IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v117y2014icp125-133.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Understanding the adoption dynamics of medical innovations: Affordances of the da Vinci robot in the Netherlands

Author

Listed:
  • Abrishami, Payam
  • Boer, Albert
  • Horstman, Klasien

Abstract

This study explored the rather rapid adoption of a new surgical device — the da Vinci robot — in the Netherlands despite the high costs and its controversial clinical benefits. We used the concept ‘affordances’ as a conceptual-analytic tool to refer to the perceived promises, symbolic meanings, and utility values of an innovation constructed in the wider social context of use. This concept helps us empirically understand robot adoption. Data from 28 in-depth interviews with diverse purposively-sampled stakeholders, and from medical literature, policy documents, Health Technology Assessment reports, congress websites and patients' weblogs/forums between April 2009 and February 2014 were systematically analysed from the perspective of affordances. We distinguished five interrelated affordances of the robot that accounted for shaping and fulfilling its rapid adoption: ‘characteristics-related’ affordances such as smart nomenclature and novelty, symbolising high-tech clinical excellence; ‘research-related’ affordances offering medical-technical scientific excellence; ‘entrepreneurship-related’ affordances for performing better-than-the-competition; ‘policy-related’ affordances indicating the robot's liberalised provision and its reduced financial risks; and ‘communication-related’ affordances of the robot in shaping patients' choices and the public's expectations by resonating promising discourses while pushing uncertainties into the background. These affordances make the take-up and use of the da Vinci robot sound perfectly rational and inevitable. This Dutch case study demonstrates the fruitfulness of the affordances approach to empirically capturing the contextual dynamics of technology adoption in health care: exploring in-depth actors' interaction with the technology while considering the interpretative spaces created in situations of use. This approach can best elicit real-life value of innovations, values as defined through the eyes of (potential) users.

