777. .17 717.7‘1 ‘7. 277777.. 7.7 l. 7.7...7...:. . ,7.....77. I... :17?! ...7..7 ...7>..7. 1.... ...7. 51%”; i7: 1 ' 7 .771: .... 7.77.7.1. .27.... 7... >..77.. ...... r... 7.727 7 . . . T. .7 ..7 .. r .7. .7 .7 7. - f. ;. _. . 4 7 . .77. . . , . 7A 5 . L . . .. .. .7 . .4 . 4 7 7.7 . .i . .. .71 h. . . .\ 7 . 7 .. .. _ .. 7.7 . . ._ . . .. 7.7 .. 1 I ' ..77: 17.7 .r... , 7:2... .7 7. . 1. _..r7,.777777,.1..7.77.7h77777u7. (797.737.7771.. 7 7.7...77..w..7.,.7.7~ 7!! \v7r7flt777: I “firm“.flo T777. 1 7.7! 773“”... 7 7737:? .T a» 7 7’" 77!... 7 .‘L17I .Il....||i7 51 \7...7.7.\.7’,7 . . 77.77! 7....7. LT... 7.57.1.3... . QTnaév .77... .777... 7 “.7777: .r.....7..7...7.7..¥._......777.7.. E? .‘Wllgiu 17.777 .77.. 1 7 . . 7. .71» 7.7... 71.7 7:. 7|: 77.1.77 77.... 777 1 7 . .77.-.. r...‘ 7 . 7 . 77 .7 7 .mW...«..7 r7....71n777r. €177 71777.77. p.77”. 7.7" llllllllllllll“ \ ‘o===Z This is to certify that the thesis entitled CONSUMER INNOVATION: AN INVESTIGATION OF SELECTED CHARACTERISTICS OF INNOVATORS presented by William Earl Bell has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for ..........,.., _DL degree in mg AM” Major professor U ‘l7 Date November 21. 1962 0-169 L I B R . Michigat Univel Firm ABSTRACT CONSUMER INNOVATION: AN INVESTIGATION OF SELECTED CHARACTERISTICS OF INNOVATORS by William Earl Bell A perplexing problem facing marketing managers today is the rate of failure of product innovations in the market place. While innovating firms have been producing new products, consumers have been rejecting them at a devas- tating rate. Consumers who accept newness and business firms intro- ducing innovations are both innovators. The consumers who innovate are the most willing to accept something new and break their established patterns of purchasing and consump- tion. This research examines consumer innovators to deter- mine if they constitute a unique marketing target for mana- gerial considerations. Three constrast groups are delineated to determine if there is a unique market for newness. First, consumer inno- vators are defined as the first 10% of a market to accept innovations. Second, people who accept an innovation after it has achieved 10% saturation but before 50% are termed early adopters. The third group constitutes the mass market, or the characteristics of the total pepulation. Innovations of two types are studied: (1) a strategic innovation, which is a product alteration; (2) functional innovation, which is a product to perform a previously 1 ." 2 William Earl Bell fulfilled function in a new way. Color television and stereophonic equipment are studied as representative of the former type of innovation, and dishwashers and air condition- ers are the products of the latter type. Two kinds of information are sought concerning the con- sumer: (1) socio-economic data, and (2) the buying process and influences exerted on and by innovators. 5,456 interviews from the Detroit Metropolitan market provide the data for the study of characteristics. A sample of 109 was reinterviewed for information concerning marketing behavior and influences. The chi-square statistic is used for testing the hypotheses. Results show that innovators are different from the mass market, and they do constitute a unique marketing segment. Further, consumer innovators are different from early adopt- ers in most of the variables studied. A summary of the way these people differ is shown in Table I. The people who accept simple changes, the strategies, differ in their characteristics from those who accept func- tional innovations. While innovators constitute a unique market, the nature of the innovation may delineate the market still further. Table II shows in summary form how these groups differ. The innovators are found to be disseminators of informa- tion concerning the innovistic products by giving opinions and demonstrating the products. Informal communication is recognized as more effective than mass media by innovators. William Earl Bell Innovators do not shOp for innovistic products. The purchase decision is made without comparisons. The major consulting source of innovators is buying guides. COMPARISON OF PROFILES: TABLE I INNOVATORS AND EARLY ADOPTERS variable InnovatorS‘ EarlygAdOptersa Age Head Young Youngest Spouse Young Youngest Occupation Head Highly concen— Not as highly trated in Pro- concentrated in fessional and a specific group Managerial group Spouse Little concen- Little concen- tration tration Education Head Very highly Highly educated educated Spouse Highly educated Average Family Income Highest High Ethnic Group Jewish, French, British, German, Other EurOpeans Italian Home Characteristics Ownership High ownership Highest ownership Structure Single and Highest single multi-units unit Home Value Very high value High value Rent High rent High rent Number in Family Dispersed Dispersed ”*9 COMPARISON OF PROFILES: AND FUNCTIONAL INNOVATORS TABLE II William Earl Bell STRATEGIC Variable Strategic Functional Innovators Innovators Age Head Very young Young Spouse Very young Young Occupation Head Dispersed Highly con- between Pro- centrated in fessional-Mana- Professional- gerial and Managerial Craftsmen- Foremen Spouse No difference No difference Education Head Above average Very highly education educated Spouse Above average Very highly education educated Family Income Ethnic Group Home Characteristics Ownership Structure Home Value Rent Number in Family High income Negro, French, Italian Slightly higher than average Highly con- centrated in single units High value High rent Dispersed Very high income Jewish, German, British Very high More highly concentrated in single units Extremely high value Very high rent Dispersed #5 Copyright by WILLIAM EARL BELL 1963 CONSUMER INNOVATION: AN INVESTIGATION OF SELECTED CHARACTERISTICS OF INNOVATORS By William Earl Bell A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION Department of Marketing and Transportation Administration 1962 1}? (5) \‘ \2). \ L3 3.} PREFACE This study is concerned with the acceptors of product innovations. The consumers who purchase innovistic products are termed innovators. They break their traditional patterns of purchase and consumption behavior when they accept innovistic products. The focal point of the study is an attempt to determine if the consumer innovators constitute a specific marketing target. Such a target could be delineated for special marketing endeavor. Interpretation of the data in terms of positive action for marketing management is the second major aspect of the study. The study is divided into two parts. Part I is con- cerned with the background. Chapter I briefly reviews the importance of innovation to the economy. Comments are made on the highlights of previous research on the acceptance of newness. Chapter II presents the problem which is deline- ated for study. The research design utilized to elicit the data is given in Chapter III. Part II is concerned with the presentation of the research findings for the problem outlined in the second chapter. The socio-economic characteristics are portrayed in Chapter IV. A detailed examination is made in an attempt to discern any existing differences between the people who 11 buy goods first and those who buy later. Chapter V inves- tigates the values and attitudes held by initial consumers. The sixth chapter describes the buying process of innovators and the role of the innovators as influentials in their social groups. The final chapter summarizes the findings and points out various adjustments of the marketing mix which could be made when firms introduce innovations. The author is indebted_to many people who c00perated in making this study possible. It would be impossible to mention them all. I would, however, like to mention several. First, my dissertation committee composed of: Dr. William Lazer, Chairman, Dr. Frank H. Mossman and .Dr. Paul E. Smith. These men provided guidance, patience, and encouragement throughout the study. I would like to particularly acknowledge Dr. Lazar's devotion of many hours to the project. Second, I sincerely thank the Detroit News and particu- larly Dr. Albert Moellman, Director of Research, for allowing me to use raw data they had obtained in connection with their publication, The,§;;§h Quinguennial Survey g; the Detzoitnarket. Finally, I eXpress gratitude to my wife, Dorothy, who offered encouragement, sympathy and understanding. iii TABLE PREFACE . . . . . . . . . . LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS . . . LIST OF APPENDICES . . . . PART I. Chapter I. INTRODUCTION . . . The Role Of Innovation In The Economy Innovation as a Way of Life OF CONTENTS THE BACKGROUND 0 0 O 9 O O Dominance of Innovation . Innovation and Economic Activity Benefits of Innovation . . Arguments Against Innovation . Innovation Defined . . . . Types of Innovations . . . Innovation And Management . . Reasons for Innovating . . Problems of Innovation to Managem O O O V O O O I O C I 0 O O I O O 0 Useful Information to Management Innovation And The Consumer . The Consumer Innovator . . Functions Performed . . Research Studies On The Consumer Innov Introduction . Lack of Research . . Problems of Defining and Identifying Personal Characteristics . Adoption Process and Rates of Adoptio Marketing Influences . . . Summary . . . II. THE PROBLEM . . . . I 0 O O 0 O U 0 O O O C Scope Of The Problem . . Types of Innovations Studied Kind of Product Investigated . iv 0 O ooomoooaooooo :3 0.930... dOOOOOOOICO t oofiooooOoooooooooooo-ao O Q C O O O O O O O I O I O O I' Page ii vii xi xii h) xixnra-wmmm TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued Chapter AdOpter Categories and Contrast Groups Utilized . . . . . . Statement Of The Problem . . . Hypotheses . . . . . Boundaries Of The Study . . . I O O C 0 O O C C O O O O O O 0 III. RESEARCH DESIGN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction . . Criteria And Selection Of The Contrast Groups . Early AdOpters . Population . . . Sampling Procedures Geographic Area The Sample . . . The Subsample . The Questionnaire The Chi-Square Statist c roducts 00000000080 00000000000 P O O O I O O O O O I O O O O I D O O O O O O O O O I O O O O O I 0 O O C O O O O O O O O 1 PART II. THE EVALUATION IV. THE MARKETING TARGET IN TERMS OF SOCIO- ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS . . . . . . . . Introduction . . . . Section I. A Summary Of The Findings Innovators Compared with Other AdOpter Categories . . . . . . . . . . . . . Homogeneity of Innovators . . . . . . Types of Innovation . . . . Section II. The Detailed Statistical Analysis Of The Findings . . . . . Introduction . . . . . . . . . Ages of Heads and Spouses . . . Occupations of Heads and Spouses . Education of Heads and Spouses . . Family Income . . . . . . . . . Ethnic Groups . . . . . . . . Home Characteristics . . . . . . Number in Family . . . . . . . . C I C O O Q I O C I I I O 0 O C O O V. VALUES AND ATTITUDES OF CONSUMER INNOVATORS Introduction 0 O C O C O O C O O O O C C O O O C O O I O O O C O O O I O O O O O O O O O TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued Chapter Page Mobility . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143 Geographic Mobility . . . . . . . . . . 144 Job Mobility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 Venturesomeness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147 Gregariousness . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147 Vacation Habits . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 Recreation . . . . . . . . . . . . 166 The Meaning For Marketing Manageme ent . . . 166 VI. MARKETING BEHAVIOR AND INFLUENCES OF CONSUMER INNOVATORS . . . . . . . . . . . . 168 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . 168 The Buying Of InnOVations . . . . . . . . . 168 Sources of Information . . . . . . . . . 168 Consulting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170 Media Exposure . . . . . . . . . . . . 171 ShOpping for Innovations . . . . . . . . 173 The Use of Credit . . . . . . . . . . 175 Innovators As Influentials . . . . . . . . 176 VII. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . 180 The Consumer Innovator . . . . 180 Implications For Marketing Management . . . 183 The Marketing Mix . . . . . . . . . . . 185 Pricing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190 summary I I O O O 0 O I O O O O O O O O 1 9 1 APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192 BIBLIOGRAPHY O O O I O C O O O O I O O I O U I O I I 280 vi Table 20 3. 4. 50 14. 15. LIST OF TABLES Market Saturation of Innovistic Products . Market Saturation of Early Adoption Products 0 o O O 0 I O O o O O 0 O 0 O 0 sample Size 0 0 o 0 O O O 6 0 0 U 0 O O 0 Group Sample Size . . . . . . . . . . . . Innovators Compared with Contrast Groups: A sum a ry o O O 0 a O a 6 0 O I 9 O O 0 Differences Between Strategic and Functional Innovators . . . . . . . . . Age Distribution of Head of Household by Adopter Categories . . . . . . . . . . . Age Distribution of Spouses by AdOpter Categories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Age Distribution of Heads of Households of Innovators . . . . . . . . . . . . . Age Distribution of Spouses of Innovators Age Distribution of Head of Household by Types of Products . . . . . . . . . . . Age Distribution of Spouse by Types of PrOduCtS 0 0 O O I O O O O I l O O U 0 0 Occupation of Head of Household by Adopter Categories 0 O O O O O O 0 0 O I I O 0 0 Occupation of Spouse by Adopter Categories Occupation of Heads of Households of Innovators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Occupation of Spouses of Innovators . . . vii Page 57 58 61 62 7O 77 84 85 88 89 91 93 95 97 98 99 ‘ LIST OF TABLES - Continued Table 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28.‘ 29}' 30. 31. 32. 33. 340 35. 36. Occupation of Head of Household by Types of Products . . . . . . . . . . . . . Occupation of Spouse by Types of Products Education of categories 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Education of Education of Heads of Households of Innovators . . . ... . . . . . . . . . Education of Spouses of Innovators . . . Education of Head of Household by Types Of PPOduCtS O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Education of Spouse by Types of Products 'Family Family Family Ethnic Ethnic Ethnic Income of AdOpter Categories . . Income of Innovators . . . . . . Income by Types of Products . . . Background by Adopter Categories Background of Innovators . . . . Background by Types of Products . Home Ownership and Type of Dwelling by AdOpter Categories . . . . . . . . . . Home Value by AdOpter Categories . . . . Monthly Rent by AdOpter Categories . . . Home Ownership and Type of Dwelling of Innovators . . . . . . J . . . . . . . Home Value of Innovators . . . . . . . . Monthly Rent of Innovators . . . . . . . viii Head of Household by AdOpter Spouse by AdOpter Categories Page 101 102 104 105 107 108 110 113 115 116 118 120 122 125 126 127 129 130 131 LIST OF TABLES - Continued Table 37. 38. 39. 4o. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. Home Ownership and Type of Dwelling by Types of Products . . . . . . . . . Home Value by Types of Products . . . Monthly Rent by Types of Products . . Number in Family by AdOpter Categories Number in Family of Innovators . . . . Number in Family by Types of Products Time Lived in the Detroit Area . . . . Time Lived in Previous Area . . . . . Time on Current Job . . . . . . . . . Time Employed by Firm . . . . . . . . Time Employed by Previous Employer . . Membership in Organizations . . . . . Vacation Habits by AdOpter Categories Vacation Habits of Innovators . . . . Vacation Habits by Types of Products . Recreational Activities . . . . . . . Sources of Original Information about Innovations 0 O 0 O O O O O O O O 0 Consulting Sources . . . . . . . . . . Hours a Week Viewing Television . . . Magazines in the Innovistic Household Number of Stores Visited . .'. . . . . Friends Owning Innovistic Products . . Comparison of Time of Purchase: Friends and Innovators . . . . . . . . . . . ix 0 Page 133 134 135 137 139 141 144 145 146 146 147 148 150 155 160 166 169 171 172 173 174 178 179 LIST OF TABLES - Continued Table Page 60. Comparison of Profiles: Innovators and Early Adopters . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61. Comparison of Profiles: Strategic and Functional Innovators . . . . . . . . . . . 182 Figure I. II. III. IV. VI. LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Adopter Categories . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rates of Acceptance . . . . . . . . . . . . Farm Research AdOpter Categories . . . . . . Rank Order of Information Sources by Stage in the AdOption Process . . . . . . . . . Summary of Characteristics and Communication Behavior of AdOpters . . . . . . . . . . . Categories Selected for Use . . . . . . . . xi Page 14 20 42 47 51 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix Page A. Definitions and Terminology . . . . . . . . . 193 B. Suggestions for Further Research . . . . . . 197 C. Interviewing Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199 D. Reinterviewing Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207 E. Chi-Square Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . 225 F. Other Variables and Classifications 227 O 0 O O O xii PART I. THE BACKGROUND CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION The Role 9; Innovation IQ The Economy Innovation as a Way 2: Life Many scholars have sought to explain the more notable advances of the human race in terms of the degree and speed of innovation within a culture. In the United States, . . . innovation, change, mobility, movement are permanent traits . . . . In stressing the need for innovation, Americans are fighting for the mainte- nance of this aspect of their way of life, for the permanency of one thing to which they are attached.1 Thus, innovation is a primary and pervasive force in the economy.2 Dominance 9; Innovation Innovation is a major competitive tool of business firms today. The fierce competition for differential advan- tage makes innovating a primary weapon in the business environment. New product offerings have been growing at an increasing rate. For example, products which were not in 1Roger Girod, "Comment on 'Consumer Reaction to Product InnOVation'," Consumer Beh vior, ed. Lincoln Clark, III (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1958), p. 10. 2E. J. Kelley and William Lazer, "Managing Innovation in Marketing," Advanced Management--Office Executive, Vol. I No. 7 (July, 1962), p. 10. existence at the end of World War II constituted 70% of Procter & Gambles's household sales volume in 1959.3 Of General Foods' 1959 sales, 24.5% were from products only 10 years old.4 (Retail) food buyers are offered 24 new products on an average day, 120 a week and 6,000 a year.5 It is obvious that new products are the energizing force in the economy. The constant change of the product mix is evi- dence of the dynamics of present-day business. Innovation apg Economic Activity The amount of investment in our economy is partially determined by innovations. It has long been accepted that investment is a crucial element in determining the level of economic activity. The amount of money expended depends in part on the new opportunities for investment. New products and new processes are two types of innovation which enhance investment and the level of economic activity. At least one renowned economist argues that innovations are the primary cause of the business cycle.6 Innovations stimulate the level of economic activity; and if new innOVations are not forthcoming, economic activity slows down. 3Grey M tter, Grey Advertising Agency, Inc., National Advertisers' Edition, Vol. XXXI (January, 1960), p. 1. 4Ibid. 51bid. 6Joseph A. Schumpeter, Business Cycles (New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1939), pp. 87—102. Benefits 22 Innovation Innovations aid various segments of the economy in numerous ways. For example: 1) Consumers are offered products that fill a need or want better than previous products, or fulfill a want which was previously unfulfilled. 2) Labor benefits through the creation of new jobs to design or adjust equipment in order to produce an innova- tion, the actual production of the innovation, and the numerous marketing functions which need to be performed. 3) The national level of economic activity is enhanced by innovations. Research and developmental eXpenditures in 1960 were over 11 billion dollars, of which business eXpend- itures were 4.49 billion.7 4) The owners of the innovation gain from the monetary rewards achieved through the success of a new product. A competitive advantage can be gained through innovations. Arguments Against Innovation The results of innovation are not without criticism. Economists frequently argue against the wastes of high tail fins, planned obsolescence, throw-away bottles and the like. Their concern, as social critics, is that innovations are wasteful, that consumers do not need the products which 7National Science Foundation, Statistical Abstract 9; the Sniteg States 1962 (Washington, D. C.: U. S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of Census), p. 542. m are a result of an economy of abundance. They argue that the consumers are being manipulated by business for its own gains. Business is blamed for what they term a Warped sense of values currently held by consumers. Business is also criticized for unnecessary depletion of natural resources. These critics have as their focal point the "misdi- rected" allocation of resources. They argue, for example, that society is "production oriented" and that the measure of economic activity and a standard of living is the quan- tity of goods and services available.8 The implication is that resources are not properly allocated and that a dis- tinction needs to be made between kinds of goods and services provided. For the benefit of society, goals should be other than production oriented.9 Recognition should be given to the fact that this is a value judgment, and someone other than the market should make the decision as to what goods are best for society. This becomes a social and moral argument against materialism and not an argument against innovation per se. A second major criticism against innovation is the endeavor of marketing men to induce or create demand through advertising. Critics argue that the wants of the consumer are created by production. This follows the economic law of 8See John K. Galbraith, The Affluent Society (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1958), particularly Chapters 9-11. 91b1d. J. B. Say which asserts that supply creates its own demand. 2 Thus, they argue that wants are not originated by the con- sumer but by business. "(Advertising and salesmanship) . . can not be reconciled with the notion of independently determined desires, for their central function is to create desires--to bring into being wants that previously did not exist."10 Many scholars would argue that a need or want cannot be created. The role of advertising is to disseminate informa- tion and inflame demand rather than to create a demand. In the last analysis, it is the consumer who has the power to accept or reject the innovation. By his actions, he decides whether emulation, prestige, and yearly models are values for which he is willing to pay. In our society, this is a consumer decision. There is ample evidence that the consumer has made the decision to accept or reject innovations offered in the market place. The rate of product failure is devastating. Estimates run from 50% to 98%,11 indicating that rather than being controlled, the consumer has control over the success of product offerings and exercises it to a high degree. 1OIbid., p. 155. 1Samuel C. Johnson and Conrad Jones, "How to Organize for New Products," Harvard Businegg Revi w, Vol. XXXV, No. 3 (May-June. 1957).-p. 50. InnoyatIon Sefined An innovation is the act of implementing a novel idea into a process or product. For an innovation to be success- ful, the process must be feasible or a product needs to have commercial acceptability. There are three major elements which must be present for a successful innovation. The first is an idea. This element is defined as an invention and is the creative work normally done by researchers. The second is the implementa- tion of the idea or product from the conceptual stage to the final stage. This is the element, the actual production of the innovation, which receives the major attention of the business firm. The third element crucial to a successful innovation is the acceptance on the part of the market for which it is intended. While two parts of the process may be partially controlled by the firm, the acceptance decision is exogenous to the firm and is solely dependent upon the consumer. Influence may be exerted, but the decision is in the hands of the potential consumers. Typ§§,g§ Innovations "Innovations are of all degrees of importance and of narrow or wide application.“12 There is a continuum of innovation ranging from an infinitesimal change, such as a slight product alteration, at one end of the continuum to a 1"2J. M. Clark, gompetitIon,a§ a SynamIc grocess (Washington, D. C.: The Brookings Institution, 1961), p. 185. completely novel product or change on the other end. From the consumer's vieWpoint, three types of product innovations can be delineated in this continuum. The least complex type of innovation is termed a stra- tegic innovation. This type is an alteration of an existing product. It performs no new function for the user of the innovation. The unique feature of a strategic innovation is that it requires no change in the behavior pattern of the users of the innovation. No new skills are needed on the part of consumers. The strategic type of innovation is the most common because it requires the least amount of inge— nuity on the part of the firm and the least severance with the past on the part of the consumer. A new ingredient in toothpaste, a change in packaging, new colors, larger motors, additional trim are examples of a strategic innovation. A second type of innovation is a functional innovation. While the function the product is to perform remains the same, the method of performing this function is new. A functional innOVation is more complex than a strategic inno- vation on the part of both the producer and the consumer. For the firm, it is a new product, requiring new raw mate- rials and/or new processes. For the consumer, it fulfills a previously fulfilled want in a new Way. It breaks with the traditional method of performing an old function. For example, an electric or gas clothes dryer requires a different behavior pattern on the part of the consumer than the previous clothes drying method. The consumer no longer picks up each laundered article, shakes it, pins it on the line, checks at intervals for dryness, unpins each article, placing clothes pins in one container and laundry in another. Instead, the consumer removes the clothing from the washing machine and places it in the dryer in somewhat of a heap, returning later to remove the dried laundry at the prOper time. Other examples of a functional innovation are home freezers and air conditioners. They necessitate a change of habits and behavior on the part of the consumer as well as the manufacturer. A third type of innovation is a fundamental innovation. This is the rarest type and the most complex of the three. It requires an original idea or concept which is implemented by the firm. In addition to the idea, a market needs to be develOped. A fundamental innovation is a break with the past. It performs a new function for the consumer. It fulfills a need which may not have been previously recognized, or if recognized, was not previously fulfilled. A fundamental innovation requires new types of behavior patterns and activities for the consumer. This type differs from the previous ones in that there is no substitution involved. It requires newness. An example of a fundamental innovation is a dehumidi- fier. The want, e.g., comfort even in muggy or chilling 10 damp weather and freedom from the expense and nuisance of mildew or mold, had never been previously fulfilled. The product is a novelty and requires new type activities, rather than ones of substitution. Innovation gag Management Ressons for Innovating In a dynamic competitive society such as ours, it is crucial that management must be aware of the everchanging desires of the consumer. "The basic managerial response to accelerating change must be innovation."13 Typically, management views innovation as an internal situation rather than external. Business literature has had as a focal point such internal criteria for new products as the following: To use up excess plant capacity. To take up slack in manpower and facilities. To make maximum use of sales organization. prevent wasting by-products. To employ surplus capitsl. To provide hedge against sIsck season . To offset declining market for a compsny“s basic products.1 NOW-P'Um—‘ 0000000 *3 0 While this approach to new product innovation is a‘ valid one in so far as it goes, it also reflects the product or process orientation of the firm, rather than the market- ing or customer orientation to which word homage is paid. Without consumer acceptance, without accurate market 13Kelley and Lazer, Qp. cit., p. 10. 14Srsy Matter, 22. cit., p. 2. 11 information, the innovation will have no opportunity to succeed. Differential advantage which can be gained by intro- ducing a new product is a major impetus for any firm. The new product may have a uniqueness or be patentable and offer a monopoly until a close imitation is marketed by a competitor. The rewards to the innovating firm can be large. A completely new product may create a new industry from which a monopoly over the product may create a monopoly over the industry.15 For minor product variants, a monopoly of an innovation may be a competitive advantage. In either case, if the rewards to management are greater than the costs, there is a gain which accrues to the firm. Company growth is enhanced through innovations. The companies which are within "growth industries" typically are oriented toward new product innovation. Examples of these industries are chemicals, drugs and electronics. They nor- mally have high research and development expenditures. "It is about 'par' to have around 50% of sales in products that .16 are new since the war.‘ 15Clerk, gs. cit., p. 181. 16Ralph W. Jones, "Management of New Products," Egg IournaI 2: Industrial En ineerin , Vol. IX, No. 5 (Sept.- Oct., 1948). Reprinted in William Lazer and E. J. Kelley, eds., Managerial Marketing: Perssective sgg View oints, Revised Edition (Homewood, 111.: Richard D. Irwin, 1962), p. 444. 12 The above reasons for innovating place emphasis on the rewards for innovating. However, another reason for inno- vating is the possible loss of markets or market position due to not innovating. Given a competitive position, how long can a firm hold its position without introducing new product innovations? While it is not known, it is doubtful if a competitive position could be held for long in the dy- namic business environment of today. ro em g; Innov t on.