Adoption Intention with Technical Standard Communication in Industry Practitioner Networks: Survey Experiment
Keywords:
Technical Standards, Diffusion of Innovations, Survey Experiment, Practitioner Networks, Adoption IntentionAbstract
Technical standards serve as critical foundations for interoperability, safety, and efficiency across modern industries. However, the successful diffusion of these standards heavily relies on how effectively they are communicated within professional networks. This study investigates the factors influencing industry practitioners' adoption intentions regarding new technical standards. Using a randomized survey experiment design, we analyze the impact of different communication sources and information detail levels on practitioners. The sample consists of technology and engineering professionals recruited from active industry networks. The empirical results demonstrate that communication originating from informal peer networks yields significantly higher adoption intentions than communication from formal standard-setting organizations. This effect is primarily driven by lower perceived social distance and higher perceived trustworthiness of peer-communicated information. Furthermore, providing detailed technical use cases alongside the standard documentation substantially enhances adoption willingness compared to high-level strategic summaries. These findings provide important insights for standard-setting organizations and industry leaders, suggesting that decentralized communication strategies leveraging key opinion leaders within professional networks can accelerate standard adoption.References
1. Stead, J.G.; Stead, W.E. Why Porter Is Not Enough: Economic Foundations of Sustainable Strategic Management. In Rethinking Strategic Management; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 67–85.
2. Triguero, Á.; Moreno-Mondéjar, L.; Córcoles, D. The Importance of the Eco-Innovation, Knowledge Network and the Geographical Dimension in the Adoption of Circular Economy Business Models. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2025, 34, 10903–10924.
3. Wolniak, R.; Sadłowska-Wrzesińska, J.; Miciuła, I.; Wojtaszek, H.; Głuchowska-Wójcicka, M.; Skelnik, K.; Tylżanowski, R.; Nejman, Ż. The Prevalence and Impact of Innovative CSR Strategies in Manufacturing Enterprises in the Silesian Voivodeship: A Multifaceted Analysis of Benefits, Challenges, and Market Adaptability. Sustainability 2023, 15, 16116.
4. Sadiq, M.; Mehmood, K.; Leong, M.K.; Ghani, U.; Usman, M. Industry 4.0 and Circular Economy: Examining the Role of Supply Chain Integration and Corporate Social Responsibility. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2025, 32, 8242–8257.
5. Santiago, B.d.S.; Scavarda, L.F.; Gusmão Caiado, R.G.; Santos, R.S.; de Mattos Nascimento, D.L. Corporate social responsibility and circular economy integration framework within sustainable supply chain management: Building blocks for industry 5.0. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2025, 32, 269–290.
6. Baumgartner, R.J. Managing Corporate Sustainability and CSR: A Conceptual Framework Combining Values, Strategies and Instruments Contributing to Sustainable Development. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2014, 21, 258–271.
7. Jung, J.; Ko, H.; Kim, Y.J. How Do Startups Drive Innovations Towards Sustainability? Sustainability 2025, 17, 1693.
8. Teece, D.J.; Pisano, G.; Shuen, A. Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management. Strateg. Manag. J. 1997, 18, 509–533. Available online: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3088148 (accessed on 20 January 2026).
9. Gelb, J.; McCarthy, R.; Rehm, W.; Voronin, A. Investors Want to Hear from Companies About the Value of Sustainability; McKinsey & Company: New York, NY, USA, 2023; Available online: https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/strategy-and-corporate-finance/our-insights/investors-want-to-hear-from-companies-about-the-value-of-sustainability (accessed on 20 January 2026).
10. Rauch, A.; Wiklund, J.; Lumpkin, G.T.; Frese, M. Entrepreneurial Orientation and Business Performance: An Assessment of past Research and Suggestions for the Future. Entrep. Theory Pract. 2009, 33, 761–787.
11. BlackRock. Larry Fink’s 2022 CEO Letter to CEOs: The Power of Capitalism. BlackRock, New York, NY, USA. 2022. Available online: https://www.blackrock.com/corporate/investor-relations/larry-fink-ceo-letter (accessed on 29 January 2026).
12. Mubushar, M.; Cerchione, R.; Rasool, S.; Centobelli, P.; Morelli, M. The effect of corporate social responsibility on customer engagement and citizenship behavior. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2025, 32, 580–598.
13. Elkington, J. Partnerships from cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st-century business. Environ. Qual. Manag. 1998, 8, 37–51.
14. United Nations. The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2025; United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2025; Available online: https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2025/The-Sustainable-Development-Goals-Report-2025.pdf (accessed on 20 January 2026).
15. Wang, T.; Bansal, P. Social responsibility in new ventures: Profiting from a long-term orientation. Strateg. Manag. J. 2012, 33, 1135–1153.
16. Marsh, A.T.M.; Velenturf, A.P.M.; Bernal, S.A. Circular Economy strategies for concrete: Implementation and integration. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 362, 132486.
17. Chugunova, M.; Danilov, A. Use of Digital Technologies for HR Management in Germany: Survey Evidence. CESifo Econ. Stud. 2023, 69, 69–90.
18. Núñez-Laguna, I.; Gambetta, N.; García-Benau, M.A. Knowledge in the diversity-efficiency nexus: How board composition shapes sustainable resource use in emerging markets. J. Innov. Knowl. 2026, 11, 100847.
19. Bertelli, B.; Kocollari, U.; Merzi, L.; Torricelli, C. The role of circular economy in reducing corporate default probability: Insights from recent research. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 2025, 75, 101555.
20. Sitompul, H.; Saifi, M.; Hutahayan, B.; Sunarti. Use of Renewable Energy to Enhance Firm Performance: A Systematic Review. Sustainability 2024, 16, 9157.
21. Marler, J.H.; Parry, E. Human resource management, strategic involvement and e-HRM technology. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2016, 27, 2233–2253.
22. Morrison, E.A.; Adu, D.A.; Guo, Y. Executive compensation, sustainable business practices and firm performance: A systematic literature review and future research agenda. J. Account. Lit. 2026, 48, 224–248.
23. Tanco, M.M.; Kalemkerian, F.; Santos, J. Main challenges involved in the adoption of sustainable manufacturing in Uruguayan small and medium sized companies. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 293, 126139.
24. Mejjaouli, S.; Tadj, L. Optimal Control Strategies for Adaptive Pricing in Ride-Sharing Services. Int. J. Ind. Eng. Theory Appl. Pract. 2025, 32, 52.
25. Neumeyer, X.; Liu, M.; Jin, Z. On the relationship between digitalization and managerial competencies. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE Technology and Engineering Management Conference—Europe, TEMSCON-EUR 2021, Online, 17–20 May 2021.
26. Houessou, A.M.; Aoudji, A.K.N.; Biaou, G. Nexus between Competitive Business Strategy and Firm Performance: Moderating Effect of Competitive Intensity. J. Afr. Bus. 2025, 26, 514–537.
27. Pérez Estébanez, R.; Sevillano Martín, F.J. Business Sustainability and Its Effect on Performance Measures: A Comprehensive Analysis. Sustainability 2025, 17, 297.
28. Hayes, A.F. Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis; Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA, 2017.
29. Nazir, S.; Piprani, A.Z.; Mukhuty, S.; Upadhyay, A.; Vilko, J.; Poon, W.C. Industry 4.0 Integration for Sustainability and Value Creation: Moderating Role of Digital and Environmental Strategy. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2025, 1–18.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Authors
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Articles are distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), unless otherwise stated.
