 Welcome friends to a discussion on diffusion of innovations and as we know diffusion of innovations is how why and at what rate new ideas and technology spread in a society and among people and this is a concept which has been popularized by American communication studies professor Everett Rogers who started working on this from 1962 on a book of the same name and there have been five editions of the book and this study started in 19th century by French sociologist Gabriel Tarde and there have been a number of studies beginning in rural sociology about adoption of hybrid cons for example in Iowa and then it has diversified into many fields including social network analysis and into educational technology as well. So there are fascinating ways of looking at innovations and how they spread among societies so let's begin this discussion. As I said this has been popularized by Everett Rogers and this is Everett Rogers and this is his book in fifth edition and today we are going to talk about we are going to take a lot from this book in our discussion today. So let's define diffusion first. So diffusion is the process in which an innovation is communicated through certain channels over time among members of a social system so those channels are important that that spread of time is important and the members of the social system is important and one of the ways in which it spreads is a concept known as imitative behavior. So at the level of small groups and within communities when we are talking of micro level processes there is some kind of an imitative behavior and those micro level processes bring up to a macro level social changes as well. So we are going to look at both the micro and the macro aspects of diffusion of innovations. And innovations is defined as anything that potential adopters perceive to be new or which it could be new ideas, it could be new beliefs, it could be tacit knowledge, it could be explicit knowledge, it could be processes, even protocols, tools, technologies, the way we live our lives or even belief systems. So it encompasses a lot of things, a lot of new ideas and in today's discussion we will also be talking about Indian scientist Raghunath Mashalkar's assured paradigm on what is good innovation and what is not good innovation or what are the factors which determine whether an innovation will be adopted or not adopted. And a key to understanding innovation is that existing knowledge is implemented in new context and that opens up new possibilities. So your existing knowledge is an indicator of whether you will be adopting innovations or not and we will be talking details about how the innovation process goes ahead. So diffusion of innovation begins with a few individuals, the innovators, people who take up the new idea and then it is followed by early adopters and then the curve begins to climb as more and more people adopt the new idea. So we will be talking of concepts like a critical mass of how and why these change agents matter and why these innovators are so very important at kickstarting the innovation process but it is very important to understand that to begin with only a few individuals will take up the new idea and we will also talk about what are the characteristics of those innovators, people who are always willing to take up the new idea. And then we have the early adopters and the late adopters and the laggers and we will see details about that. So this is the popular diagram, popularly known as the S curve and this is what the diffusion of innovation is. So over time we have a small number of early adopters who are always willing to try out new things and then the innovators right there and then we have the early adopters here and then we have the later adopters and then it just achieves the total diffusion that it could achieve. So we have this popular S curve of diffusion of innovations and this is always how it begins over time and this is the cumulative number of people. On the Y axis we have cumulative number of people who have been adopting the innovation and on the X axis we have the time. So over time as it starts we just have very few people who are the innovators who take up the new idea and then we will find out that there is also a percentage of people who take up the new idea and then you know what percentage of early adopters and all. We will just see as we carry on with our presentation today. So as I said the first 2.5% of the adopters are the innovators. So for example if there are 200 adopters and 5, the first 5 are the innovators, people who are always willing to try out new ideas. The next 13.5% are early adopters. So that would include the opinion leaders also. So innovators are kind of the change agents and then we have the early adopters and it's very important to involve opinion leaders there because people depend on interpersonal channels to adopt or not to adopt these innovations. And then we have an early majority about 34% and then we have the late majority 34% and finally the laggard who are the last to adopt any kind of an innovation. So if I have to put that in this graphical format and this is the famous bell curve we get. So the first 2.5% are the innovators and then we have the early adopters which is 13.5% and then the early majority and the late majority and this is the laggard. So this almost looks like that normal curve we are so used to seeing. So this provides us an idea about 16% of the people who are always first to kickstart the process and the S curve that we saw is reflective of this. And then we have the early majority and the late majority and the laggard at end. So the early innovators or the change agents they are regarded as venturesome. So they are always willing to their adventures by mindset always willing to try out new ideas, new systems, new technologies, new belief system, new ways of doing certain things. The early adopters are the people who have some kind of respect in society and they are going to look at the pros and cons and look at the relative advantages. And we will find out what are the factors which influence the diffusion process but the early adopters are the ones who have some respect in the community and they are the ones who will act as opinion leaders also in the adoption of the new technology or the idea. And then we have the early majority people who deliberately