§g Management "Any business enterprise has two and only these two basic functions: marketing and innovations."17 Thus, the task facing business is not one of determining if business should innovate but rather how it should be carried out most advantageously. Management is faced with the problem of introducing innovations to potential customers. In general, marketing management is concerned with how to do a better job in introducing newness. They need to know what products might be accepted by consumers. In addition, how fast they might be accepted would aid companies using a payback on invest- ment criteria. They would also like to know if specific marketing strategies and tactics might be utilized when offering product innovations. For example, strategic and tactical 17Peter Drucker, Ige Practices sf Management (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1954), p. 37. considerations might well be found in areas of product plan- ning, promotion, price and channel selection. An approach to these problems can be found in the market orientation philosophy. Given the market as the focal point for management success, marketing research en- deavor should start with market considerations. Specific types of information which can be obtained only in the market place are set forth below. Useful Information 39 Management Delineating a potential target is a crucial step for management. In attempting this delineation, management would find the answers to the following questions to be very helpful: Is there a specific type of individual who accepts newness? Is there a core of the market to which advertising might be directed? Are there people who are the taste setters? Can a group of peOple forecast the success or failure of innovations? Is there sufficient inelastic demand to effectively utilize a skimming pricing policy? To effectively answer these questions, attention must be turned to the pe0ple who are the first to purchase inno- vations in the market place. Innovation And The Consumer ‘ Egg Consumer Innovator There are difficulties in identifying innovators opera- tionally. From a theoretical point of view, they are the very first to buy. Operationally, this assertion needs to be quantified. This is achieved by segmenting a market or potential market into adopter categories. A scheme which can be utilized follows. FIGURE I ADOPTER CATEGORIES H O O 0m 00 N 0 Market Penetration Cumulative Percentage L\ o Innovators Early Late Adopters Adopters Adopter Categories In any market or potential market, the first 10% who adopt a product are consumer innovators. The next 40% who adOpt a new product are termed early adOpters. The remain- ing 50% are the last to adopt and are known as the late adopters. The above scheme for segmenting the market can be useful to management. Previously, it was shown that pos- sible strategical and tactical considerations could be 15 gleaned from the market. It may be that one type of adver- tising should be used in the first steps of market penetra- tion and a different type in the middle stages and still a different type for the last to adopt. Other examples of benefits which could be derived from such a segmentation are channels utilized and pricing considerations. Functions Performed The consumers who are the first to buy product innova- tions perform numerous functions. First, the consumer holds the veto power for the success or failure of the innovation. "The thousands of products now on the market are only a part of those which have been introduced to the public on the assumption they would sell."18 Product innovations con- stantly are being placed before the public for acceptance or, possibly, rejection. There is ample evidence that the consumer has done a thorough job of screening out the new products. Estimates of new product failures range from 50% to 98%.‘9 A second major function performed is the determination of the rate of acceptance of a given market. The higher the rate of acceptance, the quicker the payback of the invest- ment. In addition, the people who buy the innovation in the IdWroe Alderson, M rketin Behavior and Executive Action (Homewood, 111.: Richard D. Irwin, Inc., 1957), p. 260. 19Johnson and Jones, gs. cit., p. 50. 16 initial stage of the product“s life cycle20 also forecast the success of the new product. FIGURE II RATES OF ACCEPTANCE m a- .2 :~/' u \£~ m Qw/ h P / aw; ,_«~" 8 8 / ff'fi/ ” r-1 0-1 ,/ / '/ Qvtk‘”) \ p ' l1 o , ,/’ // fi ,/ s. a / A) Time In Figure II, product 1 has a low rate of acceptance. The length of time for the product to achieve 10% market saturation is approximately twice as long as the time for product 2. Therefore, the payback period is longer. Product 2 requires approximately twice as long to obtain 10% saturation as product 3. Similarly, it has a longer payback period. . It is important for management to achieve as fast an acceptance as possible to obtain a return on their invest- ment. The innovators will help determine how long or short this payback period will be. A third major function which is performed by the con— sumer is the influence which he may exert over his neighbors 20The term refers to the stages through which a product goes, from introduction to its decline. For a discussion of this concept, see E. Jerome McCarthy, Basic Marketing: A MapagerIal Approach (Homewood, 111.: Richard D. Irwin, Inc., 1960), pp. 485—88. 1 7 ; and friends. He may be an opinion leader in a given commu~ nity and may serve as a demonstrator of the new products. Thus, this person may be the key to whether or not the product will ever achieve mass acceptance and become a prof- itable addition to a product line. ~.——_——_C——_—————_ Introduction This section is divided into six parts. The first part notes the lack of research in relation to consumer products. The second part deals with a major research problem-m defining and identifying the consumer innovator in opera- tional terms. Different approaches which have been utilized are presented. Part three reviews briefly studies which are concerned with the personal characteristics of innovators in terms of sociological, psychological, and demographic vari- ables. Part four sets forth the findings of research related to the adOption process and rates of adoption as it pertains to the individuals and the community. The fifth part reports on the influences which have affected the behavior of the various adopter categories. Such influences as communications, formal and informal, are given considera- tion. Part six summarizes the major findings of previous research as they apply to innovators. Lack p; Sesearch Despite the importance of innovation and consumer 18 behavior, surprisingly little research has been done in this areaa This is particularly true of product innovationsa The majority of research on innovation has been done by rural sociologists in their concern with the acceptance of new ideas and products in farmingo Problems 9f Defining and Identifying A major problem in studying the consumer innovator concerns definitions and identificationo One approach has been to delineate the people in terms of innovative~ mindednesso21 This term is defined as those who accept the innovation after the pioneers but before it attains wide— spread acceptanceo22 This definition excludes those who are the handful of people who are the pioneerso A scale to measure the concept of innovative-mindedness is constructed which classifies the total sample into three groups: the innovativewminded (22% of the sample), the intermediate (over 50% of the sample)? and those "not innovativemminded" (approximately 22% of the sample)o To ascertain in which of the groups an individual belonged, the respondents were asked three questionso Question one pertained to ownership or intended ownership of selected household appliances° Question two related to the attitude shown toward new applianceso Question three 21Eva Mueller, "The Desire for Innovators in Household Goods," Consumer Behavior, edo Lincoln Clark, III (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1958)g ppo 13‘370 22Ib1d., p0 26° 1 9 ; elicited attitudes toward new features or improvements on appliances. , Responses were classified positive, pro-con, and nega- tive. The respondents whose answers were two positive and a pro-con, or all positive were classified as innovative- minded. Two negative and a pro-con or three negatives were considered non-innovative-minded. The other possible com- binations were considered intermediate. Thus, one did not have to own any new appliances to be classified as innovative-minded. The criterion was an intended purchase, rather than absolute ownership. A second approach in identification has been utilized by rural sociologists in their attempt to distinguish the innovators from other groups. Their studies are concerned with how farmers adopt new ideas and technology. They have been quite prolific in their studies regarding acceptance of newness. H. F. Lionberger, author of Adoption 9f flew Ideas and Practices, lists an annotated bibliography of 100 research sources on this topic.23 One scheme which has received widespread acceptance for identification of adopter categories by rural sociologists 23H. F. Lionberger, Adoption 9: New Ideas and Practices (Ames: The Iowa State University Press, 1960), pp. 119-44. IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIaIIIIII.IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 20 is constructed on the basis of The Adoption-of-Farm- Practices scale.24 This scale consists of 25 new farm prac— tices. The year of adOption for each of the practices is ascertained from the sample. A standard scoring technique is then utilized which assigns equal weights to each prac- tice. This device yields a single measurement score for each respondent. It has been ascertained that these scores are normally distributed or closely approach normality.25 It is from this concept of normality that the adopter cate- gories are identified. They are as follows. FIGURE III FARM RESEARCH ADOPTER CATEGORIES U 0 +3 m 0 'U m £10 a a > B ...) 5 Innovators Early Late 3 Adopters Adopters , d /2. 5% 13.5% 16% \l_ Time of Adoption 24Everett M. Rogers, Characteristics 91 Agricultural Innovators apd Other ngpter Categorieg (Wooster: Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station Research Bulletin 882, May, 1961), pp. 57-63; E. M. Rogers and G. M. Beal, Reference Group Influences in the Adoption of Agricultural Technology (Ames: Iowa State University, 1958). 25Rogers, ibid., p. 60. ii 21 Thus, the rural sociologist classifies a sample in five different ways. The first 2%% to accept new ideas and prac- tices are termed innovators. The next 13%% 0f the sample who accept are known as early adOpters. The third category is the early majority which is comprised of the next 34%. Group four consists of the next 34%, who are labeled the late majority. Finally, the last 16% to adOpt from a given population are termed the late adopters. The major difference in these two approaches is that the former method excludes the very first who purchase and the latter defines the very first (2%% of those adopting) as the innovators. A second difference in the approaches is that the former does not need to own a product to be classified as innovative-minded; in the latter method they must have adopted the idea or product and the time lag between intro- duction and acceptance is the crucial measurement. A third method of defining and identifying innovators which has been utilized is that of ascertaining whether a person owns a product or engages in a practice which has been classified as an innovation. A study, utilizing this method, which relates social class and acceptance or rejec- tion to innovations was conducted by Graham.26 Choosing five innovations of which only one was a new product, the 26Saxon Graham, "Selection and Social Stratification: Factors in the Acceptance and RejeCLion of Five Innovations by Social Strata In New Haven, Connecticut" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University, 1951). 22 author attempted to correlate different social class cultures with different innovations. The operational definition of this study utilizes all three approaches. An innovator must own at least one of the innovations studied, be among the first 10% of a market to accept the innovation without regard to the time lag from introduction of the innovation to its acceptance. Personal Characteristics A major way of determining what type of peOple accept innovations is by ascertaining what the personal character- istics of these peOple are. This is an excellent method of finding whether the innovators constitute a specific market— ing target. It is a method of determining what personal variables, if any, help eXplain a propensity to innovate. The following sections set forth findings of various researchers who have delved into the personal variables. Culture One consideration in explaining the propensity to inno- vate is culture. The following quotes by anthropologists indicate the importance placed on this concept: Several factors Operate in the process of acceptance or rejection of new items by society. One of the most important of these, again, is the culture base.27 27Saxon Graham, American Culture: pp Analysis pf ts DeveIOpment and Present Characterigtics (New York: Ha rpe and Brothers, 1957). p. 543. 23 For an innOVation to be accepted then, it usually must be cggpatible with the culture base already existing. One example of how cultural factors influence accept- ance of newness is reflected in a study by Pedersen in rela- tion to ethnic groups.29 He found that the Danish farmers had adopted more selected farm practices than did the Polish groups. The study indicated that the Polish group tended to perpetuate the status quo whereas the cultural adjustment of the Danes facilitates the interaction of newness. Thus, some ethnic groups are more prone to innovate than others. Social isolation has been found to be linked with unfa- vorable attitudes and nonadoption of innovations in farming.30 In addition, heterogeneous neighborhoods were found to be more receptive toward improved school practices and greater participation in agricultural and school organi- zations than homogeneous neighborhoods.31 One research firm reports that people who are highly 28Ralph Linton, The Study pf Mgn, Student's Edition (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1936), p. 341. 29Harold A. Pedersen, "Cultural Differences in the Acceptance of Recommended Practices," Rural Sociology, Vol. XVI (March, 1951), pp. 37-49; Charles R. Hoffer, Acceptance pf Approved Farming Practices Among Farmers 2: Dutch Descent (East Lansing: Michigan Agricultural Experi- ment Station Special Bulletin 316, June, 1942). 3OE. A. Wilkening, "Social Isolation and Response of Farmers to Agricultural Programs," American Sociological Review, Vol. XVI (December, 1951). pp. 836-37. 31J. A. Duncan and B. W. Kreitlow, "Selected Cultural Characteristics and the Acceptance of Educational Programs and Practices," Rural Sociolo , Vol. XIX (December, 1954), pp. 349-57. 24 mobile are the ones which start the trend toward product acceptance.32 Opinion Research Corporation accepts a lead- ership concept which influences styles, tastes, and product preferences. The leaders to which this firm refers are mobile in more than a single dimension. It lists seven types of mobility which need to be considered. They are as follows:33 1. Intellectual mobility 2. Occupational mobility 3. Kinship mobility 4. Economic mobility 5. Social mobility 6. Educational mobility 7. Geographic mobility A single dimension of mobility is not sufficient to identify the peOple who start the trend toward product acceptance, but rather all types of mobility must be con- sidered. It warns that too much of one type of mobility may mean that another type may be low. Researchers found that the high mobiles were the first to use automatic clothes dryers and sound reproduction stereo equipment. There is some evidence, however, which indicates that not all new products are accepted at a faster rate by the high mobiles. For some products, the rates of acceptance were similar among different classifications of 32v1ctor Hillary, "PeOple Who Are 'Highly Mobile' Start Trend to Product Acceptance, Survey Says, " _all §treet gourng; (Eastern Edition), June 5, 1959, p. 11. Also reported in "Predicting Consumers' Needs: Can Tastemakers Point the Way?" Printerg' Ink, August 28, 1959, pp. 23-26. 33"Predicting Consumers' Needs . . . ,” ibid., p. 25. 25 mobiles (classified sample as 27% high mobiles, 50% medium mobiles and 23% low mobiles). For some products, the low mobiles had a greater rate of acceptance than the high mobiles. Thus, while the mobility concept works for some products, it does not work for all. Another aspect of culture which has been given consid- eration by researchers is religion. Several studies34 have indicated that religion has not been statistically signifi— cant when related to acceptance of newness. One study has indicated that church membership is so related but church attendance is not.35 It has been traditionally assumed that innovations and social change are most readily accepted in metropolitan areas as opposed to farms and villages. However, there is some evidence that the validity of this generalization needs to be questioned.36 The role of agricultural colleges and the extension information disseminated has made the rural areas much more sophisticated than would have been true in the past. With the educational work, the research being done in this area, the excellent communications which have 34Joseph H. Greenberg, "Social Variables in Acceptance and Rejection of Artificial Insemination," American Soc; a logical Review, Volo XVI (1951), pp. 86-91; James Copp, Personal apd Social Factors Associated with phg AdOption pf Recommended Farm Practices Among Cattlemen (Manhattan: Kansas Agricultural EXperimental Station Technical Bulletin 83, September, 1956). 35Copp, 2p. cit., pp. 15-16. 36Greenberg, _p. cit., pp. 86—91. 26 been established between the sources of newness and the con- sumer, this generalization needs further research. The “rugged individualism", the lack of conformity to a social ethic may be traits which are the breeding ground for newne S S 0 Social Class Closely related to culture is the concept of social class. Social class refers to the segmenting of the pOpula‘ tion into different strata. This is frequently done on the basis of four variables: source of income, house type, occupation and dwelling area. The prOponents of social class assert that the pOpulation can be stratified into unique groups for which different marketing appeals should be utilized. Graham37 asserts that each social class has a unique culture. Thus, he hypothesized that since each social class differs culturally, innovations would be accepted differen- tially. "Selection (of innovations) was hypothesized to be dependent in part upon the compatibility of the attributes of the innovation with the previous configuration of the culture into which it was introduced."38 To test the above hypothesis, he chose five innovations: television, canasta, supermarkets, and two types of health insurance. He found 37Graham, "Selection and Social Stratification . . . 9" Abstract. ' 381bid. 27 that when the social classes differed in the degree of acceptance, it could be eXplained primarily by variations in the possession of those cultural characteristics compatible with the innovation“s attributes. Thus, no single class (social) or classes will be conserVative or liberal in reacting to all inno- vations. Depending upon innovational characteristics in various instances, the upper class would accept at one time and reject at another. The same could be said for the middle and lower classes . . . if the classes were to accept in equal degree, they would do so because of their common sharing of some aspects of the culture of their society.39 Thus, one would not expect to find innovators in a unique social class for different types of innovations. Measurements of social class have been made by rural sociologists in relation to acceptance of new farm practices. Copp asserts that all the evidence supports the argument that there is a high positive correlation between social-class position and the general predisposition to adopt recommended farm practices. Perhaps the act of adOpting recommended farm practices might be inter- preted as an indication of upward social mobility aspirations. In addition, Rogers found a relation of social class ratings and AdOption-of-Farm-Practices Scores which was significant at the one percent level.l+1 The research cited asserts that each innovation appeals 39Saxon Graham, "Class and Conservatism in the AdOption of Innovations," Human Relation , Vol. IX, No. 1 (1956 , p. 92. 40Copp, pg. cit., p. 24. 41Rogers, pp. ci ., pp. 13-14. 28 1 to a different social class. For example, television would be accepted more readily by one social class than by another I social class. However, when considering innovations of dif- ferent types, social class cannot be distinguished. If an innovation is a complement to the existing product line, the market may remain the same in terms of social class. However, if a firm is diversifying its product line through innovations, the marketing target may shift. Education Innovators are more highly educated than the other adopter categories. This is the general finding of numerous researchers and has been proven to be highly significant statistically.42 While these studies relate to farm prac- tices only, it is interesting to note that the correlation was higher when related to formal education than to techni- cal agricultural training. For example, a study conducted in the Netherlands found that the educational variable is important in that country as well.43 In conjunction with a higher formal education level, it has been found that innovators read more farm magazines and Extension bulletins. Also, they were found to have a better 421b1d., pp. 12-13; Copp, pp. git., p. 14; c. R. Hoffer and Dale Stangland, Earmers' Reaction pp pr Practiceg (East Lansing: Agricultural EXperiment Station Technical Bulletin 264, February, 1958), p. 15. 43A. W. Van Den Ban, "Some Characteristics of Progres- siVe Farmers in the Netherlands," Rural Sociology, Vol. XXII (September, 1957), pp. 205-12. 29 reading ability than some of the other adOpter categories.44 Age The old adage "you can't teach an old dog new tricks") has become a part of society. The generalization is often made that the young are much more subject to change than the elderly. However, the research evidence has by no means substantiated this belief. Some researchers have found age to be significant while others have not.45 It would be logical, considering the higher education, that the age of the innovators would be lower. However, an explanation for the older peOple being the innovators is that the young are financially weaker and cannot afford to adopt new products.46 Thus, while the younger consumers may desire to innovate, they cannot afford to do so. Several researchers have found that innovators fall into a 35-54 age bracket.47 However, this bracket is so 44Rogers, pp. cit., pp. 14-16. 45For studies which have found age to be significant, see: Rogers, pp. pip., p. 14; C. P. Marsh and A. L. Coleman, "The Relationship of Farm Characteristics to the AdOption of Recommended Farm Practices," Rural Sociology, Vol. XX (September—December, 1955). PP. 289-96. For studies which have found no significance, see: Copp, pp. cit., p. 13; M. C. Wilson and G. Gallup, Extension Teaching Methods and Other Factors That Influence_ AdOption of Agricultural and Hope Economics Eractices (Washington: U. S. Department— of Agriculture Federal Extension Service Circular 495, August, 1955); Hoffer and Stangland, pp. pip., p. 13. 46Copp, pp. cit., p. 13. 47"How Consumers Take to Newness," Business Week, September 24, 1955. p. 41; Copp, pp. cit., p. 13. 30 large, it obscures any actual information concerning the marketing target for innovations. In general, however, when the studies do not show age to be statistically significant, the data tends to show either a curvilinear relationship or a difference in per- centage which tends to show that the younger are the acceptors.48 At this stage Of knowledge, no marketing target can be delineated regarding newness. Additional research needs to be done in this area. Income A significant variable when considering the purchase of product innovations is income. Because products cost money, income must be above a subsistence level before consumers can purchase innovations. One would not eXpect to find innovators at the extreme low end Of the income scale. As the income becomes higher, the consumer has the Opportunity to purchase innovations. Thus, the higher the income, the more Opportunity for innovating. However, this relationship need not continue. It may be that the higher the income, the greater the prOpensity to innovate, but this is not yet proven. Numerous researchers have shown that while the innova- tors are found in several income brackets, most studies indicate they are found in the higher brackets. For example, Mueller's study Of the innovation-mindedness showed 481bj . 31 that more individuals fall within the $5,000—$7,449 than any other bracket.49 This income group was 9% larger than the next highest which was the tOp income bracket ($7.500 plus). Copp, using a different type measurement, found that the higher the gross farm income, the higher the adoption score. A problem of using this measurement is that one can not ascertain which is the cause and which the effect. Adoption of numerous new practices may lead to a higher income or a high income may lead to a high rate of adOption. One can only conclude that a high income is a characteristic of a high adoption score. His results do not indicate a “topping off" as did the Mueller study.5O Rogers' study resulted in the same conclusion found by Copp. The innovators and early adOpters had a median income Of $15,940 while the next closest group (early majority) had a median income Of $8,700. This proved to be statistically significant.51 The research evidence shows then that inno- vators do have a higher income than the rest of the population. Values and Attitudes Numerous researchers have attempted to measure psycho- logical variables as they relate to innovators. The major hypothesis is that the people who accept newness may have a 49"How Consumers Take to Newness," p. 41. 50Copp, pp. cit., pp. 18-19. 51Rogers, pp. cit., p. 18. 32 unique composition of traits. These peOple break from the traditional patterns Of behavior. Thus, one eXplanation Of why they do so may be found in the values and attitudes they have. Hoffer and Stangland, through the use of models, found that the farmers who were efficient tended to adOpt recom- mended practices. In a similar fashion, farmers who identi- fied themselves with self-reliance and progress adopted more practices than those who did not.52 Farmers who associated themselves with conservatism and security tended to delay or not adOpt the approved practices.53 Mueller found that the innovation-minded were prone to be Optimistic, specifically in terms of financial outlook. Twenty-seven percent Of the innovation-minded had incomes which had been going up and eXpected further improvement. Twenty-three percent of the group reported that their income had been steady and eXpected it to rise in the future. COpp, using a Rigidity-Flexibility scale, found the more flexible farmers tend to show a progressive mentality in their farming while the rigid appeared more traditional. By scaling attitudes toward credit, future in farming and orientation in farming, he found the scale was correlated significantly with the adOption scale.54 52Hoffer and Stangland, _p. cit., p. 3. 53Ibid. Also, Hoffer, pp. cit.; Rogers, pp. cit., p. 43. 54COpp, pp. cit., pp. 26-27. 33 Venturesomeness Innovators, by their very definition, need to be ven- turesome. These peOple are the first to try new methods and products. Several researchers have attempted to construct a measurement Of venturesomeness.55 This variable is diffi- cult tO measure as it is an "acceptable" trait to have, and thus, peOple do not like to admit they are not venturesome. At least two approaches have been tried to Obtain a measurement Of this variable. One method is that Of asking farmers' Opinions Of new practices and constructing an index from the elicited data.56 The second method consists of presenting hypothetical practices and recording their responses as to whether they would "adOpt immediately," ”wait and see," or "not be interested." This latter method has the advantage of not using the actual eXperience Of a new practice as a bias in the respondent's attitude.57 In both methods, the measurement was found to be statistically significant. This conclusion would need to be found, since by definition, the innovators would be peOple who would try 55Thls term is defined as the degree to which individ- uals possess a favorable attitude toward trying new ideas and practices. 56Frederick C. Fliegal, "A Multiple Correlation *Analysis of Factors Associated with AdOption of Farm Prac- tices," BppsT SOOTOTogy, Vol. XXI (September-December, 1956), pp. 284-92; Eugene A. Wilkening, Acceptance p: Improved Fsrm Epscpices Tp Three Cosstal ETpr CountTes (Raleigh: North Carolina Agricultural EXperiment Station Technical Bulletin 98, 1952). 57R°83r39 9.20 94.30: ppo 34‘350 34 newness before other groups. Other Characteristics Research indicates, among the other factors examined, that innovators are quite active in formal social organiza- tions, Parent Teacher Associations, and the like. The rela- tionship of membership to adOption is highly correlated.58 Not only are they members in formal social groups, but they also tend to hold Offices in these groups. Thus, the inno- vators are active members of such groups. "Merton59 has categorized individuals as 'cosmOpOlites' and 'localites.' The localites were persons who read local newspapers, had local friends, and participated in formal organizations in the local community. In comparison, cosmo- polites had their friends, interests and organizational mem- berships outside of the local community in which they lived."60 Numerous researchers have attempted to measure this 61 dimension by constructing a scale. Such items as the 581b;d., p. 13; Copp, pp. p;p., p. 14; H. F. Lionberger and C. M. Coughenour, SOOTal Structure app Diffusion p: Farm Informst;on (Columbia: Missouri Agricultural Experiment Bulletin 631, April, 1957); E. A. Wilkening, Acceptance p; Tpproved Esrm Tractices . . . . 59Robert K. Merton, Socis; Theory snd Social Structure (Glencoe, Ill.: Free Press, 1957). 60Rogers, pp. cit., p. 36. 61Gregory P. Stone and William H. Form, Tpp Local ppm- munity Clothing Market (East Lansing: Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station Technical Bulletin 262, 1957); William M. Dobriner, Tpp Suburbsn Community (New York: G. P. Putnam's, 1958), pp. 132-43. 35 amount of visiting with neighbors, the importance of neighbors' Opinions on the respondent's farm decisions are typical. Thus, a high score indicates a locally oriented individual who identifies with the neighborhood. It has been found that the innovators tend to be less localite than other adOpter categories. This may be partially eXplained by the fact that innOvators are not completely integrated into the community. That is, they are different than the rest of the population. This finding has implications in terms of the influentials which will be discussed in a later section. AdOption Process and Rates p: Adoption AdOption Process AdOption, as used by sociologists, refers to the acceptance of new ideas and products.62 For the marketing strategist, it refers to the acceptance of new products by consumers. The adoption process concerns various stages which are 62G. M. Beal, "Information Sources in the Decision- Making Process," Tpp Research Clinic pp Decision Making (Pullman: State College of Washington, August, 1958), pp. 36-51; G. M. Beal, E. M. Rogers, and J. M. Bohlen, "Validity of the Concept Of Stages in the AdOption Process," Rursl Sociology, Vol. XXII (June, 1957), pp. 166-68; Subcome mittee for the Study of Diffusion Of Farm Practices, North Central Rural Sociological Committee, AdOpters p: Spy Farm Ideas, North Central Regional Extension Publication NO. 13 (East Lansing: COOperative Extension Service, October, 1961). For a dissent Of the stages, see E. Hassinger, "Stages in the AdOption Process," Rural Sociology, Vol. XXIV (March. 1959). pp. 52-53. . 36 used by the adOpters from the time of awareness that a new idea or product is available until they accept the innova- tion. The adOption process looks at how individuals approach the acceptance Of innovation; it is concerned with the problem solving steps taken by innovators. Researchers, in general, have been able to delineate five stages through which the innovator progresses when becoming an innovator. They are: . Awareness . Interest . Evaluation Trial Adoption U'l-p’wmd Awapeness. At the awareness stage, a person first learns about a new idea, product, or practice. He has only general information about it. He knows little or nothing about any special qualities, its potential usefulness, or how it would likely work for him. Interest. At this stage the farmer develops an interest in the new thing that he has learned about. He is not satisfied with mere knowledge of its existence. He wants more detailed information about what it is, how it will work, and what it will do. He is willing to listen, read, and learn more about it, and is inclined to actively seek the information desired. It makes little difference whether we call this the information or the interest stage. The personal need Of the individual making the decision remains much the same. Evsiuation. At the evaluation stage a person weighs the information and evidence accumulated in the previous stages in order to decide whether the new idea, product, or practice is basically good, and whether it is good for him. In a sense, he reasons through the pros and cons mentally, and applies them to his own situation. Perhaps this stage could very well be referred tO as the 'mental trial stage.’ To be sure, evaluation is involved at all stages of the adOption process, but it is at this stage that it is most in evidence and perhaps most needed. Trial. At this stage the individual is con- fronted with a distinctly different set of problems. He must actually put the change into practice. This 37 means that he must learn how, when, where, how much, etc. Competent personal assistance may be required in putting the innovation to use. The usual pattern of acceptance is to try a little at first, and then to make large-scale use of it if the small-scale experiment proves successful. AdOption. At this stage a person decides that the new idea, product, or practice is good enough for full scale and continued uge. A complete change is made with that end in view. 3 The above framework used in analyzing acceptance Of farm products does not have a parallel developed in accept- ance of product innovations. Researchers have not been able to determine if a problem solving approach is applicable to purchase decisions. Some reports indicate there is a deci- sion orientation, while others find the Opposite conclusion. Some salient facts concerning purchase decisions which have been determined are:64 More than one third Of durable good buyers actually spend less than a few weeks planning their purchase. Little or no family discussion precedes a dur- able goods purchase in 71% of families surveyed. Only one store was visited by 47% Of the people who bought a new TV set, refrigerator, washer or stove. Only 21% Of the buyers remembered receiving information from advertisements and circulars. But 62% said that they did not receive informa- tion from any reading material, ads, billboards or point of purchase. 63H. F. Lionberger, Adoption pp New Ideas and Practices, pp. 22-230 64James K. Blake, "How Much Thinking Before Buying," Sun's Review spp Modern Industr , Vol. LXVI (August, 1955), pp. 38-41. A complete report of this research can be found in Lincoln Clark (ed.), Consumer Behavior, Tpp Dynamics p: Consumer Sesction, I (New York: New York University Press, 1954), pp. 30-87, by George Katona and Eva Mueller. 38 More than half of all buyers did not choose between models in different price classes, consid- ered only one price. The Older and presumably more seasoned consumer, the less deliberate his purchases become. Rural consumers are as circumspect almost as active information seekers as those in large metro- politan markets. These same researchers found, by use of a scaling tech- nique, that of a total sample, only 20% of these people can ; be classified as careful purchasers. Thus, from this study, the problem solving approach to purchase decision would seem to have little validity in the evaluation stage. However, it is possible that word Of mouth information still gives the customer sufficient information to make an intelligent, problem solving approach to purchase decisions. The potential customer may be well informed by Opinion leaders and presold by informal sources of information. AdOption Rates Rates of adoption refer to the differences in the time sequence of acceptors of newness within a given population. Part of this phenomenon has previously been explored when adOpter categories were defined. Also, the previous section set forth numerous variables as a partial explanation for this diverse behavior. Several reasons have been set forth for an explanation Of why some products, practices, and ideas are adOpted quicker than others. The time span is likely to vary with individuals, the nature of the change involved, and the situation in which the individual finds himself when he learns 39 about the change alternatives. Cost is important in this respect. The greater the cost involved, the more likely a person is to think a prOposed change through carefully before adopting it. Also, the more complex the practice, the slower it is likely to be adOpted. That is, strategic innovations would be accepted at a faster rate than a functional or fundamental innovation. The more complex, the greater the break with tradition, the slower the acceptance will be. A study Of acceptance and adaptation in school systems has been made. Mort and Cornell66 found that the diffusion rates of new adaptations were slow, particularly in the early stages. On the average, it took seven times as long for the first 10% to accept as the next 40%.67 Several economists have been concerned with rates of adoption of innovations. Their approach is generally with industrial innovations and acceptance by a firm or industry. Mansfield68 suggests the following factors as the principal ones which influence rates Of diffusion:69 1. As the number of firms in an industry adopting an innovation increases, the probability of its 65H. F. Lionberger, AdOption pp New Ideas and Practices pp. 24-25. 56F. R. Mort and F. c. Cornell, American Schools in Transition (New York: Columbia University Teachers College, 1941). 67ibid. 68Edwin Mansfield, "Diffusion of Technological Change," Seviews pi Data pp Research and DevelOpment, No. 31 (Washington: National Science Foundation, October, 1961). 69ibid., p. 21. 4O adOption by a nonuser increases (he warns this is not necessarily true for innovations such as an entirely new product line, whose profitability may decrease with imitation). 2. The eXpected profitability of an innovation influences the probability Of its adOption. 3. For equally profitable innovations, the proba- bility of adOption tends to be smaller for innova- tions requiring relatively large investments. 4. The probability Of adOption of an innovation is dependent on the industry in which the innovation is introduced. Another economist, Griliches, attempted to eXplain the diffusion rates in terms Of logistic variables. He asserts that it is in my belief that in the long-run, and cross sectionally, these variables (psychological) tend to cancel themselves out, leaving the economic variables as the major determinants Of the pattern Of techno- logical change. Marketing Influences Introduction Probably no other area of acceptance of newness has received as much attention as has the role of influence. This area has been the focal point for rural sociologists, as their main concern has been with the diffusion and dis- semination Of new farm practices and ideas. This section analyzes influence from two different approaches. First, the major sources of information are 7oz. Griliches, "Hybrid Corn, An EXploration in the Economics of Technical Change," Econometrica, Vol. XXV (October, 1957), p. 522. 41 related to the individual adOption process that was pre- sented above. The second approach is utilizing the adopter categories previously defined to ascertain if a difference can be found in the use of types Of media by these groups. Information Sources by Stage in the AdOption Process The sources of information available to the public are numerous. Research studies have shown that these sources change through the adOption process. The following table is a summary of research by rural sociologists regarding the sources, which are ranked by frequency, as they relate to each stage of the adOption process. In the table, mass media is mentioned most Often by farmers at the awareness and interest stages. Farm maga- zines and farm papers are used in greater frequency than other mass media such as newspapers, radio, and television.71 Neighbors and friends are the sources most Often consulted when a final decision is to be made. Thus, the informal groups are the most influential after the formal media create an awareness and an interest. 71G. M. Beal and J. M. Bohlen,.Tpp Diffusion grocess (Ames: Iowa Agricultural Extension Service Special Report 18, March, 1957); J. H. COpp, M. L. Still, and E. J. Brown, "The Function Of Information Sources in the Farm Practice AdOption Process," Sara; Sociology, Vol. XXIII (June, 1958), pp. 146-57; E. A. Wilkening, "Role Of Communicating Agents in TechnOlO ical Change in Agriculture," Social Force , Vol. XXXIV May, 1956), pp. 361-67. . 42 FIGURE IV RANK ORDER OF INFORMATION SOURCE; BY STAGE IN THE ADOPTION PROCESS AWARENESS: INTEREST: EVALUATION: TRIAL: ADOPTION: learns about gets more tries it uses or accepts it a new idea information out men- tries a for full- or practice about it tally little scale and continued use 1.Mass 1.Mass 1.Friends 1.Friends 1.Friends media-- media and and and radio, neigh- neigh- neigh- T.V., bors bors bors newspapers, magazines 2.Friends 2.Friends 2.Agri- 2.Agri- 2.Agri- and and cultural cultural cultural neighbors- neigh- agencies agencies agencies mostly bors other farmers 3.Agri- 3.Agri- 3.Dealers 3.Dealers 3.Mass cultural cultural and and media agencies, agencies salesmen salesmen Extension, Vo-Ag., etc. 4.Dealers 4.Dealers 4.Mass 4.Mass 4.Dealers and and media media and salesmen salesmen salesmen Personal eXperience is the most important factor in continued use of an idea. *Subcommittee for the Study of Diffusion of Farm Practices, 0p. cit., p. 7 43 AdOpter Categories72 Research reports indicate that the innovators tend to be better informed than other adopter categories. They sub- scribe to more farm magazines than any other category. Not only do they receive more types of information, but they obtain the information sooner, and it is of a more technical nature. Innovators often have direct contact with agricul- tural scientists. They approve of the use of science in agriculture. They also tend to read more research bulletins. In contrast with this direct line information received by the innovators, the early adopters have more contact with extension agents, vocational agricultural teachers, and agricultural agency workers. An explanation for this finding is that the innovator may be aware of the new prac- tice before the local change agent, since the innovator is in contact with other innovators, scientists, and travels widely. The early adopters have more visits and contacts with exchange people than any other adopter group. Late majority and laggards are more prone to depend on friends and neighbors for their information on new farm practices and ideas. As previously pointed out, innovators are not locally bound as are the other groups. By the defi- nition of being first to accept, the innovators cannot 72The information for this section was obtained from Subcommittee for the Study of Diffusion of Farm Practices, _2. cit. 44 follow friends within a given neighborhood. The only ’ friends they could depend upon would be innovators in other areas 0 Influence of Innovators One of the most perplexing, yet important, problems is ascertaining the influence of the innovator. Since, by definition, he is the first to adopt, it would be logical to assume he would serve as an important agent in the dissemin- ation of practices and ideas. That is, he would serve as a local demonstrator, an influencer of local change and a direct line of communication for the remainder of the com- munity. If this is true, extensive effort should be utilized in selling the innovator as thoroughly as possible on a new idea, product, or practice. However, some researchers report that because innova- tors are "different", they are not the influentials, but rather the next adopter group performs this function because they are more like the rest of the population.73 Many of the ways which innovators are "different" have previously been set forth in terms of innovator character- istics. Some studies have shown that these people do not have the highest status in the community, particularly if the changes are substantial and if the norms do not favor 73Ibid. 45 such change.74 ”Perhaps it is prOper to say that they are watched but not followed."75 It appears that in this stage in the research, there is insufficient evidence for a conclusion as to the actual influence of innovators.76 ummr The primary purpose of this section is to set forth the major findings of scholars concerned with the acceptance and diffusion of newness by peOple. This is an area of interest to many disciplines. AnthrOpologists, sociologists, psy- chologists, economists, as well as marketing scholars are concerned with the concept of change and newness. A focal point for much of the research has been an attempt to determine if the acceptors of newness are dissim~ ilar in any way to the rest of the pOpulation. The research indicates they are dissimilar; yet they are homogeneous as a group.77 R 74G. M. Beal and J. M. Bohlen, The 2i;§ugi2n.§§ggggs, 92o.2;3.; E. A. Wilkening, "Informal Leaders and Innovators in Farm Practices,” Rural Sociology, Vol. XVII (September, 1952). pp. 272-75. 75Lionberger, Adoption 2; New Ideas and Practices, p° 540 76For a study which shows that innovators are persons BOUght as information sources, see H. F. Lionberger, Some Characteristics of Farm Operators Sought as Sources of Farm Information in a Missouri Community," Rural Sociology, Vol. XVIII (December, 1953). pp. 327—38. 77Neal Gross, "The Differential Characteristics of AccePtors and Non-Acceptors of an Approved Technological Practice," Buzal Sociology, Vol. XIV (June, 1949), ppo 148-560 J ___________::__________jIIIIIIIIIlI| __—_L— 46 The following table summarizes the research findings of over 20 years of research and consists of over 100 studies by rural sociologists with regard to characteristics and communication behavior of the adopter categories. The table sets forth numerous characteristics of the various adOpter categories as found by sociologists. However, it remains for researchers to determine if the same conclusions hold true for the owners of consumer products, with the focal point being on the innovators. In the fol- lowing chapter, a similar outline will be hypothesized for the owners of consumer products. The results of an empiri- cal study which tests some of the hypotheses are presented. 47 «sedan deacon pumped mopaaoufi ufiaom «mousse qua» nonpo mdoapdNHQdmno fluency aw unfinm nuogaua_3om mmunwaoavdacu cad macapqanvnpd a»? musics haddoaMMHu o>mn mnoapuosco mo Ho>od bog pane no snow «mmoaaop xaou use afiwga Hansvduowhw< ended on have non ma pang ascended 09:9 no munawmdq unease deacon omdnmea eson4 macapoua uadmfio Huahou ma hpa>apod c3»: “sedans .360 no ado Hmhnnp oavpaq now» nuance owunmhw >33 hermaam mecca sun so 13.30% emcee 0» Have soc. em exoz 0964 nausea deacon amassed psond hpaazsaoo on» afinpua_mpocpaoo Adahouafi and: soap nuance owahoka 26c.» 3.533 33335 6nd o>fip adbhomnoo 09oz pmocn op aqua nos rm £82 3.8m A beat 2.: endanau doom: as anon $38 an op deacon” m 3593 Hdfioow nwfim hvfindsaoo on» canvas mnoapduaadmno SH mnuocoq qoapdozco awakens n>oA< o>ammonmoum anode on pace non m.MH uxuz unannoua 3.3m dovmoooa on won his nonfivoann mafiasau sauna can 633.. H368 panama have: 353 «macaedufiaamno madam no m6H3.haqzoo ma mundane uqowpownpmnu npfik.ddud op_thHfinm maoaaoouuo ...8 ~26.” swam «somonspn9> ecu canaeecacm mdofifi_3ua emcee on pace com Tm emcee muoeaaqan msewpm Hdfioom .m unfinmnoeama maono .: munchies . m musdn>.uqu mudsafive<. .N 83.33 no case A .3238 HO oavmaaopoosuno *mMHmUufiadu mmamon<_hc mCH>4MHm.ZOHH mmeHh 48 ON. 0% 80mm .mm Amoofipocnm Such Mo nowmdmuan mo sedan can no“ coppasaoonbm* usonm sham caddy “whopamfioq can access“ sagas: muonso anew souamm “moaooufi 30H “mason Hadam unopnwfloq can mcnofihh messy cmufim demano>d can» smHHdam sapnmaam unapoaasp noamuopxm «mmqfiudwda sham uncanMfion awesome omqaao dad monoHnm Hduoa new: mmcnfiudefi Sham poapaoo pmonmwm pnoHOHMMo use mahdu donam dmuwadfiooMm ommuw>m acne mmmfl hfipamfiam housed hapnmfiam “needy omsdq maflvoaadn nondmmoh mwnop um>onaH Rodeo umpmwpqofiom pecacemuc pmoa one edouwdwwoomm pmoa «pmowswq soapdEHOMqfi no moohsom .N mommonfimsp finch .m oEszazoo > mmeHh CHAPTER II THE PROBLEM co e _2 Egg Problem This research is designed to explore one aspect of innovation, that of early acceptance by the consumer of innovistic products. First, the research seeks to identify the peOple who are the first to purchase selected new product offerings. The identification is sought in terms of socio-economic characteristics. Research by sociologists, as previously shown, has indicated that innovators are different in numer- ous variables than those who follow later in the acceptance of newness. A second aspect of the research is to determine if these peOple are opinion leaders and what role they might play in influencing their friends and neighbors in decisions to purchase new products. The third dimension of the research seeks to determine if the characteristics of innovators of consumer products are similar to those of the innovators of farm products and ideas. Types 2; Innovationg Studied Three types of innovations have been delineated: 49 5O strategic, functional and fundamental. The strategic inno- vation is defined as only a slight change in an existing product. A functional innovation means a new way of per- forming a previously fulfilled function. The fundamental innovation is the radically new product which performs a new function. This study is concerned with the first two. They constitute the majority of product innovations which are introduced to consumers and are the types of major concern to business today. The third type is of major corporate and economic importance. It occurs relatively rarely, however, and does not lend itself to an empirical study. Kind 2: Product Investigated This research is limited in scope to the task of exploring the innovistic purchasers of one kind of product. Kind of product refers to the categorization used in clas- sifying goods on the basis of similarity between products. An example of this distinction is the separation of items into clothing and household appliances. There are inherent differences within these goods and their uses. The people who buy innovations may be different as well, i.e., food innovators may not be fashion innOVators, and the two groups may present very different profiles. The kind of goods selected for study is household appliances. AdOpter Categories and Contrast Groupg Utilized This study has as its focal point the innovator, which 51 is the primary adOpter category. For comparisons and con- trasts, an additional category, the early adopter, is defined and investigated. Thus, two categories are studied rather than the five categories used by sociologists. A second contrast group is defined and used in the study. This group constitutes the total pOpulation of a geographic area. By studying this group, it is possible to determine the distribution of characteristics for the pOpu- lation. The findings can be thought of as the expected value if no segments of the population are deleted. That is, if a product had a 100% market saturation, the distri— bution of characteristics would be the same as the pepula- tion. Schematically, the categories are as follows. FIGURE VI CATEGORIES SELECTED FOR USE /”/f““ g: ‘0”: //‘”'EV ‘ \oo‘fi Innovators Early Adopters 100% Market Saturation The first 10% are compared with the next 40% and then with the expected value if no segments were removed from the population. Statement f the Problem ...—.— The objective of the study is to investigate 52 empirically the characteristics of consumer innovators for strategic and functional innovations. Specifically, it seeks to gain insight into the following questions: 1. What are the characteristics of consumer innovators in terms of socio-economic variables? 2. Is there conformity of the characteristics within each type of innovation? Are the strategic innovators homogeneous in their characteristics? Are the func- tional innovators homogeneous in their characteristics? Are the two types similar in their characteristics? 3. Do innovators constitute a group of consumers who can be differentiated from the early adOpters and the total population? 4. What are the influences recognized by the innOVators in the process of selecting innovations? 5. What marketing tools appear to be most effective in influencing new product acceptance? 6. What role do innovators perform as diffusion agents? Are they local demonstrators and opinion leaders? Hypotheses The fundamental premise of this research is that there is conformity of characteristics for consumers who are the first to adOpt an innovation for a specific kind of product and that these characteristics can be differentiated from those of the general population. Following are specific hypotheses to be tested: 53 1. There is a significant difference between the inno- vators and the contrast groups for each of the charac- teristics tested. The characteristics are as follows: a. Number of peOple in the family b. Age of head and spouse 0. Age distribution of children d. Occupation of head and spouse e. Education of head and spouse f. Family income g. Home characteristics 1) own VS. rent 2) type of structure 5) home value 4) monthly rent Ethnic groups Vacation habits Automobile ownership Movie habits Dining out habits HWLcl-J-D‘ 0 O O O 2. There is a significant difference between the stra~ tegic innovator and the functional innovator for the characteristics tested. 3. The major influence regarding the purchase selection is magazines. 4. The majority1 of innovators do not consult people outside the family before purchase. 5. The majority of innovators have been asked by vauaintances to see their products. 6. The majority of innovators have been asked their Opinions of the innovation by other people. 7. The majority of innovators visited only one store before purchasing. 8. The majority of innovators used credit in purchasing 1Majority is defined as 51% or greater. . .- .~. ...I 1.1. u 54 their innovations. 9. The majority of innovators have-four or more maga- zines in their homes. 10. The majority of innovators belong to at least two types of organizations. 11. The majority of innovators have lived in the Detroit Area three years or less. 12. The majority of the heads of households of innova- tors have been employed by their employers three years or less. 13. The majority of innovators watch TV six hours or- less per week. Boundaries Sf The Study This study has several limitations. The significant ones are as follows: 1. The research concentrates on only one facet of inno- vation, that of consumer acceptance. Innovation, however, starts with the conception of an idea. The firm plays a dominant role in making the new product available commercially. Thus, only one of the three parts is explored. 2. This research is concerned with only one class of innovation: product innovation. Social, cultural and ideological innovations are not considered. The study is further limited to only one kind of product, house- hold appliances. Different kinds of products might 55 yield different results. 3. Consumer innovators are defined as a percentage of a total market rather than of potential market. Not all households could be considered a potential customer for some products. The 10% cut-off point is an arbitrary decision. This may need readjusting in future studies for obtaining distinctions of characteristics. 4. The information gathered concerning the consumer was not obtained at or near the date the innovations were purchased. Thus, in the intervening time period, these peOple may have changed in their socio-economic characteristics. CHAPTER III RESEARCH DESIGN Introduction The purpose of this chapter is to set forth, in detail, the method utilized in obtaining the relevant data used in this study. The chapter is divided into four sections. Section one is devoted to a discussion of the criteria used in the selection of the class of goods and products. Section two sets forth the contrast groups which are used for comparing the characteristics studied. Section three is an explanation of the sampling procedures for the original sample and for the subsample. The fourth section presents the methodology used for the statistical analysis of the data. Criteria ASS Selection 9; 222 Products This study is limited to one specific class of goods. The products are chosen from the household appliance industry. Specific products within the given industry are selected on the basis of the following criteria: 1. At least one product should be selected from stra- tegic innovations and functional innovations. 2. The majority of people within the geographic area should be able to use the product. 56 57 3. Innovation should be of recent enough introduction so that people can recall the process of selection. 4. The products should not be ones which appeal to or are utilized by select social classes. 5. Information can be obtained concerning the identifi- cation of the peOple who purchased the products. 6. The peOple should have the choice of accepting or rejecting the product offering. 7. The value of the product should be sufficiently high that gifts would be excluded. 8. Saturation of the market must be known. The products chosen for study which meet the above criteria follow. TABLE 1 MARKET SATURATION OF INNOVISTIC PRODUCTS ‘ Percent of Innovations Market Saturation* Strategic Color TV .6 Stereophonic (including combinations) 9.3 Egnctional Automatic Dishwashers 5.2 Air Conditioners (room and central) 6.1 *Sixth Quinguennial Survey g: the Detroit Market, The Detroit News, 1962. 58 The Contragt Groupg Early Adogterg The same criteria given above are utilized for selec- tion of early adOption products and type delineation as were used for selection of the innovistic products. Those selected follow. TABLE 2 MARKET SATURATION OF EARLY ADOPTION PRODUCTS Early AdOpter Products Percent of * (Medium Penetration) Market Saturation Strate 10 Hi Fi Phonograph 22.7 Functional Food Disposal 21.0 Clothes Dryers 43.0 *Sixth Quinguennial Survey 9; the Detroit Market, The Detroit News, 1962. The owners of these products are called early adopters. The characteristics of this group are contrasted statisti- cally with the characteristics of the innovators to deter- mine if they are different. Po ulation A second group, with which the characteristics of inno- vators are contrasted, is the pOpulation. The character- istics of the population are inferred from a sample.1 This 1Sixth Quinguennial Survey 22 the Detroit Market, The Detroit News, 1962. —— 59 provides a method of measuring the difference between the distribution of the characteristics of equal to or less than 10% market penetration and what the distribution would be if a product had a 100% saturation. This relationship is tested for statistical significance. Sampling Procedures Geographic Aygg The study is limited to the Detroit Metropolitan Area. This area is composed of Macomb, Oakland, and Wayne counties. This designation conforms with the Census Bureau definition of the Detroit Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area. From the 1960 census data, it is known that there are 1,080,220 households in this three county area. This area was selected for three major reasons. First, excellent statistics are available concerning the character- istics this study seeks to investigate. Second, data from previous research that has been done can be utilized. Third, it is feasible operationally. Egg Sample Pertinent data relating to the characteristics for the selected products in the given geographic area has been previously collected.2 The information was gathered, by use of questionnaires, in the Spring of 1961. The following information is the description of the sampling procedure 2Ibid. 60 used by the research firm. The survey involved 7,233 in—the-home interviews conducted by trained interviewers regularly employed by Market Opinion Research Company for such purposes. Respondents were selected from every census tract, incorporated place and unincorporated township in the six southeastern Michigan counties of Livingston, Macomb, Monroe, Oakland, Washtenaw and Wayne. This area is designated by the Audit Bureau of Circula- tions as the Detroit Retail Trading Area. The basic sample for the survey was one percent of occupied dwelling units with a minimum of four interviews in virtually every census tract; reduced to one-half percent for Detroit City and the greater part of the area where population density exceeds 5,000 persons per square mile. Field counts of the 1960 census by enumeration districts were used as a base. Interview points were established at every 400 housing units in the one percent area and at every 800 in the one-half percent area. The blocks were selected at random within each enumeration district which fell into the sample. Interviews were taken at every fourth home in clusters of four. This resulted in a total of 7,233 interviews, of which 6,388 were in the three-county Detroit Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area as designated by the U. 8. Bureau of Census, referred to herein as Metropolitan Detroit. Two questionnaires were used alternately. Ques- tions for which the need for detailed information by areas was anticipated appeared on both questionnaires. This applied particularly to such questions as popu- lation, housing, occupation, income and newspaper coverage. Required information was punched on standard 80-column International Business Machines (IBM) cards for tabulating. Cards were duplicated where neces- sary to bring the number up to one percent of the 1960 Census occupied dwelling units for each census tract in the entire survey area. This resulted in 11,660 cards for the six-county Retail Trading Area (1,165,835 households), and 10,800 cards for the three-county Metropolitan Detroit Market (1,080,220 households).3 Only one of the questionnaires described above pertains to the information utilized in this study. Thus, the number 3Ibid., pp. 4-5. 61 of interviews used in the sample for this study was 3,194. The interviews were duplicated to 5,456 which constituted approximately a %% sample of the Detroit MetrOpolitan Area. The size of the sample for each product is given in Table 3. TABLE 3 SAMPLE SIZE Innovation Sample Size Strategic Color TV 47 StereOphonic 496 Functional Automatic Dishwashers 283 Air Conditioning 327 Early Adopter Eroducts Strategic Hi Fi Phonograph 622 Functional Food Disposal 589 Clothes Dryer 1,406 For analysis, duplications are removed. For example, a strategic innovator is counted only once if a respondent owns a color TV and a stereo. Similarly, duplications are removed from the other classifications: functional innova- tors, strategic early adopters and functional early adOpters. The same procedure is used when all innovators and early adopters are combined as a single unit. The 62 following table exhibits the different size groups. TABLE 4 GROUP SAMPLE SIZE Group Sample Size Strategic Innovators 530 Functional Innovators 563 Strategic Early AdOpters 622 Functional Early Adopters 1,731 Innovators 1,021 Early AdOpters 1,814 Total Sample 5,456 The questionnaire utilized for this sample is found in Appendix C. The Shhsaanls Additional information was desired for a study of the innovator which was not obtained in the original question- naire. Therefore, it was necessary to do additional inter- viewing. Since names and addresses of respondents in the original sample were available, a subsample was drawn. Much of the information desired from the subsample concerns recall about the selection process of the product(s) purchased. This necessitated limiting the potential sub— sample to a realistic period of recall. The cut—off period arbitrarily selected was six years. That is, no purchasers of the products analyzed who purchased before 1956 were included. This limited the sample to 498 respondents. A quota sample was the procedure used for gaining the additional information. This method was selected for the 63 following reasons: 1. Many of these peOple would have moved in the 16 months from the time of the original interview. 