UNIVERSITY TECHNOLOGY OF MARA SHAH ALAM

FACULTY OF COMMUNICATION AND MEDIA STUDIES

BACHELOR OF COMMUNICATION (HONS.) INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION

(MC247)

INC551

INNOVATION-DECISION IN SOCIAL DIFFUSION

ASSIGNMENT TITLE:

CASE STUDY 4: STAGES IN INNOVATION PROCESS

(THE ECOLOGICAL SYSTEM OF INNOVATION: A NEW ARCHITECTURAL

FRAMEWORK FOR A FUNCTIONAL EVIDENCE-BASED PLATFORM FOR SCIENCE AND
INNOVATION POLICY)

CLASS:

MC247S4C

PREPARED BY:

TADEA KHADIJAH BINTI TABIRA (2021352497)

PREPARED FOR:

DR. MOHD SHAHNAWI BIN MUHMAD PIRUS

SUBMISSION DATE:

22ND JUNE 2022

1
TABLE OF CONTENT

NO. CONTENT PAGE

1.0 Agenda Setting 3
2.0 Matching 4–6
3.0 Redefining/Restructuring 6–7
4.0 Clarifying 7–8
5.0 Routinizing 8 – 10
6.0 References 11

2
1.0 AGENDA-SETTING

There are five phases of adoption for organizations, according to Rogers (2003), which include
agenda-setting, matching, redefining, restructuring, clarifying, and routinizing. The first step of
the process refers to agenda-setting which is an organization's process of deciding to adopt
as well as seeing where one is falling short of one's goals or aspirations in terms of
performance. Besides that, organizational priorities may be set via this ongoing process, and
it is always scanning its surroundings for new ideas such as innovations as it prioritizes
concerns that have come to light. In many cases, a company discovers a new technology first
and then finds problems it might solve. Thus, a problem-based approach to agenda-setting
was identified by Rogers in both cases (Rogers E. M., 2003).

Based on Jon Sundbo (2003), product, process, market, or organization innovation

includes not only technological breakthroughs but also organizational and management
innovations as well as a wide range of other types of innovations, including financial
innovations and combinations. Innovation is essential to a nation's ability to compete. Planning
innovation strategies has been a priority for national governments to boost economic
development. However, the network of interrelationships, systems, niches and channels that
make up an ecosystem is not a straight line (Yawson R. M., 2021).

In this case, there have been no direct assessments of national innovation systems
using these models. In their formulation, many empirical investigations and institutional policy
frameworks refer to the essential aspects of these models. However, like with prior models of
innovation, the linear character of presentation is the major deficiency found in the literature
with these new national innovation policy portfolios which are often referred to as National
Innovation Ecosystem (Yawson R. M., 2021).

Besides that, the successful use of organizational support systems is critical in fostering
effective innovation, which is a major challenge for many firms. Reduced competitiveness is
possible if companies do not innovate. Strategic direction should be considered a key action
parameter and the overall framework for choices regarding innovation and change. This
requires theoretical integration to connect the organizational environment with innovation
(Leskovar-Spacapan, G. & Bastic, M., 2007).

3
2.0 MATCHING

This phase determines an organization's capacity to execute an idea. Rogers (2003) found
that the invention was reviewed to determine whether it would improve corporate performance.
Forecasting is important to assess what future innovation adoption will mean for the firm
whereas innovation discussions examine advantages or downsides and decide whether to
accept or reject the suggestion. Freeing an innovation for a brief period may boost its
acceptance. Trial ideas are deployed faster. The innovation and problem now fit conceptually.

Chris Freeman (2013) defines industrial innovation as the launch of a new or better
product or the first commercial application of a new or improved process or equipment. Most
economic activities in modern society are best performed by the market and capitalist
businesses. There are times when public intervention in legislation, education, the
environment, infrastructure, research, social security, and income distribution may augment
or correct the market and its capitalist participants. When there's no market mechanism,
regulation is utilized (Yawson R. M., 2021).

