Archive for June 6th, 2008

Technology adoption lifecycle


Jeremiah Owyang from Web Strategy by Jeremiah provides some interesting commentary on the attitudes and trends that drive adoption of new technologies in a post called “Social Media Early Adopters: Pioneers, Settlers, and Colonists“.

Owyang argues that users fall into one of three categories:

“Pioneers
Obsessed and enamored with the technology, this individual is always adopting the latest social technologies. This individual is fickle with tools, won’t establish loyalty to websites, may move when they see colonists adopt the tool.

Example: Often experimenting with products in their beta stage, this person will quickly move on to the next tool as fast as adopting the second.

Settlers
These second generation adopters look for key market or network indicators before adopting a new technology. This person is less enamored with the new technology, and more interested in the value that it provides.

Example: They may trial tools after seeing several people in their network mention or trial the tool, and may adopt after a beta or trial period is over.

Colonists
Colonists are the mainstream adopters, they are often our parents, non-techies, and the everyday people we meet. They adopt these tools due not because of an internal desire to stay cutting edge, but often because several people around them make it an attractive destination and the they see the utility to the communication. They are not late adopters.

Example:

Joins Facebook because colleagues, family, and friends are using it.”

The Technology Adoption Cycle

Owyang’s model bears close resemblance to the technology adoption cycle originally developed by Joe M. Bohlen and George M. Beal in 1957.

As Wikipedia explains (”Technology adoption lifecycle“):

“The technology adoption lifecycle model describes the adoption or acceptance of a new product or innovation, according to the demographic and psychological characteristics of defined adopter groups. The process of adoption over time is typically illustrated as a classical normal distribution or “bell curve.” The model indicates that the first group of people to use a new product is called “innovators,” followed by “early adopters.” Next come the early and late majority, and the last group to eventually adopt a product are called “laggards.”"

Owyang points out - rightfully so - that the first category of his model (Pioneers) are a very fickle bunch that seem to have few loyalties to applications and don’t tend to stick around for long before moving on to something else. They are the tinkerers on the neverending quest for the next best thing.

In saying that though there are some important caveats to bear in mind about this category. In particular it is arguable that a far higher percentage of this group are tied to the tech sector than other categories. Tech bloggers like Duncan Riley and Michael Arrington for example have a vested interest in the exploration of new tools because it is in their business to report on them. Indeed they try to break the news of brand new tools before everyone else does because the highly competitive nature of the tech blogging market demands it.

Therefore you could argue that the motives that drive Pioneers in Owyang’s model, or Innovators in Rogers’ bell curve, are much different to subsequent adoption groups - and it is these motivational differences that are responsible for the absence of website/application loyalty.

For example I gain from exposure to new or innovative functionality because they point to trends in development and usage, and can also provide insight into the next wave of technology that still lay beneath the horizon. My use of these tools does not necessarily mean I intend to use them for an extended period of time. In fact in most cases I expect not to.

I have very few applications I rely upon regularly, and I’m quite fastidious of what I keep in my primary toolbox. So when it comes to tools that I plan on using, I have a tendency to stick with them.

Particularly in educational technology, I think a discerning eye is extremely important. As I’ve argued before, objectivity and proper inquiry are essential:

“Sure, it’s important to evaluate new technologies in terms of how they can be used to embetter our online activities - and more importantly our offline activities - however this must be ever tempered by proper investigation and inquiry. Immediately flocking to the next new trend without thoroughly investigating the last one is detrimental to all technologies involved; not to mention the people that use them. This is especially critical for education…

[The danger] is that users may afford new tools an overinflated sense of value fanned by the flames of media hype. The important task for users therefore - and particularly for educators - is to ensure these technologies are evaluated and analysed according to their own merit, rather than the ever fickle waves of pop culture influence; lest we fall prey to the curse of implementing technology for technologies sake.”

References:

Friday, June 6th, 2008

Internet, social networks, social software 2 Comments