The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Innovation Implementation: Overcoming the Challenge
Abstract
In changing work environments, innovation is imperative. Yet, many teams and organizations fail to realize the expected benefits of innovations that they adopt. A key reason is not innovation failure but implementation failure—the failure to gain targeted employees' skilled, consistent, and committed use of the innovation in question. We review research on the implementation process, outlining the reasons why implementation is so challenging for many teams and organizations. We then describe the organizational characteristics that together enhance the likelihood of successful implementation, including a strong, positive climate for implementation; management support for innovation implementation; financial resource availability; and a learning orientation.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams
Edmondson, A. (1999) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2666999 · Cited by 12,026
The Challenge of Innovation Implementation
Klein, K. J., & Sorra, J. S. (1996) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/259164 · Cited by 2,113
Self-citationDisrupted Routines: Team Learning and New Technology Implementation in Hospitals
Edmondson, A. C., Bohmer, R. M., & Pisano, G. P. (2001) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3094828 · Cited by 1,729
Implementing computerized technology: An organizational analysis.
Klein, K. J., Conn, A. B., & Sorra, J. S. (2001) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.86.5.811 · Cited by 615
Self-citation
Cited by
Proctor, E., Silmere, H., Raghavan, R., Hovmand, P., Aarons, G., Bunger, A., Griffey, R., & Hensley, M. (2011) · Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research · doi:10.1007/s10488-010-0319-7 · Cited by 8,721
Systematic review of the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) framework
Moullin, J. C., Dickson, K. S., Stadnick, N. A., Rabin, B., & Aarons, G. A. (2019) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/s13012-018-0842-6 · Cited by 1,223
Michaelis, B., Stegmaier, R., & Sonntag, K. (2010) · Journal of Managerial Psychology · doi:10.1108/02683941011035304 · Cited by 219
Michaelis, B., Stegmaier, R., & Sonntag, K. (2009) · Journal of Change Management · doi:10.1080/14697010903360608 · Cited by 216
Context and implementation: A concept analysis towards conceptual maturity
Pfadenhauer, L. M., Mozygemba, K., Gerhardus, A., Hofmann, B., Booth, A., Lysdahl, K. B., Tummers, M., Burns, J., & Rehfuess, E. A. (2015) · Zeitschrift für Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualität im Gesundheitswesen · doi:10.1016/j.zefq.2015.01.004 · Cited by 189
Metadata
- Authors
- Klein, K. J., & Knight, A. P.
- Venue
- Current Directions in Psychological Science
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2005-10
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 243-246
- ISSN
- 0963-7214 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-8721
- OpenAlex
- W2128745127
- Cited by
- 409
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 8.60
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