2. This method is Operationally feasible within reason- able time and cost limitations. The Detroit area was divided into five geographic areas. Names and addresses were matched with these areas. Approximately 90 names and addresses were selected in each area. Each interviewer was given a map with the list of names and addresses and the geographic area delineated. Seniors and graduate students of Michigan State University were used as interviewers. Each interviewer was told to get a minimum of 20 interviews from the area. Respondents not at home, refusals, and moves necessitated the interviewers' moving around the given area. The goal of obtaining wide dispersion of a geographic area was extremely well achieved. The number of usable interviews obtained was 109. The actual interviewing was carried out in September, 1962, approximately 16 months after the original questionnaire was administered. MW The basic purpose of the questionnaire was to obtain information concerning the innovators which was not recorded in the original interview. A COpy of the interview and interviewing instructions is found in Appendix D. The instrument was tested in the Lansing area prior to the actual interviewing. The Ch - u re Statlgtic Some convention must be adOpted before one can assert as a result of the statistical analysis whether or not the consumer innovator is significantly different from other groups. That is, some technique must be used to determine if the distribution being considered is different or if the variations which occur are caused by chance. The research tool utilized for that is the chi-square statistic. The chi-square test compares the actual value in a cell with the expected value. The expected value is computed on the basis of proportions. The method used to compute chi- square values is found in Appendix E. To interpret a given chi-square value, only a few facts need to be known. The higher the value, the more difference there is between the actual observation and what would be expected if no other factors were influencing the distribu- tion. It cannot be eXpected that the chi-square value would be 0 since that would imply that the actual and the expected cell values were identical, thus, some leeway need be pro- vided. This is done by determining the confidence limit to be used. The confidence limit designates the probability that the conclusion is correct. The analysis conducted uses four confidence limits. The first is the 90% level which means that if found signi- ficant at that level, there are 10 chances in 100 that the distribution would occur by chance. Similarly at the 95% level, it means that the particular distribution would occur u 65 by chance only 5 times in 100. At the 99% and the 99.9% levels, the occurrence of a chance factor is decreased to 1 in 100 and 1 in 1,000 respectively. The tables show the chi-square values and the signifi- cance levels. If a table shows that the variable is "signi- ficant at all levels," this is interpreted to mean that there is less than one chance in 1,000 that the distribution occurred by chance. If it shows that the variable is "not significant at all levels," this means that there is no dif- ference even at the 90% level. That is, even allowing 1O chances in 100 that the distribution could have occurred by chance, it could not be interpreted to mean there was a sig- .::A&zee;:;&m;.i new... . . nificant distribution. The convention for this type of research is to use the 95% confidence level to designate whether the distribution is significantly different. This convention is adopted for this paper. The chi-square value is shown in the tables for each analysis, and the confidence limit where it becomes significant is also given. This is for determining the extent to which the distribution is different. For example, it might be determined that a variable is significant at the 95% but not at the 99% level. This would mean that while it is different, it does not differ by much and that the dif- ference is not of a great magnitude. The computations for the chi-square values presented were done by the MISTIC computer at Michigan State Univer- sity. Any standard statistics book has chi-square tables 66 which show the values for different confidence limits. When comparing the table value with the computed Value: if the computed value is less, then there is no significant dif- ference; if greater than the value in the book, there is a significant difference. PART II. THE EVALUATION CHAPTER IV THE MARKETING TARGET IN TERMS OF SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS lntroductlon The socio-economic variables studied in the research are presented in this chapter. The chapter is divided into two distinct sections. Section I gives the findings in sum- mary form. It is concerned only with the significant rela- tionships. Section II gives the analysis of the data in detail. The statistical analysis is presented with the tables which relate to each variable studied. Section I gives an evaluation of those hypotheses con- cerning the socio-economic variables. First, the innovators are compared with the other adOpter categories to determine if the innovators are unique in their characteristics and how they differ from the other groups. Second, the innova- tors are evaluated to determine if they are a homogeneous group. Third, the hypothesis concerning whether a differ- ence is discernible between the strategic and functional innovators is examined. Section II presents the evaluation of each variable in regard to the three hypotheses, giving the data in statisti- cal and tabular form. 68 “— 69 Section l. A Summary 9: The Findings lnnovators Compared with Other Adopter Categories It was hypothesized that the innovators would be dif- ferent in the distribution of characteristics studied than the other adopter categories defined. This hypothesis is true for all the variables when the innovators are contrasted with the distribution of charac- teristics for the mass market. This conclusion is valid for both the heads and spouses of innovistic households. When comparing innovators with early adopters, they are also found to be different for most of the variables studied. Table 5 shows the variables and whether the adOpter categories are different. The remaining part of this section is devoted to a dis- cussion of how these groups differ in the distribution of characteristics. Age Previous research pertaining to age has not been con- clusive. Most of the reported research found that the majority of innovators were within the 35-54 age bracket.1 This research finds that both the heads and spouses of innovistic households are younger than the mass market. Over 60% of the heads of innovistic households are less than 45 years of age, compared to 52.8% for the population. 1See page 29. 7O Innovistic spouses are also younger than the p0pulation. Slightly over 35% of the innovators are under 35. This com- pares with slightly over 31% of the pOpulation falling in this bracket. TABLE 5 INNOVATORS COMPARED WITH CONTRAST GROUPS: A SUMMARY (95% confidence limit) Early Adopters Mass Market Variable Is there a difference? Age Head Yes Yes Spouse No Yes I Occupation Head Yes Yes Spouse No Yes Education Head Yes Yes Spouse Yes Yes Family Income Yes Yes Ethnic Group Yes Yes Home Characteristics Ownership Yes Yes Structure Yes Yes Home Value Yes Yes Rent No Yes Number in Family Yes Yes The heads of innovistic households are not as young as the early adopters. The first acceptors of newness, while being younger than the population, are not as young as those who accept at a later time. The spouses of innovators and early adopters are younger than the population, but there is -_-L— 71 no difference between the two. This lends credibility to the argument that the young are not financially able to afford newness, using their income to buy the traditional products necessary for day to day living instead. Occupation Occupation is an important variable in assembling a profile for a market segment. It delineates the market if purchasers of certain type products are found in specific occupations. It gives an indication of other dimensions of the adOpter category, such as: interests, income, friends and the like. Both the innovators and their spouses are employed in occupations differing from those of the mass market. Occu- pations of the heads of innovistic households are also dif— ferent from those of the early adOpters. The heads of innovating households are predominantly concentrated in professional and managerial occupations. Early adopters are concentrated in two occupational groups: professional--managerial and craftsmen--foremen. The popu- lation is widely dispersed throughout the occupational groupings. Slightly more spouses of innovators are employed than the spouses for the other groups. A greater percentage of working spouses are in professional orimanagerial occupa- tions than would be eXpected. No difference is discernible “— 72 between the innOVIstlc spouses and the early adopter spouses. Education Both the heads and spouses of innovistic households are different in the amount of formal education they have acquired. Over 38% of the heads of innovistic households have at least some college education, compared with slightly over 21% of the population. 29.3% of the innovistic spouses have at least some college education, compared to 15% of the population. Innovators (both heads and spouses) also have more formal education than the early adopters. The acceptors of newness, both the heads and the spouses, have more formal education than do the other adOpter categories. This finding coincides with the conclu- sions reached by sociologists when studying acceptance of newness by farm Operators. Family Income The innovistic households enjoy a much higher income than either of the other two groups. Over 31% of the inno- vators have incomes of $10,000 or above, compared to slightly over 22% of the early adopters and slightly less than 14% of the population. Thus, the incomes of innovators are definitely different than those of the other groups. This finding is similar to the conclusions reached by rural sociologists. Mueller found that more individuals fell “— within the 35,000-$7,449 bracket than any other bracket.2 This study finds the modal bracket to be $7,000-$9,999. Ethnic Groups Farm research, previously reviewed, suggests that ethnic groups may be a factor in the acceptance of newness. Some cultures are more prone to innovate than others. This raised the question: Are certain ethnic groups acceptors of the innovations studied? To determine the ethnic group identity, they were traced through the male line. The classification system utilized is found in Appendix C~2. The ethnic backgrounds of innovators differ signifi- cantly from those of the other two groups. However, the greatest frequency for both the innovators and early adOpters is found in the ethnic group most represented in the population: the British. Innovators, when compared to the population, are over represented in the following ethnic groups: German, French, Jewish and Other Europeans. When innovators are compared to the early adopters, they are over represented in the following groups: French, Jewish, Negro, Polish and Other European. Thus, the French, Jewish and Other Europeans have a greater over representa- tion than any other ethnic groups for the innovators. 28ee pages 30 and 31. 74 Home Characteristics Another dimension of the characteristics of the acceptors of newness is the type of living units which they occupy. One of the previously reviewed research projects asserted that the innovators are highly mobile.3 Thus, they may rent living quarters and move frequently, rather than constitute fixed home owners with community ties. The home characteristics add another possible clue for investigation in determining the market for innovations. There is a significant difference between the three categories in regard to home ownership and rentals. Home owners are most frequently early adopters, followed by inno» vators and finally the pOpulation. Only a slight difference is discernible between the innovators and the pOpulation in relation to the type of structure in which they reside. Early adopters more fre- quently live in a single unit dwellings than do the other adOpter categories. Innovators who own their homes have much higher-valued homes than do the other two categories. 21% of the innova- tors have homes valued at $25,000 or over. 13.1% of the home-owning early adopters have homes in this bracket, com- pared to 7.9% for the total pOpulation. Innovators who rent their homes pay a higher rent than does the pOpulation. There is, however, no significant 3See pages 23 and 24. —— 75 difference between the rent paid by innovators and that paid by early adopters. Number in Family Marketing managers would find it advantageous to know if their market for newness, the innovator, is from a large family or a small one. The findings presented in this chap- ter are based only on the number of people within a house- hold. Additional data relating to the number and ages of children can be found in Appendix F-4. The number of people in a household differs between the adopter categories. However, the dispersion is slight. Large families appear proportionately more often in the homes of innovators than in homes of the general population. The early adOpters have fewer families composed of one and two people, but more than would be expected in the four to seven member family when compared with the population. The differences between the innOVators and early adopters are negligible. Homogeneity pf Innovators A second hypothesis concerning the innovators is that the innovators are a homogeneous group in regard to the socio-economic variables. That is, the owners of the dif- ferent innovistic products studied would have characteris- tics that are similar. In a previous portion of this chap- ter they were found to be a unique group, but it has not been determined if they are similar in the characteristics. 76 In all of the variables examined in this section, inno- vators did not constitute a homogeneous group. The detailed analysis of how the product owners differ with regard to the variables is given in a later section. The distribution of each variable for each innovistic product is set forth. Because of this lack of homogeneity, it is desirable to determine if the owners of the different types of innova— tions previously outlined yield different profiles. Atten— tion is turned to this consideration. Typgg pi lnnovation It was hypothesized that the strategic innovators would differ in their characteristics from the functional innova- tors. Table 6 shows in summary form in what variables the strategic innovators differ from the functionals. The remainder of this section considers how the strategic and functional innovators differ. Age Strategic innovators, the acceptors of the simplest type of change, are much younger than are the functional innovators. This is true for both the head of the household and the spouse. Over 35% 0f the heads of households owning strategic innovations are younger than 55 Years. Only 21.5% of the functionals fall in that category. Over 40% of the spouses of strategic innovators are less than 35, compared to 'IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIlIlIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 77 slightly over 30% of the spouses of functional innovators. While innovations are accepted generally by the young, the simple changes are accepted by the youngest of the inno- vators. TABLE 6 DIFFERENCES BETWEEN STRATEGIC AND FUNCTIONAL INNOVATORS (95% confidence limit) Variable Is there a difference? Age Head Yes Spouse Yes Occupation Head Yes Spouse No Education Head Yes Spouse Yes Family Income Yes Ethnic Group Yes Home Characteristics Ownership Yes Structure Yes Home Value Yes Rent Yes Number in Family Yes Occupation Strategic innovators show concentration in two occupa- tional groups: professional-managerial and craftsmen- foremen with 30.9% in the former classification and 25.7% w 78 in the latter. The functionals are very highly concentrated (54.9%) within a single occupational group, professional- managerial. This is over twice as many as would be expected when compared to the number of people in this occupational group for the population. There is no difference between the spouses in regard to the two types of innovations. Education Innovation owners and their spouses are both very highly educated. However, the heads and spouses who own functional types of innovations are much more highly edu- cated than are the strategic innovators. 27.1% of the funCw tional innovators have at least a completed college educa- tion, compared with 13.6% for the strategies. The spouses follow a similar pattern. 16.7% of the spouses owning functional innovations have at least com- pleted college, compared with 8.8% of the strategies. The innovations which require the most change on the part of the consumer are accepted most readily by the highly educated. Family Income The acceptors of functional innovations have higher incomes than do the strategic innovators. 42.8% of the functional innovators have incomes of $10,000 or over com- pared with 23.4% of the strategies. While both groups have high incomes when compared to the population (only 13.7% i -e 79 of the population have incomes of $10,000 or over), the functionals have almost twice as many in this bracket as do the strategies. Ethnic Groups The ethnic backgrounds of the strategic innovators are quite different than the backgrounds of the functionals. The strategies are relatively more often French, Italian, Negro, Polish, Scandinavian and Other European than are the functional innovators. However, the only group which has a major difference is the Negro ethnic group. Functional innovators are relatively more often British, German, Jewish and Other Slavic. Only the Jewish and British show a sizable difference. There is, then, a difference between the ethnic groups for the types of innovations. In relative terms, the Jewish and British are the most prone to accept complex change, and the Negroes are most prone to accept the simpler changes. However, the British are not over represented for either type of innovation when compared to the number of people having British ethnic backgrounds in the total market. Home Characteristics There is a difference between these two groups in regard to home ownership. 86% of the functional innovators own their own homes compared to 79.8% of the strategies. Slightly more strategic innovators reside in multi-unit dwellings than do the functionals. lIIIIIIIIIIIIIIlIlllllllIIIIlllllllllllllIIIIIIIIIIIlIIlIlllIIIlIlIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 80 0f the innovators who own homes, the functional inno- vators have homes of very high value; 49.3% have homes valued at $20,000 or more. This compares with 20.6% of the strategic innovators owning homes in this bracket. Functional innovators who rent pay higher rents than do the strategic innovators. Number in Family There are only slight differences between the number of persons in the families of strategic innovators and in those of functional innovators. More homes with functional inno- vations have no children (living at home) than homes with strategic innovations. Conversely, in very large families (8 or more members) the functionals are represented more than the strategies. However, both groups are widely dis- persed in the number of peOple in a family. —_—-— 81 Section ll. Thg Detailed Statistical WEEW Introduction i The purpose of this section is to present the detailed f findings of the study regarding the characteristics examined. Each variable is isolated and analyzed on three levels. First, the adopter categories are set forth. Second, the distribution of the characteristics for the owners of each innovistic product is examined. Third, the strategic and functional innovators are compared. The strategic and func- tional early adOpters are analyzed as well. Tables Each major Variable has three separate tables. The percentage distribution is shown in each cell for the owners of the particular group. These figures can be converted into absolute figures by referring to a previous section which gives the sample sizes for each group. The first table presented for each variable shows the distribution of characteristics among the adopter categories: innovators and early adopters. Similarly, the sample total figure is shown. The sample total is the inferred distri- bution of the population of the Detroit MetrOpolitan Area on the basis of a %% sample of households. The primary purpose of this chart is to be able to distinguish if there is any significant difference between the innovators, early adopt- ers and the pepulation. 1 “— 82 The second table has as its purpose the presentation of the data to prove or disprove the assertion that the inno- vators show homogeneity in their characteristics. The dis- tribution of the characteristics of the owners of each product is presented for the innovators in this table. The third table shows the data in terms of strategic and functional innovations for both the innovators and early adopters. It was hypothesized that strategic innovators may not be similar to functional innovators in their character- istics. This table is designed to test that hypothesis. The fourth table relating to each variable is found in Appendix F. This table shows the characteristics of the multiple product innovators. The number of owners is so small that no statistical analysis was made. For example, two peOple out of the total number of interviews owned all four products classified as innovations. Only five owned three and only 95 owned any two. While the information is not analyzed, it is important for seeking insights into trends. There are several other sets of tables found in the appendix. One set relates to the homogeneity of early adopters. While this was not necessary for comparing the innovators, it was desirable to gather this information to see if the early adOpters show uniformity. The results of this inquiry are found in Appendix F. The second set of tables includes several variables which are incidental to the study. They were included in 83 the original questionnaire, however, and have been appended. They are also found in Appendix F. Ages 93 Heads and Spouses Adopter Categories This research finds that the innovating families are different with respect to age than the early adopters and the general population. This can be seen in Tables 7 and 8. The first shows the distribution of age for the head of the household and the latter for the spouse. Sgggp p: Households.--The adOpter categories are signi- ficantly different with regard to age. Both the innovators and the early adopters are younger than the population. However, all three groups are characterized by portraying their highest frequency in the 35-44 age bracket. The major way that innovators and early adOpters differ is in the amount of people who are less than 45 years of age. Early adopters have 64.8%, innovators 61.1%, compared to 52.8% of the population. Thus, the acceptors of newness are younger. However, the very first, the innovators, are slightly older than the early adOpters. The difference between the innovators and early adopters is also significantly differ- ent. This analysis yielded a chi-square value of 11.9, which is significant at the 95% level, but not at the 99%, indicating the difference is small. Thus, with regard to the head of the house, early adopters are youngest, followed by the innovators and then the mass market. 84 as. "seesaw pozc as. ”seesaw soap mm. "seesaw peas sac>ca Has no pqscsmsqmam om.mma n mx 0.3 oia Tom mém Tum m.m H. oacpoa 398m me m.m mda 9mm :.mm wd 1 nnopmog‘ 3.3m a.“ H.m >.mm s.mm m.mm m.m . sscpssoeqH Hugo .03 mm #Wlmm +~Mlm+~ #:Imm #MImN :NION mHlmH mwfihommpflu - scpnoee uaonemsom we deem Mo nowuspahpmfin om< Ahomopdo a ...—.333 30930 no omdpsoonom .0 m3 mfimo§roduct owners. Almost 23% are 55 or older. The hypothesis that innovators are homogeneous with respect to age is refuted by the dispersion shown for the innovistic households. Spouses.--The spouses in households owning innovistic products are not a homogeneous group with regard to age. The ages of spouses conform similarly with the heads‘ 88 am. "seesaw scan ha.m “seesaw peas w.ma o.sa s.om m.sm H.mm m.m a. fleece camera assess as» as assessesMAm mo.om n «x H.oa m.ma m.mm m.om m.om m.m - ncsoaesesoo has o.m w.ma H.mm «.mm o.wa - - scsacsnnan o.m m.m w.am m.mm m.om mam - newsman m.oa m.m m.mm s.sm m.mm - - use aoaeo nouao -mm mum «mm mnmm m-om ma-ma eaoeossom no seem so scaespsaeaan ewe Aposoonm u no excuse no omwnqoonom a adv mmoafipozfi mo aommmbom .8 mg mo ZOHSmHmamHn mud m mnm¢a as. "dcpdpm Pozn and "seesaw peas m.m m.w m.ma m.sa m.wm s.sm m.m m. swepca camera massed ass as assessaswam om.mm u we - e.m w.ma a.sa m.am m.sm m.s - acscapaesco was as s. m.m m.m H.mm m.mm s.sm s.a - assassnaan 8 w.a o.a m.m m.sa m.sm m.om m.oa m. ocucpm m.s m.ma s.m m.am m.mm m.am s.w - sea aoaoo omsomm uouao . u u u n n 1 oz use mm as mm em me as mm sm mm R am on an ma . muoepdboqu omsomm mo soauspanpmfim owe ApostHm a mo unease Mo owdpsoonom a may mmca<>QZZH no mmmDomm m6 onEDmHmHmHQ mu< OH mumda 90 distribution. Color TV owner spouses tend to be older, as do air conditioner owner spouses, than the other two product owners. However, more spouses of air conditioner owners are under 35 than are the color TV owner spouses. Spouses of stereo owners tend to be much younger than do the other product owners. Dishwashers tend to be owned by relatively more spouses in the 35-44 bracket with comparatively even dispersion in the next bracket on both sides. As with the heads of households, no conformity exists for all four products regarding age of the owning spouses other than the common modal bracket. Thus, it is essential to discern similarity or variation between the functional innovators and the strategic innovators. Types It has been determined that innovators are not a homo- geneous group. The task now is to determine if a difference can be ascertained between owners of the types of innova- tions previously delineated. Strategic innovations are defined as the lowest level of change, both to the firm and to the consumer. Functional innovations are defined as being more complex, calling for a new way to perform a pre- viously fulfilled function. This level of analysis is to test if differences do exist. Heads p: Households.--Table 11 shows that the strategic as. ”seesaw uses *2. ”scenes scan as. "seesaw sees m.NH 0.:H P.0m m.NN H.mm m.m H. 141 " causes caassm assess ass as pessamasmam ma.am n as I‘ll." I! II 11! Illll .Iulcll . III!!! m.m m.m s.ma m.mm m.mm m.m - enacpa9s¢_sassm successess 0.: m.aa w.mm m.mm m.om m.m m. aacsnee¢.aassm camcpeapm m” massed ass as essenmasmsm mm.ms w mx o.m H.ma m.sm m.mm m.ma m.a - aaoeseossH Huscaecssa w.m m.m s.am m.mm s.om m.m . snacesscssH camcpsspm _ a enmemm sm-mm sm-ms asamm smomm smuom ma-ma mass 9 ecsnaaasao seosecam eaoseasom no seem no scnpsnaspaae cm< A083 .m cane; 2086 no cmmpqoohom a m3 maobmomm mo mamas Hm QAOMHMDOM mo 94mm m0 ZOHBDmHmamHQ mad HH mqm¢H ——:— 92 innovators are much younger than the functional innovators. Slightly over 68% of the strategic innovators are under 45 years, while only a little over 55% of the functional inno~ vators are less than 45. Thus, while innovators tend to be younger than the pOpulation, the most simple kind of inno- vation is more often accepted by younger heads of households than is the more complex innovation. Also shown in Table 11 is the fact that early adOpters are not homogeneous and that there is a difference between a strategic early adopter and a functional early adOpter. In this case, the functionalists tend to be younger than the strategic early adOpters. Thus, the conclusion Opposite to the above: after a product has gained acceptance by 10% of the market, the more complex innovation is accepted by the younger at a faster rate than the less complex type of change. Spouses.--The age distribution for spouses in innovis- tic households differs between strategic and functional innovations. They follow the same pattern as did the heads. That is, the strategic innovations are accepted more readily by youthful spouses than the functionals; only 30.2% of the functional innOvator spouses are under 35, compared to 40.5% of the strategic innovator spouses. The early adOpter spouses conform to the early adOpter heads, also. The functionalists are younger than the strategies. In both the early adOpter and the innovator categories, 93 an. "seesaw sees as. "seesaw soap mm.a "seesaw peas m.m m.m m.ma m.ea m.mm >.sm m.m m. . causes magnum assess ass as esscaessmam mm.mm n mg m. m.m m.m m.ma m.om m.mm m.m a. paacpaQe¢.saasm senescence c.s m.m m.m m.om a.mm m.sm a.m m. sacenee<.sassm enmmesapm asthma ass as esseamssmam mm.ss w mx m. H.m m.©a w.©m s.mm m.®m m.m n myopmbossH descaponsm m.a H.m w.m m.sa m.sm m.ma m.oa m. snacssscssH esmccsapm ..wwam “Mame SAM sass elm awn lass 9-3 see as. soapspaseaao ems dmfihfimmwdo mpoddOhm Remap a canvas unease no ommpsoonom d adv 3890mm ho mag Hm mmaomm .mo ZOHSmHmBmHn ”no.4 NH. mag — 94 the age bracket which has the most respondents is the 35-44 one. In all cases, the 25-44 group has almost 60% of the owners a Occupations p: Headp an Spouses AdOpter Categories There is a significant difference between the adopter categories for both the head of the household and the spouse. The occupational distribution is much greater for the head than is the distribution for the spouse. SSSSS pi Households.~*Innovators have quite a different occupational distribution as is indicated by the high chi‘ square value. This difference is almost entirely due to the relatively high number of innovators in the professional and managerial occupations when compared with the early adopters and the general population. Almost twice as many innovators belong to this category as would be expected. The only other category which is over represented, compared to the mass market, is the craftsman and foreman group. Over 60% of the innovators are in these two groups; thus, there is a fairly high concentration of the innovators within occupa- , tional groups. When contrasted with the early adopters, the innovators continue to show a difference, with a chi~square value of 40.02 which is still significantly different. The appor- tionment of occupations is much broader for the early adOpters than for the innovators. 95 macaw.” a as esscemnsmem mmdmm n «x m6 o.o.n m.m m3“. o.m.m .15 min 1: mtnm dence ransom Tm has Em A.» sums Tam mes Tm Ham stances 3.3m as c... an as as sea a... ...m 9.2 assesses N H uh S , me O H .S O a. ... W. n a as a... mm a... a a an ...... a... a. .... as . J u m. .w s e t. x w s W. .m s ...senoacpmo o s h a .... a a u o O S a 3 e u w m. amassed msowuemaooo flhnomopeo a dampen mango .Ho ommpsoonom a new mMHmQEB fiend Mm aommmaom mo Ban .3 23.535000 m...” mama... r 96 Spouses.--There is approximately equal representation of employment outside the home for spouses in all three adopter categories. The innovator group has slightly more working spouses than do the other two groups. Thus, it would be expected that they would be slightly over repre— sented in each occupational group. The greatest over repre- sentation occurs in the professional and managerial class, though the percentage is very low. Clerical worker is the only other category over represented to any degree. When comparing only the innovators with the early adopters, there is no significant difference in the occupa- tional distribution. The chimsquare value is 14.96, which is not significant at the 95% level. Innovators Turning to the question of whether or not there is homogeneity within the innovators, it can be seen in Tables 15 and 16 that the heads of the households and their spouses have a diversified distribution. Spggp pi Households.--Table 15 shows that the profes- sional and managerial group owns a greater number of all four products than any other group. However, the total pro- portion of each product owned by the group is quite dis- similar. Over 70% of the dishwasher owners fall in this group. Air conditioner owners show a high representation in this group, when compared with the remaining two products. Spouses.-‘The spouses of color TV owners have a 97 nachos ass as ascentsswam sm.mw w ms m.m ®.~.~. Win m. ®.m in...“ .n. H.N mfz m.m 30H. OHQEHm m. a.a® c. w. m.m e.s m. ®.s m.s H.s ascemoee sense m. m.wa a. m.s o.s a.a u m.m m.m s.m assesscssH .9 N N H M S a 0 d S O a Mm ,. . u .m . we a... m a a a an a n a. .. . r e I. c v.1 \a, x , s e x J B I I. a J a T. a d4 0 s t. e . a s m a a a .... a a a a o e r A em I I. mofihowopoo I 3 WU 8 O o s a m. e u s noemomé Hoawgauoao Afiowopmo a snags gage .Ho emeuscohom e wev mmHmowmaam gong. Mm mmbomm mo ZQHBLEbooo 3.. "Emma 98 m.m o.oa m.m m.s o.ma a.sa m.s a.s m.am asses canssm aHo>oH ads as pascamasmam mm.mom w as s.m m.a H.m o.» m.w o.ma m.s m.s m.ms auscseassco has a. m.m s.a s.a a.m H.ma a.m a e.os nonsensaaa m.s m.a H.m m.s m.ma m.mm s.m s.s e.am esteem a.m m.m m.oa a.m m. m s.mm a u m.am as acaoo N H MS has HS 0 8 ms M... m. mm m mm. as a. mm o I. o sfl .. . e a J .s are J J 51.1! B “Hus“? OS to a U a 9 JO .1 08 w 0 S in D. J as t. mm - e s m s a .e a T. “me m s w m m. afloapmboqu S uncapeQSeeo Aposoonm a Mo unease mo omeesoonom a may mmCBESOZZH kc manommmbom m6 mmamm ha chaamDooo md mqmda 99 m.m m.ss m.a m. w.m s.a H.. a.m m.s m.m Haves canssm nac>oa ass as esscsussmam mm.ww u «x - a.ss m.a m.a 0.: m. - s.m m.m m.» scsospaesoo the s. o.mm - - m.m s. - s.a H.m m.s aosnsssasn m.a m.ms - o.m m.s m.H . s.m m.o m.s esteem m.s H.mm s.m . H.m - - - H.m o.sa >9 assoc S N N H, M S e o J_S O n. ma .... mm mm m am. we a mm m .... n m at m a... ea u. w. a ...—“U 9 3 IO 1. 09 u 0 S P 1 s e I x s W s a . n .m We. 0 S a a m m m. mqofipw>oan uncapSASOOO Avosdoam a Mo wheeze mo omcpnoonom a adv mmdfi¢>022H ho mmmDomm ha ZOHB¢NDOUO ma mamas 100 slightly higher representation in the work force than the spouses of any other product owners. A sizable percentage of these spouses are in the professional and managerial occupational group, compared to employed spouses of the other product owners and the eXpected value from the popula- tion. There are very few working spouses in homes which have dishwashers. Types Since lack of homogeneity is observed in Tables 15 and 16, it is desirable to turn attention to discovering if there is a difference between the strategic and functional innovators. Tables 17 and 18 show that there is lack of uniformity for the heads of households but no difference is discernible for the spouses. ,Spggp p; Household§.--While both types of innovators have the highest concentration in the professional and mana- gerial group, the functionals have a much higher representa- tion in this group. The strategies have a high concentra- tion in two other occupational groups, which is not true of the functionals. In relative terms, the strategies are in the categories of craftsman-foreman and Operatives twice as often as the functionals. Looking at the early adOpters, it can be observed that the difference between the two types is significant; however, it is slightly so. Functional early adopters tend to cluster more into three groups: professional and m.m _ 0.0H m.m _ m.» _ o.ma _ H.sa _ m.s H.s ‘ m.am _ asses canssm fleece mam we peeesnsemsm mm.mm u «x s.m s.s m.m m.s m.wa m.om m.s m.m m.mm aaepaeee sense successesa s.m a.» H.: m.m m.oa m.ma a.m s.s s.mm essences sense enmepeapm nae>ca and as successemam Hm.saa w «x m m.m m6 m.m we: m6 m1? m.m Wm min £0296an Hesowvonsh m.s m.m m.m m.s m.wa s.mm m.m m.s m.om naepeseeeH enmepenpm N H M S B 0 .d S 3 ms .... m. a m m We a a n mm o t. 0 3. J J. S 9 J J . I a a a n n n a . . n a a J u e. a s e t. a m w e s as 9 o s A a T. .... 