The validation of a use innovativeness scale

Abstract

Purpose -To validate a measure of use innovativeness, or how existing products are used in a novel and innovative manner. The measure has practical significance for innovation research as it consists of only nine items as opposed to the original 44. The use innovativeness measure derived from research predicts acceptance of new technology (in this case computer technology) and could be adapted to other fields of innovation research. Design/methodology/approach -A survey was conducted and structural equation modelling techniques were used to analyse the data. Findings -Evidence for a unidimensional measure of use innovativeness is provided by structural equation modelling. The nine-item measure has fewer items than the original 44-item measure developed by Price and Ridgway and consists of the items of multiple use and creative reuse. The measure was found to be positively correlated with innovativeness and opinion leadership and the acceptance of new information technology. The construct of use innovativeness is thus a practical measurement for use in innovation research. Research limitations/implications -Some limitations regarding the nature of the sample are discussed. Implications for future research in the diffusion of innovations are also addressed. Originality/value -The only paper which validates a measure of use innovativeness, so that it has practical and theoretical use in innovation practice and research.

Business strategies, profitability and efficiency of production

“…On the subject of innovativeness, Girardi et al (2005) suggests that innovating organizations search for opportunities, accept risks, pursue financial profits and organize resources, while, as a group, representing the possibilities for change in their societies. A clear consensus in the literature about the influence of the innovation indicates its relevance to economic performance in both organizations and countries (Paladino, 2008).…”

Profiling Marketplace Change Agents (Influential) Using the Multiple Flow Communication Theory

“…Thus, opinion leaders' primary goal is to deliberately influence other consumers (and their purchase behavior), which sets them apart from innovators. Opinion seekers illustratively do not want to be unique (Bertrandias & Goldsmith, 2006), pay high value to their social consent (Bertrandias & Goldsmith, 2006), and are inversely related to innovativeness, which means that opinion leaders are highly innovative but their innovativeness influences opinion seekers as well (Girardi, Soutar & Ward, 2005). Ruvio & Shoham (2007) significantly grounded the existence of these differences between opinion leaders and opinion seekers.…”

The Influence of Cognitive Innovativeness on the Behavior and Style of Consumer Adoption: Implications for Electronic-Banking Service Adoption

“…According to previous researches the variables product knowledge, product usage and product involvement as the moderator variables, affect the domain-specific innovativeness in the consumer innovativeness hierarchy model (Girardi, Soutar, & Ward, 2005;Goldsmith, Hauteville, & Flynn, 1998;Grewal, Mehta, & Kardes, 2000) so it is suggested that this subject will be investigated in future researches.…”