The DOI matches its Crossref record; 66 of the 69 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Supply chain innovation diffusion: going beyond adoption
Abstract
Purpose: A comprehensive evaluation of the constructs that contribute to the incorporation of a supply chain innovation into an organization is markedly absent in the literature. Even in academic fields where the post‐adoption diffusion stages of acceptance, routinization, and assimilation are often investigated, no study integrates these constructs and their constituent dimensions into a unified framework. In addition, these post‐adoption activities are largely ignored in the supply chain innovation literature. This paper aims to integrate extant literature regarding acceptance, routinization, and assimilation for the purpose of clarifying the definitions and identifying the dimensions of each construct to provide guidance to scholars who are investigating innovation diffusion in the supply chain. Design/methodology/approach: Through the lens of diffusion of innovation theory, a broad base of literature both within and beyond the scope of traditional supply chain management (SCM) journals is considered to develop a unified framework of post‐adoption activities. Findings: This research effort provides an in‐depth analysis of the post‐adoption stages of the organizational diffusion process and suggests 17 activities that support diffusion. Relationships between and within these stages of the process are inferred to create a unified framework of post‐adoption activities. Research limitations/implications: The resultant framework provides a reference point for future research. Although providing motivation for this study, this research is limited by the fact that few studies in the SCM literature consider organizational diffusion beyond adoption. The proposed framework is contingent on generalizing literature from related academic disciplines. Future SCM research can validate these findings and further tailor the framework to be more specific to supply chain applications. Practical implications: This article provides insight for supply chain professionals who seek to not just adopt, but also to fully embed a newly acquired innovation into their organization. Managers can use this article's resulting framework as a reference to determine what actions they should take to fully incorporate an innovation. Originality/value: Although recognized as an important area of investigation in other literature streams, post‐adoption activities are almost entirely overlooked in SCM research. This study provides both the motivation and a starting point for scholars to consider such activities.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Further, given that AI techniques are dynamic and evolve rapidly, the organisations may need to establish and extend the IT systems (such as new generation BI systems) to update the innovations in AI techniques”
From AI-augmented HRM: Antecedents, assimilation and multilevel consequences (2023) · cites this paper as Hazen, Overstreet & Cegielski, 2012
Citations
Cites
The theory of planned behavior
Ajzen, I. (1991) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-t · Cited by 90,587
Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology
Davis, F. D. (1989) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/249008 · Cited by 68,483
User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward A Unified View1
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/30036540 · Cited by 45,035
Rogers, E. M., Singhal, A., & Quinlan, M. M. (2019) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203710753-35 · Cited by 37,670
(1975) · PhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation) · Cited by 36,737
User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982 · Cited by 25,709
A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926 · Cited by 23,066
Moore, G. C., & Benbasat, I. (1991) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.2.3.192 · Cited by 9,150
Understanding information technology usage: a test of competing models
Taylor, S., & Todd, P. A. (1995) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.6.2.144 · Cited by 8,815
Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions
Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2008) · Decision Sciences · doi:10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192.x · Cited by 8,159
Research works printed but not linked: 6
- Bandura, A. (1986), Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
- Lewin, K. (1952), “Group decision and social change”, in Newcomb, T.M. and Hartley, E.L. (Eds), Readings in Social Psychology, Henry Holt and Co., New York, NY, pp. 459‐73.
- Prahalad, C.K. and Mashelkar, R.A. (2010), “Innovation's holy grail”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 88 Nos 7/8, pp. 132‐41.
- Rogers, E.M. (2003), Diffusion of Innovations, Free Press, New York, NY.
- Saga, V.L. and Zmud, R.W. (1994), “The nature and determinants of information technology acceptance, routinization, and infusion”, in Levine, L. (Ed.), Diffusion, Transfer, and Implementation of Information Technology, Elsevier Science, Amsterdam, pp. 67‐86.
- Sullivan, C. (1995), “Systems planning in the information age”, Sloan Management Review, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 3‐12.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
El-Kassar, A.-N., & Singh, S. K. (2018) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2017.12.016 · Cited by 1,414
Big data and predictive analytics for supply chain and organizational performance
Gunasekaran, A., Παπαδόπουλος, Θ., Dubey, R., Wamba, S. F., Childe, S. J., Hazen, B. T., & Akter, S. (2016) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.08.004 · Cited by 1,343
Self-citationRole of big data analytics in developing sustainable capabilities
Singh, S. K., & El-Kassar, A.-N. (2019) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.12.199 · Cited by 485
Kwak, D., Seo, Y., & Mason, R. L. (2017) · International Journal of Operations & Production Management · doi:10.1108/ijopm-06-2015-0390 · Cited by 431
Cloud computing in manufacturing: The next industrial revolution in Malaysia?
Ooi, K., Lee, V., Tan, G. W., Hew, T.-S., & Hew, J.-J. (2017) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2017.10.009 · Cited by 369
Metadata
- Authors
- Hazen, B. T., Overstreet, R. E., & Cegielski, C. G.
- Affiliations
- Auburn University (US)
- Venue
- The International Journal of Logistics Management
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2012-05-18
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 119-134
- ISSN
- 0957-4093 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2021566208
- Cited by
- 117
- References
- 69
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 8
- FWCI
- 8.06
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The International Journal of Logistics Management (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Innovation Diffusion and Forecasting
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › Quality and Supply Management
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Sustainable Supply Chain Management
- Keywords
- supply chain innovation, diffusion of innovations, diffusion of innovation theory, acceptance, routinization, assimilation, innovation adoption
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review