Have you ever heard of Everett Rogers’ book, Diffusion of Innovations, or the theory
of diffusion of innovations? I hadn’t until I began my first week of classes this
semester. In his book, Rogers defines diffusion as “the process by which an
innovation is communicated through certain channels over time among members of
a social system” (Rogers, 2010, p. 5). He defines innovation as “an idea,
practice, or object that is perceived as new by an individual or other unit of
adoption” (2010, p. 11). Why am I giving you all of these definitions, you ask?
Because they are important to understanding why society accepts or adopts some ideas
while rejecting others.
I’m sure you’ve had an incident where you wondered why someone
didn’t accept your idea or purchase a new product that would better their lives
when it made sense for them to. Take, for instance, the movies and television
shows in which a teenager is trying to explain to their parent or grandparent the
importance of a smartphone or tablet. The teenager explains all of the benefits
of using these devices, but their older counterpart is left wondering why the
teen can’t just use a book to get the information they need. Diffusion of
innovations explains this process.
According to Rogers, there are five different types of
members in the social system: innovators, early adopters, early majorities,
late majorities, and laggards. Innovators are “visionary” and “imaginative,”
but they are dangerous to those in the system who are more “pragmatic” in their
thinking (Robinson, 2009, p. 3). Early adopters are the “trend setters,” and “what
[they] say about an innovation determines its success” (2009, p. 4). Early
majorities are pragmatic, but they are willing to adopt an innovation only
after getting “solid proof of benefits” that the innovation can provide (2009,
p. 5). Late majorities are those who are the most pragmatic of the majorities.
They “hate risk and are uncomfortable with your new idea” (2009, p. 5).
Laggards are those members who “hold out until the bitter end,” only jumping on
board with the innovation because they have no choice (2009, p. 5). I’m sure by
now you’ve tried to place yourself into one of these categories. I did too, and
I believe I’m in the early majorities group.
So, now that you have some background information about what
diffusion of innovations is, you’re probably wondering why it matters. Trust
me. It matters...A LOT! Just think about all of the different innovations that
have been presented to us and adopted or rejected over the years: organized
religion, ethics, laws, the written language, the automobile, the computer, the
Internet, etc. How did our society come to adopt these ideas and products? The answer
is opinion leaders. Opinion leaders are those members of the social system who “exemplify
and express the [social] system’s structure” (2010, p. 27). It is through
opinion leaders that innovations are adopted.
Now, let’s look at how diffusion of innovations applies to
strategic communication, particularly when it concerns the asset-light
generation. In his article, “Why Digital Natives don’t like newspapers,” Alan
D. Mutter defines the “asset-light” generation as that which “travels light,”
meaning it prefers technology and all of its useful trappings. It prefers “renting
over owning, flexibility over commitment and convenience over cost” (Mutter,
2013). When dealing with a group of people with this mindset, it’s hard for
communicators to convince them that things seemingly so archaic like the
newspaper can be a part of current innovations. So, the question for strategic communicators
is this: how can they meet and exceed the standards of the asset-light generation?
The asset-light generation possesses younger, more
innovative minds that are looking for the next big thing. The majority of this
generation has grown up in the digital era, enjoying technological advances
like “televisions, computers, Xboxes…Androids and tablets” (2013). Because of
this upbringing, they are looking for innovations that will trump the latest
ones. Take, for example, laptop computers. They were once the hottest new tech
toy on the market, but now there are tablet computers that can do the same
things as laptop computers but with a mobility and convenience that laptops can’t
offer. It’s up to strategic communicators to appeal to the needs of this
generation, and to do this, they must present innovations in ways that the
asset-light generation uses, such as blogs, smartphones, and social media
outlets.
Last week, I watched the movie Paranoia (2013), which stars Liam Hemsworth, Gary Oldman, and
Harrison Ford (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1413495/?ref_=nv_sr_1).
In the movie, Liam’s character, Adam Cassidy, presents an innovation to his firm’s
president, which is smartphone software that would change the way users employ
social media to stay isolated yet connected. His boss rejects his idea because
it isn’t innovative enough to market to the masses. Later on in the movie, Adam
works with another firm to develop a social media app that the military would
later endorse to combat friendly-fire casualties. I thought the ideas presented
in the movie were cool, because they presented innovations that I thought were
profitable to our society. But, what happens when there are instances where
innovations aren’t innovative enough for the asset-light generation? How do we
capture their attention? How can publishers create products that this
generation would adopt?
Rogers’ theory shows how innovations are adopted into
mainstream culture. To capture the attention of the asset-light generation, strategic
communicators must exploit the five-step process that innovation-decision
requires for diffusion to work, which includes knowledge, persuasion, decision,
implementation, and confirmation (Rogers, 2010, p. 20). Here, I’ll mention the
movie Paranoia again. When Adam
pitched his idea at the second firm, he remembered all five steps of the
innovation-decision process when he explained his idea. Because he kept his
audience in mind (one that was looking for the next best thing in smartphone
technology), he was able to succeed in getting his boss and later the
Department of Justice to adopt his innovation.
Strategic communicators and publishers must also use this five-step
process to capture the attention of the opinion leaders, who are the epicenter
of social systems (Rogers, 2010, p. 27). Because of their roles in social
systems, opinion leaders need to be the target audience when creating products
for the asset-light generation. They must also target the change agents, who “influence
clients’ innovation-decisions in a direction deemed desirable by a change agent”
(Rogers, 2010, p. 27). When these members of the social system are the focus, strategic
communicators and publishers have a better chance of getting their innovations
adopted into mainstream society. These two entities are important because they
have the most influence within the social system. They are able to see the
benefits of innovations readily and use their authority within the system to
appeal to the different segments of the system.
Let me take you back to the scenario I gave you in the
beginning of this post. Remember that person who just wouldn’t accept your idea
or recommendation? How would you go back to them and pitch your idea/recommendation
now that you know about diffusion of innovations? I’m sure this time you’d be
more successful in persuading them to adopt your idea. Now that I know about
Rogers’ theory, I willing to bet that I can be a better persuasive communicator
both professionally and interpersonally.
References
Mutter, Alan D.
(2013, February 6). “Why Digital Natives don’t like newspapers.” Retrieved from
http://newsosaur.blogspot.com/2013/02/why-digital-natives-dont-like-newspapers.html
Robinson, Les.
(2009, January). “A summary of Diffusion of Innovations.” Retrieved from http://www.enablingchange.com.au/Summary_Diffusion_Theory.pdf
Rogers, Everett.
(2010). Diffusion of innovations. Retrieved
from http://books.google.com/books?id=v1ii4QsB7jIC&source=gbs_slider_cls_metadata_2_mylibrary
No comments:
Post a Comment