Diffusion of Geoservice Industry in the Asia-Pacific: Dynamics and Drivers of Innovation

Abstract
The Geoservice industry is increasingly contributing to global sustainability and welfare
by providing many solutions to environmental and socio-economic issues as well as through
extending business opportunities based on Geoservice applications and technologies. Geoservice
or Geospatial industry is up to 10 times larger than the vedio games industry and up to one third
the size of the global airline industry.i The paper try to explore and identify the factors,
indicators and drivers influencing geoservice industry growth and diffusion in the Asia-Pacific
region. This paper relied on the Diffusion of Innovation and Technology Organization
Environment models complemented by the Process Virtualization Theory in composing a
conceptual framework to identify the factors facilitating and boosting innovation according to
each stage of the diffusion process and according to each of the TOE-DOI dimensions. The
discussion and conclusion outline the application of innovation diffusion factors on the Asia-
Pacific geoservice industry in order to provide an assessment and conclude the implications for
both academia and industry people.
1. Introduction to Geo-service Industry
1.1. Understanding geoservices
Oxera (2013a) defines geo services as interactive digital mapping and location-based
services (LBS) that include satellite imagery, satellite positioning signals, navigation devices,
and digital maps. Aerospace information services is utilized for many commercial applications
through Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and its various applications. Such services rely
and base on aerospace navigation, remote sensing and communication capabilities, as well as
systems architectures and platforms for data analysis, management and distribution of these
information products to end users. ii
“Location-Based Services (LBS) are the delivery of data and information services where
the content of those services is tailored to the current location and context of a mobile user. This
is a new and fast-growing technology sector incorporating GIS, wireless technologies,
positioning systems and mobile human-computer interaction. Geo-Information (GI) Engineering
is the design of dependably engineered solutions to society's use of geographical information and
underpins applications such as LBS.” (Brimicombe and Li, 2009). iii
 Vrček, Bubaš and Bosilj (2009) used Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC)’ definition in
describing LBS as an integration of three technology areas: GIS special databases, Mobile GIS
and Web GIS. “LBS is a wireless IP service using the geographical information of a mobile user,
i.e. each application service using the position of a mobile device”. In order to guarantee a
successful integration for LBS, there should be a global standardization among positioning
techniques, network communication, user interface, GIS applications, platforms and
architectures.
1.2. B2B and B2C Applications of LBS:
1- Emergency, safety and medical services i.e. associating patient‘s location coordinates
with emergency calls for better emergency service response and coordination
2- Customer information services regarding weather forecast, tourist sights, restaurants,
hotels, parking lots, public transportation, theater, cinemas etc.
3- Navigation /routing services as an upgrade of information services to help customers
reach their destination using GPS and digital mapping tools in mobiles or cars
4- Tracking services for people, animals, vehciles, or shipments to prevent theft and
facilitate delivery
5- Transactions and billing services i.e. mobile operators charge calls of users staying in
their homes similar to landlines as in Japan and USA. Other example is paying through
mobile phones in stores, cinemas, public transportation and so fourth in which wireless
and POS devices can interact to enable the exchange of information and transaction
process to save employee efforts and customers time.
