The need for some innovative concepts of innovation: An examination of research on the diffusion of innovations

Abstract

This paper examines research on the diffusion of innovation, the final stage in the process of techrtological change. The focus rests primarily on two traditions in diffusion research: that of economists and that of sociologists. Diffusion researchers in these and related disciplines have made significant contributions to the understanding of the dynamics of processes of change; yet the state of the art in diffusion research is not equal to the sum of its parts. This is due in large measure to disciplinary parochialism: scholars have concentrated on those innovations, diffusion environments, explanatory variables, and analytical methodologies which are most compatible with their particular disciplines, despite the fact that diffusion is not a discipline-specific phenomenon. Deficiencies in current understanding of diffusion are examined in the context of this and other significant problems. The paper concludes by considering the policy relevance of diffusion research and suggesting issues with which future research might productively be concerned.

A Taxonomy of Innovation: Configurations of Attributes in Healthcare Innovations

“…Similar to Rogers' (2003) findings, and consistent with Dearing and Meyer's (1994) observation that attributes are likely to be concurrently perceived, we found all the attributes constituting our framework conceptually distinct, but that some were moderately empirically inter-related. This would appear to confirm Warner's (1974) assertion that innovations are unlikely to be described adequately by a single attribute. From the ANOVA analysis presented in Table 3, the attributes' 'disruption' and 'observability' can be identified as the most important differentiating variables, with f-ratios of 135.089 and 65.438 respectively.…”

Technological Diffusion Research And National Policy Issues

“…While they may have achieved this objective, the range of variables in any particular study is so narrow that generalizations about the relative weights of different classes of variables cannot be derived. Additionally, the comparability of variables across studies is very limited, so that even when the organizations or innovations studied in separate studies are the same, the measures of innovative behavior or of various independent variables frequently differ (Downs and Mohr, 1976;Warner, 1974). Downs and Mohr (1976) have accomplished the most thorough diagnosis of the problem, which they label &dquo;instability&dquo; of findings across different studies.…”

“…The prospect of this massive amount of research helping to resolve national policy issues is appealing, but it may not be realistic. In the last five years the field of diffusion research has come under considerable criticism, much of it from within the field by some of its eminent contributors (Rogers, 1976;Downs and Mohr, 1976; Warner, 1974;Gold, 1977). The purpose of this paper is to assess the extent to which the literature on the diffusion of innovations can contribute to resolving public policy issues involving governmental efforts to influence technological diffusion in the civilian economy.…”

The introduction of professional regulation and labor market conditions

“…For example, Walker (1969), Warner (1974) and others argue that there may be broad patterns in the diffusion of legislative innovations in which some states act as leaders and others as followers.…”