Early models for assessing innovation were inconsistent, linear, and ignored
interdependencies across indicators and metric variables, according to Robert M. Yawson
(2021). Science statistics are generally portrayed as an input-output relationship between
research resources and outcomes. In this system, the expected economic benefits of research
are employed for accounting. To create an evidence-based policymaking system, the
innovation ecosystem architecture must be linked, not linear. Innovation's ecological system
may include a firm, industrial sector, nation, region, or even the planet (Yawson R. M., 2021).

Change processes cause communal, group, or whole-organization learning. Human

and technological processes create and transmit knowledge. Organizational change
management is a technique to improve performance by changing the links between people,
technology, organizational structure, and information. It frequently begins with a top
management-approved strategic change. Learning within and across firms is key to
understanding how innovation systems function (Yawson R. M., 2021).

As a result, the Ecological System of Innovation is proposed by Robert M. Yawson

(2021) as a new design framework for a national innovation policy. The Delphi Method, the

4
Decision-Making Trial, and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL) Method, the Balanced
Scorecard (BSC), Systems Dynamics Modelling, the Quadruple Helix Theory (QHT), and the
Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) are some of the models, approaches, and ideas used in
this framework of the AHP.

Firstly, the RAND Corporation, in the 1950s, completed a series of studies that served
as the basis for the Delphi approach (Jones, J. & Hunter, D., 1995). The purpose was to get
a collection of experts' most reliable consensus. Analyses are used to gather, evaluate, and
interpret STI measures and indicators. After establishing national innovation criteria, identify
gaps and create a solution area. Next, are STI metrics and Science and Engineering Indicators
(SEI). First, the SEI records the most essential quantitative data on national and global
scientific endeavors (National Science Board, 2008). SEI makes data accessible to users with
different information needs and processing preferences by employing tables, figures, narrative
text, bulleted text, and Web-based connections, and reference lists. Academic research
produces fresh ideas and R&D people, but it's harder to measure the former (Yawson R. M.,
2021).

Secondly, by using interactive man-model approaches and evaluating qualitative and

factor-related elements of social issues, the DEMATEL method was created by the Battelle
Geneva Institute (Gabus, A. & Fontela, E., 1972). Widespread use cases for the approach
include anything from manufacturing and decision-making processes to the city and region-
level environmental assessments as well as global issues (Yawson R. M., 2021).

Thirdly, even when considering both physical and intangible factors, it has been shown
that using relative measurements rather than absolute metrics in decision-making is preferable
(Haines, J. D., & Sharif, N. M., 2004). Therefore, relative scoring approaches are
recommended when seeking to evaluate the relative relevance or relative dominance, or
relative preference) of elements and actors that contribute to making a choice (Yawson R. M.,
2021).

BSC is the last phase in the innovation system's architectural framework. Successful
firms have an organized strategy. Performance measurement information must be utilized to
set goals, allocate and prioritize resources, validate or alter policy or program directions, and

5
report on progress. The National Ecological System of Innovation's action plan may be built
on this paradigm, which connects strategic vision to core competencies and organizational
success factors. This strategy for building the National Ecological System of Innovation (NESI)
is novel (Yawson R. M., 2021).

3.0 REDEFINING/RESTRUCTURING

At this point, Rogers (2003) expressed the invention starts to lose its foreign nature to the
organization. On the one hand, if the invention does not completely match the organization’s
condition, it is recreated to adapt to the organization’s requirements and structure more
closely. Sometimes, a new organization unit is formed with responsibility for the innovation.

Large-scale initiatives like a broad R&D tax credit are ineffective. Efforts to affect
certain socioeconomic sectors and activities must be targeted. Public policies aimed at
fostering innovation have a wide range of goals and expectations from the government, as do
the policies themselves and the methods used to achieve those goals. Key policy issues in
this respect revolve around the building of a viable evidence-based platform for science,
technology, and innovation policies. Understanding the social science of the STI policy is the
best way to deal with this dilemma (Yawson R. M., 2021).