6- Social media, gaming and entertainment services are increasingly relying on LBS
7- Marketing and advertising LBS, for instance customers receive SMS of nearby deals,
stores, and places related to their personal preferences. iv
Entertainment related LBS may include location based social media such as “checking
in” procedure in which a user can share location information and broadcast it to friends, groups
and individuals in social networks and online communities coupled with attractive features such
as gaming, coupons and incentives for social engagement. Geo-tagging is another feature that
can be added to LBS in which social media content is integrated into location aware mobile
devices so that users can share and use location photos with web content, and that can be useful
as touristic service among other benefits. Sports is another application in which LBS can be
useful to monitor sports activity. Millions of users use such sports LBS applications to manage,
store, update and share workout information on the web including location, distance, speed,
duration, route, or burned calories. Mobile location based gamming is another entertainment
LBS combining a physical traditional gaming such as hide and seek, with virtual and online
gaming relying on positioning and wireless technologies, image recognition, augmented reality
and so forth. Augmented Reality is a new LBS trend combining real and virtual world to deliver
semi-real life experience by integrating user’ camera view with virtual 3D graphic and locational
information (Buczkowski, 2012). v

2. Baseline information: global and regional outlook on geoservice industry

2.1. Global outlook
Geo-service facilitates business functioning and whole industries such as logistics, where the
Global Positioning System (GPS) has been estimated to generate at least $10 billion in cost
savings. Other macroeconomic benefit is by providing market information such as geographic
information services that can reduce transportation cost, promote customer choice which will
result in better competition in a wider marker and product offering, as well as reducing prices,
which in turn will have benefit to customers. The following figure summarizes those benefits.
(Oxera, 2013a)
Matt Ball (2013) referred to Oxera report and supported the Geo-service growth trend,
“The cost savings for shorter journey times and fuel costs are estimated to be $22 billion for
consumers. The educational benefit that promotes a “higher-order thinking” is estimated at $12
billion per year. The value of more efficient emergency operations, with a 20% reduction in
ambulance times, is estimated at more than $427 million for the UK alone.” vi
Oxera (2013 b) reported that Geo-service applications such as Google maps and Google
earth are becoming more beneficial and promising trend. Significant benefits from these uses to
the world economy and both consumers and businesses include:
 billion hours of travel time, and 3.5 billion litres of gasoline saved globally each year due to
improved navigation;
 faster emergency services responses—in England, Geo services are estimated to help save
around 150 lives per year;
 improved agricultural productivity, through better targeted irrigation, which helps to achieve
global cost savings of $8 billion to $22 billion per year;
 a more educated workforce that is able to fulfil high-end, high-productivity jobs;
 a more informed population through access to information on the location of countries, cities
and places of interest;
 the facilitation of competition, leading to savings from price reductions among infrequently
bought goods and services of up to $0.5 billion to $2.8 billion per year. vii
Other report referred to a significant growth for location based services as to help
customers in finding and sharing offers and to make the best purchasing decisions. “In 2012,
there were approximately 747 million users of location-based services worldwide. The number is
expected to triple to approximately 2,093 million users worldwide by 2016… Location-based
services (such as Foursquare, Google, and other localized apps) are expected to bring in $10
billion in revenue from consumers and advertisers by 2016.” LBS also has a growing technology
trend in which marketing and other benefits can be integrated with Bluetooth, GPS, RFID, WIFI,
NFC, iBeacon, and recently Google Glass. (Rori, David and Daniel 2013).viii
Geo-Service industry has a global value reaching $270 billion in which $90 billion of that
paid in wages to workers, and making up roughly 0.2% of global gross domestic product (GDP).
The diffusion of Geo services is growing globally with 30% increases per year, while 50% of
Internet users accessing maps online, and 35% using maps on smartphones. The industry has a
high demand potential for skills with job growth of 22% for cartographers, 16% for survey/
mapping technicians, and 35% for geographers. Moreover, the Asia Pacific is mentioned to be in
the nascent stage of growth in terms of growing jobs and growing value of services, bypassing
other more developed parts of the world. Such diffusion is expected to increase as digital maps
get better and more accessible. To sustain this diffusion growth, a broader awareness and
promotion is needed as well as more investment from governments and companies to foster open
data policies, more geographic education, and product innovation especially in earth observation.
(Matt Ball, 2013).
