The innovation adoption process: A multidimensional approach

Abstract

The study analyses the broad sets of factors that influence the innovation adoption process in the environmental, organizational, top managers,’ innovation and user acceptance context. The innovation adoption process is presented as a sequence of stages, progressing from initiation through adoption decision to implementation of an innovation and it is considered at the organizational level. The Delphi survey conducted among 264 experts of a diverse professional and academic experience allowed examining the perceived significance of each factor for the various stages of the innovation adoption process. The results of the analysis show that the considered factors do not affect the innovation adoption process with the same strength but exert varying levels of influence on the subsequent stages. The study discusses the implications of these findings and suggests ideas for future research.

‘Wicked’ solutions for ‘wicked’ problems: Responsible innovations in social enterprises for sustainable development

“…Although Lubberink et al (2017, 2018, 2019) provide valuable insights into the responsible innovation process, the factors identified in their studies do not clearly illustrate various dynamic actions of social enterprises. For example, the complexity in the environment affects innovation process (Pichlak, 2016); hence, to ensure acceptance of an innovation, social enterprises could be focusing on inclusion using bottom-up development at the initiation stage and not after. Inclusion strategies, especially forming partnerships, have been found to be prominent during the innovation development (Chalmers, 2012) and even the innovation scale-up stage (Corner & Kearins, 2018).…”

Profiting from collaborative innovation practices: Identifying organizational success factors along the process

“…This is precisely the gap that this work aims to address, adopting a systematic and a comprehensive approach on the role of organizational context on the collaborative innovation process. It is worth noting that studies focused on the development of innovation practices at the organizational level usually position their approach either from a factor perspective or from a process perspective (Pichlak, 2016); that is, while research adopting the factor approach assumes that context plays a crucial role in determining innovation behavior and outcomes in firms, studies taking the process approach take into consideration a broad class of events and milestones that arise in the course of the different phases of the innovation process. In this sense, this work intends to bring together the factor and the process approach, with the purpose of advancing an understanding of which specific organizational aspects might act as critical success factors influencing the outcomes of each of the stages of the collaborative innovation process.…”

“…While there is an ever-growing body of studies dealing with the role of internal context in the capitalization of collaborative innovation practices, current research still fails to provide a refined theory on the organizational conditions under which the performance of these practices may be leveraged (Burcharth, Knudsen, & Søndergaard, 2013). Also, studies on collaborative innovation usually position their approach either from a factor perspective – focusing on explaining how the context plays a crucial role in determining innovation outcomes – or from a process perspective, but rarely adopt a systematic perspective that includes both approaches (Pichlak, 2016).…”

Critical success factors determining performance of cross‐border acquisition: Evidence from the African telecom market

“…There has been rare scholarly work in the area of performance after cross‐border acquisition and competitive advantage. Previous works have focused on the process of M&A (Pichlak, 2016), business strategy (Bindra, Parameswar, & Dhir, 2019; Melin, 1992), and the M&A performance (Graebner, Heimeriks, Huy, & Vaara, 2017) in terms of wealth creation, innovation, value creation, product development, and learning (Singh, Chauhan, & Dhir, 2019; Singh & Dhir, 2019). However, in those studies, less attention was paid to factors affecting the postacquisition value creation and performance of its affiliated companies (Cartwright & Schoenberg, 2006; Dhir et al, 2019).…”