have been replaced by research on the innovation process in
organizations
Innovation process can be divided into 2 sub processes: initiation (all of the information
gathering, conceptualizing, and planning for the adoption of an innovation, leading up to the decision to adopt, and (2)
implementation all of the events, actions, and decisions involved in putting an innovation into use)