DOCSLIB.ORG

Innovators Or Laggards: Surveying Diffusion Of

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Innovators Or Laggards: Surveying Diffusion Of INNOVATORS OR LAGGARDS: SURVEYING DIFFUSION OF INNOVATIONS BY PUBLIC RELATIONS PRACTITIONERS A Thesis Presented to The Graduate Faculty of The University of Akron In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts Carol A. Savery August, 2005 ii ABSTRACT Everett M. Rogers’ diffusion of innovations theory was used as a framework to study 116 chapter members of the Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) in a Midwestern state. A web-based survey and paper-based survey were both used to collect the self-reporting data. According to Rogers (1986), “Diffusion is the process by which an innovation is communicated through certain channels over a period of time among members of a social system” (p. 117). Public relations practitioners are the members of the social system that were studied. Rogers defined an innovation as, “an idea, practice, or object that is perceived to be new by an individual or other unit of adoption” (p. 117). Diffusion research centers on the conditions which increase or decrease the likelihood that a new idea, product or practice will be adopted by members of a given culture. A literature review of diffusion of innovation showed no research applying Rogers’ theory to public relations. It is hoped that this thesis research will to add to the body of knowledge about diffusion of innovation in public relations by helping to identify the perceived innovation attributes, influences, obstacles and relative advantage of innovations by public relations practitioners. This could assist public relations agencies in weighing the pros and cons of future decisions and strategies for implementing innovations. iii DEDICATION This graduate school experience would have been impossible without the love and encouragement provided by my husband, Dr. John R. Savery and my sons Dylan and Eden. I also dedicate this thesis to the memory of my mother, father, and infant son Nathan. iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I wish to thank the supportive thesis committee that included my faculty advisor, Dr. David Ritchey, Dr. Andrew S. Rancer, and Dr. Dudley B. Turner. Dr. Heather Walter was a valuable faculty resource and mentor. The University of Akron staff, Anthony W. Serpette of Application Systems Services and Cathy Kodish of Learning Technologies and School Services guided me through training and questions about the online survey tool, 2WAY. The wisdom that all these people shared so generously will forever influence my understanding of communication and researching. I would also like to thank the Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) chapters and members who participated in the online and paper-based surveys. Their contribution and time validated and enhanced the learning experience of this student researcher. Finally, I would like to acknowledge Everett M. Rogers who passed away on October 21, 2004. His remarkable career as a scholar, writer, teacher, and pioneer of diffusion of innovations theory continues to inspire new students in communication. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF FIGURES ………………………………………………...………………… ix CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION …………………………………………...……………………… 1 II. LITERATURE REVIEW ………………………………..…………………………. 4 Theoretical Framework …………………………………...……………………. 15 Five Adoption Category Traits ………………………………………………… 16 Five Stages in the Innovation Decision Process ……………………..………… 18 Research Questions ……………………………………………………………...19 III. METHODOLOGY …………………………………………...………………….. 23 Participants …………………………………………………………………….. 26 Procedures ………………………………...……………………………………. 26 The Survey ……………………………………………………………………... 27 Research Phases …………….………………………………………………….. 27 IV. RESULTS …………………………………………………...……………………. 32 Participants …………………………………………………………………….. 32 Response Rates ………………………………………………………………… 33 Demographics …………………………………………………………….……. 33 Gender …………………………………………………………………...…. 33 vi Age …………………………………………………………………………. 34 Number of Years Working in PR ……………………..……………………. 34 Size of PR Department or Group …………………………………….…….. 34 Types of PR Performed by Practitioners ....................................................... 34 Results of the Research Questions …………………………………………….. 35 Characteristics ………………………………………………………………… 35 Total-Innovation of Participants ………………………………………..….. 35 Individual Innovation Characteristic Types ………………………..………. 35 Innovators ………………………………………………………………… 35 Early Adopters ………………………….………………………………… 36 Early Majority …………………….……………………………………… 36 Late Majority ……………………………………………..……………… 36 Laggards ……………………………..…………………………………… 37 Question 13 Influences ………………………………………………...………. 37 Question 14 Organizational Influences ………………………………………… 38 Question 15 Influences by Individuals ……………………………………….... 38 Obstacles ………………………………………….……………………………. 39 Innovations Adopted ………………………………………..………………….. 40 Perceptions About Using Innovations …………………………………………. 41 V. CONCLUSION ……………………………………………….……………………. 45 Limitations of the Study …………………………….………….……………… 47 Suggestions for Future Research …………………………..……….………….. 48 REFERENCES ………………………………………………………………………… 51 vii APPENDICES …………………………………………………………………………. 56 APPENDIX A ………………………………….………….………………………….. 57 SURVEY QUESTIONS (Q1 – Q 32) ………….…………………………..……… 58 APPENDIX B …………………..…………………………………………………….. 64 IRB APPROVAL (ASSIGNED 20050219) ………..……………………………….. 65 APPENDIX C …………………………………………….…….…………………….. 66 IRB APPROVED E-MAIL TO PARTICIPANTS ………………………………….. 67 APPENDIX D …………………………..…………………………………………….. 68 E-MAIL REQUEST TO PRSA CHAPTERS ……..………………………………… 69 APPENDIX E ……………..