Understanding the early stages of the innovation diffusion process: awareness, influence and communication networks

The themes of awareness and influence within the innovation diffusion process are addressed. The innovation diffusion process is typically represented as stages, yet awareness and influence are somewhat under-represented in the literature. Awareness and influence are situated within the contextual setting of individual actors but also within the broader institutional forces. Understanding how actors become aware of an innovation and then how their opinion is influenced is important for creating a more innovation-active UK construction sector. Social network analysis is proposed as one technique for mapping how awareness and influence occur and what they look like as a network. Empirical data are gathered using two modes of enquiry. This is done through a pilot study consisting of chartered professionals and then through a case study organization as it attempted to diffuse an innovation. The analysis demonstrates significant variations across actors’ awareness and influence networks. It is argued that social network analysis can complement other research methods in order to present a richer picture of how actors become aware of innovations and where they draw their influences regarding adopting innovations. In summarizing the findings, a framework for understanding awareness and influence associated with innovation within the UK construction sector is presented. Finally, with the UK construction sector continually being encouraged to be innovative, understanding and managing an actor’s awareness and influence network will be beneficial. The overarching conclusion thus describes the need not only to build research capacity in this area but also to push the boundaries related to the research methods employed.

Establishing a connection between knowledge transfer and innovation diffusion

Successful innovation diffusion process may well take the form of knowledge transfer process. Therefore, the primary objectives of this paper include: first, to evaluate the interrelations between transfer of knowledge and diffusion of innovation; and second to develop a model to establish a connection between the two. This has been achieved using a four-step approach. The first step of the approach is to assess and discuss the theories relating to knowledge transfer (KT) and innovation diffusion (ID). The second step focuses on developing basic models for KT and ID, based on the key theories surrounding these areas. A considerable amount of literature has been written on the association between knowledge management and innovation, the respective fields of KT and ID. The next step, therefore, explores the relationship between innovation and knowledge management in order to identify the connections between the latter, i.e. KT and ID. Finally, step four proposes and develops an integrated model for KT and ID. As the developed model suggests the sub-processes of knowledge transfer can be connected to the innovation diffusion process in several instances as discussed and illustrated in the paper.

The role of location in knowledge creation and diffusion: evidence of centripetal and centrifugal forces in the City of London financial services agglomeration

In this paper we report on a major empirical study of centripetal and centrifugal forces in the City of London financial services agglomeration. The study sheds light on (1) the manner and magnitude of firm interaction in the agglomeration; (2) the characteristics of the agglomeration that aid the competitiveness of incumbent firms; and (3) the problems associated with agglomeration. In addressing these issues, we use the data to (1) test emerging theory that explains the high productivity and innovation of agglomerations in terms of their ability to generate and diffuse knowledge; and (2) evaluate the ‘end of geography’ thesis.

Strong armies, slow adaptation: civil-military relations and diffusion of military power

Why are some states more willing to adopt military innovations than others? Why, for example, were the great powers of Europe able to successfully reform their military practices to better adapt to and participate in the so-called military revolution of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries while their most important extra-European competitor, the Ottoman Empire, failed to do so? This puzzle is best explained by two factors: civil-military relations and historical timing. In the Ottoman Empire, the emergence of an institutionally strong and internally cohesive army during the early stages of state formation—in the late fourteenth century—equipped the military with substantial bargaining powers. In contrast, the great powers of Europe drew heavily on private providers of military power during the military revolution and developed similar armies only by the second half of the seventeenth century, limiting the bargaining leverage of European militaries over their rulers. In essence, the Ottoman standing army was able to block reform efforts that it believed challenged its parochial interests. Absent a similar institutional challenge, European rulers initiated military reforms and motivated officers and military entrepreneurs to participate in the ongoing military revolution.

The diffusion of grassroots innovations for sustainability in Italy and Great Britain: an exploratory spatial data analysis

Little research so far has been devoted to understanding the diffusion of grassroots innovation for sustainability across space. This paper explores and compares the spatial diffusion of two networks of grassroots innovations, the Transition Towns Network (TTN) and Gruppi di Acquisto Solidale (Solidarity Purchasing Groups – GAS), in Great Britain and Italy. Spatio-temporal diffusion data were mined from available datasets, and patterns of diffusion were uncovered through an exploratory data analysis. The analysis shows that GAS and TTN diffusion in Italy and Great Britain is spatially structured, and that the spatial structure has changed over time. TTN has diffused differently in Great Britain and Italy, while GAS and TTN have diffused similarly in central Italy. The uneven diffusion of these grassroots networks on the one hand challenges current narratives on the momentum of grassroots innovations, but on the other highlights important issues in the geography of grassroots innovations for sustainability, such as cross-movement transfers and collaborations, institutional thickness, and interplay of different proximities in grassroots innovation diffusion.