-
We assume that evidence matters in the decision making of potential adopters.
Interventions of unknown effectiveness and of known ineffectiveness often spread while effective interventions do not. Evidence is most important to only a subset of early adopters and is most often used by them to reject interventions. Solution: Emphasize other variables in the communication of innovations such as compatibility, cost, and simplicity.
-
We substitute our perceptions for those of potential adopters.
Inadequate and poorly performed formative evaluation is common as experts in the intervention topical domain engage in dissemination. Solution: Seek out and listen to representative potential adopters to learn wants, information sources, advice-seeking behaviors, and reactions to prototype interventions.
-
We use intervention creators as intervention communicators.
While the creators of interventions are sometimes effective communicators, the opposite condition is much more common. Solution: Enable access to the experts, but rely on others whom we know will elicit attention and information-seeking by potential adopters.
-
We introduce interventions before they are ready.
Interventions are often shown as they are created and tested. Viewers often perceive uncertainty and complexity as a result. Solution: Publicize interventions only after clear results and the preparation of messages that elicit positive reactions from potential adopters.
-
We assume that information will influence decision making.
Information is necessary and can be sufficient for adoption decisions about inconsequential innovations, but for consequential interventions that imply changes in organizational routines or individual behaviors, influence is typically required. Solution: Pair information resources with social influence in an overall dissemination strategy.
-
We confuse authority with influence.
Persons high in positional or formal authority may also be regarded as influential by others, but often this is not the case. Solution: Gather data about who among potential adopters is sought out for advice and intervene with them to propel dissemination.
-
We allow the first to adopt (innovators) to self-select into our dissemination efforts.
The first to adopt often do so for counter-normative reasons and their low social status can become associated with an intervention. Solution: Learn the relational structure that ties together potential adopters so that influential members can be identified and recruited.
-
We fail to distinguish among change agents, authority figures, opinion leaders, and innovation champions.
It is unusual for the same persons to effectively play multiple roles in dissemination into and within communities and complex organizations. Solution: Use formative evaluation to determine the functions that different persons are able to fulfill.
-
We select demonstration sites on criteria of motivation and capacity.
Criteria of interest and ability make sense when effective implementation is the only objective. But spread relies on the perceptions by others of initial adopters. Solution: Consider which sites will positively influence other sites when selecting demonstration sites.
-
We advocate single interventions as the solution to a problem.
Potential adopters differ by clientele, setting, resources, etc., so one intervention is unlikely to fit all. Solution: Communicate a cluster of evidence-based practices so that potential adopters can get closer to a best fit of intervention to organization prior to adaptation.