………………………………………………………….. 70 “WELCOME” SCREEN SHOT ON 2WAY ONLINE SURVEY ……………..…… 71 APPENDIX F ………………………………………………………………………… 72 E-MAIL APPROVAL FROM IRB FOR ADDING A PAPER-BASED SURVEY ………………………..…………...…………………………………….....73 APPENDIX G …………………...……………………………………………………. 74 PARTICIPANT INTRODUCTION LETTER TO THE PAPER-BASED SURVEY ……….…………………………………………………………………… 75 APPENDIX H …………….………………………………………………..…………. 76 “SURVEY CLOSED” SCREEN SHOT ON 2WAY ONLINE SURVEY ………..... 77 APPENDIX I ………………………………………………………………………… 78 TABLES …………………………………………………………………………….. 79 APPENDIX J ……….………………………………………………………………… 94 FIGURE 2 …………..………………………………………………………………. 95 viii LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1 Diffusion curve (Rogers, 1995)…………………………..……………………. 16 2 Dates surveys were submitted or received ……….……………………………. 95 ix CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION The field of public relations is currently in a period of great innovation largely due to the widespread use of both the Internet and new communication options. These innovations allow public relations practitioners to target their publics directly, without the intervention of editors and reporters who can act as both gatekeepers and censors of information. I was introduced to Everett Rogers’ Diffusion of Innovations theory in a graduate communication class in 2004 at The University of Akron’s School of Communication. As I pondered this theory, I became aware that the seminal book, Diffusion of Innovations, was in its fifth edition (Rogers, 2003) -- this theory had obviously stood the test of time since it was first published in 1962. In a review of the fifth edition of Rogers’ book (1995), Stanford professor Orr (2003) stated that the book, “has become the standard textbook and reference on diffusion studies…comprehensive and even-handed…an insightful explanation of the conditions that indicate that an innovation will reach the much-hyped tipping point” (p. 1). The focus of my graduate studies was in public relations. I was surprised when I found that scant research had been done linking public relations and diffusion of innovations. The impact of technology was cited by Cutlip, Center, and Broom (2000) in research done by The Institute for Public Relations Research and Education (Wright, 1998), “Intranets and Internets make two-way communication possible as never before…new media landscape is changing 1 rapidly…technology makes it possible to distribute and capture more data and information than ever before” (pp. 285-287). In my own career in the field, I knew that public relations practitioners had to keep abreast of new innovations to keep up with the speed and demands of communication. A gap in the research suggests a fruitful area for additional investigations (A. S. Rancer, personal communication, March 17, 2004). I had discovered a gap in the diffusion of innovations research in public relations and started to plan my thesis using Rogers’ theory as a framework. I was curious about public relations practitioners’ perceptions about their personal innovation characteristics, perceived obstacles to adopting innovations, the innovation influences, the change agents, the opinion leaders, perceptions about using innovations in their work, and what innovations were currently being used. The University of Akron had a site license for the web-based survey tool, 2WAY Interactive System from Modern Mind (2WAY), that could be installed on any computer type and used for projects related to The University of Akron, including thesis research (A. W. Serpette, personal e-mail communication, November 2, 2004). The name of the online survey tool linked metaphorically to two-way communication -- an important principle of effective interaction in public relations. Two-way communication’s importance to public relations was put forward by Jerry A. Hendrix (2004): Two-way communication was once considered a linear process involving the transmission of a message from a source through a channel to a receiver. Today, however, the PR practitioner must program two-way communication activities that permit audience response
Load more

Recommended publications
  • University of Florida Thesis Or Dissertation Formatting Template
    MOTIVATIONS FOR SOCIAL MEDIA ADOPTION ALONG THE PRODUCT LIFE CYCLE By DENNIS DIPASQUALE A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2017 © 2017 Dennis DiPasquale To both of my parents, for all the reasons, but especially for the support and patience as I forged a path in life different from anything either may have expected when I was born, and for the patience I suspect I inherited and that allowed me to persevere when this task became frustrating in ways it was never meant to be ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This document represents work well beyond the research toiled over to create it. It should go without saying that the patience and mentorship of my advisor Dr. Amy Jo Coffey was instrumental not only in creating this body of work, but helping me find my path as a researcher as she truly polished a rough and rusty academic. I would also like to thank Dr. Gregory Webster for sitting on an idle committee for the better part of the past five years, as well as his assistance with some of the statistical questions in forging this work. I also need to acknowledge Dr. Richard Lutz and the Marketing Department of the Warrington College of Business Administration for taking me in as one of their own and creating a new professional path that I did not expect yet absolutely relish. Finally, to the many friends, coaches, and family for being a supporting element in my life, acting as a counterbalance to the sweat and stress involved with pursuing this path.