2.2. Geoservice industry in the Asia-Pacific
LBS is segmented in the Asia-Pacific as consulting, integration and design, managed
services, and other services in different applications including mapping, discovery and
infotainment, business intelligence and analytics, emergency support and disaster management,
leisure and social networking, location based advertising, location based games and augmented
reality, as well as tracking.ix
Asia-Pacific region engaged in LBS’ diffusion efforts since the early millennium,
Ha’ayin R (2000) reported the deployment of Cellebrity ™ LBS platform for an Australian
Application Service Provider as a first commercial platform in the region offering high value
location-based services to business and consumer customers. The platform will enable mobile
users to integrate LBS with internet services and other business features such as mobile yellow
pages and targeted promotional coupons among other applications. The reporter explained how
LBS companies were optimistic to invest in this region and willing to further grow such market. x
Turner A. (2007) emphasized LBS market growth in the Asia-Pacific especially after the
introduction of mash-up services and increase in mobile advertising. In 2006 Frost & Sullivan
estimated LBS market worth of USD 291.7m in 13 Asia-Pacific countries and predicted a
compound annual growth rate of 15.3% between 2006 and 2009 to reach USD 447m by the end
of 2009. The analysis referred to Japan and South Korea as the most mature LBS markets with
almost 92% of Asia-Pacific LBS revenues. Such high percentage of industry growth and
diffusion was attributed to the advanced technology and infrastructure which offer application
developers, content providers and users an ideal environment for LBS growth. Less developed
Asia-Pacific countries still face barriers for LBS diffusion and growth including privacy,
interoperability, and lack of supportive environment to attract user attention such as the
limitations of LBS hand held technologies and applications, mainly because investors prefer
basic data services rather than LBS for quicker Return on Investment. The Analysis expects
continuous adoption and diffusion of LBS in the Asia-Pacific derived by the wider availability of
GPS-enabled handsets, value-added mash-up services and intense advertising.xi
Another report by Lourdes S. (2008) supported the growing demand for mobile LBS
market in the Asia-Pacific based on Frost & Sullivan analysis in which total revenues of this
market from 13 Asia-Pac countries reached US$383.6 million in 2007 and expected to reach
US$2.8 billion by end-2013, at a CAGR (compound annual growth rate) of 39.3 percent (2007-
2013). in 2007 Japan and South Korea are the region’s leader adopters accounting for 49.5
percent (US$190 million) and 43 percent (US$165 million) respectively. However, the high
adoption cost for other Asia-Pacific countries is gradually overwhelmed by other countries in the
region such as Australia, New Zealand, Singapore and Taiwan who try to offer differentiated
value-added services in an attempt by operators to sustain revenues from innovative applications
like fleet tracking and asset management. Japan and South Korea have developed a leading LBS
business model that can be followed in the region by offering integrated LBS mash-up offerings
relying on LBS value chain ecosystem including geographic information service (GIS) or map
providers, application developers, content providers and aggregators, merchants and advertisers,
platform and infrastructure vendors, handset manufacturers, and mobile operators. More
advancement and availability of mobile broadband technologies with LBS features at lower cost
will drive more LBS diffusion and mass adoption as well as developing personalized push-based
content by location information. LBS mobile advertising is proven to be a successful revenue
model in the Asia-Pacific market.xii
BWild (2014) reviewed MicroMarket Monitor industry report expecting growth in LBS’
Asia-Pacific market from $1,57 billion in 2013 to $11,25 billion in 2019, at an estimated
compound annual growth rate of 48.2%, for the given period. Much of revenues were driven by
