6.7.1 Modality of Interpretive Scheme
Signification and communication are two interlinked components of the interpretative schemes of Giddens’s structuration theory. Rogers (2003) explains communication as a “process of sharing information between participants for reaching a mutual understanding” and communication thus plays an important part in promoting levels of adoption. In the technology adoption literature it is argued that it is through communication that individuals make sense of innovation in order to accept or reject it. The analysis of data in this project has shown that in terms of interpretative schemes for the five case studies the areas of significance have been strategy development/directives and communication.
6.7.2 Development of Strategy
Three of the case studies had developed a documented strategic development plan where as the other two had a pragmatic plan (Case D, E). In all five cases the decision for the strategic technology plan was reached at the senior management level. A top down bureaucratic approach with development and consultations was evident in all case studies. The literature on technology adoption suggests that top managers that develop strategy need to consider stakeholders at all levels. The findings from this study demonstrate that this was addressed by developing adequate and relevant bespoke training courses. The training and support programmes helped to increase the rate of compliance with technology and in all five cases technological solutions were perceived to provide future prosperity.
6.7.3 Communication
There were two methods of communications; communication through mass media and face-to-face communication through one to one meetings and training and support sessions. Diffusion is also a kind of communication where the message communicated is about a new idea (Rogers, 2003). The use of institutional intranet and email services formed a channel of communication in two of the case studies (Case A, C). Despite the availability of this method of communication in reaching a large number of staff it was evident that many were unaware of the strategy plan. Rogers also argues that mass media communication messages are not effective in influencing levels of adoption as they often fail to deliver the specific messages needed by individuals to confirm their beliefs. The need for a clear vision has been the subject of recommendation from a number of studies (Surry, 2005; Fish 2007). In Case C an innovative method of using animation and diagrams generated more interest and better understanding of the initiative as it provided a discursive knowledge and enabled the respondents to rationalise and explain their actions.
In all cases there was a claim that face-to-face interpersonal communication was provided. Rogers (2003) argues that once individuals have established a need for innovation then they are ready to enter into exchanges about that innovation, with the exemption of early adopters for whom interpersonal influence is not necessary because they possess a venturesome orientation and are able to cope with uncertainty. From the analysis provided it is evident that the majority of staff members in all five cases were early adopters.
6.7.4 Summary and Propositions
Overall the findings from this project demonstrate that:
1. Decision making about technological strategy rests with senior management 2. Top down communication approaches are useful
3. Interpersonal interactions are used to provide support and motivation
A clear strategic vision has been cited in the literature as a requirement for a successful un-fragmented adoption of technology. In all case study scenarios the strategic vision for the adoption of technology was in answer to the call for survival. This message was communicated and received by the majority of staff members and hence the following propositions can be formulated:
P1: A top down communication approach based on interpersonal interaction influences the adoption of technology
P2: For adopters of technology institutional technology strategies are significant.
6.7.5 Social Positioning
According to Giddens (1984) the positioning of the actor in social encounters is fundamental to social life. The managers that were responsible for ensuring the successful operation of the farm and the smooth integration of technology had social status and this helped them in their duties (Case C, D, E). In Case E, the farm manager was granted the social positioning rather than this being self-imposed, and was regarded as an expert because of his track record. Managers with social position were looked upon, as managers with a mandate to ‘challenge existing practices’ and ‘push the boundaries. In all five cases social positioning status was also afforded to the veterinarian doctors because of their expertise. Giddens (1984) refers to this type of social positioning as giving an actor definite identity within a social group.
6.7.6 Motivational Factors
The respondents of the five case studies identified different intrinsic motivations for the adoption of technological innovations. These motivations included pragmatic drivers such as improving the mortality rate of the flock (Case D), detecting fake and fraudulent
supplies (Case B), reducing mistrust of the supply market (Case D), the desire to succeed and intrinsic drivers such as curiosity towards new innovations. Other factors that were identified included animal welfare and environmental issues (Case E) from an Islamic (halal) perspective. Respondents from all five case studies that had interaction and were engaging with the supply chain questioned the integrity of the supply market. Breakdown in the relationship of trust and confidence was the result of supply market exhibiting characteristics associated with what is opposite of halal, which is called haram (forbidden, not permissible). This further confirms that for a true halal product (wholesome) all the entities of production from farm to fork must be included in the halal certification. Halal is not only non-cross contamination with haram and the method of slaughtering, but it is about the complete cycle of production – as it was originally intended – to include the treatment and welfare of the animals.
6.7.7 Psychological Anxiety
Rogers (2003) suggests that “preventive innovation” occurs when the avoidance of an unwanted event in the future is the reason for the individual’s adoption of a new idea. At case farms C, D and E preventive innovation was one of the motivating factors for the adoption of technological change to shield the institution from market uncertainties and the danger of bankruptcy.
6.7.8 Ontological Security
The analysis of the case study farms illustrated an underlying trend that some members of staff were reluctant to trade their old ways of working for new technology; instead they wanted to maintain the status quo. This is defined by Giddens (1984) as ontological security, keeping the same routine behavioural pattern in order to continue to experience positive and stable emotions and to avoid the uncertainty and not knowing that is associated with change. Although ontological security might have serious implications for the adoption of new technology, our case studies revealed that ontological security was overcome in the form of technically informative and educational training sessions, which were perceived to be consistent with the respondents’ perceptions of their roles.
6.7.9 Summary and Propositions
The findings can be summarized in the following way:
• Social positioning can increase the rate of adoption
• Social positioning is either self-imposed or implied by others • Psychological anxiety is a motivator for adoption
• Halal
The findings of this study have shown that individual feelings of anxiety can be an important factor in the adoption of new technology. This study has therefore confirmed the findings from other studies that suggest preventive innovation as a motivator (Kelley, 2003; Smith, 2001). The analysis show that absence of halal in the social system led to mistrust of the supply chain and acted as a motivational factor when present. The following propositions are offered in relation to psychological anxiety and motivational factors:
P3: Contextual and intrinsic drivers are motivational for the adoption of technology.
P4: Halal is critical as a guiding principle
P5: Social Positioning increases the rate of adoption