do those things so they will be doing a lot more thinking before adopting any kind of thing. And then we have the late majority who are the skeptical and the laggard who are regarded as people who are more traditional in their outlook and they would not adopt certain any new idea or technology unless they have no other choice. So we have all these different types and I'm just putting them in single words but there's a lot more about who the innovators are and what their personality types are and who the early adopters and who the early majority or the late majority and the laggard are. But important to understand that there are at least five different types of people in this innovation process. And this is a very very important idea from Everett Rogers and we must put some time here about discussing these stages of the diffusion process. So the diffusion process starts off with the knowledge or awareness of that new technology, new idea, new belief system or new ways of doing things. And that is provided by the mass media generally. So the first process in the diffusion process is knowledge or people get aware of that. And then comes the persuasion process and this is where probably the interpersonal channels and the local impacts is more important because after the awareness you must have more reasons to decide whether or not to adopt the innovation. And that is where you need something more than just knowledge. So lots of pros and cons about whether the innovation is as good as the earlier one or whether there are any advantages of this or what are the incentives for all that. So that's the second stage. And the third stage where one finally decides whether to try out or not. So again that is a stage which will follow the persuasion. So many of us might find this very similar to the advertisement models of people get aware and then they have interest and then they have the desire and action and all that. So this is very similar to some of those advertising models. So then we make a decision on whether to adopt the innovation or not. And again that also has a lot to do with both the mass media channels and our interpersonal contacts and the decision is based on a lot of information about what are the advantages of the innovation. How much effort I have to put into adopt the innovation and all such things. And then one tries out the innovation so that in implementation stage is not the final stage. That is the stage at which we are trying it out ourselves so that trial ability is very important and that trying out will determine and the results of that trying out will determine that whether it will be finally adopted or not. And that is the process which is known as the confirmation. So just to repeat the diffusion process involves first is knowledge where we have awareness about the innovation. And then there is more knowledge or more information about that which persuades us to adopt the innovation process as we'll see that you know that there's a campaign which is required for people to adopt. So it does not occur naturally and then you decide to adopt the innovation innovative idea or method or technique or strategy. Finally you try it out and then you confirm it. So every innovation has to go through these five processes. Now we are going to talk about what are the factors which determine whether a new idea will be adopted or not. And Everett Rogers describes these five factors. So the first factor which will determine whether I'll be adopting the new technology or not or will be adopting the new idea or not is the relative idea how much better it is from the old idea. So if it is just incrementally better then probably I might not be interested in that but if it is a lot better then we will be thinking of adopting this new idea. And there are many factors in relative advantage one of them of course and always is the affordable factor whether I'm able to save money through the innovation. And we might have other advantages also it could be relative views it could be convenience it could also you know make me feel good and so there are a lot of whether it's a part of social fad and all those kind of things. So the relative advantage of the new idea is what determines whether the new idea or technology will be adopted or not. And the second very important thing about the adoption of the new idea or technology or adoption of the innovation is compatibility. And this means the degree to which the new idea is similar to existing practices. So if the innovation is not consistent with the existing experience if it is very different from what I've been doing it's remarkably different. So that ease of use will be lost there. So if there is an innovation which is incompatible to the value systems or the kind of things that I've been using then probably I will have a greater resistance to adopting that. So the degree to which it is similar. So we have to start off with our similar ideas and with our comfort with the kind of things we've been using and we have to build upon that. So compatibility is a very important factor when it comes to adopting new ideas and new technologies. Very important to understand whether the new idea or practices is simple or complex. Because if it involves a lot of difficulty in adopting the new technology or new idea then probably we are going to not expend that much of energy. And that is one area where a lot of good innovations do not diffuse properly because people find that to be extremely complicated. So the end user has to be kept in mind. If the end user is not kept in mind when we are designing these new technologies, new ideas and new strategies then the innovation will not be very successful. And as we discussed the process of adoption involves a stage where we are trying out the innovative idea and we are finding out whether it works or not. So if the innovative idea cannot be adopted on an experimental basis and that is why we have all these trial packs and 30 days of free trial and those kind of things. Because that provides us with an option of trying it out for ourselves and seeing what our experience is. Whether we are satisfied and whether it is useful, whether it is compatible, whether it is not complex and what are the relative advantages when I use it. So it is not on what the change agent wants to tell me but it is on how I find it. So