the LBS mobile marketing and advertising trend. However other applications include navigation
and travel, geo-social networking, real estate and retail searches. The APAC region is now
experiencing the highest growth for LBS in the world due to significant number of smartphone
users as well as availability of LBS infrastructure, technologies and applications. The region
holds 19.1% share of the overall LBS global market as of 2014 and expected to reach 27.8% by
the end of 2019. The reason behind this growth is that LBS capabilities can provide operational
efficiency and facilitation for supply chain management where leader adopter such as Japan and
China encouraged the private sector in the region for more dependability, reliability and trust in
LBS.xiii
Lee E. (2014) referred to LBS diffusion in the APAC where many investors are supporting
market growth and expansion in the region such as AdNear mobile and location based
advertising company, which secured US$19 million from series B funding Partnership with
Japanese and other APAC investors. AdNear with headquarter in Singapore and LBS outreach in
the APAC has worked with brands such as P&G, Woolworths, Audi, Unilever, BMW,
Vodafone, Ford, Samsung, and IKEA. AdNear also claims the region has over 320 million LBS
users.xiv

3. Geoservice diffusion in the Asia-Pacific: theories and methods

 3.1. Diffusion Of Innovation (DOI)
Golich and Pinelli (1998) outlined that knowledge diffusion refers to the use and transfer
of knowledge.xv Rogers (2003) explained diffusion as a two way communication of innovative
new ideas, through certain channels, over time, among the members of a social system. Diffusion
is different than dissemination in which diffusion is a planned and managed communication of
innovative information or knowledge where dissemination can be spontaneous and unplanned
communication.xvi
Askarany D. (2003) explained the diffusion of advanced techniques by relying on the theory of
innovation diffusion in which organizations innovate to develop solutions for their own use or
for commercialization to external organizations. On the other hand, organizations also adopt
external innovation but it takes long time and difficult process to achieve wide adoption. A lot of
research is made to understand the dynamics and drivers for boosting innovation diffusion and
adoption as a common problem facing academic and industry people. xvii
There are several studies focusing on innovation diffusion in the context of geospatial industry
such as (Wachter S. 2006xviii; Masser, I. and Onsrud, H.J. 1993xix, Parr D. A. 2008xx; Chan T. O.
1998 xxi; Chan, T. O. and I.P. Williamson. 1999 axxii; Chan, T. O. and I.P. Williamson. 1999bxxiii
Onsrud, H. J. and Pinto, J. K., 1993xxiv; Chambers K. et al. 2004xxv ; ONSRUD H. J. 1991xxvi;
Nedovic-Budic, Zorica. 1998xxvii; Budic-Nedovic Z. 1995xxviii ;Obermeyr, N.J. 1990xxix).Other
studies can be classified according to countries and regions, in which some are focusing on
Africa(van Helden, P. 1999xxx ;Musinguzi M. 2011xxxi, Eria S. 2012xxxii; Cavric B. I. 2003xxxiii). In
Europe studies include (ASSIMAKOPOULOS D, 1997xxxiv ; ASSIMAKOPOULOS D,
2000xxxv ;Miellet Philippe, 1996xxxvi ;JohanssonT. P. 2012xxxvii; Favier, T. et al. 2012xxxviii; Masser
I. et al. 1996xxxix; I Masser and H Campbell 1996xl ; Masser, I., 1993xli Vonk, G. et al. 2007xlii;
Brunn S. D. et al. 1998xliii). In North America ( L. Wiggins 1993xliv ;Budic, Z.D. and D.R
Godshalk. 1994xlv ; Roche S. 2000xlvi ; Convery M. and Ives-Dewey D. 2008xlvii; Johnson C. A.
2013xlviii; WHITE S. H. 2005xlix). In Latin America (Hasenack, H. 1992l and Camara G. et al.
2006li ) In Asia (Tiwari C. and Tewari V. 2012lii; Wang Z Y and Wang J F 2007liii; Wu, C. H.
2012liv). In Ocenia\Pacific (Escobar F. J. et al. 1998lv; Baby N. and Peterson J. 2012lvi; Dooley P.
2001lvii). The core study focusing on geospatial diffusion in the regional level of Asia-Pacific was
done by Rajabifard A. (2002)lviii . This paper tries to provide an update for geoservice diffusion in
the Asia-Pacific regarding methodological framework and industry information.