    [Show full text]
  • Redalyc.Acceptability Engineering: the Study of User Acceptance Of€Innovative€Technologies
    Journal of Applied Research and Technology ISSN: 1665-6423 [email protected] Centro de Ciencias Aplicadas y Desarrollo Tecnológico México Kim, Hee-Cheol Acceptability engineering: the study of user acceptance of innovative technologies Journal of Applied Research and Technology, vol. 13, núm. 2, 2015, pp. 230-237 Centro de Ciencias Aplicadas y Desarrollo Tecnológico Distrito Federal, México Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=47439895008 How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal Journal's homepage in redalyc.org Non-profit academic project, developed under the open access initiative Disponible en www.sciencedirect.com Journal of Applied Research and Technology Journal of Applied Research and Technology 13 (2015) 230-237 www.jart.ccadet.unam.mx Original Acceptability engineering: the study of user acceptance of innovative technologies Hee-Cheol Kim Department of Computer Engineering, u-Healthcare & Anti-aging Research Center, Inje University, Gimhae, Gyeong-Nam, Korea Received 19 April 2014; accepted 18 August 2014 Abstract The discipline of human-computer interaction (HCI) has been vital in developing understandings of users, usability, and the design of user- centered computer systems. However, it does not provide a satisfactory explanation of user perspectives on the specialized but important domain of innovative technologies, instead focusing more on mature technologies. In particular, the success of innovative technologies requires attention to be focused on early adopters of the technology and enthusiasts, rather than general end-users. Therefore, user acceptance should be considered more important than usability and convenience.
    [Show full text]
  • Diffusion of Innovations in Service Organizations: Systematic Review and Recommendations
    Diffusion of Innovations in Service Organizations: Systematic Review and Recommendations TRISHA GREENHALGH, GLENN ROBERT, FRASER MACFARLANE∗,PAULBATE, and OLIVIA KYRIAKIDOU∗ University College London; ∗University of Surrey This article summarizes an extensive literature review addressing the question, How can we spread and sustain innovations in health service delivery and or- ganization? It considers both content (defining and measuring the diffusion of innovation in organizations) and process (reviewing the literature in a sys- tematic and reproducible way). This article discusses (1) a parsimonious and evidence-based model for considering the diffusion of innovations in health service organizations, (2) clear knowledge gaps where further research should be focused, and (3) a robust and transferable methodology for systematically re- viewing health service policy and management. Both the model and the method should be tested more widely in a range of contexts. Key Words: Diffusion of innovation, systematic review, implementation. his article summarizes the findings of a systematic literature review of the diffusion of service inno- T vations. The United Kingdom Department of Health explic- itly commissioned this work, which was carried out between October 2002 and December 2003, for its National Health Service’s exten- sive modernization agenda (UK Department of Health 2001). Our review, which supplements and extends previous overviews and meta- analyses (Damanpour 1991, 1992, 1996; Granados et al. 1997; Meyers, Sivakumar, and Nakata 1999; Rogers 1995; Tornatsky and Klein 1982; Address correspondence to: Trisha Greenhalgh, University College London, Room 403, Holborn Union Building, Highgate Hill, London N19 5LW, United Kingdom (e-mail: [email protected]). The Milbank Quarterly, Vol.
