Dissemination of Innovation as Social Change

Abstract

For community psychology, the phrase "dissemination of innovation" implies the use of new social programs or social policies. As such, it also implies the potential for broad-scale change. It typically addresses how individuals and organizations can improve their approach to particular problems. Hence, for community psychologists interested in promoting human welfare, this paradigm offers an approach to the study and creation of social change (e.g., Rappaport, 1977; Fairweather & Davidson, 1986). If solution of a social problem is the goal of an innovation, then dissemination and implementation of what innovation on a wide scale may mean that important steps have been accomplished (Fairweather & Tornatzky, 1977). Such an approach is not specific or unique to community psychology, but has been applied within a variety of disciplines. Other labels for this approach include reserach, development, and dissemination (House, Kerins, & Steele, 1972), knowledge utilization (Havelock, 1973), diffusion of innovation (Radnor, Feller, & Rogers, 1978), and technological innovation (Tornatzky, Eveland, Boylan, Hetzner, Johnson, Roitman, & Schneider, 1983). The use of this paradigm has occurred in fields as diverse as political science (Pressman & Wildavsky, 1973); sociology (Ryan & Gross, 1943); agriculture (Havelock, 1973); and public health (Green & Johnson, 1996); and has been applied to numerous social problems, including youth violence (Thomas, 1998); HIV/AIDS prevention (Dearing, 1994); poor nutrition (Harveyberino, Ewing, Flynn, & Wick, 1998), adolescent drug, alcohol,a nd tobacco use (Laflin, Edmundson, & Moore-Hirsch, 1995; Brink, Levenson, & Gottleib, 1991); and citizen action against nuclear weapons (McAlister, 1991). Other recent reviews include chapters by Parcel, Perry and Taylor (1990); Oldenberg, Hardcastle and Kok (1997); Portnoy, Anderson, and Eriksen (1989); and Basch, Eveland, and Portnoy (1986). For community psychologists, the dissemination of innovation is typically viewed in the specific context of social innovations such as social programs or policies. These "social technologies" represent new approaches designed for the solution of particular social problems. Dissemination has as its goal the creation of positive social change. This chapter is concerned wtih applications of the dissemination of innovation paradigm to the improvement of human and community functioning. The dissemination of innovation can be thought of as a specific approach to influencing social policy, one of several delineated by Phillips (Chapter 17, this volume). The dissemination of innovation, as it has been approached by community psychologists, is unique in two ways relative to other social policy approaches. First, the dissemination of innovation involves systematic approaches that are active in style and involve the interntional of spread of the innovation. This is to b contrasted to investigations of other approaches that invovle the naturally occurring spread of social programs. As seen later in this chapter, active interpersonal, group, and organziation tactics are involved in the dissemination of innovations. Second, this approach has typically involved the dissemination of particular specificable social-program models. While the dissemination of innovations can and has (in other fields) involved multiple levels of behavior, including policies, procedures, and personnel, as practiced within ghte field of community psychology it has typically involved the dissemination of particular social programs. Fairweather and coleagues (Fairweather, 1972; Fairweather & Tornatzky, 1977; Fiarweather, Sanders, & Tornatzky, 1974; Fairweather & Davidson, 1986; Rappaport, 1977; Tornatzky, Fergus, Avellar, Fairweather, & Fleischer, 1980) are primarily responsible for introducing the notion of dissemination of innovation as a social-change process to community psychology. For this group, the dissemination of innovation is embedded in Fairweather's framework of experimental social innovation (Fairweather & Davidson, 1986). This overall theory of social change describes an incremental process involving four sequential steps ending in the dissemination of innovations. While not necessarily dependent on the overall experimental social-innovation model of social change, it is best to understand how the dissemination of innovation fits within the four-phase model of social change: (1) the creation of innovative models designed to solve a specific social problem; (2) a scientifically credible evaluation of the effectiveness of the innovation; (3) limited replication of the model, assuming a positive assessment of its effectiveness; (4) an active dissemination or purposeful attempts to have the program implemented on a large-scale fashion. These four phases represent a dynamic process, with each phase dependent on previous steps. Failure at any phase necessitates reverting to prior phases. The dissemination-of-innovation phase itself consists of three components - adoption, implementation, and institutionalization. Adoption involves the host setting's decision to use an innovative social program. Implementation is the actual use of the program. Finally, imstitutionalization or routinization (Yin, 1978) of the innovative social program takes place when a new social program moves to the status of being part of business as usual.