Champions of Technological Innovation

Abstract

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.. This study investigated the personality characteristics, leadership behaviors, and influence tactics of champions of technological innovations. Analyses of questionnaires and interview transcripts of twenty-five matched pairs of champions and nonchampions revealed that champions reported using transformational, leader behaviors to a significantly greater extent than did nonchampions. Champions exhibited higher risk taking and innovativeness, initiated more influence attempts, and used a greater variety of influence tactics than nonchampions. Regression analysis of a model of champion emergence, relating personality characteristics, transformational leader behaviors, and influence tactics, showed that champions were significantly higher than nonchampions on all paths in the model.'The increased turbulence, complexity, and competitiveness of organizational environments have made the identification, evaluation, and adoption of technological innovations a critical determinant of organizational productivity, competition, and survival (Zaltman, Duncan, and Holbeck, 1973; Bigoness and Perreault, 1981; Morgan, 1988). As a result, a major research effort has focused on variables that facilitate or hinder the adoption of technological innovations (e.g., Rogers and Shoemaker, 1971; Kelly and Kranzberg, 1978; Kimberly and Evanisko, 1981; Pennings and Buitendam, 1987). One variable that has been strongly linked to the success of technological innovations is the presence of a champion. This is an individual who informally emerges in an organization (Schon, 1963; Tushman and Nadler, 1986) and makes "a decisive contribution to the innovation by actively and enthusiastically promoting its progress through the critical [organizational] stages" (Achilladelis, Jervis, and Robertson, 1971: 14). Twenty-six years ago, in a seminal article on radical military innovations, Schon (1963) identified the role of a champion. He contended that in order to overcome the indifference and resistance that major technological change provokes, a champion is required to identify the idea as his or her own, to promote the idea actively and vigorously through informal networks, and to risk his or her position and prestige to ensure the innovation's success. According to Schon (1963: 84), "the new idea either finds a champion or dies." A multitude of field and case studies have found strong support for Schon's contention that innovation success is closely linked with the presence of a champion (e.g., Roberts, 1968; Achilladelis, Jervis, and Robertson, 1971; Rothwell et al., 1974; Burgelman, 1983; Ettlie, Bridges, and O'Keefe, 1984). Yet, despite the important contribution attributed to champions in the innovation process...

The politics of innovation: Why innovations need a godfather

“…The need for product champions is widely recognised (Kanter, 1988;Peters and Waterman, 1982;Pinchot, 1985), and their contribution to successful innovation has been widely reported (Frost and Egri, 1991;Howell and Higgins, 1990). Two thirds of the firms surveyed by Duchesneau (1977) confirmed the presence of such a role, and the SAPPHO project of the 1970s provided systematic evidence to support the product champion hypothesis (Achilladelis et al, 1971).…”

Transformational and transactional leadership and innovative behavior: The moderating role of psychological empowerment

“…Research shows that transformational leaders put greater emphasis on innovation than transactional leaders (Church & Waclawski, 1998;Howell & Higgins, 1990). In addition, recent research found a positive relationship between transformational leadership and organizational innovation (Gumusluoglu & Ilsev, 2009;Jung, Chow, & Wu, 2003;Jung, Wu, & Chow, 2008).…”

Toward Information Infrastructure Studies: Ways of Knowing in a Networked Environment

“…Even with here-and-now, small-scale expectations and interactions, participants confront what can be called differing "readiness factors" (Olson & Olson, 2000). The introduction of technology is discussed in the champion literature with leadership depending upon different types of goals, champions (e.g., project, technical, and user champions), and innovators (e.g., gatekeepers focused on products in particular and conceptualists focused on approaches) (Howell & Higgins, 1990;Schon, 1963). In planning for the internet, there is a shifting baseline of understanding as the user/designer base of experience grows.…”