1 9 w u 0 O S 9 m a u 1 s T. ecauseeeae apeseesm 33.39.30 A093 c n33”: gonzo mo 03.500qu a may magnomm no man. wm aommmbom .mo mama mo 23.38000 5.. fig 102 m5. 9m :4 am mi dence seesaw Sees has as peeeansemam «min n we o.mw ®.m m.a >.H m.: whopmoe< hahsm HueOHvosdh m.m> H.m H.N m.m :.m whopm0d< Sauna afimopeupm acts Sm as eeeeEBmem emf: w «x H.m® N :.m m. H.m :.: encum>oqu AdsofipquM m.m> w. m.H H.: m.d m.N w.m m.m myopu>oqu camopmnpm N Wu M S Q .d S o a. a a a s s as. mm m 1.. w... m a m. w... %M. O S m. % 05 h ... _. ... a .... . .. am a a m. a o s A e I t I e w o O S a e u M m defihfimwado mFOSUOMN macapsmsOoo Amaze a camper unease mo omensoosom 6 may mausocmm no mmmwa Hm mmpomm ho 20Ha¢mbooo 103 managerial, craftsman and foreman, and Operatives; while the strategies tend to be more widely dispersed. Educatlon 93 Heads nd Spouses Previously it was shown that research has indicated that the acceptors of newness had more formal education than those in other categories. The amount of formal education has meaning to the marketing manager particularly in rela- tion to the level of advertising copy. This study, too, ascertains that the innovators have more education than the population. The following section examines the educational variable in detail. AdOpter Category Both the heads.and spouses of innovistic households are significantly different in the amount of formal education they have acquired. SSSSS pi Households.--Both the innovators and the early adopters have more formal education than the mass market. Over 38% of the heads of innovistic households have had at least some college education, compared to slightly over 21% of the population. Innovators have more education than the early adOpters. The distinction between these two groups, however, is slight. The chi-square value for their comparison is 14.16 which is significant at the 95% level, but not at the 99% confidence limit. Spouses.--The spouses in innovistic households are more 104 £33.33 N one 5 eogaosa poz 5396260 on can cams—om on» no $10 m 8.3.3.93 NN on» 3 decades.“ won an: assoc mange. ...—He .8 when eopoamaoo mueswoflnd 39.3.. is we eeeeemflwam SEE n «x m. Tm :6 ads «Sm 9mm fimm egos ceases m. Tm km TS Tom Sam Ti echoes 3.8m m. :6 a}: was Hem 0.3 was 89388 SN 9 .d 0 0 O S H O m S S 9 1.0. I O O O .... O O O I ... a n. in ...... ... a a. D. m 3 a 3 S a S T. a. m. e m. e m. «.4 m. e mofinowopeo P o P o O O I I H3963» 383.com we econ no 8383a “Showcase .o n39? 9386 no omgsoohom .o «3 mmHmommag Eofl Hm aoagom mo Sam .8 SSS—EM ma Ema .393an «N on» 3 63533 902 .3335? on can «HQ—Sm 25 me $99 13.0 no a 03.39.80 363056 mHo>oH a #6 PfidoHH—Hwfim jfimm n NM m4 md HA o.m 3w 9% :im H18 p398. 398m mg m. m4 m6 9: {+3 FAN {NH Hopmog 3.3m >4. m. :d ad 0.: m6: «.md :6 .HofigonnH 5 O 1. S N S N 9 .d O 0 O S H 0 S S 9 m w ,m o m m mm mm am mm mm m. m M»... a _L a U. _.L U. W 9 .5. P e 4 “a W am my % m. I9 moanommpdo 3 8 U. 9 q P w P m .L T hop906< 838de Abommpwo a n33: 9886 mo wmdpqmoaom a may man—”5895 505. Mm mmbomm .mo 20HB.mm caspoa mamsam uao>ma Has an pqsoamanmfim mm.m:a n «x m. m.~ :.oH s.am m.mm H.3H , s.oa uoqoapaenoo ““4 H.H H.:H m.mm a.mm m.am m.m a.m amnmsznman m. 3.: m.m s.~a :.mm m.Hm m.ma oonopm :.m - w.ma m.oa m.mm :.mm m.Hm >9 noaoo SN 9& 30 0S H0 ms 99 1.0 a o o o o o 1.0, o o J m. 3.. ma mm am 3 mm m m a... s s. s r 0.. 1. 31. a 0n... 0 9 . m mm w W W macapd>OQQH pdonomdom ho ddom no nowpmodum Aposoonm a no unonso mo owmvuwohom a adv mmoe<>OZZH mo manommmbom mo mnoan doapdosdm Aposdonm a no unease no omspnoouom d adv wmce¢5ozzH mo mmmDomm m6 20HB.mm Oddpoa onHdm Ho>ma mm.mm ad pquHMHanm Poz mm.wH u NN m. m.m o.oa m.>a w.om m.HN :.:H unopmood hasum HdQOfipoqsm H.H m.m >.> m.:a :.mm H.mm m.md mam9m06¢ hasam osmmpsspw .433 a? pa pqSEBmsm 3.8 u «x a. ma TS 9mm tam Qua m.» mnofigqfl. 3338a H.H N.: :.m m.mH w.mm >.Hm o.>H whopdbonnH ofimwpdhpm can“ no.d mono «on» who” mmcs cons 1.0 I O O O O O I. O O O I w... m. w. mm H m .mw ham m m. a n a T a .L o a p m... a .... fl m. w m J s a. a a We a. @098”. Q P m p. m I I sofifimmfio $0595 uaonomsom no doom no soapsosum Aomhp a nfinpfiz mnoqzo mo omwunmonom a may maoanomm mo mamas Hm nuommmnom ho noa Has pm pqaoflm«nwfim pw.mm u «x m.H m. o.H H.> m.aa w.:: m.Hm o.ma mnmpmou< hanum Haqoflpoqsm m.a m.a m.a m.m w,m m.mm H.mm m.mH maugmqo< aanam afimmpaapm n” mao>ma Has pa panHMHamHm mm.am u «x m.a m. >.m 0.:H >.Hm w.mm w.ma :.m muopa>oqu Huuofipoqsm m.m m.H m.m m.m >.ma o.m: >.mm o.oa myop¢>oan afimmpanpm SH SN 9;. Do as H0 HS so 3 .mo 3. mm mm mm mm 3 1. n P»... T3 U. U. 0%. a S W 8T 9 .L O p a a f, a .3 my a a a Us a. onho. P WP w I T. umHMHmmuHo muosoonm dogwoscm Amman .0 323.3 2086 mo mwapnmonvm a may magnomm ho mag Mm mmbomm .mo 233483 :N mug 112 flgags 2: Households.--Strategic innovators are not for- mally educated to as high a degree as are the functional innovators. Thus, the heads of households who are more highly educated accept more complex innovations, while the heads with a lesser amount of formal education accept the more simple innovations. Over 80% of the heads who own the functional innovistic products have at least some high school compared to 61.3% of the strategic innovators and 49.3% of the mass market. When turning to the early adOpters, education is still significantly different at the conventional level. This difference is, however, of small magnitude. Functional early adOpters tend to follow the same pattern as was seen for the innovators. They have more formal education than do the strategic early adOpters. §pou§e§.--There is a significant difference in educa- tion, with the functional innovator spouses having more formal education than the strategic innovators. Similarly, early adopters who have more education accept complex changes more readily than the lesser educated. ami miss AdOpter Categories Both innovators and early adopters definitely have higher incomes than the population, although a wide disper- sion is shown. In addition, innOVators have higher incomes than do the early adopters. Over 31% of the innovators have 323 is p... pfioflaqmam 8.3.. n «x m.: H.m o.mm m.>m H.wd >.:H ddpoa mamswm mg. a}: 1mm dam MAM mé 23903 3.3m m.ma m.~a - 3.0m >.HN :.HH . o.m howd>OdQH 3 1 80 . 3a mam raw mama mama mmmi oooma nan» . hupaonw aoooaoaa aoooww uOOOmfi uOOOma asap mmoA mmfinomopwo Hopmocd qofipspflhamfin maoqu hafiasm Ahhomcvso a dfinwwk mammuo mo owqumohvm a may mMHmcwaE.:H H6909 oHQHMm maosma Has as pasoamanmam mm.mma n ma m.ma m.wa m.:m o.wm m.aa m.4 noqoapasqoo “Ha m.mm m.mm m.mm m.m m.m m.m “msmssnman m.m H.2H m.mm o.mm m.:a m.m omnopm MW m.ma o.sa m.wm :.mm m.@ a.m as Rosco ooo.maa mmm.:aa mmmma mmmma mamas ooo.ma nmmmwns nooo.oaa nooosa -oooma noooma asap smog wqoapasoan soapspanpman usoqu aaaasa Aposdonm a no mhcnao mo mmdpqmauom a adv mmoa<>ozznn no @005 NHHEE mm mamas m.: _ H.m o.mm _ m.sm _ a.ma _ e.ga _ Hayes mamasm uao>oa Han pa pqaoauaqmam am.:m u ma F.» m.:H m.mm s.mm m.HH m.m , whopmod< handm quowpoqsm s.m m.oa m.mm m.mm a.ma a.s myopmosa sauna osmopsncm mao>ma add as unsoauaamam em.mm n ma m.dm m.dm m.mm P.md ®.~ N.m myopd>oqu anOfipoudm ,o n” :.m o.¢H w.mm o.mm H.3H m.m mn0p0>oqu camopwnpm oooamaw mmmazaa mmmma mmmmw mmmzw ooomw mama cabs an “spawns nooo.oaa nooosa aOOOma nooomw asap mama soauammuao aposeonm aoapapanpmao «soouH assess Ammhp.d manna: mnonzo Mo omapqoonom 6 «av magnomm mo mag Hm mzooznn ugh Nag 117 strategic innovators. The same phenomenon is observable for the early adopters. Comparing the chi-square values, the differences between early adOpters are not as great as the differences between the innovators. However, the tendency is the same. That is, the functional early adOpters are from a higher income bracket than are the strategic early adopters. Ethnic Groups The ethnic group identity used in this study was traced through the male line. The classification system utilized is found in Appendix C. AdOpter Categories It can be seen in Table 28 that the innovators and early adopters are well dispersed throughout the Various ethnic groups. None of the groups appear to stand out in a clear majority. Those of British origin, however, by far outweigh the other groups. It must be noted that in this particular geographic area, the British are by far the domi- nant ethnic group. Thus, one cannot look at the table and assert that the British are the innovators, even though they have the greatest frequency. The meaningful analogies are from observing the over or under representation in relation to the makeup of the pOpulation. Table 28 shows that there is a significant difference in the three categories. Innovators, when compared to the population, are over represented in the following ethnic Ex "gouache En "88gb: mm. “gains. mH0>mH a #6 vacamwdmam .3..:om n «N «A «4 FA dm dm m.m dams mtm m.m Tm 93 mdm ogoawaawm w. mtn m6 m.m H.m m6 m.m :.m :3: H6 add m.mm pncpmoaé hag Fe m. Hem W-H Mom Q.” We: Com 3cm Cop Nomfl :omN “Hopgoa We. V a S S a M r I o a 1 ... mm m m . um. w m m m m . u e a e o a W A a I. u m 4 ..+ I. x 1 I. 1 s o s I. a I. .... a .w a u. u. 9 U. s o m m m u U. m. umHHomopdo .- u Ampmou< B3503 393m Ahhomopdo d can»? 2086 no mwdpaoouom 6 «av mMHmonmado Eon? Hm gomumog 858.5 mm as 119 groups: German, French, Jewish and Other Europeans. The innovators are also significantly different when compared to the early adopters. The chi-square value for this comparison is 78.52, which is significant at all levels. The innovators have a greater over representation when compared to the early adopters in the following ethnic groups: French, Jewish, Negro, Polish and Other EurOpeans. Therefore, the French, Jewish and Other Europeans have a greater over representation than any other ethnic groups for the innovators. British, German, Italian, Scandinavian and Other American are most over represented by early adOpters. There is a lack of any pronounced heterogeneity as the differences pointed out are of small magnitude. Innovators Turning to the query of innovators being similar for the different products, Table 29 shows that they are not homogeneous. Owners for each of the products are widely distributed with regard to ethnic grouping of backgrounds. The one exception to this generalization is found to be the owners of television. A greater over representation of the classification Other Europeans exists among color TV owners than for any other ethnic group. There is also a higher representation of owners among Polish and Other Slavic groups when compared to p0pulation ownership. The latter groups also have a higher ratio of ownership of color TV than for the other E... . ~58:qu *m " 855336 E“ . " «50833 3. "8.65329 fin . N “ 9:05:56 m.a N.H >.m H.m H.m _ m.m _ ~.ma _ m.m _ m.m _ m.m w.ma m.om macvoa sadism 32.2” a? pa 933.383 5.6a u «x m. «A >6 m4 0.: add m.m md Tm Tm Wad min 6833380 9.2 m d... wt... :6 m.m w...” m.m man man :4 Tm 19” «.mm anonmgmwn m. w. H.m N.N w. >.® ®.mH ®.H m}: NHN m.N.H O.mN powhwpm 1m Tm 0.5 .. :6 mid 90H . .. md .....ma 0.: d3. noaoo V w. a m S s w d N .... I M w m. S 0 T. O 3 a Q. .... mm m m a a a u a m n a m .... a. .... ... .m x m I. ... s o s I. o I. Tr O O U. U. m U. 9 a m m m u ... W. 30330qu unsoawxocm 03pm mmOB¢>OZZH mo gomgodm .0ng mm mama 121 innovistic products. Negroes are highest in over representation of ownership of stereo, both in relation to ownership of other innovistic products and to the population. The next highest over representation of stereo ownership is by Other Europeans. Dishwasher owners are over represented by the Jewish group compared both with ownership of other products and the expected frequency. The next highest over representation of ownership by ethnic group for dishwashers is the British. Air conditioner owners do not have an over representa- tion with regard to other product owners. They are slightly over represented, when compared to the pOpulation, by the following ethnic groups: British, German, Jewish, Polish, Other Slavic and Other Europeans. Types Turning to Table 30, it can be seen that the strategic innovators are significantly different from the functional innovators. Strategic innOVators are relatively more often French, Italian, Negro, Polish, Scandinavian and Other Euro- pean than are the functional innovators. However, the only one which is highly different is the Negro ethnic group. Functional innovators are relatively more often British, German, Jewish and Other Slavic. Only two groups show a relatively higher number--the British and the Jewish groups. Looking at the early adopters, it can be seen that, while the strategies have over representation in several 4 122 333 do on... paaoflfinmsm $53 a «x m. m4 m6 md ®.m m6 .7: m.m m.m «6 odd aim 930885qu ECHvogh m. w. m6 o.m min mé H.m._.. N...” mi mi. m.~H H.mm 6209.26an camopdhgm S 0 I 1. O 9 9 a... I 9 J ...... mm m m m m w. u a m. m. a w n a... M. I .m I m «Tu. Tu W. O m»; .L. anon. M. .... m m m a q as m .3 33338 easouwxoom 35pm A033 6 £an 9386 wo wmdwuoonom a adv magnomm mo mg Mm gomgog 0% 0m mag mposconm 123 uaotzemv needoxna unrxeutnnafis unsonmxocm afianpm came .3 eosfimmoao m». uqsonxnbd mp. "qkoqxubo fim. makoqxdbp mm. unsonxdba 1m >23 $309 395m mHo>oH Has pd vnonMHanm mm.mw n «x a . m w . in 03383 hasdm Adaowpoqdm Hem dofifl mumpg8< handm camopoawm m w mm mm m a .... .... w. ... m B W a A W I a m W H w 4 4 x 1 t.1 s o s I o I fl. 0 U. U. m U. u M... macadOAA QHSZHBZOO Om mqm<fi 124 groups, only the Negro group is of any size. The func- tionals, while also having relatively higher representation in numerous categories, do not have as great a difference as did the strategies. The British and German groups have more over representation for functional early adopters than do any of the other categories. 39mg Characteristics A series of three tables for each level of analysis is presented regarding home characteristics. The first indi- cates whether there is a difference between the adopters who own their homes and those who rent. The type of dwelling is also shown. This refers to the number of living units per dwelling unit. The second table in the series shows the home values of those who own, while the third shows the monthly rent paid by the renters. Adopter Categories 7 There is a significant difference between the three categories in regard to owning and renting. More early adOpters own their homes than do either of the other groups. A greater percentage of innovators own their homes compared to the pOpulation total. Only a slight difference is discernible between the innovators and the population in relation to the type struc- ture in which they reside. Early adOpters more frequently live in a single unit dwelling than do the other categories. Home ownership within the adOpter categories is also LuJ. «I‘m-ya...“ c a ‘ {iii-ii»: .. 323 ad. 3 unsusflqmsm 3&8 n «x £92 in pa pfiosflnmsm 3.11: n «x mi :4 ma. mzfl m6» 9mm m6» .398. camsam a. s. m. m.» «.3 «.3 9mm nuances 3.3m m... m. Tm 9m 9mm 9: dun Saga .2. ohofi no 0H mum dam m H madam muse mofihomouao 3384. mafiaaokn mom mpHQD mo hopes: mfinmhomso ufiom Ahnomopso a swan“: mumsso Mo omquooaom a adv mmHmcme.m nopnsoqu 38 s magma mamas amass mamas 8mg } @833 $8.03 908.3% 880.3% "semi“ can» smog 820398 1 M0983. Aunonsouson cud one omonp no owswsoonmm w adv osam> «sow 4111‘ Ahhowopdo.d danpfik.mhoqzo mo omspnoohom d adv mmHmommB axon mm mama .433 is pa pfifiuflmam 8.9 u «x 2.0H . o.HN m.mm o.wm w.: Hapos mamswm 9mm 9mm Tam 0.2 m.m $303. 3.3m m.om m.mm m.®m o.mm m.m nopwboqu “7" . once. . . . , .HO 8Hfi mmfinm~.fi fibfia©®fi mm%no+~% gmiwwmg WOHHOMGPQU Hopmod< Anson on? mmogp mo swapmooswm a mmv vqom thpdoz “snag a saga“: unease mo omwpqoohom u may mmHmomedn on: omonp you wqfipqsoo oHAsOd op odd m.ooa maniac sumo mi :4 Tm Tma Q6» 0.8 m6» H38. 39% 39:: fin an pfioamflmsm 9.5 u mx wages in pa afloamflmfim 3.? n «x 9m m. mi duos m6» Tom mi. «383380 n3 - i. :4 md {mm mi 9.3 “Eggs 9 m m.: m. w.H H.m m.mm m.HN :.®> .oonopm - Cm mi ads Tow - .83 E. “38 whoa 6.3».me ml m +~I m N H. mPflOm mg nqofipd>oqu mafiaaoza mom mafia: no sopssz manuaoaso oaom Ap05U0hm a Ho-mhon:o mo omwpnoohum o adv mmoa¢>OZZH mo wZHAAmzn mo anus nz< mHmmmmzzo mzom :m HAm¢H m.» N.m m.sm m.os i.ia s.m dupes magnum III, ill"... I! Ilavi‘ mso>ua add us squeamsnmsm mm.amm n «x .14.; - w.>H >.:H >.mm >.wm ®.m m.H mascavfidnoo nw< o.m: m.mm m.mH b.0H r. H.H nonmusnwfin m.HH w.» m.mm s.mm m.mH H.i omnmpm no nu m.>m i.w m.Hm m.mm i.m - >9 soaoo ones no mmm.:mw mmm.maw mmm.:aa mmm.mw 00m.>» ooo.mmw -ooo.omfi -ooo.maa -ooo.osa -OOmew qua» mama -1:4|a . , quHpc>osdH Aunonzooson and on: anon» Mo omdpsoonom d adv 05Hd> 030m Aposooam a no unonao mo swapnwonom a may mmoaaSOZZH mo mpq¢5 mzom mm mania 131 ids 04m mam 9mm mi dance 035m 333 a? pa pnaoflsuma Exam n «x 9mm mid {mm m.mm o.m 3833qu HQ o.m> >.mH m.w u u pvnmssnmwn :.w >.Nm w.Hm :.mm >.m .oonovm u u n u u >8 noaoo once _ osw .s 83 manna imam» are; ass 33 - uncapdboan Anson on: omosp Mo owspaoonom u may paom hagwqoz AposGOHA d.uo aaonao no owdpaoohom d adv mmoa¢sozzH mo 32mm Namazoz mm mamas 132 high in the ownership of homes valued at $25,000 or over. Stereo owners have homes of much lower value than do the other product owners. There is also a significant difference among the inno- vators with respect to the monthly rent. Dishwasher owners pay a much higher rent than do the other two product owners. Air conditioner owners tend to pay higher rents than do the stereo owners. Color TV owners do not rent, but own their homes instead. Types More functional innovators own their own homes than do strategic innovators. Slightly more strategic innovators live in multi-unit dwellings than do the functionals. This relationship is statistically significant. Strategic early adOpters rent more often than do the functional early adOpters. The strategic early adOpters differ little from the characteristics of the pOpulation. The same is true for the type of dwelling unit occu- pied. The strategic early adOpters closely parallel the population, while the functionals are more strongly concen- trated in the single unit dwellings. Number in Eamily This section sets forth the findings only in regard to the number of people within a household. Additional data relating to number and ages of children can be found in 133 It!" dupes oagssm m.i i.s _ m.m m.ma w m.ms o.mm _ m.ms _ uso>oa Has 93 pnuosmsamsm mi.maa a ma Hm>ma mmm an pswosmsswflm mm.i u «x m. m. m. m.m i.mm s.m m.am unmanaea sagas assosvouss 0.: m.H l m.m s.ma m.me m.sm m.ms snowmosaxsanam osmopaupm usu>ma as. as agnososamsm no.0» n ma ausoa mam pa pesosmsnmsm m~.s u «x :.m m. m.m m.h m.mm m.md o.ww whops>oan.Has0fiponsm m.i m. m.s m.m m.mm m.ow m.ms unopa>oqu osmoaaspm 0.33 _ . . use 0H mum 4am m a mnqmm msso make an measaosn non muss: no nonssz I mfinmnmnzo meow doHMfimdeo m#0560hm Amman a canvas unease no mmdpqooaom a.uuv mepanomm mo mmmwa Mm mZHQAmzn pajamas nz¢.mHmmmmzzo mzom hm-mqmda 134 a; mi ma... m6: iii”. .....m aspen. sadism 326s in as ”macadamia poz imi n ma Tm.“ dos mim mim ma. 9m $383. 3.3m 30305....” mas ind mam fimm 9m... Tm €383 3.3m 03325 wages is 8 pfioflfiwsm 3&9” .... ma m .mm in .3 i . mm m . a m . m i . .... 233.0an . 303.3% mad mi dmm mim 0.9. Q...“ 3330qu osmmpsfim 11L1 . -.-..1 0905 no mmmaimw mmmamaw mmmwamw mmmamw 00mqwa . a ooofima $8.8m “Fascism 0.8083 Bosnia swap 33 use p Amnmskooaon who one among Ho mwmpdmoamm m mmv madmb meow II} $.1- dmfi%fimmdac mvofidohm Aomhu_m sfifipfia wheeze mo mmwaqoohom a adv mm mAm¢B mBoDanm ho mmmwa Mm HDA¢> mzom 135 i.oa o.Hm ; m.mm b o.mm _ my: _ Haves magsum mao>ma Has pa puaosussmsm me.sm n «x i 11 1 1 v 11 1 . i 1 1 1 1 m.mm m.~m m.om «.mm m.m _ mampmcea.sssumwauaoquqsm m.as i.mm m.ai m.es a m.“ H mnmpnoe4.san¢m osmmaaapm .1 1 11.111 W11 11 1.111111111111111 1 -11 nausea Has an nanosmsqmsm mm.>m u «x 4 .1 J c 1 1- ..- .. {mm is dmm 98 i m.m . muopgofia . 3.038% V .... .w h. mm m 2% a . mm P. m i 309.263 033.2% I!!! I411 III-Ill.:..l.‘ . ’1 .1 1 w 11 1 . I1 1 0.33 a ... .. a 9% - to cede mma mam isa 0mm mam Oim sun» snag a omsa_sp i 11 Auden on: anon» no owmpdoonom a may pswm mambo: I1" 1'I.| A083 .0 map? 3085 Ho cwwnqouhom a adv magnomm ho mg -Hm 92mm MEGS mm mamas swansunuao mpossosm ___,L,_ _ 136 Appendix F-4. Adopter Categories The innovators have larger-sized families than the gen- eral population. The number of peOple within a family is quite significantly different at all confidence levels for the three groups: innovators, early adOpters and the eXpected distribution of the pOpulation. Families composed of three or less people are under represented in the innova- tor group, but those having from four to nine are over represented. The early adopters have fewer families composed of one and two peOple, but more than would be expected in the four to seven member family as compared with the pOpulation. The chi-square value of the innovators and the pOpula- tion (i.e., removing the early adopter from the analysis) is 67.96. This is also significant at all levels. When comparing the innovator with the early adOpter only, the chi-square value is 20.35, which is significant at the 95% confidence level but not the 99%. Adepting the con- ventional level of 95% for this type of research, it can be asserted that these two groups are different in the number of family members. However, these differences are slight. Innovators have more families with 8 or more members than do the early adopters. While these differences are discernible, the mode for all three groups is four members per family. Innovators 32.3 3» pa pfiosfiamsm REA u «x m. m. m4 m4 mi o.m «.3 99 «.ma m.mm mi assessing m. m. H4 :4 od 0.3 93 mim was {is A m4 5383 3.3m a. a. o.m o.m Sm mama mda dam T? 0.5 cam 93385 WI/ 0803 1 .3 a 2‘ a m _ i. m ... s m N a 82%..pr _ has E 3952 .8983 l\ Abomopdo «.5an 3086 «0.033030% .o adv amonmag mammofi Mm. Madman... .mmmzsz o: mug 138 tend to cluster slightly more around the three through five persons per family (57.8%) than does the population (54%). Early adopters have more amassment than the other two groups (62.7%). Innovators Innovators are not homogeneous, statistically, when considering the number of peOple per family. The distribu- tion of owners of each innovation by family size is shown in Table 41. The sample total is also presented for compara- tive purposes. Sample total is the eXpected percentage of owners to be found in each classification of the variable, based on the distribution of the population. Color television owners all have seven or less peOple in their families. For all other products, some owners have families made up of more than seven members. The mode for color television owners is two people per family but is closely followed by five per family. Stereo owners typically have four in the family with a clustering around three through five members per family unit. At the same time, there is a wider dispersion of family size than for any other product. The owners of dishwashers show heavy concentration in the two through six member families, with the mode being four. Over 88% fall into this interval. Air conditioner owners are typically families of two. However, they are widely dispersed and follow rather closely 139 Haves oamssm m. m. m.H w.H m.: o.m «.ma m.mH «.ma m.mm m.: mao>oa Haw pa pusUfiMHanm Hm.>m u «a - - m. :.m :.m w.m m.wa o.mH m.ma m.>m H.m soaofipfieqoo ns< - - m.m m.m m.: H.ma m.om o.mm «.0H m.ma . soumassmfin m. m. w.a m.H ~.w m.ma s.>H o.mm ~.ma m.HH m.m _owampm . - - - H.m m.ma m.mm m.:a m.ma m.sm m.: >9 soaoo 0808 so as oa m m a m m s m m a uncapubondH assess as nopsgz Aposdonm d «o uhonzo Mo mmmsqmoaom d mwv mmoa<>o§H ho Mada 2H mamas—m H: Manda 1.40 to the characteristics of the p0pulation. The dispersion of the number of people per family of innovators is perhaps wider than one would expect. The mode values are not high and they are not uniform. Due to the lack of homogeneity, several different rows were removed one at a time to see if any one group of appli- ance owners was causing the high chi-square value. This was not productive as no three are similar enough to yield a low chi-square value. Types The purpose of Table 42 is to indicate whether or not the owners of the innovation types, strategic and functional, are different. Comparison of the strategic and functional innovators produces a chi-square value of 26, which is not significant at the 99.9% level. Using the convention of 95%, it is asserted that there is a difference between the strategic and functional innovators, even though relatively slight. Both types of innovators have fewer families of one and two members than would be expected. The strategic innova- tors have still fewer small families of one and two members than do the functional innovators. Both types have the same mode, which is of relatively low value and tends toward a wide dispersion. The strategic and functional early adopters are com~ pared and found to be significantly different at all 141 m. m. m.H w.H m.: o.m m.wa m.ma _ «.ma m.mm m.: Hapoa mamsam mHm>oH Ham pa pqsosmsnmfim :m.mm n mx m. m. H.H m.H m.m o.mH m.ma H.:m :.ma m.:a s.H mumpmoe< 1 - sagas Haaospoqsa m. u :.N m.m m.: :.b H.:N m.HN :.HN m.:a m. mampm06< handm owwopdnpm Hm>ma gm.mm pa pascansqmsm poz o.mm n ma - - H.m m.m m.m 0.:H H.0m m.Hm >.mfl w.om m.a myopa>oan quoflpoqsa No No NOAH Hod New wom‘fl How-fl m-JN Powfl mom-H mom WhopgogH afiwopwhpm 0H9: noHH 0H m m h m m 4 m N H mama an emflmsmmsao assess as popssz mpssaosm momma a manna: unease no uwupnwonmm d adv mspbacmm mo mmmwa Mm MnHE¢H 2H mMmZDz N: mqm¢a 142 confidence levels. Functional early adopters show a greater percentage of larger families than the strategic early adOpters° In addition, the functional early adOpters have larger-sized families than would be eXpected from the population. A chi-square Value was computed for all four groups to determine if they would tend to average out. This did not happen. Thus, all types are found to be significantly different. CHAPTER V VALUES AND ATTITUDES OF CONSUMER INNOVATORS Introduction This chapter is a continuation of the exploration of the consumer innovator. The concern of this chapter is to determine the makeup of the people in terms of the values and attitudes which they have. After having determined they comprise a unique market in terms of socio~economic vari- ables, attention is now focused on the outlook of these people and how they differ from other segments of the market. Attention is given to ascertain if any of these findings may add additional insights which have meaning to marketing management. Mobility, Recalling that previous research has indicated the acceptors of newness are highly mobile in numerous dimen- sions, it was hypothesized that the innovators of this study would also be mobile. Two types of mobility are examined, geographic and job mobility. The questions on mobility were asked in the reinterviewing process, for which there were 109 respondents. 14} 144 geographic Mobility It was hypothesized previously that the majority of innovators have lived in the Detroit area three years or less. Table 43 shows the responses to the question: How long have you lived in the Detroit area? TABLE 43 TIME LIVED IN THE DETROIT AREA Len th of Time in getroit Area % Responding Less than 1 yr. - 1 to 2 yrs. 1.83 2 to 3 yrs. .92 3 to 4 yrs. .92 4 to 5 yrs. 2.75 Longer than 5 yrs. 93.58 Obviously these peOple are not mobile in regard to residence in geographic area. In addition, the respondents were asked how long they lived in the previous area, defined as other than the three- county area. The results are as follow in Table 44. Again, the innovators are clearly not mobile geographically, with 45.9% never having lived outside the three-county area. These peOple are, then, deep~rooted in the community in which they live. Their ties with friends and neighbors are of long standing. If the innovators are influential and Opinion leaders for a given location, it would be that much easier for marketing management to utilize them for product 145 testing and panels. The concept of influence by these con- sumer innovators is discussed in the next chapter, but it is well to note at this point that they are stable components of the community, which in itself would have some bearing on opinion domination. TABLE 44 TIME LIVED IN PREVIOUS AREA Len th of Time in Enother Area % Responding Less than 1 yr. - 1 to 2 yrs. 1. 2 to 3 yrs. 4. 3 to 4 yrs. 3. 4 to 5 yrs. 6. Longer than 5 yrs. 37» Never 45. gpp Mobility Again, influenced by other research findings, it was hypothesized that the innovators have been employed by their employers three years or less. However, job mobility ques- tions produced a result similar to those inquiring into geographic mobility. In regard to the length of time on the current job, the information in Table 45 was elicited. Over 50% of the respondents have held their current jobs longer than five years. When asked how long the respondent worked for his present employer, the information in Table 46 was obtained. 146 TABLE 45 TIME ON CURRENT JOB Length of Time on Current Job in % Responding Company Less than 1 yr. 3.7 1 to 2 yrs. 6.4 2 to 3 yrs. 3.7 3 to 4 yrs. 3.7 4 to 5 yrs. 6.4 Longer than 5 yrs. 51.4 Retired 7.3 Unemployed .9 Self-employed 16.5 TABLE 46 TIME EMPLOYED BY FIRM Length of Time Employed by Firm % Responding Less than 1 yr. 1 to 2 yrs. 2 to 3 yrs. 3 to 4 yrs. 4 to 5 yrs. Longer than 5 yrs. Retired Unemployed Self-employed ooooooooo WKOUU-QKOQO'flO Again, the respondents show stability. Over 63% have worked for the same firm longer than five years. Turning to the length of time worked for the previous employer, the following information was elicited. 147 TABLE 47 TIME EMPLOYED BY PREVIOUS EMPLOYER Length of Time Employed by % Responding Previous Employer First job - no previous employer 17 Less than 1 yr. 6 1 to 2 yrs. 7 2 to 3 yrs. 11 3 to 4 yrs. 7 4 to 5 yrs. 13 Longer than 5 yrs. 21 Unemployed Selfmemployed 11 Don9t know 2 It can only be concluded that the innovator is not mobile. He is frequently a permanent resident of the com- munity with strong neighborhood ties. He is a stable employee, remaining with his employer, often in the same position, over long periods of time. When he has a history of changing Jobs or moving to another area, it usually has been after a sizable period of employment or residency. Venturesomeness W One measure of gregariousness which is obtained is the membership in various types of organizations. Research in farm products previously discussed found that the acceptors of newness Were joiners. A similar conclusion is reached for the innovators of 148 consumer products. When asked the types of organizations to which they belonged, only 17.4% replied they did not belong to any organization. The data from the answers elicited follow. TABLE 48 MEMBERSHIP IN ORGANIZATIONS Type of Organization % Belonging Civic 56.9 Religious 52.8 SOCial 45.0 Professional 31.2 None 17.4 Over half of the respondents belong to two types of . organizations. This does not consider the number of organi~ zations in which they hold membership within each type. The innovators of products are "belongers." The majority of these peOple are socially oriented. Their Opinions concern- ing new products can be most important. They have an oppor- tunity to act as informants to different audiences. Vacation Habits 1 Another indication of the values held by innovators 4 concerns the scope of their outlook. Are they venturesome in aspects other than trying new products or do they adhere to convention? Are they "locally" centered or do they travel widely? This question is particularly pertinent since this study investigates appliances in the home, and 149 there is a possibility that these people are "home~oriented." In an attempt to determine whether they are home- oriented, a series of four tables relating to vacations are presented. The first table is designed to show if the groups are different in relation to taking a vacation and in the duration of the vacation, stated as a percentage of those taking a vacation. The second table tells whether or not they were away from home overnight. These percentages are based on those taking a vacation. The third table shows the mode of travel utilized. These figures may add to over 100% as some vacationers used more than one method of trans- portation. The fourth table in the series shows the distance traveled as a percentage of those who travel. Adopter Categories There is a significant difference in the adopter cate- gories in relation to taking a vacation. This can be seen in Table 49. A higher percentage of innovators take a vaca= tion than do the early adOpters and the pOpulation. In addition, the table shows that of those who take a vacation, the length of vacation time is significantly different. The innovators take longer vacations than do the contrast groups. However, the pOpulation takes slightly longer Vaca- tions than do the early adOpters. Table 49A shows that there is a difference in the number of days away overnight. The innovator tends to be away overnight more than the contrast groups. The early . Iv. 150 aa.a ..., "ewpapm poz soweaow> no npmumgo "empupm pee soapaoa> no summons am.a "empapm poz soapsos> no newsman mac>od H®>ma *mm pa pssoataqmsm mm.ma 1 mm Add as pqaoamasmam mm.maa n ma m.: ~.m m.mm m.ms m.ma m.mm caspoe mamsam H.: o.m o.mm w.ms s.ma 4.0» pneumoe< sauna >.m w.aa p.0m H.os m.oa m.we atopspoqu amber - . nMooz mmmoa m mMcmk m Mom: H whoa no m : dowuwoc> wofinowopmo soaedom> Ho muwdwq a dam 90pm0d¢ Amman a manna: oncnso Mo mwdpsmonom d adv mmHmoomaoH Add 96 pascamwQMHm mm.mw n NN m. 3 06m mdm {mm .389 Squaw HRH Tmm m. mm 98 23.83 3.8m m .8 m .o... w . mm m ..a 2326an whoa no ma :Huw NIH onoz moauomcpwo Anodeod> c whens» wmonp Mo omdpsoosmm a may pnmfissm>o ha3< when hopQOdm Ahhommvdo a damp“: wheeze no swapnoonom d adv mamousaé $22 an EsszBzoov mama 20Hema Has as pesoseaamam ea.o: n ma m. m. m: m4 o.m m5» mém H38. oamasm a. m. H6 m. Lam To» #3 28.903 3.3m 5 e. s. mm. «A 3 .11. 