3.1. 1 Rogers’ theory for innovation diffusion
Rogers (2003) in his framework model, listed the drivers for innovation adoption as follows:
1. Percieved characteristics of innovation:
The characteristics include: (a) Relative advantage: where the new innovative idea is more
useful, benefecial and valuable for customer or society than previous ideas. It can be measured in
economic terms, social prestege, convenience and satsfaction. (b) Compatability: is the degree of
new innovation consistancy with existing values and social norms as well as adopters potential
needs or experiences. The adoption of incompatable innovation is slower and required prior
adoption of new values system. (c) Complexity: is how difficult or easy the new innovation is
percieved and used by customers. Some adopters have more capacity to understand and use the
new innovation while others may need to first develop new skills and knowledge in order to deal
with the new innovation.
PRWeb (2014) explained LBS market growth and diffusion in the Asia-Pacific because
LBS related technologies and infrastructure i.e. 4G and GPS is getting widely available at lower
cost. Moreover, the customer base of LBS is also increasing as they are getting more interested
in benefiting from LBS opportunities such as navigation, mobile advertisements, tourism, and
consumer tracking. In the Asia-Pacific, market growth was generated by LBS technology
advancement i.e. Cell-ID, E-OTD, OTDOA, A-GPS, E-GPS, and hybrid Technology as well as
the increasing number of adopters led by global top investors such as Cisco, Microsoft, ESRI,
Blackberry, Facebook, and Masternaut. Enterprises try to attract customers by providing them
suitable services.
LBS have promising future especially in the Asia-Pacific. TNS’ Mobile Life 2012 Study
examined cell phone users among 48,000 people in 58 countries whereas over 60% of those who
did not use LBS yet but wanted to use it in the future. The numbers indicate the increasing global
societal awareness and interest about the benefits and applications offered by LBS especially
where almost one third of world populations are using smart phones while in developed Asia-
Pacific countries such as Japan, Korea, Australia, Singapore, Taiwan, Malaysia and New
Zealand, the percentage climbs to over 42% making the region’ customers eager to adopt
location based services (coordinates, 2012).lix
(d) Trialability: is the degree of which an innovation maybe initially experimented and tested
to minimize uncertainity and speed up diffusion for adopters who prefer to have minimum risk
and best results from the new innovation. (e) Observability: customers prefer to wait and observe
the results of new innovation before they adopt it. Such observation is much related to
interpersonal communications where people trust more the word of mouth from neigbors and
friends as well as social discussions. Some innovations manifest their results, excellence and
benefets faster than other innovation based on the nature of technology and ability of customers
to understand and observe its value. Rogers asserted that „Innovations that are perceived by
individuals as having greater relative advantage, compatibility, trialability, and observability and
less complexity will be adopted more rapidly than other innovations.“ (Rogers, 2003).
Computerworld (2002) reported the early endeavors of wireless LBS diffusion in the
Asia-Pacific especially after successful initial trails of LBS applications in Singapore including
buddy-finder, points of interest services, fleet management and PDA-enabled applications -
running across an E-OTD (Enhanced Observed Time Difference). Investors and industry people
expect LBS growth and success in the Asia-Pacific due to the huge increase of GSM operators
and mobile users in the region as well as the advancement of technology and applications. They
are willing to further develop the trail scale and scope in terms of applications to achieve a
breakthrough for new generation LBS. The trail was the first of its kind worldwide and helped in
evaluating current LBS opportunities regarding E-OTD technology and applications based on the
high technology in Singapore i.e. GPRS, MMS (multimedia messaging), multimedia phones and
PDAs coupled with good infrastructure.lx
2. Adoption‘ Decision Process:
The process starts from the individual’s first knowledge of innovation till adoption,
implementation or use and confirmation or rejection . the five innovation decision processes are:
(a) knowledge: when an individual or a system learns about the new innovation and its functions
and how to use it and benefit from it. (b) persuasion when the individual forms favorable or
unfavorable attitude towards the new innovation (c) decision is made when the individual choose
to adopt or reject the innovation. (d) implementation is when the individual use the innovation.
