Why are Particular Innovations Successful? Rogers' Five Factors

Rating

Why are Particular Innovations Successful? Rogers' Five Factors
🔥 Everett Rogers' 5 Factors, also known as the 5 Factors of the Innovation-Decision Process, were introduced in Rogers' seminal work "Diffusion of Innovations" that was first published in 1962. They represent five key elements that influence the rate at which innovations are adopted by individuals or organizations. In other words, they represent the REASONS WHY some innovations are adopted more quickly than others (if adopted at all). Here's an elaboration and example on each:

1. RELATIVE ADVANTAGE: This factor refers to the degree to which an innovation is perceived as better than the idea, product, or technology it supersedes. Innovations that offer a clear and significant improvement over existing solutions are more likely to be adopted quickly. The greater the perceived relative advantage, the faster the adoption.
   For example, a smartphone has a relative advantage over a traditional landline phone because it offers more features, such as internet access, camera, GPS, and apps.
2. COMPATIBILITY: Compatibility is the extent to which the innovation fits with existing values, experiences, and needs of potential adopters. If an innovation is seen as consistent with the adopter's current situation, beliefs, and practices, it is more likely to be adopted.
   For example, a solar panel is compatible with the environmental values and energy needs of some people, but not with others who prefer conventional sources of electricity.
3. COMPLEXITY: Complexity refers to how difficult an innovation is to understand and use. The simpler and more user-friendly an innovation is, the more likely it is to be adopted. Innovations that are perceived as too complex may face resistance.
   For example, a new computer is complex for someone who has never used one before, but not for someone who is familiar with its functions and operations.
4. TRIALABILITY: Trialability is the extent to which an innovation can be experimented with on a limited basis. When individuals or organizations can test an innovation with minimal risk or investment, they are more likely to adopt it. Innovations that are easily testable allow potential adopters to reduce uncertainty about the innovation's value.
   For example, a free trial of a streaming service is trialable for someone who wants to test its quality and content before subscribing.
5. OBSERVABILITY: Observability is the degree to which the results or benefits of an innovation are visible to others. People are more likely to adopt innovations that they can see in action. If the positive outcomes of an innovation are easily noticed and communicated to others, it can influence the adoption rate.
   For example, a hybrid car is observable for someone who wants to show their environmental awareness and social status to others.

Rogers' Five Factors are the cause behing his broader Diffusion of Innovations theory and Innovation Adoption Curve, which explains the process by which innovations spread through a population or within an organization. By understanding these factors, businesses and innovators can tailor their strategies to increase the adoption rate of their innovations and encourage the acceptance of new ideas, products, services, or practices.
Sources:
Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: Free Press.
Wikipedia. Diffusion of innovations.

		Comments by date▼ Comments by rating Rating
		Jaap de Jonge Editor, Netherlands
	4 Why Some Innovations are Adopted Faster than Others Thanks for sharing this excellent summary. I believe these 5 factors of Rogers still are the main ones explaining why certain innovations are accepted or adopted quickly while others are adopted slower or not at all. ⇨ Or should we add another cause for spreading up adoption of an innovation, due to the internet/agile age?

		Maurice Hogarth Consultant, United Kingdom
	1 Acceptable Because of Acceptability In my opinion, the key word as to the "reasons why" some innovations, changes etc., are more successful, or quicker adopted, is because they are more "acceptable". More acceptable in terms of personal pay-off or benefit, at least to the overwhelming majority of those effected. The Five Factors seem to state this within their terminology. I) "... perceived as better..."; in relation to me. II) "...fits with [my] values, experiences, and needs ... [re] ... adopter's current situation, beliefs, and practices. III) "... user-friendly ..."; in that it won't be too difficult for me to learn or use. IV) " individuals ... can test ... with minimal risk or investment"; i.e. a "try before buy" benefit so I can see what my pay-off will be. V) "... the results or benefits ... are visible."; so, if it is OK for someone in a similar role to me it is likely to be OK for me. I was involved in a programme of major cultural, working practices changes in a large manufacturing organisation. From experience a particular department of the organisation (in which the work was difficult and dirty) was known to be a hot-bed of difficulty, with the workers downing tools "at the drop of a hat." So, it was decided that would be the last to be tackled, in hopes that the (V) OBSERVABILITY factor would add to our benefit. We had barely worked through the first phase when representatives from this department were at our door wanting to know when they were scheduled for these changes ... "Gobsmacked" we rapidly made changes to the planned schedule to get started now. In this case the key factor was that the workers in the department had registered (I) RELATIVE ADVANTAGE, in terms of personal and departmental benefit's, a lot quicker than us "expert specialists" and the managers. They had also OBSERVED the actual and potential benefits arising from the changes. As has been said, no one knows the job (pros & cons) better than the person/s doing it. So, conversations with them will be highly likely to provide the information that will feed Roger's Five Factors and so enable acceptability and consequently rapidity of implementation. It also demonstrated the speed with which the people effected could consider, analyse and decide on a major issue without workshop facilitators or other 'consultant' specialists.

		David Stehlik Professor, United States
	2 Also, what Makes for Difficult Imitation... I can't help but notice that some of these "whys" are also the inverse of what makes for strategic moats. That is, whereas innovations are adopted at scale as their advantages become obvious, their si (...)

		Paramathmuni srinivas Kumar India
	1 Government Policies and Ecosystem also Matters The innovation may satisfy all the above conditions except for the trialabilty. A major reason for this can be that government policies hinder its implementation. In such case where government policie (...)

		Stainly Masafwa Accountant, Zambia
	2 Acceptance of Innovations Incredibly interesting.Thanks for this piece of work shared. Regards. (...)

		Jaap de Jonge Editor, Netherlands
	2 Pulling Adoption of Innovations Apart in 5 Factors The 5 factors from Rogers help to analyze, predict and work on the adoption of particular innovations. They explain why a specific innovation was, is or will be successful (or not). @Maurice Hogarth: (...)

		Dr. Eyal Policar Entrepreneur, Israel
	1 Externalities & Internalities I am an entrepreneur and fully agree with Rogers' 5 factors. However, there can be no Innovation without an innovator. So besides the externalities which this is all about, there are also internalitie (...)

		Brillo L. Reynes Consultant, Philippines
	1 Demonstration Effect I guess the term "Demonstration Effect" captures the entirety of Roger's Five Factors. This term is also commonly used in Business and Economics. (...)

		Anonymous
	1 Demonstration Effect and Innovation Factors by Rogers @Brillo L. Reynes: Please explain as… “Demonstration Effects are effects on the behavior of individuals caused by observation of the actions of others and their consequences. The term is particularly (...)

		Helen Strong Business Consultant, South Africa
	2 Who is the Champion? The elements in the model are totally relevant but ‘internal’ to the innovation. The model does not consider external factors which could either promote or sabotage adoption of the new products/system (...)