The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Adoption of Technological, Administrative, and Ancillary Innovations: Impact of Organizational Factors
Abstract
The influence of six organizationalfactors on the adoption of three types of innovations was examined in public libraries. It wasfound that (a) all factors together were a better predictor of technological than administrative or ancillary innovations, and (b) specialization and organizational slack had a stronger effect on technological innovations than the other two types, whereas administrative intensity and organizational size had a stronger effect on administrative innovations. It is concluded that differentiation between types of innovations and stages of adoption is essential in developing realistic theories of organizational innovations.
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
Cited by
Organizational innovation: A meta-analysis of effects of determinants and moderators
Damanpour, F. (1991) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/256406 · Cited by 6,542
Self-citationLu, Y., & Ramamurthy, K. (. (2011) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/41409967 · Cited by 1,309
Corporate Reputation and Philanthropy: An Empirical Analysis
Brammer, S., & Millington, A. (2005) · Journal of Business Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10551-005-7443-4 · Cited by 984
Atun, R., de Jongh, T., Secci, F., Ohiri, K., & Adeyi, O. (2010) · Health Policy and Planning · doi:10.1093/heapol/czp055 · Cited by 427
Past, present, and future barriers to digital transformation in manufacturing: A review
Jones, M. D., Hutcheson, S., & Camba, J. D. (2021) · Journal of Manufacturing Systems · doi:10.1016/j.jmsy.2021.03.006 · Cited by 377
Organizational context, climate and innovativeness: adoption of imaging technology
Nystrom, P. C., Ramamurthy, K., & Wilson, A. L. (2002) · Journal of Engineering and Technology Management · doi:10.1016/s0923-4748(02)00019-x · Cited by 263
Exploring the public sector adoption of HRIS
Troshani, I., Jerram, C., & Rao Hill, S. (2011) · Industrial Management & Data Systems · doi:10.1108/02635571111118314 · Cited by 236
Organizational characteristics and the CRM adoption process
Ko, E., Kim, S. H., Kim, M., & Woo, J. Y. (2008) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.05.011 · Cited by 217
Implementation research: state of the art and future directions
Linton, J. D. (2002) · Technovation · doi:10.1016/s0166-4972(01)00075-x · Cited by 126
The Decision to Adopt Evidence-Based and Other Innovative Mental Health Practices: Risky Business?
Panzano, P. C., & Roth, D. (2006) · Psychiatric Services · doi:10.1176/appi.ps.57.8.1153 · Cited by 115
Metadata
- Authors
- Damanpour, F.
- Venue
- Journal of Management
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1987-12
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 675-688
- ISSN
- 0149-2063 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-1211
- OpenAlex
- W2069159729
- Cited by
- 963
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 2.60
- 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.