Most models of innovation do not provide a holistic, end-to-end perspective. The ability
to innovate and input elements like R&D expenditure, scientific institutions, people resources,
and capital appear to be the focus of the majority of innovation policy attention. National
Science and Technology Policy Centres throughout the world have been leading efforts to
establish new frameworks for the innovation system because of this current predicament. The
National Innovation Ecosystem refers to these new paradigms of innovation (Yawson R. M.,
2021).

Building on the classic linear chain model, this study proposes an expanded NESI that
incorporates all stakeholders in the innovation process of academics and businesses alike into
a unified system. Even though it has a national scope, the framework maintains an emphasis
on the organizational level as well as measurements and instruments for measurement at this
level (Yawson R. M., 2021).

6
 For example, as for the Delphi method, certain components are needed to achieve the
organized communication: feedback on individual contributions of information and knowledge
which is an evaluation of the group's judgment or position; a chance for people to change their
ideas and some degree of anonymity for individual replies. Using a self-administered
questionnaire, many experts may be polled at little cost thanks to the Delphi method (Yawson
R. M., 2021).

A the end, the National Ecological System of Innovation may need ongoing updates to
the model. Measures that haven't worked may need to be discarded or reworked, or their
usefulness may be enhanced. However, any changes to the BSC will be done selectively so
that national organizations may measure progress against a consistent baseline and identify
and evaluate important trends. With its process-based emphasis on how particular activities
are related to organizational performance objectives, the BSC enhances the information
supplied by other tools (Yawson R. M., 2021).

4.0 CLARIFYING

Thus, Rogers (2003) said that the Clarifying stage is connected to the propagation of an
invention inside an organization or intra-organizational diffusion. It is at this stage of diffusion
that an innovation's place and function inside an organization are being refined, as its name
implies. This is the time of year when members of an organization's complicated network of
communication networks gather to discuss the latest innovations. Social interaction also leads
to a shared understanding of an invention.

According to Balzat Markus and Horst Hanusch (2004), interaction and connections
are critical to understanding the innovation process. As a result of the cumulative processes
of interactive learning and seeking that take place in organizations, individuals, and knowledge
institutions, innovation seldom occurs on its own. As a result, the system must be described
in terms of both its constituent parts and the interactions that exist among those parts.
Relationships may be understood as knowledge carriers and interactions as processes in
which new information is created and disseminated.

The studies and presentations from the year 2021 show that new metrics and models
for evaluating R&D are gaining widespread acceptance across countries and regions, which

7
is unsurprising given the breadth of the research that was presented. However, the taxonomy
must utilize to be similar across countries and regions in the science-policy community. When
looking at the numerous models of National Innovation Ecosystems, the fundamental problem
is that they are always presented linearly (Yawson R. M., 2021).

As an example, the BSC’s progress toward a company's goal may be tracked with
certain indicators, while long-term performance can be tracked with another set of metrics.
One way a company may measure its present performance such as financial, customer
happiness, and the outcomes of business operations together with its attempts to better these
aspects like the process improvement, staff motivation, and information system enhancement
is via the use of the balanced scorecard. By focusing on how particular behaviors affect
organizational performance results, the BSC complements information supplied by other
methods (Yawson R. M., 2021).

Academic, Government, Industry, and public viewpoints are used to produce the ESI,
which is based on the national innovation target. For each of the four perspectives, the aim is
translated into applicable competencies, as well as an evaluation of important success
elements and particular indicators, which reflect inputs and processes as well as outputs and
results. Knowledge management activities and initiatives, such as strategic recruiting, hiring,
training, team development, document management, collaborative communication systems,
knowledge and skills audits of employees, knowledge base developments, and the fostering
of communities of interest within organizations, help to promote learning and growth in the
workplace (Yawson R. M., 2021).

