A Simulation-Based Approach to Understanding the Dynamics of Innovation Implementation

Abstract

Abst ractThe history of management practice is filled with innovations that failed to live up to the promise suggested by their early success. A paradox facing organization theory is that the failure of these innovations often cannot be attributed to an intrinsic lack of efficacy. To resolve this paradox, in this paper I study the process of innovation implementation. Working from existing theoretical frameworks, I synthesize a model that describes the process through which participants in an organization develop commitment to using a newly adopted innovation. I then translate that framework into a formal model and analyze it using computer simulation. The analysis suggests three new constructs-reversion, regeneration and the motivation threshold-characterizing the dynamics of implementation. Taken together, these constructs offer an alternative explanation for the paradox of innovations that produce early results but fail to find a permanent home in the organizations that adopt them. 1 Int roductionThe history of management practice is filled with innovations that failed to live up to the promise suggested by their early success. Examples include job enrichment (Hackman 1975), quality circles (Lawler and Morhman 1987), Total Quality Management (TQM) (The Economist 1995), Business Process Re-engineering (White 1996), and various attempts to implement new computer technology (e.g. Orlikowski 1992). A paradox currently facing organizational theory is the fact that the failure of these innovations often cannot be attributed to an intrinsic lack of efficacy. Instead, there is often compelling evidence suggesting that, were the innovation in question appropriately adopted and implemented, the organization would benefit significantly. For example, while numerous studies find that the dedicated use of TQM improves quality, productivity, and overall competitiveness (Easton and Jarrell 1998, Hendricks and Singhal 1996, Barron and Paulson Gjerde 1996, a recent survey found that among US managers TQM is "…deader than a pet rock" (Byrne 1997). The situation is similar for a wide range of other innovations (Klein and Sorra 1996).Unfortunately, existing theory has little to offer on the question of why potentially useful innovations often fail to find a permanent home in the organizations that try to implement them.TQM is one of the more widely studied management techniques, but Dean and Bowen (1994:393) conclude that "...TQ initiatives often do not succeed, but as of yet there is little theory available to explain the difference between successful and unsuccessful efforts." The theoretical landscape is similarly bleak for other types of innovations (Klein and Sorra 1996). While the collection of tools and techniques designed to improve organizational effectiveness continues to grow, the knowledge about how to use them effectively apparently does not. This paper offers a theoretical framework for understanding the phenomenon of failed efforts to improve organizational effectiveness via innovation adoption and implementation...

Decision Making and Biases in Cybersecurity Capability Development: Evidence from a Simulation Game Experiment

“…Even simple systems are not immune to this problem, as time delays and feedback loops between causes and effects can create complicated outcomes that are hard to anticipate [55]. Indeed, even highly educated and experienced individuals perform poorly when making decisions in such dynamic and complex settings-see [56][57][58][59] for examples in various research settings.…”

A system dynamics approach for examining mechanisms and pathways of food supply vulnerability

“…The framework facilitates the generation of qualitative system maps, which serve as an initial step for exploring structural features that generate dynamic behavior. They provide a parsimonious view of links between population, food activities, and environmental conditions that is transparent and internally consistent, and allows initial exploration of tradeoffs in the system (Kopainsky and Luna-Reyes 2008;Repenning 2002). The maps developed here present a general overview of industrialized food systems for the purpose of illustrating how to use system dynamics diagramming techniques to examine food system structure.…”

Robust Imitation Strategies

“…For the simulation, the model based on the R-S-P framework was programmed in C++. When possible, we set parameters suggested by prior literature (Repenning, 2002) or empirical evidence (Oliva and Sterman, 2001). …”