9.3 232.0qu mfinw. peom madam msm dawns sec Hm>dna oz mowhomopdo eAQOHpeoe> m mqfimmp smog» mo cmeenooamm w mev nopmodd Ho>ena mo 0602 Ahhommpmo e manna: mumsso mo cwepqoosom e mev mfimoesafi EEoQ em Sweenezoov 2.3% 28.30% mm: memes 154 UFaLraF PFC +0 +‘fluc Tfl?‘tu.nv ...(E «u 0.. 1 Nb TS mim «.5 . m6“ Rm H38 Seed «.3 we... «.S m.m« Him €3.63. 3.8m N.mm m.mm m.:H I mumm :.: unopd>oan tea... $8-83 $9.8m more: 8H and 000m nun» mama «mahomobdo Aeoao>eup on: omonp mo mmepsmohcm w mmv acum06< Umam>dhfi mmHHE fleece Annomopeo a canvas whence mo cmdpsoohom e wev mfimoomeeo ”HERE em Anaefimzoov 2.3% ona6 Lama #8 0.0m 0.8 «.8 E. .830 «:33 , w on we macs .8 m meow: i 383 m s 2 « s 3 H 838.; 209.26qu a eem dogged, Mo ”~quva 326099 a mo mango mo omdpnmonom e 93 mmoagozfi .mo mBHmdm 20548;; on $3 «.mH o.mm m.mm :.wm Hopes mamaam mam>ma Had an panHMflqmflm mm.wm n mx mafia m.mm :.>m m.mm quofipfiuaoo afi< m.mm womm mama o.ma gmnmusnmfin ,o m.wa m.mm o.mm o.>m omamgm R, 1. Noam Noam 35mm N.Hm >8 Hoaoo whoa dug ma :Hnm mmma ho h mdoz mnoyuboan Aqowpwod> a mqwxdu mmonp mo mmwpnmonmm a may pamfiqgmbo aw34 mhwa ApOduOQA a mo mhmnso mo mmwpawohmm d adv mmoa¢5022H mo AQMDZHazoo¢ mBHmdm 20Ha 40m mumag 157 the table, the chi-square value drOps to 5.92, which is not significant at the 90% level. Thus, the other three product owners are not significantly different from each other in regard to number of days away from home overnight. The mode of travel is also significantly different. Color TV owners use the bus more than any other group. They also use the airplane in over representative amounts com- pared to the population which uses the airplane. Dishwasher owners use the airplane more than any other product owners. The distance traveled by innovators is significantly different as shown in Table SOC. There is no one product causing this distribution to be significant. When dish- washer owners are removed from the analysis, the chi-square Value drOps to 28013, which is still significant at all levels° When color TV owners are removed, the chi-square value is 46.99, which is also significant. More dishwasher owners travel less than 100 miles than any other product owners; conversely, more dishwasher owners travel 3,000 miles or farther than any other product owners. There is no distinguishable pattern for any of the product owners. Types Strategic innovators are significantly different from the functional innovators in respect to taking vacations, as shown in Table 51. Functional innovators take more vaca- tions than strategic innovatorsa The length of vacation m. _ m. _ m.: _ m.H _ o.m _ w.o~ _ m.HN _ Hapoa mamadm 326a is as pneoflaqmam mmfim u x N u w. N.HH >.H w. >.Nb m.mH Redefipficqoo HH¢ a. a. mi: a. 3 was was siesta a n m.: u m.m :.m> H.wd oouopm my . a m.ma 0.0H n 0.00 m.ma >8 noaoo mfinm pmom madam mum manna Ado Ho>wna oz mQOde>oan dAGOdeodb w mnwxdp mmonp Mo mmdpqmohom a may Hm>sha mo ado: Aposconm m «o whonao mo mmspamuhwm a may mmos<5022H mo AanzHBzoov mBHm men mqm<fi mHo>oH Add pa pndowmanmfim m>.Hm u N m m.mm m.mm m.e m.mm 0.: nanospseaoo HH< m.am m.mm m.m m.mm H.w umnmssnmsn H.om m.mm :.mm m.mm m.H omnmpm e.e m.m: m.HH m.om a.» >9 soaoo 9 5 tfié 83-0% $38 RTSH 8a was 000m nun» mmoq maOHpa>oan “9056099 a no mnquo mo-mmdpnmoaom a adv eoaw>ssa mess: dupes .Aposconm a no muonso no omwpqmoaom d muv mmce<>ozzH no AnmszHazoov maHmam 20Ha 00m mqm¢9 magma Han vs padofimadmam poz mm.m u NN magma a pm 95033me mun n «N «6 0.3 9?. mam 83 one panopgofia 3383 Na: ®.m._.. mfim m6: 0.3.. :.mw 629.33an oawopdnpm 332» ,w 985 .8 m 383 a $83 m £8: m at: H 8383, as an d 3 mad m as 53.3.; no :5qu den 6 ms” .8 p doam A093 6 QB»? 9386 Mo omdpumohwm a may 3890mm ho mania Mm mEHmdm 20Ha Hm a; 161 mi b hm _ mdm 9m: ~ «.3 m.% oHSoa oHassm HQEH *8 pm panoEquHm Hm.om n «x Ho>mH .Rm as $8832..“ +3.? u «x mdo>oa Ho>mH Rm pa paSHqumHm mud n mx HHs pa paaoHqumHm pea. .5. n ma m.m 9m H.mm m6: mHH no» emnopmog 3.8a Hfiofloqsa 06 ed mzmm mi: HJH 8m» sameness. 3.8m 05335 E83 20s .8 m E8: e 333 M £83 m s8: H I! . LI 838g 95. so. nodeoa> Mo npwqoq a cum omfifiamwwao uposconm bfibzbzfixvdm Hfiflfi 162 time, however, does not differ. The Opposite is true of the early adOpters. There is no difference, statistically, in the number taking vacations, but there is in regard to the length of the vacations. How- ever, no pattern evolves. That is, while more strategic early adopters take longer vacations than functional early adOpters, more strategies also take shorter vacations than do the functionals. No significant differences can be discerned between types for either innOVators or early adopters for days away overnight. The mode of travel for strategic innovators is differ- ent than for functional innovators. More functionals travel and use the airplane as a mode of transportation than do the strategic innovators. There is no discernible difference between the early adopter types regarding their methods of travel. Functional innovators show a different traveling pattern than do strategic innovators. The functionals are Widely divided, either traveling only short distances or traveling extensively, whereas the strategies tend to make medium to long trips, with fewer going a short distance. A slight difference can be found between the types of early adopters. More strategic early adopters traVel less than a hundred miles from home; more also travel 3,000 miles or over for vacations than do the functionals. mHm>oH HHu as pssOHMHanm mm.mm u NM mHm>mH HHa pa pneOHaHanm poz em.m n «x o.mH m.mm «.mm w.>m whopgo©¢ handm HddoHpquh o.mH m.om :.om e.mmv whopmoe< aHssm Omepespm mHe>oH HHs so useOHqumHm poz sm.m n «N 22 cu 0.:N P.0m m.:m >.om whope>oan addowpodSM N.mH >.om m.NN m.>m whopc>oqu camepuhpm whoa no ma :Hum NIH edoz make an Anoapdoe> 6 means» among mo mwdpsmoaom d mav dofiMHmmeHo mposooam pnwflnhm>o hw3< when Aomhp d manna: wheeze mo cmdvqeoamm a may maoenomm ac memes um AQMDZHazoov maHmam 20Ha oH Has no psonqume Nm.:: u NM mHo>0H HHs p... psaoEHamHm poz 2am u «x H. m. N.m N. m.N m.ON H.0N mk09®06< hHHwH HSoHpoqsm n m. m.w P. w.m m.ow m.om mumpmou< hHsem onmpgpm Ho>eH «.3 as paeonquHm 3.9 n mu N. m. m.oa :.H m.m m.m> >.:H unope>OQQH HQQOfipodsm m. m. :.m m. m.m H.m> m.ma mnopd>OQdH oamepahpm “Ham pdom madam mum nfidna ado He>ana oz mmha an dofiufimmddo mposdonm eAQOHpeod> d mqfixdp omonp no mmdpuooaom a adv Hc>wha no @002 Ammhp d aaavfik muonso mo omdpneOHom u may maoaacmm mo mamas Mm AQHDZHBzoov maHmdm 20Ha a 53 mHosoH,HHe we pqsOHeHsmHm mm.se n mx He>mH mam pa pseOHmHsmHm Hm.oH n ma w.sH m.em o.sH :.sm m.m unopmqe< aHsem HssoHpossa m.ow o.mm o.mH m.HN m.m myopm06< haadm onmuehpm mH0>0H Add #6 pudOHhHQMHm Hm.mm n NM mw e.gm m.Hm m.w -m.wm * m.m whopm>oqu HusoHpossa :.om H.mm «.mm m.mm m :.H msopa>oan OHmopespm w emwnwmum mmmm-oooH mmm-oow mam-o0H m sesmowmog mass an Adoao>dnp on: omen» Mo omupnmonwm a may dcflhfimmuao mposcoam 63.955”. mead; H308 Amman d nwnpfik muonkolmo cmdpuoonom d any mapbnomm ho mmmHB Mm AQHDZHBZOOV mBHmdm ZOHB “KN OUT \N-p-P-‘CD o o o a o o a o ”\OWNOQOU" *Total does not add to 100% as some respondents mentioned more than one. Several conclusions can be drawn from the information in the table above. First, over 20% of the sample did not remember, thus no particular source had any lasting influ- ence. Second, the classification "Other" was extremely high. This occurred most frequently with dishwasher owners where the home builder explained the product and made the suggestion. The other major influences under the category of "Other" were dealers who were personal friends and had suggested the products. Some respondents heard about the products in the course of business and did not consider the 170 source to be a friend. The most outstanding fact shown in the table is the importance of impersonal communications in relation to the formal media listed. This finding runs contrary to the results of farm research.1 The sociologists found that mass media was most effective in the awareness stage. It is interesting to note that store displays, point of sale merchandising, outranks the four major media, which are of relatively low size. Three of these, TV, newspapers and magazines, are very evenly distributed in their frequency. Missiles When the innovators are considering purchasing the innovations, to whom do they turn for information and advice? If they are among the first to buy, they can hardly use their friends and neighbors for advice. The answer to this question is that the majority do not consult outside the family. 75.2% of the respondents reported that they consulted no one outside the family when making the purchase of the innovistic products. Thus, while they frequently hear about innovations from informal sources, they evaluate the products themselves. While it was asserted that 75.2% did not consult anyone outside the family, this does not imply that the decision to buy is not evaluated. A question which appeared in a later section asked if they consulted for major purchases; 53.2% 1See page 42. 171 indicated they did so. Of those who did consult, the major information source is publications and organizations set up for providing con— sumer information. Over 74% of those consulting used such sources as Consumers Report,,Con§umers_§2ige, Changing Timgs and the Better Business Bureau. The table below shows the sources utilized as a per- centage of those consulting. Appendix D~3 gives the clas- sification system used. TABLE 54 CONSULTING SOURCES % of Those Source Consulting Consumer Publications & Organizations 74.1 Friends & Relatives 56.8 Media 22.4 Salesmen & Dealers 6.8 Technical 6.8 Other 13.8 Mggia Exposure It was indicated previously that the formal media did not seem to make an impression on the innovators as a source of awareness. From the above table it can be seen that the use of media for a consulting source is not as great as might be expected. The task is now to determine if these people get much eXposure to mass media. ‘Two media were examined in the reinterviewing performed. 172 Television The hypothesis was made that the majority of innovators watch television six or less hours a week. The reason for this hypothesis was that it was felt that these people, the innovators, would be extremely busy people. Attending meetings of social and civic organizations and pursuing their other interests, they would have little time for a wide eXposure to television. This hypothesis is false. In the table below, the answers to the question, "On the average, how many hours a week do you watch television?” are recorded. TABLE 55 HOURS A WEEK VIEWING TELEVISION No. of Hours % Responding Less than 6 19.3 6 but less than 11 12.8 11 but less than 16 11.9 16 but less than 21 6.4 21 but less than 26 14.7 26 or more 34.9 Thus, on the average almost 50% of the innovators get at least three hours of exposure to television per day. The exposure is there. It remains for marketing management to do a more effective job. Magazines The second medium examined is magazines. The 173 hypothesis was made that 51% or over of the innovators would have four or more magazines in the home, thus providing good eXposure. This hypothesis is valid. The 109 homes inter- viewed had 659 magazines; this is slightly over six per household. An indication of the type of magazine literature and the relative frequency can be seen in Table 56. The classi- fication scheme used is found in Appendix D-3. TABLE 56 MAGAZINES IN THE INNOVISTIC HOUSEHOLD . . % Obtaining Type of Magazine n:659 Home & Gardening 33.3 General Magazines 31.6 News & Business 7.1 Sports & Men's 4.7 Hobby 3.8 Fashion 3.2 Fiction 2.4 Buying Guides 2.0 Literary 1.7 Other 10.2 Again, marketers have knowledge concerning the type of media which gets into the innovistic homes. Shopping for Innovations Household appliances are normally considered shepping goods. That is, the potential customer travels from store to store before purchasing to compare product features and 174 prices between the various makes. Do innovators shop or do they decide on the product prior to going to make the actual purchase from the particular store chosen? Previously, it was hypothesized that peOple went to only one store before purchasing. Table 57 shows the number of stores visited before purchasing.2 TABLE 57 NUMBER OF STORES VISITED No. of Stores ‘ % Response* 20.2 56.0 10.1 10.4 15.6 3.7 More than 5 11.0 Ul-fi'WN-‘O *Total adds to more than 100% due to some respondents owning more than one product, and they may have visited a different number of stores for each product. Over 20% of the innovistic products were purchased from other than the normal source, the retail store; and these purchasers did not shop in any store. This raises some questions regarding the selection of channels for innovistic 20 means the product was not purchased at a store. One is interpreted to mean that customer went to one store and purchased. Two refers to visiting two and buying in one of those two, similarly with the rest. 175 products. One authority has questioned whether or not the same type of retail outlet should be used for innovistic products and another after the products have been accepted.3 He argues that the functions performed may differ radically; that the innovations need a retail outlet that will sell, while after being accepted, the role of the retailer is to provide selection.4 The above table clearly shows that the purchasers of these innovistic products are not shoppers. 56% of the products were purchased by looking in one store and buying the products. This would indicate one of three things: the consumer knows what he wants before looking, the retailer is doing an outstanding job of selling, or the retail outlets handling the innovations are very few in a given area. The only valid conclusion that can be drawn here is that the consumer innovators do not Shop in different stores to select the innovations. 222 flag 2: Credit It has been hypothesized that the purchasers of innova- tions would use credit. The hypothesis is not valid, however. Over 81% of the purchases were made on a cash basis. This is indeed surprising when considering the 3Perry Bliss, "Preretailing and Consumer Buying Patterns Over Time," Explorationa ia Retailing, S. C. Hol- lander, Ed. (East Lansing, Michigan: Bureau of Business and Economic Research, 1959). Pp. 271-73. 41mg. 176 substantial retail prices of the products being examined. Innovatora‘Aa Influentials This section is concerned with the personal influences exerted by consumer innovators in their roles as Opinion leaders and disseminators of information to their friends and neighbors. Previously it was shown that the research evidence to date on this subject was not conclusive. Some research findings have indicated they are watched but not followed. In an attempt to discover the role which the innovator plays as an influential, a series of questions was asked. The first query was whether anyone who might be interested in buying any of the innovistic products had asked to gag the ones owned. The answers to this question were that 49.5% did show the products to peOple but 49.5% did not, with 1% not remembering. There cannot be a definite conclu- sion with exactly the same prOportions given for yes and no. The hypothesis that the majority exhibited the products is therefore false. However, when the respondents were asked whether or not their opinions were solicited by potential buyers, 65.1% responded that they had been. 31.2% said they had not been asked, and 3.7% didn't know. Although slightly less than 50% exhibited the products, about 65% were asked for their Opinions. In attempting to determine the role of the innovator, 177 it is even more crucial to know whether any of the people who were seeking opinions or asked to see the products fol- lowed up by purchasing one of the innovations. Of those respondents who said they either were asked or demonstrated (75 respondents), 64% asserted that those people did purchase, 28% reported they did not purchase and 8% did not know whether the people purchased or not. Clearly, from the information given above, innovators do play a role in disseminating information concerning new products, and the friends and nieghbors who inquire about them follow up with purchases. This conclusion has meaning for marketing managers with regard to product planning and consumer panels. It is desirable to be assured that the respondents are a type of innovative leader among their friends and neigh- bors rather than belonging to a unique group. This is fea- sible by determining if their friends and neighbors own the same products and if they were purchased before or after the respondents“ purchases. It is possible that the respondents belong to social groups of which the members of the groups all own innovistic products. If this is true, then the respondents might not be influential among the groups, but rather followers. Emulation could then be a major factor in purchasing innovistic goods. The results of the reinter- Viewing indicate that the respondents do not belong to such unique social groupings where they might be followers rather than leaders. 178 When asked what preportion of their friends they would estimate have the innovistic products, they replied as shown in Table 58. TABLE 58 FRIENDS OWNING INNOVISTIC PRODUCTS # of Friends Owning Innovistic Products 75 Responding* All Most 2 Half 2 Few 61 None 9 Don“t Know 6 *Total adds to greater than 100% due to owners of more than one product with different numbers of friends owning. The innovators are unique, in the innovations owned, among their friends. Clearly they set the pace for their own social group. More proof of this is given in the next table which shows, on the average, whether friends purchased inno- vistic products before or after the respondents. Twice as many owners of the innovistic products bought before their friends. Again, it is established that the respondents are the leaders in their informal social groups. For marketing people the implications are clear. Inno- vators are the peOple who would be valuable for trying out new ideas and concepts in the product planning stage. Test 179 marketing should utilize these people for determining their acceptance and rejection. TABLE 59 COMPARISON OF TIME OF PURCHASE: FRIENDS AND INNOVATORS Time of Purchase of Friend % Responding* Before the Innovator 22 At the Same Time as Innovator 14 After the InnOVator 45 Some Before, Some After the Innovator 21 No Friends Own 9 Don“t Know 12 *Multiple product owners having different responses cause total to exceed 100%. CHAPTER VII SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The previous chapters gave a detailed and segregated analysis of the data relating to different kinds of variables. The summary presented here pulls together the findings and examines them as a whole for the meaning they have for positive marketing action. Egg Consumer Innovator Innovators constitute a unique marketing segment. It is desirable, therefore, to assemble a profile for these people. The.comparisons of the innovators with the two cone trast groups in terms of socio-economic variables were pre- viously shown in Table 5. To show how they differ, a com- pendium is presented in Table 6O° This table shows only the characteristics for the innovators and the early adOpters. The pOpulation or mass market characteristics constitute the basis from which the value of the variables, high, low or dispersed, are determined. The market for innovations has been delineated still further. It has been determined that the owners of inno- vistic products are not homogeneous in their characteristics. The strategic innovators, those who accept minor product alterations, were found to be different than the functional 180 innovators, those accepting more complex changes. EB] shows how these groups differ. COMPARISON OF PROFILES: AND EARLY ADOPTERS TABLE 60 Table 61 INNOVATORS Variable Innovators Early AdOpters Age _ Head Young Youngest Spouse Young Youngest Occupation Head Highly concenw Not as highly trated in Pro= concentrated in fessional and a specific.group Managerial group Spouse Little concen- Little concen- tration tration Education Head Very highly Highly educated educated Spouse Highly educated Average Family Income Highest High Ethnic Group Jewish, French, British, German, Other Europeans Italian Home Characteristics Ownership High ownership Highest ownership Structure Home Value Rent Number in Family Single and multi-units Very high value High rent Dispersed Highest single unit High value High rent Dispersed COMPARISON OF PROFILES: AND FUNCTIONAL INNOVATORS 182 TABLE 61 STRATEGIC Variable Strategic Functional Innovators Innovators Age Head Very young Young Spouse Very young Young Occupation Head Dispersed Highly con- between Pro- centrated in fessional‘Mana- Professional- gerial and Managerial Craftsmene Foremen Spouse No difference No difference Education Head Above average Very highly education educated Spouse Above average Very highly Family Income .Ethnic Group Home Characteristics Ownership Structure Home Value Rent Number in Family education High income Negro, French, Italian Slightly higher than average Highly con- centrated in single units High value High rent Dispersed educated Very high income Jewish, German, British Very high More highly concentrated in single units Extremely high value Very high rent Dispersed 183 When pinpointing the market for an innovistic product, the elemental step is to determine if the new product incor- porates a simple change or a complex change. One can then determine the type of people who are likely to constitute the early market. Innovators are a gregarious people. It has been deter- mined through the study that they are Joiners, belonging to varied organizations and having a cosmopolitan outlook. Yet, they are stable components of their communities and employment fields, being firmly established in their loca- tions both geographically and vocationally. Although they are widely eXposed to mass media, innova- tors do not recognize it as a source of information for new products. Informal sources of communication are the most effective sources for information, according to the innova- tors. It was established through the study that the innova- tors actually serve as a source of information for the inno- vations. They disseminate their knowledge of the new product in two ways. Their Opinions of the new product are frequently solicited by acquaintances, friends and neighbors The innovators also oblige when asked to demonstrate the new product. Many of these inquiring friends, etc., follow up by purchasing the products for themselves. Implications For Marketinnganagement The consumer is the focal point for marketing endeavor. 184 It follows from this market axiom that the better you know the consumer in the market, the better job you can do in serving that market. Profitably serving the market is one of the primary tasks of marketing management. The task can be performed prOperly only by keeping the resources of the firm in a constant state of adjustment with the market. To get the proper state of adjustment, market managers must be aware of market opportunities. Business firms are not unaware of a market for innova- tion. In America, acceptance of newness is a way of life and is firmly established in many segments of the economy. Much of business endeavor is focused on attempting to serve the market for newness. Innovations have become a major weapon in the competitive arena in which firms vie for the consumers' dollars. There is some indication, however, that the firms have not accurately interpreted the market for newness. The prima facie evidence for this assertion is the number of times the consumers exercise their veto power in regard to the product innovations offered. It would appear that busi- ness has not accepted a "market orientation.“ That is, it has not attempted to use the market as a focal point in planning marketing strategies and tactics from information gleaned in the market place. This does not imply that there would be no marketing risk involved if the market opportu- nity were appraised correctly. Marketing risk is inherent in any marketing endeavor. It does mean that a correct 185 appraisal of marketing opportunity may reduce the risk. This research has used the "marketing orientation“ philosophy. It has gathered information concerning the acceptors of newness from the original source: the accept- ors themselves. It remains to be determined what adjust- ments of the marketing mix might be made to best serve this marketing Opportunity. The Marketing Mix The potential marketing target has been defined in terms of socio-economic variables. It has been ascertained that the innovators who accept strategic innovations differ from those who accept more complex change, the functionals. Thus, the alterations of the marketing mix are dependent upon the type of innovation the firm is introducing. The innovators do not constitute a homogeneous market. Goods and Service Mix "The goods and service mix is concerned with all the ingredients which comprise the bundle of utilities that cus- tomers purchase. This includes such items as the product per se, the branding, labeling, warranties, and services accompanying the product."1 This mix is one which can utilize the type information obtained in this study. One example of how this is valuable 1William Lazer and E. J. Kelley (Eds.), Managerial Marketing; Eerspective and Viewpoints, Revised Edition (Homewood, Illinois: Richard D. Irwin, 1962), p. 413. 186 is in the area of product development. The consumers who are the first to accept newness could provide information in two ways. First, they could serve as a source for new ideas for products. What better source of new product ideas could be obtained than from the people most likely to purchase the new offering? Recalling that they are influentials in their social circles, they have the opportunity to sell the con- cept or idea before the potential product is introduced. Second, these peOple could be advantageously used in product testing. New ideas and concepts which have been found to be feasible from a production vieWpoint should be tested for consumer reaction. Since it has been determined that there is a unique market which first accepts newness, the most logical testing would be this potential market. After a record of the reactions of the innovators has been accumu- lated, it is possible that forecasting the rate of accepts ance of strategic and functional innovations could be achieved. For example, if over time a record was kept of the Opinions of the innovators, it might be that differing positive and negative responses could be scaled to the success and failure of products. Then by the reaction to g the test marketing of an innovation, the rate of acceptance 1 of the product could be forecasted. Distribution Mix The second sub—mix is the distribution mix. There are two major components of this mix: channels of distribution 187 and physical distribution. The former includes all the middlemen and facilitating agencies involved in getting goods and the title to goods to consumers. Physical dis~ tribution encompasses transportation, warehousing, storing and handling goods.2 The results of this research indicate there may be some adjustments of this sub‘mix when considering innovations. Over 20% of the innovations were purchased outside the retail establishment which is considered the normal retail outlet. It was also found that the majority did not shOp the retail outlets, but rather went to a specific store and purchased the innovistic product. The marketing managers might utilize this information by scrutinizing the type of distribution policy used by the firm. Selective distribution may well be more effective than mass distribution for innovations. It is also feasible that channels other than the normal ones could be more effectively utilized. The marketing of innovations may well require a different type of selling than established mer- chandise. Some types of retail outlets are more prone to offer different methods of selling than others. This area 1 needs further research before any conclusions can be made. . There is, however, sufficient doubt to warrant the marketing manager”s concern about the current adjustment of the dis- tribution mix regarding product innovations. 21b d. 188 Communications Mix "The communications mix is concerned with all the per- suasive and informational ingredients that are employed in communicating with the market place. Included are personal selling, advertising, sales promotion, merchandising, and special sales aids."3 This mix provides many alternative strategical and tactical maneuvers for the marketing manager. It is in this area that much of the information gleaned from the study can be used. Two ingredients of this mix are given considera- tion, advertising and personal selling. Advertising.--This study has shown that mass media advertising is not recognized as a source of information concerning innovations. The informal sources of information are much more recognized by innOVators. It has also been established that the exposure to formal media is quite broad. Two conclusions can be found from this information. First, advertising is doing an effective job and the inno- vators do not recognize it; or, second, advertising is not doing its job in introducing product innovations. Marketing management should be aware of this dilemma and determine which conclusion is correct. The information provided by the study of the socio- economic characteristics gives an indication of the types of 3Ibid. 189 media which would be utilized for selling newness. The types of magazines which are found in innovistic homes are designated. The educational level Of innovators was found to be quite high. The more complex the innovation, the higher the education of acceptors. There was also an indication that the innovators consult literature concerning the innovistic products and determine for themselves if they want the products. This would indicate that the level of advertising OOpy should be geared to meet this educational level rather than a mass market type cOpy. Effort should be expended to give them rational data which is of benefit in assessing the value of the product. The c0py should be detailed, since many of the innovators appear to be pre-sold. The research evidence indicates the innovators do not shOp and compare. Eersonal Selling,--The innovator appears to be the effective sales representative. It has been determined that innovators act as influentials within their circle of friends. They act as demonstrators and Opinion leaders. Therefore, the goodwill of the innovators is of importance. The innovators could provide a source of potential customers. Innovators know other people who might be inter- ested in the innovistic products. The sales to these people should be followed up. It is important that they have a favorable attitude toward the product. Perhaps the most effective salesman for innovations is a missionary salesman, who essentially attempts to obtain the goodwill of the 190 innovators. Pricing For some products, the pricing decisions depend upon the marketing mix selected. For other products, the price is set and the marketing mix is specified within the limita- a; tions of the price. Pricing and the marketing mix are : mutually dependent, and no discussion about marketing alter- ' i‘ natives is complete without consideration of the various alternatives available for pricing decisions. Pricing has traditionally been considered a function of cost rather than demand. The market orientation, however, requires that demand is of prime importance when considering pricing decisions. "New Product pricing is important in two ways: it affects the amount of the product that will be sold; and it determines the amount of revenue that will be received for a given quantity of sales."4 Two pricing strategies are possible when pricing a new product: "skimming" pricing and "penetration" pricing.5 The skimming policy is one of using high prices when intro- ducing the innovistic products. It has the advantage Of offsetting high costs of introduction and yielding a rapid payback. After the product has been on the market for a 4Joel Dean, "Pricing a New Product," reprinted in Lazer and Kelley, Managerial Marketing .