Stages of the New Version of the Research Framework

Table 31 demonstrates the new framework, altered as a result of the interviews. When compared with the previous framework it is much simplified.

From the findings it was apparent that the influence was not always the same entity throughout the stages of adoption. For example, knowledge for a club website can come from the individual. However, the decision to adopt the club website can be voted on by the committee, then implemented by the individual. The different entities that might influence adoption is now reflected in the research framework.

7.4.1 Knowledge

In regards to the knowledge section of the framework, ‘Organisations’ have been blocked out. This is due to the fact that knowledge will not be acquired from a Club/Committee (the Organisation), it is acquired from an individual from within the Club, externally, or from an ‘Other’ influence. The three roles a Club/Committee will play in this process are, when the decision to adopt an innovation can be made by the Club/Committee, it can be implemented by the club, and the assessment made on the innovation in the Confirmation stage. However, these stages can also be completed by the other change agents, like the Organisation and/or an Individual. The first change to the Knowledge stage is the factors that influence where the Knowledge was gained. In the Knowledge stage, the results have shown that only three entities that Knowledge can be gained from, these are from an institution, individual within the club, and/or ‘other’ influences.

The institution is either the association, sporting governing body, or government. The typical sources of knowledge (from the data collection) were;

- Seminars hosted by the association, sporting governing body, or the government,

- During delegate meetings, and

- Communications, such as email and phone calls.

Knowledge can also be gained from an individual within a club. From the data collection, this knowledge came from;

- Home/personal use of the innovation, which has been adapted for use at a sporting club, such as email or a club website,

- Work/Business use of the innovation, which has been adapted for use at a sporting club, such as email or a club website, and

- Awareness of the innovation by accident, such as a chance meeting between two club delegates at an Association delegate’s meeting. This was included, as it might form a possible explanation of knowledge in the next round of data collection.

107

The last of the factors is ‘other’ influences. This is a category that is not addressed by the previous two. This knowledge can come from a number of communication channels such as,

- Third party operators (commercial providers of online services),

- Other institutions or clubs/committees in either the same, or another association, or even another type of sport, such as NZ Online, and

- Awareness of the innovation by accident, again this was included as it might form a possible explanation of gaining data in the next round of data collection.

7.4.2 Persuasion

The second change was to the Persuasion column. The Rogers’ (2003) factors have still been included in this section (namely relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, trialability, and observability) but will be shown as needed against influence. The other factors that have been added to this sector are, if the institution influences the adoption. Some of the factors that have been omitted from the framework are the volunteer’s use of ICT, and CBO/small business use of ICT, as the data suggested that these did not influence this stage of the model.

When an institution/association influences clubs, or even individuals, to adopt an innovation, the clubs, or individuals, usually must comply otherwise they could face fines or loss of championship points. One of the Internet applications that match this is the online statistics application. For an online statistical program to work properly, all of the clubs in an association need to be involved. The institution/association needs to lead this adoption, and not give the clubs any choice about adopting it or not. This is why this influence has been included for this stage, but also decision, implementation, and confirmation.

The last factor added in this section is the type of sport. This was included in the initial framework; however, it is now a sub section of relative advantage. As cricket is a complex scoring sport at even such a local level, Internet applications may be the perfect way of processing this data. However with other sports that are not as complex, such as hockey and soccer, using computers to process data may provide less of an advantage. Thus, for Cricket and similar sports, some Internet applications may provide a greater advantage relative to how they did things previously.

7.4.3 Decision

This section has been reduced to just have the possible outcomes of adopting the application, or rejecting it. Except for the ‘other’ influence, the rest of the influences can decide on adopting an Internet application.

Another omission that has been made to the framework for the decision stage, was the ‘top-down’ or ‘bottom-up’ influence. Once it became apparent that the influence to adopt was not always the same entity, this was removed as now it has been incorporated in all of the stages of adoption. For example, the knowledge for a club website may have come from the individual (bottom-up), however decided upon by the organisation (top-down). This demonstrates that the influence (in all stages) will either be ‘top-down’ or ‘bottom-up’.

When a club, or committee, chooses to make a decision to adopt an Internet application, usually this is achieved in a number of ways. Generally the standard course of action is to hold a committee meeting and discuss the inherent uncertainly of the innovation, and then have a vote. With the data collected so far, the only Internet application that fits this type of decision is a club website.

108

When an individual decides to adopt an innovation, generally they do so without fully consulting with the club/committee, or the association. The Internet applications that these would include are,

- Email, such as seeing the gains in the work place and then sending emails to other members,

- Club Website, such as championing the ideas to build a club website as a member. This was included as it might form a possible explanation of gaining data in future rounds of data collection.

- Using the associations website, such as looking for information about fixtures or ladders (standings). Again, this was included as it might form a possible explanation of gaining data in future rounds of data collection.

7.4.4 Implementation

Until the implementation stage, the previous stages of the innovation-decision process have strictly been a mental exercise, as per Rogers (2003). Putting an Innovation into practice is quite a different prospect than thinking about it. This part of the framework has been modified to show only unforeseen events, and the uncertainty.

When an innovation is implemented, there may be unforeseen events that occur. These are not always ‘bad’ events, some might be ‘good’ events. An example of this is when statistics became available online in one club, resulting in increased informal discussion around the club about scores and individual player’s results.

Rogers’ (2003) explains that there is a certain degree of uncertainty about the implementation of an innovation. He remarks that “…uncertainly about the expected consequences of the innovation still exist for the typical individual at the implementation stage, even though the decision to adopt has been made previously.”(Rogers, 2003, p. 179)

7.4.5 Confirmation

The last stage of the revised framework is the confirmation stage. This part of the framework will can be determined by all of the decision-making units. The notable inclusion of the club/committee is there, because as a group they revise their decision.

From the initial framework, characteristics of ICTs have been added. This area appeared during the interview phase of the data collection. These include both positive and negative reinforcements of the decision to implement. These are the characteristics that developed,

- Convenience,

- The norm (becoming the normal way of doing things,

- Ease of use,

- Paper trail (written conversions are documented) and

- Information is central (all the information is in one place to access).

7.4.6 Summary of the New Version of the Framework

After the first round of data collection was complete and analysed, it was apparent that the framework that was proposed did not fit the results. However, that was expected as it was an initial framework. The new version of the framework fits much better with the results of Auckland. Nevertheless, the real test of the framework will be how robust it is when compared with other Cricket associations, other countries, other areas, and other sports, namely Soccer, and Hockey.

109