    [Show full text]
  • Fall 2011, KER202 Martin Hilbert Office Hours: by Appointment; Mhilbert [At] Usc.Edu
    CMGT 582- Communication for International Development Fall 2011, KER202 Martin Hilbert Office hours: by appointment; mhilbert [at] usc.edu Course description: This course builds on two main concepts: Development: We are usually quick to note that we live in a global communication landscape, but we all too often do not pay enough attention to the fact that 82% of this world is living in conditions that are quite different from ours: the developing world. Half of the human population lives with less than US$2.50 per day, making that a monthly income of less than US$75 for every second member of our global information society. This does not only matter for those who are poor, but shapes the global communication landscape as a whole. We still start with reviewing the multiple dimensions of development. We will discuss questions like: What is development? Is poverty merely a matter of economic well-being? What are the driving forces behind development? What are the dynamics and interplay between developed and developing societies? What is and what can the international community (like the United Nations, World Bank, global NGOs) do about it? We will spend most of the time discussing the question: What is the role of communication as a building block for the development of a society? Digital innovation: At the same time, the introduction of digital ICT (Information and Communication Technologies) changes the lives of all people around the globe (directly or indirectly). In less than two decades, 2 out of 5 people worldwide have linked up through the Internet, and 4 out of 5 have connected with mobile telephony.
    [Show full text]
  • Diffusion of P2 Innovations Pollution Prevention Review / Winter 1998 / 3 Exhibit 1
    ,+ I. P r, c DIFFUSION OF P2 INNOVATIOHS How does pollution prevention While most private belts, buying insur- and public sector compare with other innovative ance, and emergency agencies agree that planning may be un- preventing pollution ideas? pleasant and theirre- makes much more sults may not be eas- sense than alterna- ily observed. They tive waste management strategies, most would also also tend to have a relatively slow rate of adoption. agree that pollution prevention technology is dif- fusing at a rate far slower than would be expected. Rogers (1995) states: This is particularly true given the advantages and benefits that P2 offers. mhe relative advantage of preventive in- This article, through comparison of pertinent novations is difficult for change agents to literature regarding the diffusion of innovations, demonstrate to their clients, because it attempts to offer some explanations for this rela- occurs at some future, unknown time. tively slow rate and some insights on speeding up Individuals have difficulties in perceiving the P2 diffusion process. the relative advantage of preventive in- novations because the sought-after con- Prevention Is Hard to Sell sequence is distant in time, and so the rela- According to Rogers (1995), a preventive inno- tive advantage of a preventive innovation vation is an idea that an individual adopts at one is a delayed reward. In contrast, point in time in order to lower the probability that nonpreventive innovations tend to pro- some future unwanted event will occur. The un- vide a desired outcome in the near future. wanted future event might not have happened any- way, even without adoption of the preventive inno- P2 innovations have been diffusing relatively vation, so the benefits of adoption may not be clear slowly, in part because they are frequently per- cut.
    [Show full text]
  • Listening to Everett Rogers: Diffusion of Innovations and WAC Stephanie Vanderslice University of Central Arkansas
    22 Language and Learning Across the Disciplines Listening to Everett Rogers: Diffusion of Innovations and WAC Stephanie Vanderslice University of Central Arkansas In “The Future of WAC” (1996), Barbara E. Walvoord suggests framing the history and future of the writing-across-the-curriculum move- ment according to social movement theory (58), explaining that WAC qualifies as a movement because of its “change agenda and its collective nature—faculty talking to one another, moving to effect reform” (58). Con- sequently, she proposes that her evaluation of WAC’s progress at the 25 year mark and her re-envisioning of its future within this movement frame will uniquely reveal its “characteristics, strengths, and problems in ways that may help us think creatively about them” (61). Certainly creativity may be the order of the day as the WAC move- ment, in spite of its successes, struggles to maintain its vitality and visibil- ity against the perennially resistant landscape of academe. Such resis- tance, educational reform scholar Parker J. Palmer reminds us, (though few at the front lines of the WAC movement need reminding) will remain an essential feature of the academy as long as teaching “retains low status... tenure decisions favor those who publish, [and] scarce dollars. .always go to research” (10). These conditions result in a “constitutional gridlock” which breeds the “mood of resignation. .and despair” so familiar to those seeking reform (10). Walvoord’s review of WAC’s progress from a social movement per- spective turns the literature in an important direction. By providing the template of social movement theory against which to examine their suc- cesses and failures, WAC proponents are forced to take a more analytical approach to their subject, an approach that transcends the more anec- dotal “what works and what doesn’t” scholarship that has dominated writing-across-the-curriculum, especially in its early and middle years.
