Infectious Innovation
Throughout history there have been events which have shifted economic, technological, political and religious landscapes. More recently we have witnessed this shifts being caused by innovation as opposed to warring nations or Malthusian disasters.
Frequently the focus on innovation today lies on its two main components of novelty and commercial application (i.e. use). However, while these two components are key, so is a third element — the rate of diffusion. In this sense we mean how easily products or services are adopted by society in its various forms.
To quickly expand — we might expect the “innovators” to be the first group to latch onto new technology as they may be able to see further value for their existing products, willing to adapt new tech at the cost of quality or higher prices. This stubborn pro-adaption mind-set often means that sales to innovators are not usually an indication of future sales.
They are followed by the “early adopters”, the group who make careful decisions of early investment and tend to have strong opinions within their friendship groups. Hypothetically, they are the friend who would buy a hover-board or LED YZs tomorrow if given the chance — even if the company itself is not famous yet. The “early adopters” usually lay the foundations for their more cautious friends (“Early Majority”) who wait for it to be both acceptable and more well-known before buying, their consequent investment dragging along the “Late Majority” stage who are awaiting proof from most of the people they know. As with all things — there will be some who never make it — or outright refuse until absolutely necessary — the “laggards”.
This theory of adoption can be seen quite visually. Take for instance the original iPod. At the very beginning the market majority were quite happy with their CD walkman. A few friends you may know then came in with these bulky forms of MP3 players — each one as unknown and alien as the last. This spurred more people to take interest, some even following their friends into similar sales, iPod or otherwise. Spurred on by the benefits of the new tech, even more people invested, this time often asking opinions and comparing models before laying down cash, eventually transforming a CD dependent market to one now on MP3s, with the exception of some who still hadn’t evolved since the age of vinyl and radio (sorry Grandpa). While this growth provides a market leader and a series of other brand winners, some will have failed to get the support of the user and thus doomed to fail.
Change on this scale has a comparison. Plague.
Plague: A contagious disease which often renders those it infects with fever, delirium and eventually kills the majority of a population.
Centuries after, we are still reminded about the power of epidemics such as the Black Death, which swept through the Crimea from Central Asia in the 14th century (1353) decimating Europe’s population by 30–60%. So how does this compare to adoption theory?
1. Plague came from outside.
The oversight of countries to identify the plague early on was hard. Information wasn’t instantaneous and often when identified it was already in the network which provided the route of infection.
To the modern day organisation, many are aware of their immediate competitors but spotting developments from other industries is hard. For the emerging start-ups or pivoting firms entering new markets, this side-entrance strategy has often proved very effective — claiming a foothold in established markets before incumbents can react. This explains how products like the iPod entered the music industry with very little warning to the established CD player manufacturers (e.g. Sony).
2. Sluggish mind-set and established policy
Plague is historically unpredictable both in strength and appearance. Most organisations prepare for what can be expected and often are less practiced in dealing with the unknown, after all how does one truly prepare.
Yet trivialising a deadly strain has its consequences. Frequently short-term thinking limits our view of the potential scale of the change at hand. Albert Camus portrays a town leader who acknowledges how the plague could be damaging, but how severe measures such as quarantine would decimate the towns economy, livelihoods and authority. By opting to wait and see firms forego the chance to act immediately and by the time the effects of change are upon them it is often too late.
3. Word of Mouth & Fluid Transfers
Various types of plague travel by various means, but the majority require close contact — usually resulting in the spreading of infection to family, friends and co-workers. Influence works in a similar way. The “early adopters” mentioned before often act as living advertisements for their products, championing their benefits and often allowing those closest them to join. As the more people around them adopt the new technology, the more likely they are to buy in.
4. Fever and Reaction
For every action there is a reaction. As the disease takes hold there are often painful side-effects (e.g. Buboes and fever) as the body attempts to protect itself. This reaction to change is also prevalent in the marketplace. For some this could be a barrier between the old and new product (trying to copy over your old tapes to CD’s was almost impossible) or by existing companies reacting to the new change. This could be in the form of cut-pricing strategies — offering discounts for loyalty, promise of change — to keep their market base. In some cases, the severity of the change can trigger a full-body response. Uber itself has been battling governments and councils as exiting taxi firms, afraid of losing their customers, attempt to protect their jobs by taking them to court and making it illegal for Uber to exist. For some, this extreme reaction can often leave the host (or country) worse off in the longer-term. Essentially, until the new product has been widely accepted — a fierce war can emerge between older and newer product firms.
5. The Cull and Rise of the New World
While plague brings infection it also disrupts the social, economic and religious status-quo, often providing learnings and new mind-sets. The jumps made in technology soon lessen and become the standard way of life, and provide a platform for people to start building and improve life from this.
While change can be painful, we should be aware of the speed at which change can occur — but also the benefits we may generate by adapting and learning from it. Technology has increased our rate of adoption significantly. As we accelerate into a new age where the window of change is ever smaller, now more than ever — we should be attentive to the consequences of our investments and the effects it may have.
GH