(e) confirmation is about the reconfirmation or reversing of the previous taken decision based on
further messages about innovation. The innovation decision process is an information seeking
process where individuals try to maximize their understanding of new innovation and decrease
potential risk or uncertainity about the cause-effect relationship where mass media can be
effective tool to persuade, raise awareness and educate individuals about the innovation
whereabouts and information. However, mass media can not be very effective in helping
individuals during evaluation stage because they tend to rely on interpersonal communications
among peers to get more detailed information about whether the new innovation can fit them and
their needs according to their particular situation. Usually individuals seek information before
deciding to buy and try the new innovation to get a sense of persuation, as well as after deciding
and implementing for evaluation (Rogers, 2003).
Backer J. (2012) outlined that each innovation or technology has its own considerations in
which adoption decision may vary according to the degree of risk, especially in the case of
radical innovations. Incremental and synthetic innovations has a measured and stable pace of
adoption unlike technologies and industries characterized by disruptive and discontinuous
change which requires quick and decisive adoption decisions. Competence enhancing
innovations i.e. RFID, can improve and complement the firm competencies and skills. On the
other hand, competence destroying innovations can make a major shift in the the firm and
industry by making existing competencies and skills obsolete and replace it with new innovation
solutions i.e. cloud solutions.
In the final confirmation stage, the adoption decision might be positively confirmed for
continous adoption or to change if new innovative idea can provide better value than the existing
innovation or the existing innovation show dissatsfactory results, performance or issues in latter
stages. Innovation adoption decisions can be optional where individuals choose to adopt or reject
regardless of the rest of social system members. Collective innovation decison is when there is a
concensus among members or groups in the social system to adop or reject the new innovations.
Authority innovation decisions are initiated by those few who possess power, status or technical
expertise. Finally, there could be a sequencial combination of different decision categories
where for instance contingent innovation decisions are about rejecting or adopting the new
innovation after a prior innovation decision has been made in the social system (Rogers, 2003).
Rajabifard A., (2002) mentioned that SDI requires community diffusion rather than individual
adoption therefore it is important to improve the social system and organizational structure for
national and transnational diffusion.

3. Communication Channels:
 Rogers (2003) indicated that mass media channels are the most rappid and widely efficent
means to inform, advertise and persuade for the public about the new innovation. However,
interpersonal communication is more effecting tools for persuation and evaluation where
individuals seek advice from similar peers in society who already know or tried the new
innovation rather than relying on scientific and media explanations. Therefore change agents
play important role in the diffusion and persuasion because they are competent in understanding
socioeconomic status, education, values, culture and language and they try to establish more
heterophhilous or mutual understanding especially with the early adopters who have higher
social, economic and educational status so that they can easily influence and persuade latter
potential adopters for faster diffusion
According to Bass model, the interpersonal communication is more influential to spread
innovation from early adopter to latter adopters, especially in the latter stages of diffusion.
However, on the early stages of diffusion mass media has the most influence to spread
innovation and persuade early adopters of the new innovation. Such innovation diffusion curves
and models are used to forecast the first-purchase sales and market demand but not accurate
enough (Mahajan V., Muller E. and Bass F., 1990) lxi
Drivers for SDI diffusion such as communication is significant especially when
communication pattern and use is well planned. Interpersonal communication can be more
effective to encourage or discourage users for GIS adoption based on negative or positive
feedback and personal relationships. GIS was enabling technology for SDI diffusion as well as
internet and communication technologies. (Rajabifard A., 2002).
Critical mass is reached when enough individuals in the social system adopt the new
innovation to a level where the rate of adoption becomes self sustaining. The critical mass
adoption is triggered by interactive media such as emails, telephones and teleconferencing. He
noted that “the S-Shaped diffusion curve “takes off” at about 10 to 20 percent adoption when
interpersonal networks become activated so that a critical mass of adopters begin using an
innovation” (Rogers, 2003).