~. . . , p. 464. 5;b1d., p. 465. 191 given length of time, the price is drOpped before penetrat- ing the market. This method of pricing assumes that there is a core Of the market which is interested in the product and price is not a deterrent factor in purchasing the product. The penetration policy is using a lower price in an attempt to get wide distribution more quickly. In this case there is the assumption that there is not a core of the market who will pay a higher price for the innovistic Offering. This research has delineated a market for newness. Both the strategic and the functional innovators were shown to have high family incomes. Given this information, it would appear that a skimming pricing policy has some valid- ity for the household appliance industry. W1 This section has briefly reviewed some of the more salient applications of the research for positive marketing action. This has been done by showing some of the adjust- ments which can be made in the marketing mix when the mar- keting endeavor is aimed at acceptance of innovation. The precise alteration of the marketing mix is left to the marketing managers. Their creative skills are required in the task of obtaining proper balance in the mix. It is left for the practitioners to incorporate information obtained from the study to gain a "differential advantage." APPENDIX A DEFINITIONS AND TERMINOLOGY AdOpter Categories This term refers to the segmentation of the market into ' ; distinct groups. The rural sociologists utilize five segments. This study defines three: the innovators (first 10% of market), the early adopters (10% to 50%) and late adopters (last 50% of the market). Only the first two classifications are analyzed. A third classification referred to in the study is the population or the mass market. This is used when ascer- taining what constitutes a total market if a mass appeal is used. The characteristics are inferred from a sample. Adoption Erocesa The steps taken by innovators from their awareness of a new idea or product until they have accepted it are termed the adOption process by sociologists. The five steps they have delineated are: awareness, interest, evaluation, trial and adoption. AdOption Rates AdOption rates refer to the time span between awareness and acceptance for various individuals. Some people accept 193 194 quicker than others; thus, different rates exist for different peOple. Contraat Groupa See adOpter categories. This study utilizes two contrast groups, early adopters and the total mass market. Early Adoptera See Adopter Categories. Innovation An innovation is the act of implementing a novel idea into a process or product. For an innovation to be success- ful, the process must be feasible or the product needs to have commercial acceptability. Innovator-~ConsumerrInnovator The consumers who are the first to accept product inno- vations are termed innovators or consumer innovators. This study operationally defines innovators as the peOple who purchase the product before it has achieved 10% market saturation. gaaa 2§_Product Products are normally classified into numerous cate- gories for analytical purposes. Often they are classified by industry lines: for example, food products, clothing, etc. The kinds Of products this study is concerned with are household appliances. 195 Market Saturation--Penetration These terms are used synonymously to refer to the rela- tionship of the number Of households which own a product to the number of households within a given market. Mass MAEEEI See POpulation. Population This term refers to the total market in a geographic area. The characteristics of the pepulation are inferred from a %% sample of the Detroit MetrOpOlitan Area. Given that a product has 100% saturation of households, the char- acteristics of the owners would be the same as the pOpula- tion. The terms sample total and mass market are synonymous with pOpulation in this study. Eypaa 2; Innovation Three types of innovation have been delineated. The basis for this delineation is the degree Of complexity Of change involved from the viewpoint of the firm and of the consumer 0 Strategic InnOVation This type of innovation is the least complex. It is a product alteration and does not perform a new function for the consumer. Changes in the behavior patterns are not necessary for the consumer. 196 FunCtional Innovation A functional innovation provides a new product to fulfill a previously fulfilled function. It is a new method of doing something previously done. For the firm, new materials and/or processes are required. For the consumer, it breaks with the traditional way and requires new behavioral patterns to be established. Fundamental InnOVation This type is the most complex, as it requires an origi- nal concept or idea. A new function is performed by the fundamental innovation. It is not a substitute; it requires newness for both the firm and the consumer and new invest“ ment for the firm, fulfilling a previously unfulfilled or unknown want for the consumer. APPENDIX B SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH There are several areas concerning the acceptance of newness which need further research. They fall into two categories: one relates to areas which are dealt with in this study, and the other concerns areas which fall outside the SOOpe of this project. This research is limited in scope in numerous dimen- sions. The geographic area and the kind of product studied are two such dimensions. Before generalizations can be made concerning consumer innovators, more products and markets need study. It would, of course, be desirable to duplicate this type of project in other geographic areas. Two findings of this study yield inconclusive results. First, channels of distribution need further researching in regard to innovations. Second, the role of personal selling for innovistic products should be examined in detail. Per- sonal salesmen are either doing a superb selling job, or the consumers are presold and the traditional emphasis on per- sonal selling is not required. Not included in this study, but closely related would be an evaluation of the socio-economic variables to deter- mine if any one or several variables are the most important. 197 198 It might be, for example, that income is the crucial char- acteristic and all others are incidental for innovators. The determination of the importance of each variable could be done by multiple correlation analysis. APPENDIX C INTERVIEWING DATA Appendix G contains the data pertaining to the original interviewing conducted in the Detroit Metropolitan Area. The appendix is divided into two subsections. C-1: The Interview. The questionnaire which was administered to the 5,456 respondents is presented. 0-2: The classification schemes utilized for two of the variables studied, occupations and ethnic groups, are presented. 199 ZOO APPENDIX C - l mm—WINION RESEARCH COMPANY Job No - 31 327 John R . 3500 Detroit 26. Michigan (Hamel! 5-6-7-8 “moon 9-10 Cece "0.21-2‘3-l‘ cm "0.2001 11 SHOPPING HABITS a: DE’I'ROI'I’EIS 1. About how many times have you shopped at age—h of the following places for other than drugs, food, hardware, etc. (convenience goods) during the & yon—12h? HAVE NUMBER OF OFFICE USE ONLY SHOPPED TIMES Code Col. 0C) Birmingham, Woodward 3. Maple """ _ _ Daily Paid 12 1(_) Dearborn, Michigan 8. Scheefer Sunday Paid 1 2C) Detroit Downtovm 3 N00 In Falls 1‘ 3C) Grand River 8: Greenfield ' Head 01‘ House aC) 7 Mile & GratiOt Age 1 5C) Eestland 5 Occupation 16 6C) Northland _ Education 1 7C) Royal Oak, hth a. Main _‘—’ 7 ’ e of 8C) Wonderland filling 15 9C) mtside Retail Trading Area Ownerehip , ‘ 19 RIC) Ann Arbor C.B.D. Rental ,0 RZC) Howell C.B.D. Income 21 RBC) Monroe C.B.D. Race 22 , 23 MC) Mt. Clemens C.B.D. RSC) Pontiac 1C) None of above Dining the past three months have you referred. to classified advertising in a Detroit weekday or Sunday newspaper with'reference to . . c RC) nor REFERRED To 1(:) seek employment 2 ) buy or rent a home or other real estate 3 buy furniture or other household goods A y a car or other veMcle 5(: buy or rent any other commodity or service (I) To finch newspaper did you refer? l(:) News 2(:) Free Press 3C) other: (Specify) (Continued ) 3. which Of the following MAJOR APPLIANCES do you have in this home, what BRAND is each and whet FUEL does it use? Tell me also whet YEAR each use bought and whether bought NE)! or USED .from whet type of STGIE and how for from home? Refrigerator Range Dryer-Clothes Water Hester Automatic Non—Automatic Incinerator xvi-Lox: Automatic Non—Automatic Ironer Sewing Meohine Vacuum Cleaner War Room Cooler Central System De-humidifier Diehueher Garbage Disposal M2 AM PM Ali—FM Television Block A White Color Record Player Iii-F1 Stereo issuinllisn (Des cribe ) § oi C) C) C) BRAND C) C) C) C) (Z) C) C) C) C) C) C) C) C) CODE Pm CR. FUEL EAR BOJGHT E C) ('1 0 C) F! 0 Q m O l"! O [‘5 O I?! O t1) {*1 L1) Fl (Continued) HOE (mu Miles) f I o l l v vvv F) I“) I“) I“) I“) V 202 h. Which of thBSe DAiLY newspapers were received or brought into your home yesterday and how? Which of these Daily papers were paid for and which. if any, received free BOUGHT 5: DAILY NEWSPAPms BY CAJLRDSH w W RECE PAID FR___E_E ROME _ Amara _ (: ) NEWS 1(_) 2L“) (.J K( :) (_ _) («REE PRESS (__) 5(_) 6(~) R( :) (__ ) WALL ST. JOURNAL MC) 2L“) 3(_‘) I)(_ ) (_ {ORK Til-(b5 5L ) ,.( ) 2(a) N :) 5. Which OTHER DALE: newspapers were received or brought into your home yesterday? ) Ann Arbor News 7 Lansing State Journal ) Mt. Clemens Monitor Leader ) Polish Daily News ._) Pontiac Press __) Royal Oak Tribune ) Toledo Blade ) Toledo Times ) Ypsilanti Press ) Others: >< 03V 0\U\ F‘WN H O AAAAAAAAA/x _) NONE :0 A 6. Which of these DAILY newspapers were read in this home and which were read outside the home by you and any other members of your family yesterday? FREE WALL ST. NW YORK NEWS PRESS JOURNAL lMES HOME 9;); 7“me O_uj HOME 99'; HOME M dusband Homemaker 7. Which of these SUNDAY newspapers were received or brought into this home last §und§y and how? Which of these Sunday papers were paid for and which, if any, received free) 0%HT& §UNDAY NEW§PA£ER§ BY CARRIER BROUGHT OTHERWISE ECEN FREE a my; LRELE. Lore. __ (_ _)NEw 1C) 2C) BC) XC) ( In; EEPRESS 1+(_) 5(__) 6C) R(__) (_ Nm YORK TIMES 1(__. 2( ) 3( ) l)(__) 8. Which LOCAL or COMMUNITY newspapers, came into your home during the E2£K7 (DON'T gIST Dailies, Fraternity, Church, Union, etc. papers 1. 3. 2. a. C) NONE 9. Have you received the Detroit Shopping News during the t k? — —- pas was 1( 2(__) NO (Continued) e “I I?) V L/V IAF V v B. 10. Now, tell me about the automobiles in this family? What make, year model, body typo. eto.f XER— m 39qu we New) ms NE. use mm ....” _ C) C) L.) __ __ C C) C) __ _ C) C) C) How many weeks VACATION did the head of the house have last year? Weeks (a) About how many days were you (as a family) away from home overnight during vacation? Days (b) How did you travel on this continent and about how far 1(:) Car Miles M 1:) Plano Miles 2(__) Train Miles 5(_ ) Boat _~_‘Hi1es 3(__) Bus _____hiles 6(_ ) Ship Niles Did any member of this family travel abroad last year? __ __ 1 (_) YES 2(_) NO Has anyone in this family been to the movies during the pa gt month? (Do not include school, church, club9 etc. showings) (“ ) YES “(") NO (a) IF I'YES‘", Where? l(__) Movie House 2 __) Drive—In Theatre 3(___ )Kisewhere About howw times has your family eaten out for DINNER (or main meal) during the past REBEL, Number (a) The last time you were out as a family, about er was it from home? Mi A,“ V Have you done any REMODELING in this home, such as finishing a basement or attic, a patioQ new room. etc. during the past 195:? __ -u 1(__)YF.S 2 (“MO (a) IF "YES", Approximately how much was spent for this remodeling, not including furniture and furnishings? 3 16. During the past month have you obneulted newspaper advertising before shopping for any of the following items . . . . (a ) IF "YES" Which consulted? g E V) 81:12 £3314 E fig gé ES OTHER R(::) Paint & wallpaper 1(:) 2(:) 3(:) MI) __ R(: ) Furniture 1(:) 2(:) 3(:) MI) __ R(__ —) Rugs 8: _ __ _. _. arsp est 1(_) 2(__) 3(___) h(_) .— :) R(: ) Hardware & __ __ .— To 013 1(___) 2(__) 3(_..) l+(:) __ R(:) Housewares l(:) 2C) 3(:) 4C) .— R(__) Tires & V 2C) BC) MI) .__.. (Continued) Accessories 1(:: 2(va 1']. “U" "Luv [wrrmnm Including ynurimil‘. urn living X.“ thin homo? 18. “09 many are male und how may are ferrule, and how old in ouch one? (Circle Husband and Wife) w mm 9222; Under 5 you” __ ...... 5 - 9 your-o ......” .._.... ...... 10 - 12 yearn 13 - 111 your!) _ 15 - l7 yours 18 - 19 yum-n __ 20 - 2h yam-H 25 ., 3a yours ..-... 35 - 1U; yonrn _____ _______ ______ “5 .. 5h yours __ _______ ____ 55 - 61; years 65 yam-n 6e oldor ____, - ...." 190 D“ TEENAOERQ IN FMILX, About how much a Hook does such have to opond outside of parental supervision? AGE aoxg 9mm WE “EARNED ____ _____ $___~___ $ .... ...... $m 3.....- .._.... ...... 3 $ 20. How many occupied dwelling units in this building? IND. 2.1. Do you own or rent this home? 1(:) (MN 2(:) RENT 3113312 IS A LAN? [0 mg: YOU IF flNQ, How much do you think you could get for this house if it. were put up for sale? ZCodo No.5 LE llENIflg. What in the monthly rent? (Code No.) 22. In this tho first home or this family? 1C”) ym __ N0 11“ gm)", Oivo previous home address of head (husband) IF "NO‘. Oivo address of last previous homo Number dc Streets Pinon (e State! When did you move to this address? M0. YR. WW 2). In which of those groups would you place your comma) FAMILY INCOME (before Federal Tax)? (Coda No.) (Continued) 204 Appendix C~23 Occupation Classification Professionals_Technica19 Semi~£rofe§sional Accountant; lawyer, doctorg artists trained nurse9 teacher, librariang social and welfare workersg chemists, clergymeng dentistsg veterinariansg aviators? draftsmeng laboratory techniciansg engineers including chemical? civil, electrical, industrialS mechanical and mining? etce Proprietor Owner of business Manager Hotel and restaurant managersg buyers and department heads in stores, floormeng credit men? purchasing agentsp ship captains, railroad conductors» manager of retail businesss construction inspector9 etco Executiverfficial Officials of lodgesg societiesg unions? etco - president39 etca ~ of large companiesg and public officialsg etco Clerical Worker Telephone operators secretaryg bookkeeperp accounting clerks postman, shipping clerks meter reader, etco Salesworker (Retail) Miscellaneous salespeople? comparison shoppers personal shopper, etco Salesworker (Other) Real Estate and insurance salesman” hucksterg peddler, demonstratorss etco 205 Skilled--Craftsman--Foreman All skilled labor such as tool and die, heat treat, welder, precision grinder, bricklayer, carpenter, bakers, pattern makers, piano and organ tuners, plumber, steam fitter, sheet metal tradesmen, machinist, mechanic, shoe- makers, watchmakers, engravers, motion picture projection- ists, lithographers, Job setter, lay-out man, electrician, railroad engineer, stationary engineer, etc. Operatives (Mfg.), §emi-Skilled Molder, polisher, grinder, any factory machine operator (which is not skilled) such as lathe, punch press, milling- machine cutter, grinder, railroad brakeman, etc. Operatives (other), Semi-Skilled Meatcutter, telephone serviceman, chauffeur, motorman, bus driver, crane Operator, truck driver, etc. Domestic Service Maid, nursemaid, caretaker, day workers, miscellaneous servants in private family, etc. Protective Service Policeman, fireman, coast guards, watchman, sheriffs, bailiffs, soldiers, sailors, marines, etc. Other §ervice Janitor, porter, elevator operator, barber, beautician, bartenders, maids, porters, cooks, etc., (except private family) practical nurses, waiters and waitresses, gas station attendant, etc. Common Laborers Floor sander, stock boy, packers, warehouse worker, assembler, street cleaner, construction worker, apprentice, high—low truck, etc. Appendix C-2: BR TI H, English Irish Scotch Welsh Canadian British Australian GERMAN Austrian German Mennonite Swiss FRENCH French French Canadian ITALIAN Italian Negro POLI§H Polish 206 OTHER SLAV C Czecho-Slovakian Russian Ukranian Yugo-Slavian Croatian Serbian Bohemian §CANDINAVIAN Danish Finnish Norwegian Swedish Icelandic OTHER EUROPEAN Belgian Dutch Estonian Latvian Lithuanian Albanian Chaldean Dalmatian Bulgarian Greek Hungarian Macedonian Maltese Rumanian Ethnic Group Classification A IAT C Armenian Arbian Lebanese Syrian Turkish Chinese Filipino Hawaiian Indian Japanese OTHER AMERICAN Indian (Native) Latin American Argentine Mexican Portuguese Spanish American (U.S.A.) APPENDIX D REINTERVIEWING DATA Appendix D presents the data of the reinterviewing procedure. The data are given in three sections: D-1: The interviewers' instructions D-2: The Questionnaire with supporting data D-3: The classification system used for the Open end question. 207 208 Appendix D-1: Interviewers” Instructions Michigan State University ,Lnstructions Names and addresses are provided for your use. Please do not substitute other than a spouse. No children under 19 are to be interviewed. If peOple who live at that address do not correspond with name you have, do not interview. Go on to the next one. Product Description , 'f stereophonic may be a relatively inexpensive set or N an extremely elaborate one. Record regardless of size. N] Some will be in combination form; i.e., they will 1 consist of a unit which has TV-Radio, etc. They are to ;€ be included. Hi F1 is M to be recorded. 1;; Air conditioners may be either room or central. H Both are to be included. ,guestions If they do not own any of the products, thank them and go to next name and address. If own, continue rest of questionnaire. Check box for ones owned. Record last two digits of year of purchase. Put in numerical order as they mention. Refers not to brand, but to product. \0 CD VVV 209 Do not include salesmen. Refers only to the products owned. Ask only if 5 and/or 6 was answered yes. Self-explanatory Include any type credit. Record all mentions. Probe with "anything else." After they are through, hand card B for any others. State each class and give examples of each. Social includes such groups as; Fraternal, Veterans, Country Club. Civic includes such groups as: Lions, PTA, Political, Cultural organizations. Professional ~- self-explanatory. Religious -~ self-eXplanatory. If always lived in Detroit area, record as never. Current job refers to position within the firm. Circle "her" if female is head of household. Employed by the company refers to length of service with the firm. 20) 210 Previous employer refers to the one before the current employer. Probe for additional information. Rank responses in order given. Refers to the respondent only. Attempt to get them to think of day and night viewing. Attempts to find out if respondents use outside information. Probe for additional sources. o0 211 Appendix D-2: Letter pf Introduction MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY East Lansing College of Business Department of Marketing and Transportation Administration Dear Consumer: Your family has been selected to help represent the Detroit MetrOpOlitan Area in a scientific survey now being conducted by the department of Marketing and Transportation of Michigan State University. This interviewer will not ask you to buy anything. He has nothing to sell. His questions pertain to facts regarding certain products which you may own. If you should have any questions, call Michigan State University 355-4616. Thank you for your help in this scientific experiment. Sincerely, William E. Bell Project Director U -2 9. Appendix Buying Guides Consumers Report Consumers Union News Q Business Business Week U.S. News and World Report Newsweek Time Forbes Fortune Home s Fashion House and Home Better Homes and Gardens Living for Young Homemakers Ladies Home Journal Good Housekeeping The American Home McCalls House Beautiful Vogue Seventeen Glamour Charm Mademoiselle Woman's Day Family Circle Professional Journals Frsternal Magazines Magazine List WW Harpers National Geographic Esquire The New Yorker Playboy Life Look Saturday Evening Post Readers Digest Holiday Coronet Redbook Parents" Fiction Modern Romances Modern Screen True Confessions True Experiences True Love Stories True Romances True Story MW Entertainment TV Guide Movie Magazines Theater Magazines 213 Appendix D-2: Questionnaire Michigan State University Questionnaire Good morning. Is your name 7 My name is . I am doing some survey work for Michigan State University. Your name has been selected in a sample and I would like to ask you a few questions. We are attempting to gather facts regarding the people who own (hand respondent card) Color TV, Stereo, Dishwasher or Air Conditioning. 1. Do you own any of these products? 2. When did you purchase the product(s)? 3. How did you first hear about the product(s) oWned? News- In Maga- 4. Did you consult anyone outside your family before making the purchase? Consulted Not consulted D.K. 214 Has anyone else who might be interested in buying any of the products asked to see yours? Yes No D.K. Has anyone else who might be interested in buying one of the products asked your Opinion of the product(s) you own? Yes No D.K. (Ask only if 5 and/or 6 was answered yes.) Have any of these peOple purchased any of these products? Yes No D.K. a) What prOportion of your friends would you estimate have these products? b) On the average, were they purchased before, at the same time as, or after your purchase? At the Some Before How many stores did you visit before purchasing? 215 10. Did you use credit to purchase any of the products? 11. What magazines do you have in your home? a) b) Any others? c) Show list for others. 12. We would like to list the type organizations you belong to. (Give class and examples of each.) Social Professional Civic Religious 140 216 (Wayne) How long have you lived in the Detroit area (Oakland)? (Macomb) Less than 1 yr. 1 to 2 yrs. _2 to 3 yrs. 3 to 4 yrs. 4 to 5 yrs. 7 Longer than 5 yrs. How long did you live in the previous area (other than 3 county area)? Less than 1 yr. 1 to 2 yrs. 2 to 3 yrs. 3 to 4 yrs. 4 to 5 yrs. Longer than 5 yrs. Never How long has the head of the household held his/her current job in the company? Less than 1 yr. 1 to 2 yrs. 2 to 3 yrs. 3 to 4 yrs. 4 to 5 yrs. Longer than 5 yrs. Retired Unemployed Self-employed How long has he/she been employed by the company? Less than 1 yr. 1 to 2 yrs. 2 to 3 yrs. 3 to 4 yrs. 4 to 5 yrs. Longer than 5 yrs. Retired Unemployed Self-employed 217 17. How long did he/she work for his/her previous (last) employer? First Job - no previous employer ____ Less than 1 yr. _____ 1 to 2 yrs. 2 to 3 yrs. .___ 3 to 4 yrs. 4 to 5 yrs. ____ Longer than 5 yrs. Unemployed Self-employed 18. In what type of recreational activities do you as a family participate? 19. On the average, how many hours a week do you watch TV? , Less than 6 6 but less than 11 11 but less than 16 16 but less than 21 21 but less than 26 26 or more 218 20. Do you consult for major purchases? Yes No D.K. A) If yes, what sources? B) Any others? Appendix Q-i: 219 Classification 9; Recrestional Activities Number of Mentions Participating Sports Swimming Bowling Fishing Camping Golf Boating Ice Skating Skiing Tennis Badminton Hunting Roller Skating Water Skiing Handball Tobogganing Canoeing Riding Hiking Family Outings Picnicking Fairs Hayrides Zoo Lake Cultural Activities Travel Movies Reading Music Concerts Museums 16 '-'I\)U'1 __1_ 47 14.2% Spectator Sports All Sports Football Baseball Basketball Games Cards Croquet Chess farming Dancing Parties Dining Hobbies Photography Antiques Railroad Models Stamp Collecting Gardening Go-cart Other Church Activities Scouting Family Sports Y.M.C.A. Civic Activities Shopping Visiting Number of Mentions 7 4 4 .__2_ 7 5.1% 5.1% 3.6% 2.1% 3.6% 221 Appendix D-i: Classification pi Magazines Number of Mentions Home ppd Gardening Better Homes and Gardens 37 McCall°s 37 Ladies Home Journal 34 Good Housekeeping 3O Woman“s Day 25 Family Circle 20 The American Home 12 House Beautiful 9 House and Garden 6 Home 2 Flower Grower 2 House and Home 1 Living for Young Homemakers 1 Womans Home Companion 1 Popular Gardening 1 Organic Gardening 219 33.3% General Magazines Reader‘s Digest 52 ife 51 Look 29 Saturday Evening Post 26 National Geographic 19 Redbook 14 New Yorker 5 Holiday 5 Parents 3 Coronet 2 CosmOpolitan 1 Christian Century 1 208 31.6% News apd Business Time 18 Newsweek 14 U.S. News & World Report 7 Business Week 4 Forbes 2 Fortune 2 Sports and Men“s Sports Illustrated True Argosy Field and Stream Outdoor Esquire Playboy Others Hobby POpular Science POpular Mechanics PhotOplay Others Fashion Seventeen Vogue Glamor Mademoiselle Charm Fiction True Story Modern Romances Modern Screen True Confessions True Love Stories True Romances 222 Number of Mentions manure-ewe] 31 MUlUl 25 h) dmwuunox Oxlmmmrowm 4.7% 3.8% 3.2% 2.4% 22} Buying Guides Consumers Report Changing Times Kiplinger Reports Consumers Digest Literary Harpers Saturday Review American Heritage Literary Digest Scientific American Other Children and Young People“s Religious Professional and Trade Unclassified Number of Mentions 224 Appendix D-3z Classification pf Sources Consulted Consumer Sources Consumer Buying Guides Dun & Bradstreet Better Business Bureaus Friends and Relatives Friends Doctor Associates Family Other Owners Media Brand Names Newspapers Advertising Magazines Stores Television Sslesmen and Dealers Salesmen Dealers Technical EXperts Service Manual Other Literature General Number of Am 38 1 .i 43 «Jmca and we poecnmnemam pcz m:.m n ma mac>ca and we encouMnemem so.mm u mx m.m N.OH 95 N6: H.308 camaom m.: m.HH m.mw s.we mocpooe< sages w.» m.ma w.ms m.:m unope>oodH nose» I u 8 onofi .3 OH 853 m m 33.3 d H wofihomopoo % poo mquQ H9309“. A950 mdanfip coon» mo owopqoonom c any "Soc: Mom 50 madam ho hoaoswouh anemones o n33”: gonzo mo owwpqoonom o mov mmHmoneca mom pa pascaufiemnm mm.ma n «x mac>ca nae ac poocademHm mo.mm n ma m.oa >.ma m.ms :.mm coconpnecoo ae< ~.m :.>H m.m> H.m> nonmoznmfin 0/ p.m N.m H.mw m.m: oonovm 2 9. - m.am H.m> H.mw >9 ocaoo onowcmwcoa moss» m-m moss» e-a poo woman meowpm>0qu Apso maficfld coon» mo omovaoonom c any name: new poo wondfin no hoooswonh Apoddonm o no unease mo omopnoonom o mov mmoa<>ozzH mo mBHm¢m 9:0 wZHZHn Huh xHszmm< m.m N.OH m..HH F.0H m.mm m.:m m.m: myop906< Adana HmnOHpoqdm o.®: mnopmoe< adhom osmoponpm Hc>ca Rom we pcccnunemnm mm.m u mx mac>ca and we pcecnuaemnm om.wm n ma no 4 my o.m H.mH m.:> H.mm myopo>oqu anachrondh N.m H.HH >.mw :.>: whopo>oqu onoponpm moan» u I whoa no OH moafip m m mosap : H omha an 5 o p o m can ecauammeao mpoeeosm A950 Mdfiowo omonp mo omovnoonom o mov nude: 90% #50 mcficfin Mo hododdohh Aomhp o manna: muonzo mo omopaoonom o wmv maobnomm ho mmmwe Mm mBHmoeeH cHIo>fism 1 one nopocga ononzomflm cHIoeflsm seasons npcos nod mownomopoo coco pmooa Aoopcoppo on: omonp mo omopcooeod o mov nopdop¢ cmzom ofl>oz mo make no pouaopp< “anomoumo o mange: mnoczo mo omopqoonon o may mmHmowme< Dampofi camsmm Ho>0H &mm pm #fimOHmflflmwm Om.HN I NM Ho>oH fimm #6 FQNOHMHGmHm mm.¢H u NM m3 1 oo 9% e. mm necoeeeecoo one ©.HH 1 q.HH v.05 N.w© nogmosnmwa m 0...; H4 53 see «.3 .833 I I H.wd w.Hw w.®¢ >8 MOHoo cHnoban who “mesons ononsomam QHto>HnQ nopoona apnea nod coco pmooa myopo>oqu Apopsoppo on: omonp mo omopcoosod o mmv omdom ofi>oz Mo mama .... $233. v.0H m. o.ma H.0b h.h¢ cameos ceases .HeeeH an. ce eeeonueemem eoz Hm.m M Na mHo>oH Had no pamONMquHm ob.mH I NM H.ea m. e.OH o.me m.mm wooedcea eases Heeoeeceea w.mH 1 m.HH N.N> o.N© mnopmop4 hanoa oamoamnpw mambofl Ham am FQSOHMHQMHm am.mm u NN mHo>oH Had no pamONMMGmHm poz mm.N n Nx w o. 1 H.m v.0 N.Hm 0.00 whopo>occH HoQONpocdm m.HH o.H m.HH m.mb w.mm monopo>ocsH owwoponpm ano>Hum use geneous ononsomam cHno>Hna nopmona npcos sod came an coco pmoofl Apcpnopwo on: coonp mo omopcoosom o wov pofimwmmoau woodwosm pHom oncom mo came as eoeeeeee Aomhp o canvas mnoczo mo omopcoonom o mov meosmomm mo mmmwa Hm meHmoH Had so psoOfiqumfim oa.om u NM mHo>oH Has an psoOHMHcmwm om.NNN u NM 1 m.H e.aN H.5s b.qw Hopoe cannon .. e. H 98 Rec mom Spaces. aid A. mu 1 o.N N.oan ones so m once so m N a use one mofinomopoo ooc3o memo mo nopssz pmooa pa mcso nopdop< Abnomopco o canvas wnocso Mo omopcoonom o may mMHmocmeso mmemomd Mm mHmmmmzzo qumOEOHD¢ mum NHQszmd 1 m.H <.HN H.s> b.¢w Hopes magnum 383 do we €83.23... mwfim .... mg Seen an. a. HSRHWS 8.3 u we 1 o.N w.om N.oo m.mm homoepwpnoo MR4 1 o.m 0.0m «.0m o.mo nonmosnmwa E 1 ON m.©N v.12. .1ch oohopm o. 1 1 H.Hm m.m¢ 0.00H >8 noaoo once Ho m e no n N H see one mcowpo>oan posse mace Ho sopssz posed pm maze Apocponm o no mncq3o mo omopcoonom m may mmoa¢>OZZH mo mHmmmmzzo qumozoaD< mum NHszmm< magma .26 Be pcoonSmHm 8.3 ... NM 333 So as pcooESmwm wmdm ...... NM not; use a. 2.8323... omé m. mg 22.3 S. a. eeecflnemnm no.3 m «a 1 w.H m.wN m.wo w.om unopmopa manna Hocowpoqsm 1 Sm New same 18 $8.83. 33m endoscope mo, 2 3.53 is ..e peaceaeemem one... n NM 393 an. ..e Hosanna eoz No.4 n ma 1 o.N w.a¢ m.mm e.gm mnopo>oqu adcowpondm 1 w.H m.bN m.o> ®.Nm whopo>occH onmopmnpm once so m Q no N N a you one came poqzo memo Mo nonasz paced we mcso an powmfimmoao oposponm o P o aflgpfis mnoczo no 0 oeoooso o on ma m a weoboomm mo mmmwa Mm mHmmmmzzo qumozcaba mum NHszmm< H83 new a. peeoeueemem 3.8 n ma m.NN H.em b.Hm o.mm o>.H Hopes oaasom H..®m o.o< w.o< >0.N oncogene haan 7 a QR ed. mam mam cod matted unmade» manna VH1OH mam and m paonowdon nod awesomopoo nonudwno mo Ampaoaomdon Hopop mo omopcoonom o mov hopmopd nonpflwno mo nonempwnpmfia om< sopssz omono>¢ mmHmome«o mmamom< mm ZOHBDmHMBmHQ mod mHmmB 02¢ ZHMQAHmo mo mmmzbz mo< film NHszmmd m.NN H.¢m h.Hm ©.mm oo.H Hopoe camsmm Ho>oH find we psoofimwcmwm HH.wH I NM b.mN N.Hm 0.0m w.mm OD.H HOGOHPHwnoo hfifi m. ..Vm m. . Nm 0 . miw N. . on .3. N Hmnmmafimwn m m.mm 0:3 N.N.V 0.3 mH.N oohmpm mow Q.MN b.v¢ D.Qm MV.H >9 HOHOO maloa occH Ampaonomdon Hopop mo omopcoonom o mov nonpawno Mo :oHPSQanwHQ omd nopssz omono>< mmoa<>ozzH mo ZOHHDmHMBmHQ mu< mHmmH Q24 ZHmQAHmU mo mmmzbz mudmm>4 «uh NHszmm< . [11...]1.‘ 11 . «.mm H.em e.Hm e.mm oe.H fleece cadeem unseen and p. ecsoaeaemam we.me n ma camped nae e. eoeoeceemem cm.mm u an o.MN m.ov v.0e o.uq do.N myopdoc< manna Hosonpoosm q.Nm u.m< N.®m m.mm mm.H whopmoua manna onmoponpm o, mHo>oH Had no pcoOHMHcmHm poz mm.H u NM my m.mN w.Nq N.mm 0.0m so.N myopo>oncH quowponsm e.am c.He o.me o.ee HH.~ mnoeeeoeeH cemoeecem nom2505 came soanNSo mo Ampflosomdon Hopop Mo omopnoonoa o mov an umwmammoflo mpofiponm coanHAO Ho :owpfinwnpwwn om¢ Honsuz omono>4 maosaomm ho mmmwa Mm ZOHBDmHmamHQ MUN mHmmB 924 zmmnAHmu mo mmmzbz mu< Vim NHszmm< 23 0.3. new TR do... Tm H. deuce mason 1 1 0.02 1 1 1 1 .Sea 24 MW 1 b.0H o.a< o.mN b.0d 1 I conga hq< 2 0.... 0.0... oz: ode 04... o; 1 2a Re . posse .83. 31% :13 31% SAN S18 $13 one mm moofipoooan vaogomSOm no poem Mo coagdnwnpmwn omd mo nonssz Ad Has no .m and .N has Mo mnos30 yo omopcoonom o mov mmoe<>ozzH aopnomm HAMHBADE mo nAomMmDom mo madam mo ZOHBmmHmBmHQAHwN mlm Nanmmm< H. Tm 0.0 mama 0.5 0.8 new me n. Hopes cacao... I I I I 0.00H I I I I hook HH< 1 1 1 sea 9mm 04o ex: 1 1 8.30 .8... M 1 04.. 0d 0.3 0.3 0.0m 0.0a 0.0 1 2.0 Re a posse e330 ...... 0 .83. 313 R13 311% TR H18 $13 902 oz poo mo mcowpo>oan cowadpwnwmfin om< mo nonszz an Had no .m has .N has no mnocso ho omopcoouom o may mmoe<>ozzH Bopmomm mamHaqu mo mmmpomm ho ZOHBDmHmBmHn mw< mlh Nanmmm< m.o 0.0H .1m.m 0.5 o.mH H.bH m.# H.¢ w.HN aduoa mamswm 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.03 .300 20 1 1 1 1 1 0.0a 1 1 «.mm $.30 by» 9. M 04 0:0. 1 0.m 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.m 0.3 0:0 .84 Mu w. M000 nu nu Tuna 00 m mu m... m 0 ... m ....“ mm m1 m p m. .23. 0 TL. 0 «M1. M. Tu Thu HT 0 S T.- q a a t. a I e a u o s u e e a o a“ o m s a m.s ...fl D. J S 8 I m 9 I I. o s M m u 00 o mnofipwboqu M s e e W e u m T. no nonssz mnowpwmdooo Aq Hfld no .m and .N and mo mumg3o Mo mmdpnmonom w adv mmoe¢>022H Bopaomm mquaADz mo mqommmpom ho mnb o.H w. w.m w.H H. H.N m.¢ m.m dance mamawm I o.ooa I I I I I I I I agom HH< I 0.00H I I I I I I I I conga ha4 0.m 0.1% 1 1 1 1 1 04 0.0 0.0a 2; 3 Nu .wm mm w m. mm. m an Mam. m m a. 2 m m... ... m m. 1 pm. 0 a 0 10. S J t. n J 9 m. 3 Jul. 0 S I. a 608.8 9 u 9 8 J O 1.. 0 S U m MS J D. J S e I. I m S S o s A e a T1 t. w w m u e o mnoflpm>oqQH e u 1m. 8 mo nonssz macapwmsooo Av Had no «m and AN and no mawnzo no ommpqoonmm a may mmoed>OZZH Bosnomm MAmHBADZ ho mmmpomm mo 20Ha«mmooo mlh NHszmmd .QOprodvo on 003 wHQSdm egg mo fimn .Haw no pn0m umpwamfioo mmusaonHw 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 .30 0.0.0 $300 3050 1 1 1 0.000 1 1 1 1 .800 S0 1 1 1 0:3 1 0.00 1 1 $50 .8... M0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 030 .80 2 SN S N 9 Ta 0 O 0 S H 0 H S S no 0.0. .0 o 0 0. 01m 01 m on. m a.“ m m .0 0+ n p 1. Id I 8 U. d U. 6 O D. e s m a T. a .L o e umzzo p 9 an 3 on S 9 S I 01.. 