    [Show full text]
  • 18. Innovation and Diffusion
    Hall on Diffusion 8 October 2003 18. Innovation and Diffusion Bronwyn H. Hall1 1 Hall on Diffusion 8 October 2003 18.1. Introduction In 1953, a young female Macaque monkey in the south of Japan washed a muddy sweet potato in a stream before eating it. This obvious improvement in food preparation was imitated quickly by other monkeys and in less than 10 years it became the norm in her immediate group; by 1983, the method had diffused completely. In 1956, the same monkey innovated again, inventing a technique in which handfuls of mixed sand and wheat grains were cast upon the sea, so that the floating cereal could be skimmed from the surface. Again, by 1983, this method of gleaning wheat had diffused almost completely throughout the local populations of Macaques.2 Besides the obvious fact that humankind does not have a monopoly on innovation, these examples illustrate a couple of things about the diffusion of innovations: first, when they are clearly better than what went before, new ideas of how to do things will usually spread via a “learning by observing” process, and second, the process can take some time; in these cases it took thirty years, and the life cycle of the Macaque monkey is somewhat shorter than ours (Kawai, Watanabe, and Mori 1992). Turning to the world of humans, it is safe to say that without diffusion, innovation would have little social or economic impact. In the study of innovation, the word diffusion is commonly used to describe the process by which individuals and firms in a society/economy adopt a new technology, or replace an older technology with a newer.
    [Show full text]
  • An Empirical Analysis of the Factors Affecting the Adoption and Diffusion of GBTS in the Construction Market
    sustainability Article An Empirical Analysis of the Factors Affecting the Adoption and Diffusion of GBTS in the Construction Market Wei Wang 1, Shoujian Zhang 2 , Yikun Su 3,* and Xinyang Deng 4 1 School of Management, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin 150001, China; [email protected] 2 School of Civil Engineering, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin 150001, China; [email protected] 3 School of Civil Engineering, Northeast Forestry University, Harbin 150040, China 4 State Grid Liaoning Electric Power Company Limited Economic Research Institute, Shenyang 110015, China; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 25 February 2019; Accepted: 21 March 2019; Published: 25 March 2019 Abstract: This study focuses on better development of green buildings. The key to the sustainable development of the construction industry is to popularize and promote the spread of green building technologies (GBTS) in the construction market. This study integrates the technology acceptance model (TAM) and the innovation diffusion theory (IDT) to analyze and construct the theoretical model of developers’ GBTS adoption behavior from three dimensions, including the individual factor, product factor and interface factor. This paper discusses the mechanism of GBTS adoption and diffusion in the construction market. The data are collected by questionnaire, and the structural equation model (SEM) is used for empirical analysis. The results show that the developers’ perceived usefulness (PU) and perceived ease of use (PEOU) of GBTS, developers’ innovativeness and sense of community at the individual level, competitive advantage at the product level, as well as government structural guarantees and relevant stakeholders at the interface level have a significant positive impact on the adoption of GBTS by developers.
    [Show full text]
  • A Summary of Diffusion of Innovations
    Les Robinson | Phone 0414 674 676 | Email [email protected] Web www.enablingchange.com.au | Blog http://enablingchange.posterous.com A summary of Diffusion of Innovations Les Robinson Fully revised and rewritten Jan 2009 Diffusion of Innovations seeks to explain how innovations are taken up in a population. An innovation is an idea, behaviour, or object that is perceived as new by its audience. Diffusion of Innovations offers three valuable insights into the process of social change: - What qualities make an innovation spread successfully. - The importance of peer-peer conversations and peer networks. - Understanding the needs of different user segments. These insights have been tested in more than 6000 research studies and field tests, so they are amongst the most reliable in the social sciences. What qualities make innovations spread? Diffusion of Innovations takes a radically different approach to most other theories of change. Instead of focusing on persuading individuals to change, it sees change as being primarily about the evolution or “reinvention” of products and behaviours so they become better fits for the needs of individuals and groups. In Diffusion of Innovations it is not people who change, but the innovations themselves. Why do certain innovations spread more quickly than others? And why do others fail? Diffusion scholars recognise five qualities that determine the success of an innovation. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.5 Australia License. To view a copy of this license visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/au/deed.en Attribution should be made to “Les Robinson www.enablingchange.com.au”.
