Are We Conflating Innovation Resistance With Innovation (Non-)Adoption? A Reflection and Potential Resolution
Juliëtte van Acker, Bas Hillebrand, Simone M. Ritter, Mark A. Wiering, Rob W. Holland
kHUB post date: July 2026
Originally published: 18 March 2026 (PDMA JPIM • Vol. 43, Issue 4 • July 2026)
Read time: 45 minutes
ACCESS THE FULL ARTICLE
Academic Summary
In the realm of innovation studies, examining innovation responses—encompassing both adoption and resistance—has been a central focus for more than six decades. However, most innovation studies only focus on the behavioral dimension of these responses and simply equate resistance with non-adoption. We suggest that seeing resistance as the absence of adoption results in a flawed understanding of innovation responses, neglecting important negative aspects. Using insights from two psychological theories, we provide a theoretically advanced and more comprehensive conceptualization of innovation adoption and innovation resistance. More specifically, we suggest that resistance and adoption involve emotions and cognitions alongside behaviors and explain why adoption and resistance are distinct phenomena. Based on our new conceptualization, we present a typology of innovation responses that provides a more nuanced insight into how actors, such as citizens or consumers, respond to innovation. Finally, we explain the consequences of this perspective for innovation theory development, future research, and innovation practitioners.
Managerial Summary
Innovation resistance is a persistent challenge, frequently hampering successful innovation introduction and causing significant financial and operational difficulties for companies. Understanding resistance is therefore critical for innovation managers. This article clarifies what resistance is, helps managers identify it, and distinguish it from other innovation responses. First, we argue that managers need to not only focus on behavioral resistance to innovation, but also consider the cognitive and emotional dimensions of resistance. Failing to do so may create blind spots, because the emotional and cognitive dimensions of resistance can signal underlying problems that actors have with the innovations and that later on may have behavioral consequences. Second, and importantly, we argue that managers need to distinguish resistance from the absence of adoption, as preventing resistance requires a distinct approach from stimulating adoption (or preventing non-adoption). We provide a practical 2 × 2 typology that helps practitioners to recognize the four distinct innovation response types: pure adoption, pure resistance, indifference, and ambivalence. Finally, we offer actionable strategies for addressing each response type, enabling managers to manage innovation processes more effectively.