Innovation Roles: From Souls of Fire to Devil's Advocates

Abstract

The literature suggests a number of proactive roles (e.g., idea generator, idea champion, and orchestrator) that organizational members can play in development and implementation of innovations. This study examines self-report data gathered at two points in time from organizational members (N = 90) within National Cancer Institute's Cancer Information Service (CIS), a geographically-dispersed federal government health information and education network that is piloting innovative intervention strategies to disseminate cancer information to public. Unexpectedly, results indicate that those who have power to champion are also capable of challenging it, suggesting existence of a new role held by organizational members who object to or innovation: devil's advocate. The discussion explores implications for research and practice that challenge traditional notions about roles that people play in process. Keywords: Champions, Devil's Advocates, Health Communication, Innovation, Roles Much of existing research on phenomenon of has been summarized by Rogers in his review of diffusion literature (Rogers, 1995). Rogers defined as idea, practice, or object that is perceived as new by an individual or other unit of adoption (1995, p. 11). More generally, can be conceived of as the of an internally generated or purchased device, system, policy, program, process, product, or service that is new to adopting organization (Damanpour, 1991, p. 556). Whether innovations are actually new or just perceived to be new, they usually are geared to produce a desired end-state. As Kanter pointed out, innovation is process of bringing new ideas into productive use (Kanter, Kao, & Wiersema, 1997, P. 20). However, because organizations exist in highly complex, uncertain environments (Weick, 1995), innovations frequently result in a number of unanticipated outcomes. Ultimately, extent to which organizational members perceive advantages or disadvantages associated with outcomes is determined by their subjective experiences, which are rooted in communication. This study examines whether organizational members in various roles differ significantly with respect to their perceptions about pros and cons of and their levels of innovation-related communication. This work begins with an overview of roles that organizational members play in process. Subsequently, it tests prediction that those who play central roles in process will be more likely to have favorable attitudes toward and higher levels of innovation-related communication than those who play peripheral roles in process. Finally, a discussion of results provides insight about nature of resisting innovation, elaborates on existing role typologies, and explores role of communication in taking ownership of process. Innovation Roles Several factors can lead to differences in perceptions of among organizational members. For example, differences in acceptance of innovations are often based upon organizational members' levels within hierarchy, seniority, experience, and unit affiliations (Kossek, 1989). One reason for these observed differences may be that distinct groups of stakeholders have differing interests in evaluation process (Roberts & Bradley, 1991; Weiss, 1983). In an effort to evaluate outcomes from their own perspectives, various groups focus on different data in their assessment of outcomes (Ashmos, McDaniel, & Duchon, 1990; Brimm, 1988). As a result, different groups' perceptions of same may vary depending on their stake and role in process (King, 1990). Organizational requires fulfillment of specific key roles that guide a new idea through process. …