background preloader

Diffusion of innovations

Diffusion of innovations
The diffusion of innovations according to Rogers. With successive groups of consumers adopting the new technology (shown in blue), its market share (yellow) will eventually reach the saturation level. In mathematics, the yellow curve is known as the logistic function. History[edit] The concept of diffusion was first studied by the French sociologist Gabriel Tarde in late 19th century[3] and by German and Austrian anthropologists such as Friedrich Ratzel and Leo Frobenius.[4] The study of diffusion of innovations took off in the subfield of rural sociology in the midwestern United States in the 1920s and 1930s. In 1962 Everett Rogers, a professor of rural sociology, published his seminal work: Diffusion of Innovations. Elements[edit] The key elements in diffusion research are: Characteristics of innovations[edit] Studies have explored many characteristics of innovations. Characteristics of individual adopters[edit] Characteristics of organizations[edit] Process[edit] Decisions[edit] Notes[edit]

Diffusion of Innovations, 5th Edition (9780743222099): Everett M. Rogers, Everett Rogers: Gateway Uses and gratifications theory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedi Uses and gratifications theory (UGT) is an approach to understanding why and how people actively seek out specific media to satisfy specific needs. UGT is an audience-centered approach to understanding mass communication.[1] Diverging from other media effect theories that question "what does media do to people?", UGT focuses on "what do people do with media?"[2] This communication theory is positivistic in its approach, based in the socio-psychological communication tradition, and focuses on communication at the mass media scale.[3] The driving question of UGT is: Why do people use media and what do they use them for? UGT discusses how users deliberately choose media that will satisfy given needs and allow one to enhance knowledge, relaxation, social interactions/companionship, diversion, or escape.[4][5][6] It assumes that audience members are not passive consumers of media. Uses and gratifications approach[edit] Assumptions of the theory[edit] Heuristic approach of UGT[edit] History[edit]

Literacy Global adult literacy. World illiteracy halved between 1970 and 2005. The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) defines literacy as the "ability to identify, understand, interpret, create, communicate and compute, using printed and written materials associated with varying contexts. Literacy involves a continuum of learning in enabling individuals to achieve their goals, to develop their knowledge and potential, and to participate fully in their community and wider society".[4] History[edit] Illiteracy rate in France in the 18th and 19th centuries Origins of literacy[edit] Literacy is thought to have first emerged with the development of numeracy and computational devices as early as 8,000 BCE. The earliest forms of written communication originated in Sumer, located in southern Mesopotamia in 8000 BCE. Egyptian hieroglyphs emerged from 3300-3100 BCE and depicted royal iconography that emphasized power amongst other elites. Origins of the alphabet[edit]

From creation myth to the reality of innovation today On the surface, Malcolm Gladwell’s latest article for The New Yorker, “Creation Myth: Xerox PARC, Apple, and the truth about innovation“, is a story about the mouse and how inventions travel – and evolve – across time and place. But examined more deeply, the article is really about the factors that determine whether you end up with an invention or an innovation. Simply put: “invention” is the manifestation of an idea or creation of something new. It doesn’t become an “innovation” until it’s applied successfully in practice – i.e., it reaches the market and impacts people’s lives. The story of PARC – and for that matter, any other innovative company – is indeed a mix of hopeful inventions, world-changing innovations, and missed opportunities, as Gladwell observes. On the challenges of invention and innovation 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. A note on the popular story of the mouse Speaking of the “expert mind”… There’s a nuance that’s often forgotten in popular retellings of the story of the mouse.

FEED: The Razorfish Digital Brand Experience Report 2009 Key Fin El Blog para aprender inglés How any business can innovate like Apple by Josh Bernoff Yeah, right. Innovate like Apple. You can do it. One of the smartest guys I know is James McQuivey, who works with me at Forrester Research. It's very human to think about the linear evolution that created a product like the iPad. It's also wrong. In fact, breakthrough new products come about from a combination of forces. You can do this too. Exploit the adjacent possible. It's not that easy, you say. Photo by Grant Robertson via Flickr.

Please, Can We All Just Stop "Innovating"? - Bill Taylor by Bill Taylor | 11:33 AM May 30, 2012 There’s something about the culture of business that tends toward excess — in financial markets, to be sure, but also in the “market” for new ideas and management techniques. The dynamic is always the same, whether the idea in question is reengineering, six-sigma quality, or lean production systems: A genuinely original strategy is born in one company or industry, consultants discover the practice and turn it into a marketable commodity, executives in all sorts of other companies race to “buy” the product — and then they wonder why the technique didn’t work nearly as well in their organization as it did in the place that created it in the first place. I fear that very dynamic is unfolding today with respect to a piece of language and a leadership aspiration that has become the Holy Grail for business thinkers like me. That piece of language, that aspiration, is innovation. Ouch, that’s gonna leave a mark!

The policymaker’s dilemma Here is an exchange with Robert van Apeldoorn, Journalist with Trends Tendances Magazine in Belgium. ( The exchange took place in early September via e-mail. Robert: -Information and Communications Technology (ICT) is considered in Europe as a way to push growth, and is a target of national and EU policies (digital growth,etc), but the result seems to be a failure: the European computer industry (hardware) is almost dead (ICL, Siemens computers bought by Fujitsu, Olivetti almost out of computer business, Nixdorf dead) since the 90’, and the telco industry seems to be in crisis. My answer: You are correct in this observation. Almost all growth has come from companies that entered the space. It’s understandable given the need to justify spending other people’s money. This quickly becomes a lengthy discussion, but fundamentally the innovation process is chaotic. thank you very much for these interesting answer.