IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/vua/wpaper/2002-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Beyond the adoption/ non-adoption dichotomy: the impact of innovation characteristics on potential adopters' transition through adoption process stages

Author

Listed:
  • Frambach, R.T.

    (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Faculteit der Economische Wetenschappen en Econometrie (Free University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics Sciences, Business Administration and Economitrics)

  • Agarwal, M.K.
  • Nijssen, E.J.

Abstract

Research on innovation adoption has suffered from a bias towards understanding the factors that affect the dichotomous adoption/non-adoption decision. Much less attention is devoted to the question why potential adopters fail to progress to the adoption stage from earlier stages in the decision making process. Such knowledge is essential to understand what factors actually underlie the non-adoption of an innovation. As perceived innovation characteristics have been found to influence adoption in a substantial way, we develop hypotheses on their influence not only with respect to the adoption stage, but with respect to previous stages of the adoption process as well. Specifically, we develop hypotheses on the perceived levels and importance of relative advantage, compatibility, complexity and perceived risk in the awareness, evaluation, and adoption stages of the innovation adoption process. The hypotheses are tested using both multivariate analysis of variance and multinomial logit modeling on a sample of 242 organizations, focusing on the adoption process of electronic banking. The results show that the levels of perceived relative advantage and compatibility increase over the stages of the adoption process, whereas the perceived levels of complexity and risk largely decrease. The influence of the characteristics across the adoption stages shows that positive beliefs related to the innovation have highest salience in the initial stage of the process, whereas the salience of perceived complexity - generally considered an undesirable attribute - is highest in the final stage. In sum, our results imply that non-adopters are affected by innovation characteristics in a different way, depending on their stage in the adoption process, and therefore should not be considered as one homogeneous group of "potential adopters". These findings have important implications for marketing innovations.

Suggested Citation

  • Frambach, R.T. & Agarwal, M.K. & Nijssen, E.J., 2002. "Beyond the adoption/ non-adoption dichotomy: the impact of innovation characteristics on potential adopters' transition through adoption process stages," Serie Research Memoranda 0006, VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics.
    • Handle: RePEc:vua:wpaper:2002-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://degree.ubvu.vu.nl/repec/vua/wpaper/pdf/20020006.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Labay, Duncan G & Kinnear, Thomas C, 1981. "Exploring the Consumer Decision Process in the Adoption of Solar Energy Systems," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 8(3), pages 271-278, December.
    2. Ostlund, Lyman E, 1974. "Perceived Innovation Attributes as Predictors of Innovativeness," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 1(2), pages 23-29, Se.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Anita Gärling & John Thøgersen, 2001. "Marketing of electric vehicles," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 10(1), pages 53-65, January.
    2. Ozaki, Ritsuko & Sevastyanova, Katerina, 2011. "Going hybrid: An analysis of consumer purchase motivations," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 2217-2227, May.
    3. Wilfred Kassangoye & Robert Rugimbana, 2013. "Internet adoption and usage patterns among Students in selected South African Universities," Journal of Economics and Behavioral Studies, AMH International, vol. 5(6), pages 376-384.
    4. Astebro, Thomas B. & Dahlin, Kristina B., 2005. "Opportunity knocks," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(9), pages 1404-1418, November.
    5. Johan Jansson, 2011. "Consumer eco‐innovation adoption: assessing attitudinal factors and perceived product characteristics," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 192-210, March.
    6. Frambach, Ruud T. & Schillewaert, Niels, 2002. "Organizational innovation adoption: a multi-level framework of determinants and opportunities for future research," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 163-176, February.
    7. Ritsuko Ozaki, 2011. "Adopting sustainable innovation: what makes consumers sign up to green electricity?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(1), pages 1-17, January.
    8. Martin Schreier & Stefan Oberhauser & Reinhard Prügl, 2007. "Lead users and the adoption and diffusion of new products: Insights from two extreme sports communities," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 15-30, June.
    9. Bikram Jit Singh Mann & Sunpreet Kaur Sahni, 2012. "Profiling Adopter Categories of Internet Banking in India: An Empirical Study," Vision, , vol. 16(4), pages 283-295, December.
    10. Bähr-Seppelfricke, Ulrike, 2000. "Die Wirkung von Produkteigenschaften auf die Diffusion von Produktgruppen: Empirische Überprüfung in einem aggregierten Diffusionsmodell," Manuskripte aus den Instituten für Betriebswirtschaftslehre der Universität Kiel 525, Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel, Institut für Betriebswirtschaftslehre.
    11. Jacob Goldenberg & Donald R. Lehmann & David Mazursky, 2001. "The Idea Itself and the Circumstances of Its Emergence as Predictors of New Product Success," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 69-84, January.
    12. Islam, Towhidul, 2014. "Household level innovation diffusion model of photo-voltaic (PV) solar cells from stated preference data," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 340-350.
    13. Barczak, Gloria & Ellen, Pam Scholder & Pilling, Bruce K., 1997. "Developing typologies of consumer motives for use of technologically based banking services," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 131-139, February.
    14. Vasseur, Véronique & Kemp, René, 2015. "The adoption of PV in the Netherlands: A statistical analysis of adoption factors," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 483-494.
    15. Asante, Dennis & He, Zheng & Mintah Ampaw, Enock & Gyamerah, Samuel & Ankrah Twumasi, Martinson & Opoku-Mensah, Evans & Kyere, Francis & Asante, Bismark & Afia Akyia, Ellen, 2021. "Renewable energy technology transition among small-and-medium scale firms in Ghana," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 549-559.
    16. Powen Fang & Yaochuan Tsai & Hsinhsin Chang, 2013. "Relationship Performance on Self-Service Technology: Relationship Maintenance and Perceived Relationship Investment," Diversity, Technology, and Innovation for Operational Competitiveness: Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on Technology Innovation and Industrial Management,, ToKnowPress.
    17. Briguglio, Marie & Formosa, Glenn, 2017. "When households go solar: Determinants of uptake of a Photovoltaic Scheme and policy insights," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 154-162.
    18. Agarwal, Manoj K. & Frambach, Ruud T. & Stremersch, Stefan, 2000. "Does size matter? : disentangling consumers' bundling preferences," Serie Research Memoranda 0033, VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics.
    19. Petschnig, Martin & Heidenreich, Sven & Spieth, Patrick, 2014. "Innovative alternatives take action – Investigating determinants of alternative fuel vehicle adoption," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 68-83.
    20. Sara Ghaboulian Zare & Reza Hafezi & Mohammad Alipour & Reza Parsaei Tabar & Rodney A. Stewart, 2021. "Residential Solar Water Heater Adoption Behaviour: A Review of Economic and Technical Predictors and Their Correlation with the Adoption Decision," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-26, October.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • L15 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Information and Product Quality
    • M30 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Marketing and Advertising - - - General
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:vua:wpaper:2002-6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: R. Dam (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fewvunl.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.