8 1. e 0 1. D B e e U. 9 U. D. m D. m mqowpm>onQH T. T. soapmodwm mo Hogasz Av Had no «m ham “N and mo wnmnzo mo owapnoonmm 0 00v mmoe«>OZZH Boomomm mquaqsz mo mambomm mo 20Haoqu u 0 mo 009352 0000000000 000000 Ad HHw no .m and .N and mo 000030 mo mmaaqmonwm 0 00V mmoa<>OZZH economm mquaHDE mo azuomomuoqu Amhmnaooaog 0H0 oz: mmoap mo omwpanhom a mwv msam> 030m mo Amnafiz Av Had no “m haw .N mam mo mnmgzo mo mmmpnoonmm m mmv mmoa¢>ozzH Hommomm ”Swag: mo mod; 58m mlh NHszmm¢ 250 <.oa m.mm O.wN H0000 ofimswm 0.00H hdom HH< mmhfla %9« 039 ma< OHOE go 00H0 mowlmb% 000I000 0m0I000 00% 9059 mwmq “pamh 0g: wmogp no wmwpgoonom w mmv pqmm magpqoz wmgzo macwpd>oan mo 000002 Av Had no .m has .N and mo mnonzo mo omwpsmonwm w mwv mMoa4>ozzH Hopnomm mqueqoz mo 92mm Mamazoz mlm NHszmmd m. m. N.H w.H m.< o.o N.©H 0.0H m.wH w.mm m.< advoa mamadm I I I I I I 0.0m I I o.Om I nsom Had I I I I 0.3 man I m.m 0.0a m.m I 8.20 0: mu I I o.N o.H 0.0 0.0H o.oan haflawm aw 903552 Mo 909552 Aw Had no .m hdw «N ham mo mhmqso Mo omdpqOonmm d mwv mmoa<>022H Bosnomm MQAHBADE mo MQH2 00 0000000 0.0 0.0 0.00 , 0.00 «.ma 0.0m paupoa oflaawm I I I 0.00H I 0.0m anon HH< o. I 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 m.mm 00900 0:4 5 “4 H.> 0.00 «.mm m.0m 0.0a 0.mm 0030 0:0 mxmmz names 0 mxooz m 00003 m 000: H 00030 whoa no m nofiwwoa> mqoflpw>onnH 083033 H0 npwqoq m vum mo 93052 Av HH0 no «m an“ “N mud Mo muonso mo mmmpnoonom 0 may 30949025 988% @4355 mo 3ng 205435 mum NHszmm< I'll-III- .HOHpapnommadnp no 0005 wqo nan» whoa mdfims mpnuuqommwh on 050 mOOH on 000 you 005 030mm m. m. 0.: m4 o.m 0.00 0.8 .033 $950 I I I I I 0.03 I .300 a 4 I I 0.0: I I 0.00 0.3 3.5.0 03¢. 5 2 I «A 4.00 I I mam mad 9.0 00¢ mwnm adom wnwam mum aflwha ado Hm>wna oz amaze mnoapmboqu dAaowvdodb a mqfixdp wmonp mo mmdpdoonmm a may Hw>ana no @002 Mo anfidz A: add no .m and “N haw no mnonzo no mmdpaoonwm a wwv mmoa§ofizH 5800mm Eggs: .mo AEHBZOUV mama 23.535 th Nanmmm< I .n.v.vI.t.. >.~H m.:m m.pa “.mm m.m dupes camawm I I n o.ooa I finch HH< 0.0: 0.0m 0.0H I I moans za¢ m.am :.mH m.ma H.0m I 039 and 5 Mo 35.43 . 8H 23 88 mmmNIOSH $38 $903 :3... $3 885 macaum>oquH Adwam>dAp on: vmonu mo wmopqmonoA a may coao>dna moafiz H6908 mo nonasz A: Add 90 ‘m and am and mo mhmqso no umwpqoonom d mdv mmoa¢>ozzH apanomm mgmHagpz mo AanzHazoov maHm¢m zOHa¢u¢> mnm MHszmm< m.m «.3 9:0 «.0: H.300. 3050 I 0.0m 0.0m o.ooa much HH¢ I m.mm . p.00 0.8a 8.50 I92 mda 0.3 mi. 0.? 25. 00¢ ,0 we onzo may a? 0903 mIm 0059 :IH 0 0903 no 0H #50 mvnfin mq0fi96>onnH A950 mqwnfid omonp mo omdpaoonom a may npnoz Mom #50 manfin mo hoavsdohh no 909352 A: Has ho 0.m and «m 500 mo mhmnso mo mmdpamonom a may mmoa¢sozZH Bonacmm mAMHBAnz m6 mBHm >.>: daupoa oamadm I I I 0.00H 0.0m “dom.HH< I I I o.ooa o.mr vmhna hn< dm I Qua 0.5 000 9.0.. E 7 :J o; aHIo>fiHQ gunofi hum douse dam whogsomdm aHIo>HHQ hmpwmga headway mono pmwma mpozconm Aomdqova on: mmogp no omdpnmonwm a may mmsom mw>oz we make pa dvunoppd no A0AESZ A: Add no am and am and no mnmqso no omdpnmonom a may mmoad>ozZH Bobncmm mquaADz Hm maHmOQQH dunno mndo mo nonfiuz paced ya onto no honasz A: Had no ~m and .m and mo mnmn3o no omd¢noonum a adv mzounagozfi 988mm EH5?” ho Range Emozog< th anzmmm< 259 m.Nm Him TAM 9mm 2.4 H.309 oamadm 0.0m I I I 00...” .500” a 0.0m I 0.0m m.m® m®.m 00.38 3 023 0.9.. 0.9.. Cd: 31m 25. and 3930» 0.03033 I HI .n am @085 ma 9.. m o 0 find m Hum qehoafino 303:0an no “09352 Amcdoaouson H.269 mo omopqwonom a 0.3 039330 no moansnfinpuwn ow¢ 03.805. no 900.352 ? ado no «m and am and no 0.388 no owdpnoonom a may mmoa<>ozZH 988% Egg .3 zOHHbmHmBmHn mo< MHMEB n24 zmeHHmo .8 $9.52 mu< th finanmg IIIWII ’II I .. III! ..III . I ... IIIIIInIfl? ill. L‘ w .I!!! 261 H. m.m 0.0 m.ma 0.0H 0.00 0.00 m.m m. H0009 magnum 0H0>0H HH0 00 pnuofiMflanm 00.00 u «x H. m. 0.0 0.0 ~.ma 0.0m :.mm H.> a. 00000 0000000 I m. 0.0 0.00 0.ma H.mm 0.Hm 0.: I Hamommfin 0000 I 0.H 0.0 0.0 0.00 H.mm m.:m H.m m. HmIHm 03.00% 098mm .803 I m 000 oz 0.; m0 0% +0-? 01% $3 $-00 3-3 0030 .80 03 hagam 000 000000000000 00¢ 00 00000000 Apodconm .0 no 20800 no mmdvnwonmm .0 0.3 mmmamog wag ho mambomm mo ZOHHbmHmamHn m3. mIm anzmmm< m.m 0.0a m.m 0.» 0.0a H.~H m.: H.: m.am H0000 mamaam 0H0>0a add 00 pqaofiqumfim H>.maa u mx H.m 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 m.: m.m H.Hm 00000 nonpoao 0.0 H.~ H.: m.m 0.0a m.mH H.m H.: 0.0: Hamommfin 0000 A: m.m ~.m 0.00 N.» 0.00 0.0a 0.m 0.: 0.00 Hmwfim 6 2 I N H 1 MS mw M. S m m H m. m. m. m. mw m mm 0 m 0 p m. . E J. 1. o S .... a a m... m m mm m m m w m m m mwapm ”83,33. 0 p s m m I m m. J a 0 m m m zanwm 000 o 0.: O maowwwmsooo m up 0 mm $360.3 .0 no 03050 mo 03.500th .0 0.0V mmmamog Mug mo aoEmDom mo Baa ho 20Ha~ mod w. w.m :.H H. H.m m.: m.m dance mamaam Ho>mH *mm pa panHMHnmfim ma.mm u mm mo Noam mo m. w.: :.A m. H.m :.: m.m Huang mmnpoflo mo w.m® mo w. H.m o.H m. :.H m.m m.m Hdnommfin doom MW m.H m.m> m. m. H.m H.m a m.m :.m o.m Hmwfim 9. TN .\d MS 0 as o 8 3, w m x m mm mm m mm 0 T. 0 9 m a m. a M mm. m Wm. M s m. w mwgpm .Hmuhogw % p M s M 9m I m, M s m m w handm mg» 3 8T uncavdmdooo mo macadonm 3360.3 5 ho mhwgo no mwdpqmohmm a may mmmamog. Mama mo mambomm .mo zohgmoooo m-m anzmmm< rl)|lv Jll II I}! llllJI.J\ 5| £033.60 on can” magma an» no $.10 63.3.93 NM 23 a.“ dwgaofi pom mg dfisaoo @359. .5... no tam 603.3300 $653de moa . m.m :.m H.ma m.mm o.mm ~.mm oaapoa mamagm md®>oa Has an pgdoaufinmfim om.mm n mx No on: m.m mafia m.mm mama 0.:H “mama mmapoao A. 6 . o. a mom mafia meow Homm m.ma o.HH Humommfin doom H°H mom New mega deem H.mm m.md Hmwwm 9 W 4 P 1 a. .m. m e um. u. m m cwwpm $30.3. W m 3 a 3 S a S I a. 1 a 4 e a 4 3 t a a W a U. p o p w zanam an» m. I dflngmsom no down no aofipmoddm mo mposdoum 305.093 u no unmgo mo wmgqmonom d adv awaken: Mug .3 Bommmpom he 94% .mo ZOHBfiSQM mam anzmmm< omfimhaaau «x «a» a“ cwusaoafl poz .qofipaosco on can magnum can no *m.p .Had ho whom dopoamsco mmosaquu m.a m.m H.H o.m m.w o.mm :.:m H.Hm paupoa mamadm mao>oa Han pa pnaofimflqmfim ma.mw u «x m. m. H.H m.m >.oa ~.m: m.mm :.HH nmhnn mmnpoflo a; m.a m. m. m.aa m.>H H.a: . p.>fl :.m Homommfin doom 6 2 w.H m.a m.a m.m m.m m.mm H.mm m.ma am.fim SH SN 9:... 00 OS 0 ms 80 3 w; E Pm mm mm am 3 m m m4 a: as ,m. .2 ma ma m P a 39 3 Se S T. mpmnmpogw 1. 31. 9 01. O B a 3 qa U. P m n. m hahdm map I I defludosdm Mo mvodeHM ApOSdonm u no mhquo mo «mapamonom a may mach? MAE mo mambomm mo 23.38% mum xHszmm< I’lul Kins) If IJwyll m.: H.m o.mm m.>m a.ma >.:H Haves mamawm mau>ma Has pa pnaOfimfinwfim ~w.moa u «x m.m H.mH m.mm H.mm o.ma m.m Hanna nonpoao m.ma m.ma o.>m m.mH m.m m.m Admommfin doom ”w ~.m m.oa m.mm m.wm :.mH a.» fimwfim 2 Coonmflfi q mam Jaw mmmma mammw mmmzw oooma gwmmwao -ooo.oaa -oooww -oooma -ooomw nan» mama «mopm qofipmoc< haaum on» defivspfihpmfin mEOOaH hafladm mo mvoddonm Ahnommuuo a mo mnoqzo mo mmapqoonmm a may ”Eamon—4. Hg mo ”.5005” Maxim mum anzmmm¢ fiw. "nzoqxabo gm. unkoqmubp um. "qzoqxqbd N.H N.H N.m H.m H.m m.m >.md m.m ®.m m.m m.mH m.om OHdpoa mdmfidm mao>ma Han pa pancaufinmam Pm.mza n mx m.H m. m.m m.m m.m :.m m.: :.m w.: :.m m.Hm m.mm pnohnn nonpoao mm m.m m.a m.» H.: m.m , m.m m.m H.~ m.m :.m >.Hm >.mm uaumommfia doom m.a m.a 0.: m.: H.m m.» :.:H m.w 0.: m.» a.ma m.mm HmTHw w mm mm m. mm M a w. m m a m m. m“ OW m WW H .3 m. n w m m m. m. 1 .m 1 w o 1 w. o u. 9 q u W mwdpm 330.3. a m m m u u. m manam map 1:: no uposuonm uasonmxoom UHnAPm Aposdonm a Mo mnmnsb mo omdpnmohwm a adv mmmamond.wqm¢m ho nanommxo¢m 0Hzmsm mum anzmmm< m.: :.H m.m m.ma m.m> o.mm m.m> Hupoa magaam maw>ma Han pa pauOfiuaamfim mm.mma u mx mam>oa Han pa undefinfinmflm mm.>m n mm a. H. :. m.m «.mm m.m :.om Huang nonpoao - m. m. m.m m.mm :.: m.mm Hamommfin doom 8 Ma 0.: m.a m.m ».ma w.mp m.Hm m.m> fimwfim onoa,eau oH _ m-m :-m m a mpaom maze omupm nmpmoc< , sauna 0gp mead—”25 90% 3.25 no “mega mfinmuwazo 28m mo mposdonm 32693 a mo mango no mmdpnmonom .0 may mmfiamog Hg ho ozHHHEE ho E 93. mHmmmMzso axon m-m anzmmm< m.> m.m m.am m.o: :.:H H.m annoy mamaum mao>ma Han go panHufiamHm m~.mma u «x m.HH , m.m :.mm m.o: F.0H m.m Hakka manpoao m.:m w.mH o.mm >.:m m.m - Humommfin doom “w m.mH :.m m.mm >.mm m.ma m.m Hmwfim 2 mnoa mmm.:mfi mmm«maw mmm~:Ha mmm.mw o0m~Pa mmnpm ampgog< go ooo.mmw -ooo.omw -oookmaa -ooo.oafi -OOmapa gasp mama manna map Ammonsbuaon and on: macaw no mmcpqmonom a may wsda> oaom mo mposvonm Aposdoum a no mhvn30 Mo odeQoonom a mwv mmmemon<.wqm¢m mo mag¢> mzom m-m anzmmm< 270 :.oH o.HN m.mm o.wm m.: annoy oamaum mao>ma Han pa pqaofiufinmfim m~.m: n «x o.mm :.>m o.mm :.:m m.m nmhnn mwnpoao >.>m m.om - >.> m.m Hamommfin doom m.HH :.mm m.a: m.>a m.m Hmwfim whoa ma u no .8 00$ www-mz 3-8% 33: aSM:Mmoq m pm .H p 2 aanam map qumu on: mmoap mo omdpnwohom a may pnmm manage: Mo apostonm Aposdonm a no mhmnzo no omdpnwonom c adv mmmamon< Hgm¢m ho 92mm wqmazoz m-m anzmmm¢ . .o._ ...r .w: . m.. . m. «4 m4 m: o.m «.3 93 «.3 9mm m: 339035..” £96: Add 3 pnaoEEmHm «8.»: .u «x :. m. 04 m4 :6 9m: mom m.:m :.ma 9m.“ 9: aminmofloao - m. :4 «d mé NS 0.3 w.:m d: m6: :4 imommfinuoom m. - :.m m.m m: :é H.:m mém :Am m.:a m. Elm “I 1", {1 vii .IIILF II 411 I! 2 whoa depm nowymoo< no dd 0H m w P m m z m N H I}, I! I ‘ 3.8m 9% 323m 3 “352 mo 388$ “panachm a mo mhmnzo Mo mmdpnoohom a may mmmamon< qu¢m ho NAHZdH 2H mmmzbz ms: finammm: .li am. “copcpm poz qoapoou> no apmqmgo gp. "ompupm poz qofipaoo> mo npmqogp *w.a "ompupm poz qoflpaow> mo npmnoga ma: >.m «.mm m.m: «.ma «.mm Hopes mamaam 3964.. Hm>ma “mm p: pqaofimfiqmfim pm.wa n mx Haw pa anaOHMHanm poz mm. u «x H.m o.m H.wm m.m: H.mH _ m.m> oamann mmgpoao 2 ma w.: >.w m.am o.m: :um m.o> naumommfin doom oom :.m m.mm m.:: H°:H H.m» aflmwfim $303 omdpm “393% ones no m mxmvz : mmmmz m mxooz m Moms H nofipuoa> hanam mg» a cam £033.; mo :3ng mo mposdonm 3260.5 6 mo 988.6 mo owdpaogom a may macaw Mg ...8 mama 2895:; m-m anzmmm< «.ma 0.0m m.mm :.mm Hopes mamadm Ho>oa mom pa pqmoflnfinmfim cm.ma u «x m.:a w.mm m.mm m.wm Manna mmgpoao m.wH a.mm m.Hm m.:m Humommnn doom B 0.3 m.om :.om Tum nmunm 2 I whoa and ma :Hnm Ta 802 omdpm 3.30.3. l I! ‘ ...! i! ll . ullL naham map Anonpoog 6 Manama $93 no omopnoonom 6 m3 ”Eggnog 5.85 whom no 30.3on $260.5 .0 no wnwgo no owmpnoonmm d m3 mmHEOQ< Hg mo AomszBzoov manna 2035.; m-m anzmmm< Iill . n]. I \ LIIJIIII‘ wlali!» .qonpopnommnwnp no woos mno non» whoa mnnmd apnoonommmn 0» odd mooa on duo non hma msomd m. m. w.: m.H o.m m.o~ m.Hm Hopos onaom oHo>oH HHo oo poooHnHomHm poz Pm.mH u «x H. . :. >.m m. m.m moH» m.Hm nonoHpHonoo 9H< mm m. m. :.0H - m.m m.m> m.mH HomommHn ooom Ac - m. m.m P. m.m m.o~ m.om thHm mHam poem ooon mom oHoaa goo Ho>ona oz noomoooo MonmooH nHaom moo dfinonvoow> a mango» omonp no omdpnmonmm o mdv Ho>ona no 0602 no mpoddonm ApostAm o no mamaso no omovqmonmm 6 may mmmamon< qu m-m anzmmm< \L. >.>H ‘ m.:m m.>H m.mm m.m Hopoa onaom Ho>oH mom no poooHnHomHm m:.mH n «x m.~H m.:m :.~H o.mm m.m gonna monpoHo o.mm m.Hm m.>H ».mm H.m Homomen ooom ®.om o.mm o.wH ®.HN m.m Hmnnm :; 7.. Q. nonpnsh OCH :1: nHuom map Admdo>dnp on: omega no owdpqmonom a may doaw>dna moan: Haves no mposdonm Aposdonm a no muonso no owwpnoohmm a mwv mmmamon< nHm mum XHszmm< Wm «.0H . m.:m . «.0: Hopon onaom mHo>oH HHo no ooooHanmHm poz :md u «x mHmSoH do no paooHanmHm :oom n «x mi Hum N.mm HA3 gonna $3336 No :.:H mop :.Hm H3958 ooon :.: v.3 m.:m 9m: EHm 6 7 2 moan» ova um mos whoa .8 0H 3 m 3 :-H. 9.20 omopm 3.30.2 mooHn Sam 93 3:0 mango $93 no wmwpnoonom a may npaoz Mom #50 wnHQHQ no hoqoSUonh no 305.095 $260.5 a no 9886 no omopnoonmn w wdv mmmnmog nag no manna .50 szHQ mam omega: ma. "muonpdunpaoo gunned :.0H m. o.mH H6... , Tn: oHopon onaom mHo>oH mHo>oH Ho 3 poooHanmHm poz $6 u mm HHd po poooHnHomHm 5;.H u «x ».:H m. :.HH fifll Hdm Hahn oofloHo _ :.NH m. _ m6, Hé. mom H3339 ooon w” m.mH . m.HH m.m> o.mm nmwnm 2 J. QHno>nnm . and noncona mnonkowam qH m>nnn nmpomns Apnea non owdpm nonm06< mono Pmdod handm mg» Adodnoppd on: omonp no onpnoonom a may omsom mn>oz no make no dodnmpp< no onusdonm Aposdonm a no muonko no omonanAmm a may mmmamom< Hnm> >.:w Hopon onaom mHoooH HHo mHo>oH HHo no oaooHanmHm om.mm n «x opo.ooooHanmHm HH.:mou3mx - m.H o.mm «.mm m.mm gonna nonpoHo - H.m w.~m H.om m.mm HomomoHn moon - m.m «.mm «.mm H.mm Hmem 988 no m 3 no m N H 800 one mmsm H0993; anom on» no opoooonm $260.3 o no 2085 no owopaoohmm u may mmmnmono. Mam/Hm no mHmmmEEo 28203:. 03m “0“ng m.mm H.:m .>.Hm m.mm .oN.H Hopoa onaum mHo>oH find no puoonnnamnm Sum: u mx w.mm m.o: o.H: m.om mH.m gonna moopoHo H.mm m.H: :.mm . m.m: no.m HooomoHn coon :.mm >.m: «.mm m.mm mm.H Hmem w 2 ma- 3 3.70..” mum Hmawmswoh .Buonomsom non owupm “930.3. nonoHHoo no anom map Aa“mnmfififimfia. 35 $2 .3 §§ macaw MAE ho ZOHHbmHmBmHn m2 mHHME and SEC ho mung m§¢ Qmfiéfifi BI BLI OGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Alderson, Wroe. Marketing Behavior and Executive Action. Homewood, Illinois: Richard D. Irwin, Inc., 1957. Allan, Francis R., pp al. Technology and Social Change. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1957. Allen, Frederick Lewis. The Big Change. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1952° Allen, G. H. (ed.) Individual Initiative lp Businesg. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1950. Barnett, H. G. Innovation, The Basis of Cultural Change. New York: McCraw-Hill Company, Inc., 1953. Bennis, Benne, Chin (eds.). The Planning p: Change. New York; Holt, Rinehart, Winston, 1961. Brozen, Yale. Social lmplications pi Technological Chang . New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1952. Carter, Charles F. and Williams, Bruce R. Industry and Technical Erogressgeractors Govepning the Speed p: Application p: §cience. London: Oxford University Press, 1957. Carter, Charles F. and Williams, Bruce R. Investment lp lnnovation. London: Oxford University Press, 1958. Chapin, F. Stuart. Cultural Chang . New York and London: The Century Company, 1928° Clark, John Maurice. ”Competitlon pp p Dynamic Procegg. Washington, D. C.: The Brookings Institution, 1961. Clark, Lincoln H. (ed.) Congumer Behavior, Dynamlca p; ‘ Congumer Beaction. Vol. I. New York: New York University, 1954. Clark, Lincoln H. (ed.) Conpumer Behavior. Vol. III. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1958. 281 282 Dobriner, William M0 The fiuburban Community. New York: G. P° Putnam's, 1958o Galbraith, John K. The Affluent Society. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1958° Gilfillan, S0 C0 The §ociology p; Invention, Chicago, Illinois: Follett Publishing Company, 1935° Graham, Saxon. Aperlcan Culture; Ag Analyals p; Ita Development and Ereaent Characterigtica. New YOrk: Harper and Brothers, 1957° Hollander, Stanley Co (edo) Explorations lg Retalling. East Lansing, Michigan: Bureau of Business and Economic Research, Graduate School of Business Administration, Michigan State University, 1959. Jewkes, John, Sawers, David and Stillerman, Richard. Th; §ourcea p; Invention. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1959o Katona, Georgeo The Powerful Conaumero New York: McGraw- Hill Book Company, 1960° Katona, George: Paychological Analyais pf Economic Behavior. New York: McGraWeHill Book Company, Inc., 1951° Katona, George and Mueller, Evao ‘Conauper_Egpectationa, 1953-1956. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Survey Research Center, University of Michigan, 19560 1 Katz, E. and Lazarsfeld, Paul F. Eeraonal Influence, Glencoe, Illinois: Free Press, 1955. Laird, Donald A. Why People Buyo New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 19370 Lazer, William and Kelley, E, J. (eds.) Mapagpplal Marketing; ,Eerapective andeieypointa. Revised Ediétiono Homewood, Illinois: Richard D. Irwin, 19 2. Lazerfeld, Paul F., pp al, The Peeplea Choice. New York: Columbia University Press, 1948° Levit, Theodore. Innovation lp Marketing° New York: McGraw Hill Book Company, Inc., 1962° Linton, Ralph° The Study pf Map, Student's Ed. New York: AppletonmCentury-Crofts, Inc., 19360 - 11.1.!!! .1 ...-.15.. r NEH: . ..rl 283 Lionberger, Herbert F. The Adoption.pP New Ideaa and Practices. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University Press, 1960. Lippitt, Ronald, Watson, Jeanne and Westley, Bruce. Planned Change. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1953. Ludington, Carol (ed.). _The AdOption pi New Ppogucts: Process and Influence. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Braun and Blumfield, 1959. Marting, Elizabeth. The Commercialization p; Regearch Resaltg. (AMA Special Report No. 20.) New York: American Management Association, 1958. McCarthy, E. Jerome. Basic Marketing; A Managerial Approach. Homewood, Illinois: Richard D. Irwin, 19600 Merton, Robert K. Social Theory and Social Structur . Glencoe, Illinois: Free Press, 1957. Miller, Ben. Gaining_Acceptance for Major Methods Change . (AMA Research Study 44.) New York: American Management Association, 1960. Mort, P. R. and Cornell, F. G. adaptability pi Pablic School System . New York: Columbia University Teachers College, 1938. Mort, P. R. and Cornell, F. G. American Schoolg Tp VTransition {Sow Our SchoolgVAdapt_Their Practicep pp‘Changing Needs-ea Study 2: Pennaylvania). Ne: York: Columbia University Teachers College, 19 1. Ogburn, William Fielding. Social Change. New Edition. New York: The Viking Press, 1950. Packard, Vance. The Hidden Persuaders. New York: David McKay Co., 1957. Packard, Vance. The Waste Makers. New York: David McKay Co., 1960. Rogers, E. M. and Beal, G. M. Reference Group Tnfluenca la the Adoption p: Agricultural Technology. Ames: Iowa State University, 1958. Schumpeter, Joseph A. Buainesa Cycleg. Vol. I. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1939. 284 Scott, W. H., 31 al. _Technical Change and Indugtrial Relations. Liverpool, England: Liverpool University Press, 1956. Spicer, Edward H. (ed.) Human Problems la Technological Change. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1952. Statiatlcal Abstract pi the United Statea 196 . Washington, D. C.: U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census, 1962. Strassmann, W. Paul. Risk and Technological Innovation. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1959. Articles And Periodicals Arnoff, Paul and Stillson, E. Leonard. "Product Search and Evaluation," The Journal 2: Marketin , Vol. XXII, no. 1 (July, 1957). pp. 33‘39. Ayers, Eugene. "Social Attitude Toward Invention," Aperican scientist, Vol. XLIII (October, 1955). pp. 521-540. Ayres, Clarence E. "Technology-mThe Role of Technology in Economic Theory," Aperican Economic Review, Vol. XLIII (May, 1953). pp. 279-287. Barnum, H. J., Jr. "How to Screen a New Product Idea," Dun”s Review and Modern Industry, Vol. LXIII (June. 1954). pp. 36-38. Beal, G. M., Rogers, E. M., and Bohlen, J. M. "Validity of the Concept of Stages in the Adoption Process," Rural Sociology, Vol. XXII (June, 1957). , pp. 166-168. Bennett, J. W. and McKnight, R. K. "Approaches of the Japanese Innovator to Cultural and Technical Change," Tha Annals QT Lag American Academy 2: Political app Social Science, Vol. CCCV (May, 1956), pp. 101-103. Bernard, L. L. "Invention and Social Progress," American Journal p: Sociology, Vol. XXIX (July, 1923 , pp" 1-330 Bilkey, Warren J. "A Psychological Approach to Consumer Behavior Analysis," Journal pi Marketing, Vol. XVIII (July. 1953). ppa 18-25. 285 Blake, James K. "How Much Thinking before Buying?" Dun"s Review and Modern Industry, Vol. LXVI (August, 1955). pp. 38541. Boomer, Donald S. “Subjective Certainty and Resistance to Vol. LVIII (May, 1959). pp. 323—328. Brown, George H. "Measuring Consumer Attitudes Toward Products," Journal p: Marketing, Vol. XIV (April, 1950). pp. 691~698. Brozen, Yale. "Invention, Innovation and Imitation," American Economic Review, Vol. XLI (May, 1951), pp. 239‘257. Burck, Gilbert. "What Makes Women Buy?" Fortune, Vol. LIV (August, 1956), p. 93ff. Caplow, Theodore. "Market Attitudes: A Research Report from the Medical Field,W Harvard Business Review, Vol. XXX (1952), pp. 105m112. Coch, Lester and French, John R. P. "Overcoming Resistance to Change," Human Relations, Vol. 1, No. 4 (1948), DP» 5135532. Coleman, J., Katz, E., at al. "The Diffusion of an Innova- tion Among Physicians," Sociometr , Vol. XX (1957), pp. 253‘2700 Comish, Newell H. "Where do They Buy and Why?" Dun"s’ Review and Modern Industr , Vol. LXIII (April, 1954), pp. 51-52ff. Cook, J. W. "Innovation and Progress," Commercial and Financial Chronicle, Vol. CXCV (June 14, 1962), pp. 2779-2780. Copp, J. H. "Toward Generalization in Farm Practice Research," Rural Sociology, Vol. XXIII (June, 1958), pp. 103‘111. Copp, J. H., Sill, M. L., and Brown, E. J. "The Function of Information Sources in the Farm Practice Adoption Process," Rural Sociology, Vol. XXIII (June, 1958), ppo 146-31570 Deute, A. H. "Why Some Products Fail," Printer°s Ink, Vol. CLIII, part 2 (November 13, 1930), pp. 57-64. 286 Dittes, J. E., and Kelley, H. H. "Effects of Different Conditions of Acceptance Upon Conformity of Group Norms," Journal pi Abnormal Social Ps cholo , Vol. LIII (1956), pp. zoo-107. Dodd, S. C. "Diffusion is Predictable: Testing Probability Models for Laws of Interaction," Aperican Sociological Review, Vol. XX (August, 1955), pp. 392-401. Doody, Francis S. "Research in the Process of Innovation,“ Boston Business Review, Vol. VIII, No. 4 (Spring, 1962), pp. 13-21. Doutt, John T. "Product Innovation in Small Business," Business To ic , Vol. VIII, No. 4 (Autumn, 1960), pp. 58-62. Duesenberry, James. “Innovation and Growth," American Economic Review, Vol. XLVI (May, 1956), pp. 134-141. Duncan, J. A., and Kreitlow, B. W. "Selected Cultural Characteristics and the Acceptance of Educational Programs and Practices," Rural Sociolo , Vol. XIX (December. 1954). pp. 349-357. Fliegel, Frederick C. "A Multiple Correlation Analysis of Factors Associated with AdOption of Farm Practices," Rural Sociology, Vol. XXI (September-December, 1956), pp. 284~292. Gear, E. V. "New Product: Any Way to Cut the Guess and Gamble?" Sales Management, Vol. CCL (January, 1955), pp. 52-54. Gilfillan, S. C. “The Prediction of Technological Change," Review QT Economics and Statistics, Vol. XXXIV . (November, 1952), pp. 368-380. Gillin, John. "Parallel Cultures and Inhibition to Acculturation," Social Porces, Vol. XXIV (October, 1945), pp. 1ff. Graham, Saxon. "Class and Conservatism in the AdOption of Innovations," Human Relations, Vol. IX, No. 1 (1956), pp. 91-100. Graham, Saxon. "Cultural Compatibility in the Adoption of Television," Social Eorces, Vol. XXXIII (1954), pp. 166-170. 287 Greenberg, Joseph H. "Social Variables in Acceptance and Rejection of Artificial Insemination," American Sociological Review, Vol. XVI (1951), pp. 86-91. Grey Advertising Agency, Inc. lGrey_Matter, National Advertisers' Edition, Vol. XXXI, No. 1 (January, 1960); pp° 1'40 Griliches, 2.. "Hybrid Corn, an Exploration in the Economics of Technological Change," Econometrica, Vol. XXV (October, 1957). pp° 501-22. Gross, Neal. "The Differential Characteristics of Acceptors and Non-Acceptors of an Approved Technological Practice," Rural Sociolo , Vol. XIV (1949), pp. 148-156. Gross, N., and Taves, M. J. "Characteristics Associated with Acceptance of Recommended Farm Practices," : Rural Sociology, Vol. XVII (December, 1952), ppv 321-3270 Hassinger, E. "Stages in the Adoption Process," Rural Sociology, Vol. XXIV (March, 1959). pp. 52-53. Herrmann, Cyril C. "Managing New Products in a Changing Market," Journal 2; Marketin , Vol. XXVI, No. 1 (January, 1962), pp. 23-27. Hillery, Victor. "PeOple Who Are “Highly Mobile' Start Trend to Product Acceptance, Survey Says," Wall Street Journal (Eastern Edition), June 5, 1959, p. 11. "How Consumers Take to Newness," Business Week, September 24,1955, pp. 41- 46. "How to Push a New Product," Business Week, December 7, 1957, po 95. Howell, Leland L. "Planned Innovation as a Marketing Tool," California Management Review, Vol. 4, No. 4 (Summer, 1962), pp. 66-71. Johnson, S. C., and Jones, Conrad. "How to Organize for New Products," Sarvard Buslness Review, Vol. XXXV (May-June, 1957), pp. 49-62. Katz, E. "The Social Itinerary of Technical Change: Two Studies on the Diffusion of Innovation," Human Organlzation, Vol. XX (Summer, 1961), pp. 70-82. 288 Kelley, E. J., and Lazer, Wm. "Managing Innovation in Marketing," Advanced Mana ement—-Office Executive, Vol. I, No. 7 (July, 1962), pp. 10-13. Lawrence, Paul R. "How to Deal with Resistance to Change," Harvard Business Review, Vol. XXXII, No. 3 . (May-June. 1954). pp. 49-57. Lionberger, H. F. "The Relation of Informal Social Groups to the Diffusion of Farm Information in a Northeast Missouri Farm Community," Rural Sociology, Vol. XIX (September, 1954), pp. 233-243. Lionberger, H. F. "Some Characteristics of Farm Operators Sought as Sources of Farm Information in a Missouri Community," Rural Sociolo , Vol. XVIII (December, 1953). pp. 327-338. Lundberg, G. A. "Role of Key Families in the Formation of General Consumer Demand," Sociometry, Vol. 1 (January-April, 1938), pp. 375-419. “Management Problem: Coming up with Something New," . Business Week, December 24, 1960, pp. 80-82. Manville, R., and Ungar, P. "Marketing Checklist for New Products," Printer's lnk, Vol. CCLVIII (February 1, 1957), pp. 26-28. Marsh, 0. P., and Coleman, A. L. "The Relationship of Farmer Characteristics to the AdOption of Recommended Farm Practices," Rural Sociology, Vol. XX (September-December, 1955), pp. 289-296. Martineau, P. D. "Social Classes and Spending Behavior," Journal pi Marketing, Vol. XXIII, No. 2 (October, 1958), pp. 121-130. McArthur, Donald W. "How to be Sure the Customer Wants Your Product," Sales Management, Vol. LXXXIII { . ‘ w (November 20, 1959). pp. 92-96. McLaurin, W. Rupert. "The Sequence from Invention to Innovation and its Relation to Economic Growth," Quarterly Journal pi Econoplcs, Vol. LXVII, No. 1 (February, 1953), P. 97. Menzel, H., and Katz, E. "Social Relations and Innovations in the Medical Profession: The Epidemiology of a New Drug," Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. XIX (Winter. 1955-56), pp. 337-352. 289 Mueller, Eva. "Innovation-minded Families Key Group in Appliance Sales Picture," Advertising Age, Vol. XXIX (August 4, 1958), pp. 2ff. Mueller, W. F. "A Study of Product Discovery and Innovation Cost," Southepn Economic Journal, Vol. XXIV (July. 1957). pp. 80-85. Newman, Joseph W. "New Insight, New Progress for Marketing,“ Harvard Business Review, Vol. XXXV, No. 6 . (November-December, 1957). pp. 95—102. O'Maara, John T., Jr. "Selecting Profitable Products," Harvard Pusiness Review, Vol. XXXIX (January, 1961), pp. 83-89. Pedersen, Harold A. “Cultural Differences in the Acceptance of Recommended Practices," Rural Sociology, Vol. XVI (1951). pp» 37-49° "Planned Obsolescence," Part 1, Printer's lnk, Vol. CCLXXV (May 19, 1961), p. 23. "Planned Obsolescence," Part 2, Printer's lnk, Vol. CCLXXV (May 26, 1961), p. 23. "Predicting Consumers' Needs: Can Tastemakers Point the Way?" Printer's lnk, Vol. CCLXVIII (August 28, 1959), pp. 23-26. Rogers, Everett M. "The Adoption Period," Rural Sociology, Vol. XXVI (March, 1961), pp. 77-82. Rogers, Everett M., and Rogers, L. Edna. "A Methodological Analysis of AdOption Scales," Papal Sppiplpgy, Vol. XXVI (1961), pp. 325-336. Schmookler, Jacob. "Invention, Innovation and Competition," Sputhgrn goonopic Journal, Vol. XX (April, 1954), pp. 3 0‘3 5- Shomann, Louis F. "How to Break Down Prejudice Against a New and Different Product," Printer's lnk, Vol. CCXLIV (August 21, 1953), pp. 56-62. Spielvogel, Carl. "Advertising: Giving Birth to New Product," New York Times, April 5, 1959. Section 3, pp. 12ff. Staudt, Thomas A. "Program for Product Diversification," Sarvard Business Review, Vol. XXXII (November- December, 1954), pp. 121-131. 290 "The Literature of Social Invention," The Ape rlcan Behavioral Scientist Vol. V(December, 1961), ppo 10-320 "The Process of Mass Acceptance," Modepn ack n , Vol. XXXII, No. 6 (February, 1959;, Pp- 75'78ff. Tietjen, K. H. "How to Combat New Product Hostility, " Industrial M rketin , Vol. XLIII (November, 1958), pp. 41- -43. Van Den Ban, A. W. "Some Characteristics of Progressive Farmers in the Netherlands," Rural Sociology, Vol. XXII (1957). pp. 205-212. Wassen, Chester R. "What is New About a New Product?“ Journal pi Margeting, Vol. XXV, No. 1 (July, 1960), pp. 52-56. "Who Are the Innovators?" Economist, Vol. CLXXXVI (February 15, 1958), pp. 596-598. Wilkening, E. A. "Informal Leaders and Innovators in Farm Practices," Rural Sociology, Vol. XVII (September, 1952), pp. 272-275. Wilkening, E. A. "Role of Communicating Agents in Technological Change in Agriculture," ocial Force , Vol. XXXIV (May, 1956), pp. 361-367. Wilkening, E. A. "Joint Decision-making in Farm Families as a Function of Status and Role," American Sociological Review, Vol. XXIII (April, 1958), pp. 187-192. Wilkening, E. A. "Social Isolation and Response of Farmers to Agricultural Programs," Aperican Sociological Review, Vol. XVI (December, 1951), pp. 836-837. Zander, Alvin. "Resistance to Change--Its Analysis and Prevention,"_Advanced Man ement, Vol. XV, No. 1 (January, 1950), pp. 9-11. Sulletins Beal, G. M. and Bohlen, J. M., Tpe Plffusloanpppass, Ames: Iowa Agricultural Extension Service Special Report 18, March, 1957. 291 Copp, J. H. 72ersonal ang_Social Factors Associated With Adoption_p§ Recommended Farm Practices_among Captlemen. Manhattan: Kansas Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 83, September, 1956. Hoffer, C. R. Acceptance p; Approved Farming Practices ApppggFappepsflpi_Dutch Descsnt. East Lansing: Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station Special Bulletin 316, June, 1942. Hoffer, C. R. and Stangland, D. Farmers' Reactions pp Np! Eractices. East Lansing: Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station Technical Bulletin 264, February, 1958. Lionberger, H. F. and Coughenour, C. M. Social Structure and Siffusion pi Farm Information. Columbia: Missouri Agricultural Experiment Station Research Bulletin 631, April, 1957. Rogers, Everett M., Characteristics p£_Innovators and Other AdOpter Categorie . Wooster: Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 882, 1961. Stone, Gregory P. and Form, William H. as; Local Community (Clothing Market. East Lansing: Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station Technical Bulletin 262, 1957. Subcommittee for the Study of Diffusion of Farm Practices. Adopters_p£“New_Farm Ideas; (Characteristics a Communications Behavior. (North Central Regional Extension Publication No. 13.) East Lansing: Cooperative Extension Service, MSU, October, 1961. Subcommittee for the Study of the Diffusion of Farm Practices, North Central Rural Sociological Committee. JSpp Farm Pepple Accept Nap Ideas. (North Central Regional Publication No. 1.) Ames: Iowa Agricultural Extension Service, November, 1955. Wilkening, E. A. (Adoption 2: Improved Farm Practices as Related pp Familvaactors. Madison: Wisconsin Agricultural Experiment Station Research Bulletin 183, December, 1953. Wilkening, E. A. Acceptance 2; Improved Farm Practices ip Ehree Coastal Plain Counties. Raleigh: North Carolina Agricultural Experiment Station Technical Bulletin 98, May, 1952. 292 Wilson, M. C. and Gallup, G. Extension Teaching Methods spa Other Factors That Influence AdOption p: Agricultural apa Home Economics Practices. Washington: U. S. Department of Agriculture Federal Extension Service Circular 495, August, 1955. Unpublished Material Barnet, Edward M. "Recent Innovations in Retail Mass Merchandising." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Columbia University, 1954. Bennett, William R. "An Economic Analysis of Self-Service Meat Marketing A Study of the Application of the Theory of Innovation to the Development of Marketing." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Illinois, 1951. Diamond, Harold Simon. "Studies of Innovation Theory." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Columbia University, 1951. Edwards, George A. "Marketing an Innovation." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Columbia University, 1955. Fisk, George. "Consumer Information Channels." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, 1956. Graham, Saxon. "Selection and Social Stratification: Factors in the Acceptance and Rejection of Five Innovations by Social Strata in New Haven, Conn." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University,— 1951. Noss, Theodore K. "Resistance to Social Innovations as Found in the Literature Regarding Innovations Which Have Proved Successful." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Sociology, University of Chicago, 1940. Other Sources Beal, G. M. "Information Sources in the Decision-Making Process," Ihe Research Clinic pp Decision Makin , Pullman: State College of Washington, August, 1958, pp. 36—510 Booz, Allen and Hamilton. Management 2; New groducts. 3rd Edition, 1960. 293 Environmental Change and Copporate Strategy. Menlo Park, California: Stanford Research Institute, 1960. Mansfield, Edwin. "Diffusion of Technological Change," Review 2: Data_pp Research apa Development, No. 31. Washington, D. C.: National Science Foundation, October, 1961. Sixth Quinguennial Survey 2; the Detroit Market, The Detroit New , 1962. 10p Ten Brands Survey. The Detroit Free-Pre , 1961. 1111711711751 ES @8009 758 N ” U I. .. E ” 3m W111