Advertisement

Zeitschrift für Betriebswirtschaft

, Volume 81, Issue 1, pp 29–59 | Cite as

The interplay between psychometric and sociometric data and the willingness to adopt innovations

  • Dominik MolitorEmail author
  • Oliver Hinz
  • Sarah Wegmann
Forschung

Abstract

Due to high failure rates of new products, marketers are seeking ways to actively manage the diffusion of innovations. It is well accepted that individuals, who exert a remarkably strong influence on others and are usually called opinion leaders, play an important role in the diffusion process. In marketing, such opinion leaders are typically identified by self-designation, which can be biased. A second option to identify opinion leaders is the use of sociometric data which becomes increasingly available. In this paper we examine the effect of social position on the perceived opinion leadership and the resulting behavioral intention in terms of adoption behavior. In an empirical study, we examine the adoption of a new drug called “Byetta” and find that sociometric opinion leadership is an antecedent of the psychometric characteristic. Our results also confirm that such opinion leaders are more likely to adopt innovations. We also find that opinion seekers, individuals who often sought information or opinions from interpersonal sources, can be more easily identified with psychometric data. They are more restrictive in terms of adoption. Interestingly, both types are active as market mavens and thus may either advocate the adoption of the innovation or may be frankly conservative regarding the new product adoption. If opinion seekers can, however, be persuaded to adopt the innovation, they may also serve as an important multiplier. This has several implications for pharmaceutical firms that try to optimize their sales force—influencing opinion leaders may indeed start and fasten the adoption process of innovative products. But it is also necessary to allay opinion seekers’ doubts since they might slow down the adoption process. The identification of opinion leaders might not only be based on difficult to obtain psychometric data, but also on sociometric data from social networks, which is becoming more and more available.

Keywords

Opinion Leadership Personal Influence Social Network Analysis Physician Prescription Behavior 