5.0 ROUTINIZING

Rogers (2003) describes routinizing as a measure of how well the innovation was integrated
into the organization's day-to-day operations. Whether at the micro- or macro-scale,
routinizing is no less dangerous. Whether adopters are not sure if they like an idea, they may
back out of the implementation process. It is via human interactions that influence is once
again transmitted channels. The impact might be beneficial or detrimental to an idea. However,
agents of change remain responsible for supporting new users at this point.

8
 In addition to major United States government agencies, the UNESCO World Heritage
Centres, OECD, and EU Commission all gather statistics on the advancement of science,
technology, and innovation. It is critical to use KPIs to assess the performance of each goal
and to predict whether the one to which it is related will be achieved. As an example, the KPI
of building a new taxonomy of science and technology innovation is to use bibliometric, scient
metric, and visualization tools to mine patent, publication, and CV data to construct links
between existing disciplines and to identify the birth and death of areas (Yawson R. M., 2021).

The research has included SDM in the BSC conversation since it can help us deal with
the temporal lags that come with dynamic settings. The usage of SDM for a concept like BSC
and the formulation of the temporal factors relating to the cause-and-effect relationships
between BSC means and measurements are also shown. Using system dynamics, we can
better comprehend the structure and behavior of large, complex systems (Yawson R. M.,
2021).

Furthermore, the several levels of the framework outline the items that should be
included in the innovation policy. The creation of the Ecological System of Innovation provides
a solution to the question of how policies should be put into action. All of the ESI's
measurements are connected in a chain of cause-and-effect that ends in strategic success.
Understanding the measures prescribed by the balanced scorecard and how they relate to
strategic achievement relies heavily on the cause-and-effect premise. If the policies selected
are being implemented properly as indicated by certain indicators, then policy analysts need
to check that their assumptions regarding cause-and-effect linkages are confirmed in practice
(Yawson R. M., 2021).

To recapitulate, the development of innovation measurement models for firm-level

analysis has made significant progress, as the distance is a major problem in most current
frameworks for gauging innovation and policy. Measurement of national innovation and
enabling public sector competencies for such measurement have been presented in this
research as models connecting inputs, processes, outputs, and outcomes Despite differing
national and regional accounting rules, many fields share criteria for evaluating assets and
capital, making cross-country comparisons difficult. Increasingly, the value of combining
viewpoints from fields like sociology and psychology to better understand social and

9
behavioral problems is being recognized such intangibles must be better understood to
enhance and develop the public view of the ESI model (Yawson R. M., 2021).

10
6.0 REFERENCES

Balzat, M., & Hanusch, H. (2004). Recent trends in the research on national innovation
systems. Journal of evolutionary economics, 14(2), 197-210.

Freeman, C. (2013). Economics of industrial innovation. Routledge.

Gabus, A., & Fontela, E. (1972). World problems, an invitation to further thought within the
framework of DEMATEL. Battelle Geneva Research Center, Geneva, Switzerland, 1(8).

Haines, J. D., & Sharif, N. M. (2004). Understanding the relative importance of components of
technology. Journal of Doing Business Across Borders, 3(2), 5-24.

Jones, J., & Hunter, D. (1995). Qualitative research: consensus methods for medical and
health services research. Bmj, 311(7001), 376-380.

Leskovar-Spacapan, G., & Bastic, M. (2007). Differences in organizations’ innovation

capability in transition economy: Internal aspect of the organizations’ strategic orientation.
Technovation, 27(9), 533-546.

National Science Board. (2008). Science and Engineering Indicators (Vol. 1). National Science
Foundation.

Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: The Free Press.

Sundbo, J. (2003). Innovation and strategic reflexivity: an evolutionary approach applied to

services. The international handbook on innovation, 97-114.

Yawson, R. M. (2021). The ecological system of innovation: A new architectural framework for
a functional evidence-based platform for science and innovation policy. arXiv preprint
arXiv:2106.15479.

11