Suggested Citation

  • Abrishami, Payam & Boer, Albert & Horstman, Klasien, 2014. "Understanding the adoption dynamics of medical innovations: Affordances of the da Vinci robot in the Netherlands," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 125-133.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:117:y:2014:i:c:p:125-133
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.07.046
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953614004754
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.07.046?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Raghu Garud & Michael A. Rappa, 1994. "A Socio-Cognitive Model of Technology Evolution: The Case of Cochlear Implants," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(3), pages 344-362, August.
    2. Ulucanlar, S. & Faulkner, A. & Peirce, S. & Elwyn, G., 2013. "Technology identity: The role of sociotechnical representations in the adoption of medical devices," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 95-105.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Askfors, Ylva & Fornstedt, Helena, 2018. "The clash of managerial and professional logics in public procurement: Implications for innovation in the health-care sector," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 78-90.
    2. Wadmann, Sarah & Johansen, Anna Brueckner & Born, Alfred Peter & Kessel, Line, 2024. "Infrastructuring precision medicine: Making gene therapies for rare diseases workable in practice," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 351(C).
    3. Smailhodzic, Edin & Boonstra, Albert & Langley, David J., 2021. "Social media enabled interactions in healthcare: Towards a taxonomy," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 291(C).
    4. Carboni, Chiara & Wehrens, Rik & van der Veen, Romke & de Bont, Antoinette, 2022. "Conceptualizing the digitalization of healthcare work: A metaphor-based Critical Interpretive Synthesis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 292(C).
    5. Hofmann, Bjørn, 2020. "Biases distorting priority setting," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(1), pages 52-60.
    6. Francesca Iandolo & Pietro Vito & Irene Fulco & Francesca Loia, 2018. "From Health Technology Assessment to Health Technology Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-22, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Boeker, Warren & Howard, Michael D. & Basu, Sandip & Sahaym, Arvin, 2021. "Interpersonal relationships, digital technologies, and innovation in entrepreneurial ventures," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 495-507.
    2. Ng, Desmond W., 2011. "Thinking Outside the Box: An Absorptive Capacity Approach to the Product Development Process," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 14(3), pages 1-28, September.
    3. Hoppmann, Joern, 2021. "Hand in hand to Nowhereland? How the resource dependence of research institutes influences their co-evolution with industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(2).
    4. Amankwah-Amoah, Joseph & Debrah, Yaw & Nuertey, Dorcas, 2018. "Institutional Legitimacy, Cross-Border Trade and Institutional Voids: Insights from the Cocoa Industry in Ghana," MPRA Paper 84393, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Kummitha, Rama Krishna Reddy, 2020. "Why distance matters: The relatedness between technology development and its appropriation in smart cities," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    6. Raghu Garud & Henri A. Schildt & Theresa K. Lant, 2014. "Entrepreneurial Storytelling, Future Expectations, and the Paradox of Legitimacy," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(5), pages 1479-1492, October.
    7. Haico te Kulve & Wouter Boon & Kornelia Konrad & Tjerk Jan Schuitmaker, 2018. "Influencing the direction of innovation processes: the shadow of authorities in demand articulation," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(4), pages 455-467.
    8. Hart O. Awa & Ojiabo Ukoha & Best C. Eke, 2016. "Adoption of emerging ICTs: The role of actors in a social network," Cogent Business & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(1), pages 1259879-125, December.
    9. Marine Agogué & Pascal Le Masson & Douglas K. Robinson, 2012. "Orphan innovation, or when path-creation goes stale: a design framework to characterize path-dependence in real time," Post-Print hal-00707372, HAL.
    10. Xueyao Ma & Gang Li & Junjun Zhou & Xing Gao & Qifan Nie & Shuyan Xue & Ling Liu & Jiaobei Wang & Tingting Xu & Annan Jin, 2020. "Family-to-family child migration network of informal adoption in China," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-11, December.
    11. Rita Di Mascio, 2016. "Firms’ adoption of self-service technology: how managerial beliefs shape co-production decisions," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 6(1), pages 79-97, June.
    12. Di Stefano, Giada & Gambardella, Alfonso & Verona, Gianmario, 2012. "Technology push and demand pull perspectives in innovation studies: Current findings and future research directions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1283-1295.
    13. Florence Allard-Poesi, 1998. "Representations And Influence Processes In Groups: Towards A Socio-Cognitive Perspective On Cognition In Organization," Post-Print hal-01490579, HAL.
    14. Schmidt, Arne & Walter, Sascha G. & Walter, Achim, 2010. "Contingency Factors and the Technology-Performance-Relationship in Start-ups," EconStor Preprints 37082, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    15. Magali Malherbe & Fanny Simon-Lee, 2015. "Learning and knowledge accumulation as sources of influence for actors during path constitution: the example of the emergence of NFC technology," Post-Print hal-01597620, HAL.
    16. Vecchiato, Riccardo, 2017. "Disruptive innovation, managerial cognition, and technology competition outcomes," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 116-128.
    17. van den Ende, Jan & Kemp, Rene, 1999. "Technological transformations in history: how the computer regime grew out of existing computing regimes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(8), pages 833-851, November.
    18. Ding, Waverly, 2010. "The Impact of Founder Professional Education Background on the Adoption of Open Science by For-Profit Biotechnology Firms," Institute for Research on Labor and Employment, Working Paper Series qt9728v4sv, Institute of Industrial Relations, UC Berkeley.
    19. Stanislav Birko & Edward S Dove & Vural Özdemir, 2015. "Evaluation of Nine Consensus Indices in Delphi Foresight Research and Their Dependency on Delphi Survey Characteristics: A Simulation Study and Debate on Delphi Design and Interpretation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(8), pages 1-14, August.
    20. Thinley Tharchen & Raghu Garud & Rebecca L. Henn, 2020. "Design as an interactive boundary object," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 9(1), pages 1-34, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:117:y:2014:i:c:p:125-133. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.