JEL-Classification

M31 D12 

References

  1. Ajzen, I, Fishbein M (1980) Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Prentice Hall, Englewood CliffGoogle Scholar
  2. Arndt J (1967) Role of product-related conversations in the diffusion of a new product. J Marketing Res 4(8):291–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Asch DA, Connor SE, Hamilton EG, Fox SA (2000) Problems in recruiting community-based physicians for health services research. J Gen Intern Med 15:591–599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bavelas A (1950) Communication patterns in task-oriented groups. J Acoust Soc Am 22(6):725–730CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bagozzi RP, Davis FD, Warshaw PR (1992) Development and test of a theory of technological learning and usage. Hum Relat 45(7):660–686CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Burt RS (1984) Network items and the general social survey. Soc Networks 6:293–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Burt RS (1987) A note on missing data in the general social survey. Soc Networks 9:63–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Carrington PJ, Scott J, Wasserman S (2005) Models and methods in social network analysis. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  9. Chan KK, Misra S (1990) Characteristics of the opinion leader: a new dimension. J Advert 19(3):53–60Google Scholar
  10. Childers T (1986) Assessment of the psychometric properties of an opinion leadership scale. J Marketing Res 23(5):184–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chin WW (1998) The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. In: Marcoulides GA (eds) Modern methods for business research. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, pp 295–336Google Scholar
  12. Churchill G Jr (1979) A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. J Marketing Res 16(2):64–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Coleman JS, Katz E, Menzel H (1957) The diffusion of an innovation among physicians. Sociometry 20:253–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Coleman JS, Katz E, Menzel H (1966) Medical innovation: a diffusion study. Bobbs Merrill, IndianapolisGoogle Scholar
  15. Costenbader E, Valente TW (2003) The stability of centrality measures when networks are sampled. Soc Networks 25:282–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Davis FD, Warshaw PR (1992) What do intention scales measure. J Gen Psychol 1999(119):391–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Davis FD, Bagozzi RP, Warshaw PR (1989) User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Manage Sci 35:982–1003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. De Nooy W, Mrvar A, Batagelj V (2005) Exploratory social network analysis with Pajek. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  19. Feick LF, Price LL (1987) The market maven: a diffuser of marketplace information. J Marketing 51(1):83–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Feick LF, Price LL, Higie RA (1986) People who use people: the other side of opinion leadership. Advances in consumer research 13(3):301–305Google Scholar
  21. Fishbein M, Ajzen I (1975) Belief, attitude, intention and behavior. Addison-Wesley, ReadingGoogle Scholar
  22. Flynn LR, Goldsmith RE, Eastman JK (1996) Opinion leaders and opinion seekers: two measurement scales. J Acad Mark Sci 24(2):137–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fornell C, Bookstein FL (1982) Two structural equation models : LISREL and PLS applied to consumer exit-voice theory. J Marketing Res 19(11):440–452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fornell C, Larcker DF (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J Marketing Res 19(1):39–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gatignon H, Robertson TS (1985) A propositional inventory for new diffusion research. J Cons Res 11(3):849–867CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Goldenberg J, Han S, Lehmann DR, Hong JW (2009) The role of hubs in the adoption processes. J Marketing 73(3):1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Goldsmith RE, Desborde R (1991) A validity study of a measure of opinion leadership. J Bus Res 22:11–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Goldsmith RE, Hofacker CF (1991) Measuring consumer innovativeness. J Acad Mark Sci 19(3):209–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hamilton H (1971) Dimensions of self-designated opinion leadership and their correlates. Public Opin Q 35:266–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hinz O, Spann M (2008) The impact of information diffusion on bidding behavior in secret reserve price auctions. Info Sys Res 19(3):351–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Huigang L, Saraf N, Qing H, Yajiong X (2007) Assimiliation of enterprise systems: the effect of institutional pressures and the mediating role of top management. MIS Q 31(1):59–87Google Scholar
  32. Hulland J (1999) Use of Partial Least Squares (PLS) in strategic management research: a review of four recent articles. Strateg Manag J 20(2):195–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Iyengar R, Van den Bulte C, Valente TW (2008) Opinion leadership and social contagion in new product diffusion. Working Paper, University of PennsylvaniaGoogle Scholar
  34. Jacoby J (1974) The construct validity of opinion leadership. Public Opin Q 38:81–89Google Scholar
  35. Katz E (1957) The two-step flow of communication: an up-to-date report on an hypothesis. Public Opin Q 21:67–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Keil M, Tan BCY, Wei KK, Saarinen T, Tuunainen V, Wassenaar A (2000) A cross-cultural study on escalation of commitment behavior in software projects. MIS Q 24(2):299–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kim PJ, Jeong H (2007) Reliability of rank order in sampled networks. Eur Phy J B 55:109–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. King CW, Summers JO (1970) Overlap of opinion leadership across consumer product categories. J Marketing Res 7:43–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kossinets G (2006) Effects of missing data in social networks. Soc Networks 28:247–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kratzer J, Lettl C (2009) Distinctive roles of lead users and opinion leaders in the social networks of schoolchildren. J Cons Res 36(12):646–659CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kuo D, Gifford DR, Stein MD (1998) Curbside consultation practices and attitudes among primary care physicians and medical subspecialists. J Am Med Assiciation 280(9):905–909CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Laumann E, Marsden P, Prensky D (1983) The boundary specification problem in network analysis, applied network analysis. In: Burt R, Minor M (eds) A methodological introduction. Sage, Beverly Hills, pp 18–34Google Scholar