that is why trialability is a very important indicator of whether the innovative idea will be adopted or not. And finally the changes must be visible. The changes must be apparent. The relative advantage must be apparent. So innovations whose positive effects are not visible, they might not be adopted. So observability is a very important factor that whatever changes are said to be there or whatever advantages are said to accrue to this kind of a method. Those advantages must be visible to us. If those advantages are not visible or apparent, then the adoption will be more delayed. So this is from Everett Rogers book and these are the five stages that I just spoke of. The relative advantage, whether the innovation, it is advantages from the one we have been using, how compatible it is to the technology we have been using so far. Whether it is complex or simple, whether I am able to do trial on them and whether I can see the positive impact or the relative advantage more empirically or they are visible. The advantages are visible. And then the second important thing which determines the innovation decision is the type of innovative decision. Whether it is optional or whether somebody is doing it just on his or her own and everybody is not mandated to adopt that. So that is one decision which will decide whether the innovation will be adopted fast or it will not be adopted fast. Whether people decide collectively, maybe at the village level, maybe at the municipal level, maybe at the state level, district level or whatever level, where people decide collectively on adopting the new innovation or adopting the new technology or the new idea. Or whether some authority is involved there where people are mandating us to adopt the innovation. So this type of innovation decision is also an important factor which determines at what rate the innovation will be adopted by individuals and by society at large. The communication channels are extremely important as we have seen that it could be mass media, it could be interpersonal channels. And there are various stages where the mass media is important and there are other stages at which interpersonal contacts are important. So they are also another very important indicator for the adoption of innovations. And then the nature of the social system, whether it is networked, whether there is more interconnectedness among people or what are the norms of the system and all. So those are also a very important indicator of whether the innovation will be adopted or not. And finally the extent of change, agents, promotion efforts, what are the kind of campaign and how efficiently and how effectively you do those campaigns. So that is also a very important indicator in the rate of adoption of innovations. So just to repeat the factors that determine individual choice includes peer pressure and we will talk about this critical mass. If a lot of people have already adopted it then there is pressure on you to adopt that. Or if many people in your close proximity they are using something then there is pressure on you to adopt those innovations. There could be social norms, so society kind of appreciates adoption of these new technologies more often. What are the perceived benefits as we already spoke and what are the availability of resources and communication efforts also. So how much of communication campaigns are there to kind of help people adopt these innovations. So here I talk about the incentives and that again is a very important indicator which suggests how quickly the innovation will be adopted or how it can be catalyzed into adoption. So whether the incentives are for the adopter or for the diffuser, whether the incentives are for the individuals or for the community as a whole. So there are places where if everybody is not doing it then the entire community is impacted. So in vaccines for example. So whether the incentives are positive, whether you are rewarded for adopting the innovations or whether it is negative, whether you are punished for not adopting certain things and that could be symbolic. So whether the incentives are monetary or whether they are non-monetary, whether the incentives are immediate that I can see the advantages immediately or whether the incentives are delayed. So these are the factors which determine how quickly an innovation will be adopted. We've been talking about macro perspectives also and that is where we talk about social change. So this is about innovation going through the society and the means by which people adopt these changes. So here we are more concerned about whether social change is happening or not. And at the micro perspective as we will see this is more at a personal level, more at the individual level. So in the micro perspective we are looking at the individuals, we are looking at the predictors of positive adoption. So what are the interpersonal relations and what are the information exposures and how are the network positions related to adoption decisions. So that again is a social network perspective. So whether you are central to the network or whether you are peripheral to the network, whether those placements are the ones which determine whether you will be adopting an innovation or you will not be adopting. So that is the micro perspective and that is the macro perspective as I suggested. And now we are going to talk about a very, very important scale for innovation and this has been suggested by India's foremost scientists, Professor Raghunath Mashalkar and very different from Everett Rogers' factors of innovation. He talks about what is known as the assured scheme. Whether the innovation is affordable for everybody, whether it is affordable for people to adopt. So we are very quick at adopting innovations if it is economical for us. Whether it is scalable, whether it can be adopted at a larger scale. So a lot of things are very good maybe at a smaller scale. So if it is not scalable then that innovation will not be sustained. And sustainability generally in the cases of environmental sustainability in terms of social sustainability and in terms of economic sustainability. So if the innovation is not sustainable on these three factors then it will not be adopted. And universality is about the ease of use basically and whether the changes have widespread use among consumers. So when we are