This study will measure the innovativeness between two groups within the same organization.
In addition to examining general tendency to adopt innovation (i.e., innate innovativeness), this study adopted the scale for motivated consumer innovativeness (MCI) which was introduced by Vandecasteele and Geunes (2010) to measure different aspects of innate innovativeness.
This study is not searching for harmony between the various definitions, nor is it distinguishing between innovation and innovativeness (Ruvio et al., 2014), rather, this study has adopted a well-recognized definition of innovation.
Although the diffusion of innovation theory suggests five adopter categories according to their degree of innovativeness, this approach lacks theoretical justification and, more importantly, it makes a critical assumption of a normal distribution of adopters that needs empirical validation.
The ideas introduced in this paper are applicable to the evaluation of the innovativeness of planned introductions of design changes and design of new products and services.
Similar to findings from prior research on consumer innovativeness, this study demonstrated the role of innate innovativeness and its influence on domain-specific innovativeness.
Compared to uni-level approaches to innate innovativeness, this approach provides a comprehensive understanding of consumers' motivation to adopt new products or ideas (Bartels and Reinders 2011).
Following two complementary approaches, this study conceptualizes innovativeness at two levels of abstraction: general innovativeness (GI), that is, the degree of openness to newness; and specific innovativeness (SI), that is, the predisposition to be among the firsts to adopt innovations in a specific domain.
We need more of this kind of innovativeness and initiative.
One key focus of this new approach is the impact of foreign workers on the innovativeness and productivity of host firms and countries.