  43. Lazarsfeld PF, Berelson B, Gaudet H (1968) The people’s choice: how the voter makes up his mind in a presidential campaign. New YorkGoogle Scholar
  44. Leskovec J, Faloutsos C (2006) Sampling form large Graphs. 12th ACM special interest group knowledge discovery and data mining. International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, Philadelphia, pp 631–636Google Scholar
  45. Manchanda P, Xie Y, Youn N (2008) The role of targeted communication and contagion in product adoption. Marketing Sci 27(6):961–976CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Marsden PV (1990) Network data and measurement. Ann Rev Sociol 16:435–463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. McFarlane E, Olmsted MG, Murphy J, Hill CA (2006) Nonresponse bias in a mail survey of physicians. Annual conference of the American Association for Public Opinion Research, Montreal, QuebecGoogle Scholar
  48. Myers JH, Robertson TS (1972) Dimensions of opinion leadership. J Marketing Res 9(2):41–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Nair H, Manchanda P, Bhatia T (2008) Asymmetric effects in physician prescription behavior: the role of opinion leaders. Working Paper, Stanford University, 1–40Google Scholar
  50. Peter J, Churchill G (1986) Relationships among research design choices and psychometric properties of rating scales: a meta analysis. J Marketing Res 23(2):1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Lee JY, Podsakoff NP (2003) Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J Appl Psychol 88(5):879–903CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Richins ML, Root-Schaffer T (1988) The role of involvement and opinion leadership in consumer word-of-mouth: an implicit model made explicit. Adv Consum Res 15:32–36Google Scholar
  53. Rogers EM (1976) New product adoption and diffusion. J Consum Res 2(3):290–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rogers EM (2003) Diffusion of innovations. Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  55. Rogers EM, Cartano DG (1962) Methods of measuring opinion leadership. Public Opin Q 26(Autumn):435–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Ringle, CM, Wende S, Will A (2006) SmartPLS. University of Hamburg, HamburgGoogle Scholar
  57. Rumsey DJ (1993) Nonresponse models for social network stochastic processes (Markov chains). Ph.D. Thesis, The Ohio State UniversityGoogle Scholar
  58. Schloderer J, Balderjahn I (2006) Was unterscheidet harte und weiche Strukturgleichungsmodelle nun wirklich? Marketing ZFP 28(1):57–70Google Scholar
  59. Scott J (2007) Social network analysis: a handbook. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  60. Son J, Benbasat I (2007) Organizational buyers’ adoption and use of b2b electronic marketplaces: efficiency- and legitimacy-oriented perspectives. J Manage Info Sys 24(1, Summer):55–99Google Scholar
  61. Stevens GA, Burley J (1997) 3,000 Raw Ideas = 1 Commercial Success!. Res Technol Manage 40(3):16–27Google Scholar
  62. Tenenhaus M, Vinzi VE, Chatelin Y, Lauro C (2005) PLS path modeling. Comput Stat Data Anal 48:159–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Tsang ASL, Zhou N (2004) Newsgroup participants as opinion leaders and seekers in online and offline communication environments. J Bus Res 9(9):1186–1193Google Scholar
  64. Valente TW (1999) Network models of the diffusion of innovations. Hampton Press, CresskillGoogle Scholar
  65. Valente TW, Pumpuang P (2007) Identifying opinion leaders to promote behavior change. Health Educ Behav 34(12):881–896Google Scholar
  66. Valente TW, Hoffmann BR, Ritt-Olson A, Lichtmann K, Johnson CA (2003) Effects of a social-network method for group assignment strategies on peer-led tobacco prevention programs in schools. Am J Public Health 94(8):1837–1843CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Van den Bulte C, Lilien GL (2001) Medical innovation revisited: social contagion versus marketing effort. Am J Sociol 106(3):1409–1435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. VanGeest JB, Johnson TB, Welch VL (2007) Methodologies for improving response rated in surveys of physicians. Eval Health Prof 30(4):303–321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Van Lier M (2007) Netzwerkorientiertes Kundenmanagement am Beispiel der Pharma-Branche. NorderstedGoogle Scholar
  70. Wasserman S, Faust K (1994) Social network analysis: methods and applications. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  71. Watts DJ, Dodds PS (2007) Influentials, networks and public opinion formation. J Cons Res 37(5):441–458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Weimann G (1982) On the importance of marginality: One more step in the two-step flow of communication. The Am Socio Rev 47:764–773CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Weimann G (1994) The influentials: People who influence people. State University of New York Press, AlbanyGoogle Scholar
  74. Wetzels M, Odekerken-Schröder G, van Oppen C (2009) Using PLS path modeling for assessing hierarchical construct models: guidelines and empirical illustration. MIS Q 33(1):177–195Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Gabler Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Munich School of ManagementLudwig-Maximilians-University MunichMünchenGermany
  2. 2.Faculty of Economics and Business AdministrationJohann Wolfgang Goethe-UniversityFrankfurt am MainGermany
  3. 3.Mederi AG and Chair of Business Information Systems & Operations ResearchTechnische Universität KaiserslauternKaiserslauternGermany

Personalised recommendations