Looking beyond the adoption decision in innovation research: investigating innovation ...

208 Pages·2004·0.96 MB·English

by  Vandana Vaidyanathan

LOOKING BEYOND THE ADOPTION DECISION IN INNOVATION
RESEARCH: INVESTIGATING INNOVATION IMPLEMENTATION

DISSERTATION

Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for
The Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of
The Ohio State University

By

Vandana T. Vaidyanathan, M.A.

* * * * *

The Ohio State University
2004

Dissertation Committee:
Approved by
Professor Robert S. Billings, Adviser

Professor Phyllis C. Panzano _______________________
Adviser
Professor Thomas E. Nygren
Department of Psychology
Copyright by
Vandana T. Vaidyanathan
2004
ABSTRACT

Innovation has been linked to important organizational outcomes such as
economic growth and competitiveness. The field of innovation research has
predominantly been concentrated on the adoption of innovations. Researchers
have long been calling for an increased focus on a process-oriented approach
to understanding the implementation of innovations.
This research builds upon a framework of implementation originally
proposed by Klein and Sorra in 1996, and empirically tests an enhanced model
of antecedents and consequences of innovation implementation. Specifically,
climate for implementation, compatibility, and project slack were hypothesized
to be related to the proximal outcome of innovation, i.e., successful
implementation effectiveness. Implementation effectiveness was hypothesized
to be related to the distal outcome, innovation effectiveness, or the
consequences to the organization. Reinvention (the degree to which the
innovation has been modified) was expected to moderate this relationship. It
was also proposed that the perceived need to maintain fidelity to the original
innovation model would moderate the relationship between extent of reinvention
and innovation effectiveness.
The data for this study was derived from a longitudinal field project, and
consists of data gathered from key informants in fifty mental health agencies in
ii
Ohio using surveys and interviews. Data analyses included examining reliability
of scales, examining reliability and agreement indices to justify aggregation
from individual-level data to the level of the project/innovation, bivariate
correlations, principal component analyses, simple linear regression, and,
mediated and moderated regression analyses.
Climate for implementation, compatibility, and project slack were each
significantly related to implementation effectiveness. Interestingly, climate for
implementation explained the most variance in implementation effectiveness.
Implementation effectiveness was related to innovation effectiveness, but this
relationship was not moderated by extent of reinvention. Reinvention was
negatively related to innovation effectiveness, and this relationship was
moderated by the perceived need to maintain fidelity to the original innovation
model.
Overall, implementation effectiveness mediated the effect of compatibility
and project slack, respectively, on innovation effectiveness. Implementation
effectiveness, however, did not mediate the influence of Climate for
implementation on innovation effectiveness.
This research makes a number of contributions to the innovation
literature. Implications for theory development and application are discussed.

iii
To

Amma, Appa, Sriram and Praveen.

iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

First and foremost, I would like to thank Phyllis Panzano (cid:150) who has not
only guided my research, but also been my mentor and continues to be an
inspiring role model. My discussions with her have been stimulating and have
significantly shaped and influenced my thinking. Her probing questions and
judicious direction have pushed me to expand my boundaries and at the same
time given the freedom to follow my own paths. Above all, I will always treasure
her warmth, genuine concern and incredible support over the last few years.
To Bob Billings (cid:150) One of the finest teachers that I have had the fortune to
work with. I would like to thank him for his wise insights, valuable criticism and
encouragement.
To Tom Nygren who has generously shared his expertise and time to
better my work. I thank him for his advice and contribution. Thanks are also
due to ODMH and Dee Roth, who kindly permitted me access to the data used
in this project. I am also appreciative of the support of the rest of the IDARP
team in this project. I would also like to acknowledge the faculty and staff in the
Psychology Department for their support in my tenure as a graduate student.
To Sheau-yeun, without whose support, I could not have done this. For
being the second set of eyes for all the innumerable proof-reads, for running
v
around to take care of my paperwork - and most of all, for being such a great
friend. I also extend my most sincere appreciation to Chitra and Nigamanth (for
helping me when I was working away from Columbus), my colleagues, Bev and
Fan (for being insightful sounding boards, and willingly sharing their
experiences). Sriram, for everything that you are, for always keeping me in the
best of spirits, and for believing in me. To my family (cid:150) I have felt your
unconditional support and encouragement every step of the way.
I must also extend my gratitude to OPER, for the Small Grant Research
fund, which supported me during the final writing stages of this dissertation.
.

vi
VITA

October, 1975(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133) Born (cid:150) Madras, India

1996 (cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133).. B. A. Psychology, University of Madras

1998 (cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133) M. A. Applied Psychology, University of Delhi

2001(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133). M. A. Psychology, Ohio State University

EXPERIENCE
2000 (cid:150) Current (cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133). Research Consultant,
Decision Support Services,
Columbus, Ohio

2003-2004 (cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133)(cid:133). Assessment and Evaluation Specialist,
JPMorgan Chase,
New York, NY

1999-2000 Graduate Teaching Assistant,
2001-2003 Department of Psychology
Ohio State University

2000-2001 Graduate Research Associate
OSU, Marion
GRANTS AND FELLOWSHIPS
University Fellowship, Ohio State University.
Small Grants Research, Ohio Department of Mental Health.

vii
PUBLICATIONS
Radosevich, D. J., Vaidyanathan, V. T., Yeo, S. Y., & Radosevich, D. M.
(2004). Relating goal orientation to self-regulatory processes: A longitudinal
field test. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 207 (cid:150) 229.

FIELDS OF STUDY

Major Field: Psychology (Industrial/Organizational)

Minor Field: Quantitative Psychology
viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract..............................................................................................................ii
Acknowledgments..............................................................................................v
Vita....................................................................................................................vii
List of Tables..................................................................................................... xi
List of Figures...................................................................................................xiii

Chapter 1............................................................................................................1
Introduction.........................................................................................................1
Implementation in the Innovation Literature....................................................3
Diffusion Research......................................................................................3
Innovativeness Research............................................................................4
Process Theory Approach...........................................................................5
Why Has Implementation Research Been Neglected?...................................8
Challenges in Implementation Research ......................................................10
Review of Literature......................................................................................13
The Klein and Sorra Framework (1996)....................................................20
Empirical Testing of the Klein & Sorra (1996) Model.................................26
Innovation Diffusion and Adoption Research Project ................................29
Present Study and Development of Hypotheses...........................................29
Antecedent Variables................................................................................30
Outcome Variables....................................................................................37

Chapter 2..........................................................................................................49
Methods............................................................................................................49
Research Context.........................................................................................49
Research Design..........................................................................................53
Subjects.....................................................................................................54
Data Sources.............................................................................................55
Focal Unit, Level of Measurement and Level of Analysis..............................56
Key Informant Methodology..........................................................................57
Measures: Operationalizing the Constructs..................................................60
Response Scales......................................................................................60
Antecedent Variables................................................................................61
Outcome Variables....................................................................................67
Reinvention...............................................................................................71
Beliefs about Maintaining Fidelity..............................................................71
ix