<P> Like innovations, adopters have been determined to have traits that affect their likelihood to adopt an innovation . A bevy of individual personality traits have been explored for their impacts on adoption, but with little agreement . Ability and motivation, which vary on situation unlike personality traits, have a large impact on a potential adopter's likelihood to adopt an innovation . Unsurprisingly, potential adopters who are motivated to adopt an innovation are likely to make the adjustments needed to adopt it . Motivation can be impacted by the meaning that an innovation holds; innovations can have symbolic value that encourage (or discourage) adoption . First proposed by Ryan and Gross (1943), the overall connectedness of a potential adopter to the broad community represented by a city . Potential adopters who frequent metropolitan areas are more likely to adopt an innovation . Finally, potential adopters who have the power or agency to create change, particularly in organizations, are more likely to adopt an innovation than someone with less power over his choices . </P> <P> Organizations face more complex adoption possibilities because organizations are both the aggregate of its individuals and its own system with a set of procedures and norms . Three organizational characteristics match well with the individual characteristics above: tension for change (motivation and ability), innovation - system fit (compatibility), and assessment of implications (observability). Organizations can feel pressured by a tension for change . If the organization's situation is untenable, it will be motivated to adopt an innovation to change its fortunes . This tension often plays out among its individual members . Innovations that match the organization's pre-existing system require fewer coincidental changes and are easy to assess are more likely to be adopted . The wider environment of the organization, often an industry, community, or economy, exerts pressures on the organization, too . Where an innovation is diffusing through the organization's environment for any reason, the organization is more likely to adopt it . Innovations that are intentionally spread, including by political mandate or directive, are also likely to diffuse quickly . </P> <P> Diffusion occurs through a five--step decision - making process . It occurs through a series of communication channels over a period of time among the members of a similar social system . Ryan and Gross first identified adoption as a process in 1943 . Rogers' five stages (steps): awareness, interest, evaluation, trial, and adoption are integral to this theory . An individual might reject an innovation at any time during or after the adoption process . Abrahamson examined this process critically by posing questions such as: How do technically inefficient innovations diffuse and what impedes technically efficient innovations from catching on? Abrahamson makes suggestions for how organizational scientists can more comprehensively evaluate the spread of innovations . In later editions of Diffusion of Innovation, Rogers changes his terminology of the five stages to: knowledge, persuasion, decision, implementation, and confirmation . However, the descriptions of the categories have remained similar throughout the editions . </P> <Table> Five stages of the adoption process <Tr> <Th> Stage </Th> <Th> Definition </Th> </Tr> <Tr> <Td> Knowledge </Td> <Td> The individual is first exposed to an innovation, but lacks information about the innovation . During this stage the individual has not yet been inspired to find out more information about the innovation . </Td> </Tr> <Tr> <Td> Persuasion </Td> <Td> The individual is interested in the innovation and actively seeks related information / details . </Td> </Tr> <Tr> <Td> Decision </Td> <Td> The individual takes the concept of the change and weighs the advantages / disadvantages of using the innovation and decides whether to adopt or reject the innovation . Due to the individualistic nature of this stage, Rogers notes that it is the most difficult stage on which to acquire empirical evidence . </Td> </Tr> <Tr> <Td> Implementation </Td> <Td> The individual employs the innovation to a varying degree depending on the situation . During this stage the individual also determines the usefulness of the innovation and may search for further information about it . </Td> </Tr> <Tr> <Td> Confirmation </Td> <Td> The individual finalizes his / her decision to continue using the innovation . This stage is both intrapersonal (may cause cognitive dissonance) and interpersonal, confirmation the group has made the right decision . </Td> </Tr> </Table>

The two types of innovation are product innovation and