talking about universal we are putting the consumer or the people who are adopting it at the centre. And rapid means all these things have to be done rapidly because technology changes rapidly. People's choices and requirements change rapidly so it has to be done. And of course excellence is very important because in a global atmosphere if the innovation is not technologically and scientifically and otherwise excellent or of a very high order then it will not be able to sustain itself. Of course all the other things are related to that. And it must be different or it must have its own distinctiveness. So I can't get into the details of all these things but affordability, scalability, sustainability, the ease of use, the rapidity at which it is brought to the end consumer and the fact that it is very useful. And also it has its own distinct advantages. These are the factors which determine whether an innovation will be successful or not. So there are other factors also which are like bandwagon effect. So often these two things happen that probably diffusion is done but implementation is not that good. So when the incentive is just to adopt certain things and there is no incentive to use it then probably the diffusion is there but the usage or implementation is not there so we have to be aware of these kind of things. So there are many ideas which are diffused properly but not used in the longer term so that's what sustainability was about. And there are a lot of good innovations, a lot of good for example HIV vaccine where this is very advantageous but for very many reasons they do not diffuse. So we saw a situation where a lot of diffusion happens where people do not end up using it ultimately and then there are innovations which are fabulous, excellent and very useful but people don't end up using it. So there is this very important model again, this is suggested by Everett Rogers himself. So there are these two factors which help in the adoption of new ideas or new technologies. And these are firstly it's due to mass media and then it's due to interpersonal communication. So as we can see that initially it's the mass media which is very important but beyond the stage the impact of the mass media starts going down and the impact of personal communication is very, very important. So if you are just looking at mass media campaigns then probably they are not enough. So we have to look at those interpersonal campaigns using opinion leaders, using influencers, using change agents and all that. So Bas's model talks about both these factors as being very important factors for adoption of innovation. And we have an idea of opinion leaders from our two-step flow theory from personal influence theories and all where they are a class of people who are responsible for diffusing those information from the mass media to their interpersonal channels. And that's where the role of opinion leaders is very important. And as change agents we must be very clear about who these opinion leaders are, what are their characteristics and how we can involve them in these diffusion processes. And as we already know that these opinion leaders are different in different contexts and they do not have any kind of formal position but that is a position which is given to them by the members of the society. This is where this idea of critical mass is important and if we do not reach this critical mass then we will not be reaching the innovation. So there are a lot of innovations which start off quite well, for example, pagers we might be knowing that, but they do not end up reaching a critical mass and a lot of social media channels also. And we can talk about many, many channels like we chat in India for example and Google one also that they never reach this critical mass and that's why they cannot take off. So it's important using all those interpersonal channels and through media channels to reach this critical mass and that is where innovation can be more easily diffused. So reaching this critical mass is vital for any innovation to be sustained. And also the difference between tacit and codified knowledge. So there's a lot of knowledge which is tacit which is not codified which is inherent. So this understanding of different types of knowledge systems is important to help us take this diffusion process further. So what are the change agent roles and what are the things that the change agents must do. So these are the seven roles that Everett Rogers talks about. First of all, he has to develop a need for change. So he or she whenever he is talking about diffusing a new technology or a new idea or a new process or a new strategy, he has to first of all develop a need for change in the community and then establish an information exchange relationship because if an information exchange relationship is not formed and if there is no communication, then there will be no diffusion. And it's important to diagnose the problems from the user's perspective and we've been discussing that in different contexts. So that problem has to be diagnosed by the change agents to see whether it can whether anything can be done from the perspective of the change agent. And then that creating that intent to change and that creation of intent is as we have seen it's a long process where people have to be told about the relative advantages and the simplicity and all those things of the innovation. And then finally that intent to change must be translated into action and then it has to be ensured that people keep continuing with the innovation and don't discontinue it and then kind of lead to a self renewing behavior where people do that on their own. So as we've seen in the previous slide once that critical mass is reached, then the diffusion is self perpetuated then we don't have to make an effort. So it's important to understand that we have to reach this stage where people do that on their own. People adopt the innovation on their own. And finally, the use of new media is one area where we can use for adoption of innovative ideas because there could be interactive pages where people can see for themselves how these changes are happening and what are the effects and so those simulations can be adopted. So the adoption of internet itself is a subject of a lot of studies on diffusion of innovations. Thank you very much for your patience.