    [Show full text]
  • Linking Resilience Theory and Diffusion of Innovations Theory to Understand the Potential for Perennials in the U.S
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Digital Repository @ Iowa State University Natural Resource Ecology and Management Natural Resource Ecology and Management Publications 2009 Linking Resilience Theory and Diffusion of Innovations Theory to Understand the Potential for Perennials in the U.S. Corn Belt Ryan C. Atwell Iowa State University Lisa A. Schulte Iowa State University, [email protected] Lynne M. Westphal United States Forest Service Follow this and additional works at: http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/nrem_pubs Part of the Agriculture Commons, Forest Sciences Commons, and the Natural Resources Management and Policy Commons The ompc lete bibliographic information for this item can be found at http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/ nrem_pubs/8. For information on how to cite this item, please visit http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/ howtocite.html. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Natural Resource Ecology and Management at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Natural Resource Ecology and Management Publications by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Linking Resilience Theory and Diffusion of Innovations Theory to Understand the Potential for Perennials in the U.S. Corn Belt Abstract In the last 200 yr, more than 80% of the land in the U.S. Corn Belt agro-ecosystem has been converted from natural perennial vegetation to intensive agricultural production of row crops. Despite research showing how re-integration of perennial vegetation, e.g., cover crops, pasture, riparian buffers, and restored wetlands, at strategic landscape positions can bolster declining regional ecosystem functions, the amount of land area devoted to row crop production in the Corn Belt continues to increase.
    [Show full text]
  • Identifying Early Adopters for Emerging Digital Travel Services
    Phocuswright White Paper Identifying Early Adopters for Emerging Digital Travel Services Written and Researched by Julien Beresford and Norm Rose Phocuswright White Paper: Identifying Early Adopters for Emerging Digital Travel Services January 2016 Phocuswright thanks Cognizant for Identifying Early Adopters for Emerging Digital Travel Services. Without their active support, this research would not have been possible. About Cognizant Travel & Hospitality A leader in travel and hospitality consulting, Cognizant has developed the Cognizant Travel Ribbon® as a tool to assist airlines and other indus- try players in broadening their thinking about when and how to engage with customers. Cognizant defines the Travel Ribbon by eight essential stages of the overall travel experience, including: 1) Inspiration, 2) Plan- ning, 3) Booking, 4) Purchase, 5) Pre-trip, 6) Departure, 7) In-flight and 8) Post-trip. Learn more at: http://www.cognizant.com/travel-hospitality and http://www.cognizant.com/InsightsWhitepapers/own-the-travel-rib- bon-for-ultimate-customer-engagement.pdf. Cognizant (NASDAQ: CTSH) is a leading provider of information technol- ogy, consulting, and business process out-sourcing services, dedicated to helping the world’s leading companies build stronger businesses. Head- quartered in Teaneck, New Jersey (U.S.), Cognizant combines a passion for client satisfaction, technology innovation, deep industry and business process expertise, and a global, collaborative workforce that embod- ies the future of work. With over 100 development and delivery centers worldwide and approximately 219,300 employees as of September 30, 2015, Cognizant is a member of the NASDAQ-100, the S&P 500, the Forbes Global 2000, and the Fortune 500 and is ranked among the top performing and fastest growing companies in the world.
    [Show full text]
  • The Intellectual Structure and Substance of the Knowledge
    Implementation Science BioMed Central Research article Open Access The intellectual structure and substance of the knowledge utilization field: A longitudinal author co-citation analysis, 1945 to 2004 Carole A Estabrooks*1, Linda Derksen2, Connie Winther3, John N Lavis4, Shannon D Scott5, Lars Wallin6 and Joanne Profetto-McGrath7 Address: 1Faculty of Nursing, Third Floor Clinical Sciences Building, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, 2Department of Sociology, Vancouver Island University, Nanaimo, British Columbia, Canada, 3Department of Pediatrics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, 4Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Department of Political Science, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, 5Faculty of Nursing, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, 6Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Division of Nursing, Karolinska Institute and Clinical Research Utilization (CRU), Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden and 7Faculty of Nursing, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Email: Carole A Estabrooks* - [email protected]; Linda Derksen - [email protected]; Connie Winther - [email protected]; John N Lavis - [email protected]; Shannon D Scott - [email protected]; Lars Wallin - [email protected]; Joanne Profetto-McGrath - [email protected] * Corresponding author Published: 13 November 2008 Received: 19 December 2007 Accepted: 13 November 2008 Implementation Science 2008, 3:49 doi:10.1186/1748-5908-3-49 This article is available from: http://www.implementationscience.com/content/3/1/49 © 2008 Estabrooks et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
    [Show full text]