White Paper- Diffusion of Innovations

Diffusion of Innovations

Katelyn Queen

Internship Public Relations

In public relations, there are many goals to uphold when representing a company. “Public relations means exactly what it says, relations of an organization, individual, idea, whatever, with the public on which it is dependent for its existence. The public relations counsel is the practitioner, a professional, equipped by education, training, and experience to give counsel to client or employer on relations with the public on which the subject depends” (Bernays, 2006, p. 27). When working with a company understanding a theory that focuses on how innovations implement into the public. Individuals can utilize the steps of diffusion of innovations to implement new ideas into their day-to-day. Diffusion of innovations theory is a measurable and realistic way to implement new ideas, plans, and innovations into individual’s lives.

“Diffusion of innovations is the process through which an innovation (an idea, product, technology, process, or service) is adopted, through a series of stages, influenced by interpersonal, mass, and digital communication and networks, over time, through a social system, with a wide variety of consequences” (Rice, 2017, p. 532). Every step plays a key part in bringing people to implement new products and innovations into their life. The steps consist of knowledge, persuasion, decision, implementation, and confirmation. Each step has intricate pieces of how an individual forms an opinion and if they choose to use a new innovation/idea. This theory is heavy in the medical field and the public communicators work to push ideas to groups of people to implement healthier ideals as later examples will explain.

Starting at the knowledge stage, this is the stage where individuals question the new innovation. Where it stems from, how it functions, and why it even is necessary. “According to Rogers, the questions form three types of knowledge: (1) awareness-knowledge, (2) how to knowledge, and (3) principles-knowledge” (Sahin, 2006, p. 3). Knowledge is knowing the innovation exists. The exposure level. How-to-knowledge involves knowing how to utilize an innovation. For example, “As Wetzel (1993) stated, even the faculty who have technical backgrounds may not use technology in teaching, if they do not have the knowledge of how to use it correctly” (Sahin, 2006, p. 3). As an individual someone may not be exposed to a new invention to help with day to day life or even as an enjoyable piece. It is a challenge to pitch to the correct people who can get the word spread to the correct crowd to even begin to get a product going. Principle-knowledge “includes the functioning principles describing how and why innovation works” (Sahin, 2006, p. 3). This can include the behind the scenes knowledge. Understanding the science or the exact reason why it was created.

Next, the persuasion stage “The formation of favorable or unfavorable attitude toward an innovation does not always lead directly or indirectly to an adoption or rejection” (Sahin, 2006, p. 3). An individual forms their own ideas toward a new idea and can be feeling based on emotion. An individual’s friends, family, and/or acquaintances can play a heavy roll into positive or negative feelings towards a new product or innovation.

The decision stage includes, “…the individual chooses to adopt or reject the innovation. While adoption refers to “full us of an innovation as the best course of action available, “rejection means “not to adopt an innovation” (Sahin, 2006, p. 3). In Sahin’s, summary it is mentioned that rejection can occur at any step of the process.

Finally, during the implementation stage, the innovation is put into practice, “Uncertainty about the outcomes of the innovation still can be a problem at this stage” (Sahin, 2006). Through all these stages there is a chance that an individual can reject the idea completely. Even at the final stage, they may lose interest or it may not fit in their lifestyle. This stage can take time to get to and there is never a guarantee they may keep the innovation in or even give positive word-of-mouth.

“This theory is useful for explaining how we reach important decisions- not acts of impulse” An example:

Ferrence (1996) notes several applications of diffusion of innovations theory in tobacco prevention such as limiting exposure to environmental tobacco smoke, diffusion of smoking cessation programs among physicians, and diffusion policies regarding tobacco control among public health agencies. Rohrbach and colleagues (1996) also advocate use of diffusion of innovations theory to adoption and implementation of alcohol, tobacco, and drugs prevention programs in schools” (M Sharma, 2008, p. 4). This displays a couple of different people who utilized this theory to avoid tobacco usage and even in schools made a big impact on the final result.

An example of this theory not working, in the book, “Diffusion of Innovations” Everett M. Rogers gave an example of a campaign of two years that yielded failed results. “Water Boiling in a Peruvian Village: Diffusion That Failed” (Rogers, 1995, p. 3). This 2-year campaign was created to help with these villagers’ health and to lengthen their lives. People within this village were catching diseases due to their unclean water. Out of 200 families, only 11 housewives boiled their water to prevent disease. Overall this campaign did not succeed. “Villagers learn from early childhood to dislike boiled water… The village belief system involved no notion of bacteriological contamination of water” (Rogers, 1995, p. 3). The diffusion of innovation theory may not always work in all circumstances. From this particular situation, it can be concluded that people can be glued to their ways resulting in diffusion not succeeding. This innovation was pushed to help people to prevent disease and even with proof the village refused to try something new.

This theory works best when it is monitored throughout a campaign, “At the individual level of analysis, public relations research is usefully analyzed as clusters or research activities, each cluster having attributes that speed or impede diffusion” (Dozier, 1990, p. 2). “Practitioners vary in the kinds of research methods they use, from intuitive, informal “seat-of-the-pants” research to rigorous scientific studies… the best evidence is that- over time- more practitioners are doing research…” (Dozier, 1990, p. 2). “Longitudinal designs are required to measure impact variables before and after program implementation. Practitioners must employ experimental or quasi-experimental designs…to isolate program effects from confounding influences of various threats to internal validity” (Dozier, 1990, p. 3). Program evaluation: When using this theory in public relations it is important to isolate different criteria to know what is working and what to avoid for future campaigns.

In Krupp Kommunications, the public relations team works to target the correct group to introduce new products they represent in their clients. To be specific, currently, the AER dryer (a current client with K2) utilizes a product that already exists, but cordless. Following this theory, getting base information out to the public would help boost individuals to gain interest. Word-of-mouth from people to love the product could help influence others to consider the idea of the product being worth the money. As Dozier explains of isolating different aspects, requesting information about website traffic, and how the target audience interacts with social media pages. Helping the client let their customers know what makes the product better than what they could find anywhere else. Pitching to the correct people who can get the product presented to the target audience can spark the diffusion steps. Rather than looking at a target audience as a crowd, diffusion of innovations can force the professionals to look at individuals.

To conclude, the diffusion of innovations theory can take years to work effectively and has had steps that can lead to implementing a new idea or innovation into an individual’s life. When measuring the effects of a campaign there utilizing the steps within the diffusion of innovations theory can help through the process. Having knowledge of where individual potential customers are in the step process can map out the next steps to have a successful conclusion.

Bibliography

Bernays, E. L. (2006). Definition of Public Relations. Public Relations Quarterly, 27.

Dozier, D. M. (1990). The Innovation of Research in Public Relations Practice: Review of a Program of Studies. Public Relations Research Annual, 2-3.

M Sharma, A. K. (2008). Diffusion of innovations theory for alcohol, tobacco, and drugs. Journal of Alcohol & Drug Education, 3-7.

Rice, R. (2017). Intermediality and the Diffusion of Innovations. Human Communication Research 43 , 531-44.

Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusions of Innovations. New York: The Free Press.

Sahin, I. (2006). Detailed Review of Rogers’ Diffusion of Innovations Theory and Educational Technology-Related Studies . Online Submission, 1-10.