4. Social system
Another factor required for LBS diffusion in the Asia-Pacific is the social factor triggered
by lifestyle and consumer behavioural patterns in which LBS providers should consider in order
to provide tailored applications and services to their needs and environment. For instance, Japan
and South Korea supported innovative LBS applications for community creation, child-locator
services and crime-prevention (Lourdes S. 2008).
Rogers (2003) explained the social system as the interrelated units engaging and cooperating
in problem solving to achieve their common goal. Those units can be individuals, organizations,
informal groups or subsystems. Innovation diffusion is context specific ih which it differs from a
social system to another. For instance innovation diffusion differ in different places, cultures.
social norms, business, economic, legal and political environments. The social structure affect
diffusion where different sub segments within a social system has different reaction to
innovation and adoption. It is more systematic to structure the social system and organization in
order to identify different segments nature, needs and required information to minimize
uncertainity and form a more effective decision. It is also important to consider the importance of
formal and informal communication networks and relationships among social system units in
order to understand and utilize the commonalities or homophilous influence of units sharing
similar understanding and characteristics. Observing the interactions of these social relationships
and communication networks can help predecting consumer behavior and reaction for potential
adoption. The communication and social system structure, as well as the different social norms,
cultures and values can facilitate or impede diffusion in which social scientists try to understand
and fix such social, structural and communication gabs and issues of integrating new nnovation
within the social system and structure. Influencial factors in the social system include the role of
opinion leaders and change agents.
Factors that influence geospatial technology diffusion include the uniqueness of culture and
social values and attributes of each market (i.e. country or region) which can either support of
reject GIS diffusion. GIS diffusion therefore should address culturally and socially desired
functions as well as increasing the usefulness and relative advantage in accordance with their
specific culture and social norms. (Man W. H. and Toorn W. H., 2002).lxii
5. opinion leaders and change agents:
They are another influencial drivers to persuade potential adopters from other segments in the
social system. They possess competencies and social status enabling them to diffuse the
innovation more quickly than mass media via interpersonal communication and word of mouth,
especially if they established common understanding with other units in the social system and
have already tested and exhibit the benefits of new innovation. Usually change agents approach
opinion leaders from early adopters to promote the new innovation in accordance with the
change agency plans. Latter on early adopters will try to attract latter adopters to gain critical
mass and sustain diffusion growth. (Roger, 2003).
The Regional SDI development in the Asia-Pacific shows a growing adoption pattern
according to Rogers S-Curve and his generic model for organization innovation process, by
observing the characteristics and behaviors of early and late adopters as well as the role of early
champions who exerted much effort in promoting the technology to gain enough criticall mass
for diffusion takeoff. APSDI is an example of change agents or champions who provide support
to speed up diffusion in the region (Rajabifard A., 2002).
3.1.2. Roger’s approach for organizational innovation diffusion
Rogers (2003) did not only recognize innovation related drivers and attrivutes but also
identified other organizational drivers and attributes (independant variables) and their positive or
negative influences to organizational innovativeness (dependent variable) within three groups:
(1) individual leader characteristics and its attitude towards change (positive for organizational
innovativeness); (2) internal characteristics of organizational structure and its influence on
organizational innovativeness as follows: centeralization and formalization has negative
influence while knowledge complexity, interconnectidness, organizational resource slack and
organizational size have positive influence. (3) external characteristics of the organization such
as system openess has positive influence towards organizational innovativeness.
Diffusion networks
Linking the internal organizational attributes with the external characteristics of organization
can be explained by understanding diffusion networks. Rogers emphasized the important role of
diffusion networks as positive driver for innovation diffusion and adoption in which individuals
build their adoption decision mainly based on their interpersonal communication experiences and
network relationships with peer individuals who can influence their adoption decision. Opinion
leaders and their orgganizations as well as change agents and their organizations are the initiators
of innovation flow in the social system through their innovation networks as well as
communication or promotion initiatives and efforts. (Rogers, 2003).
GSDI (2013) reported initiatives from government and non government entities for geoservice
innovation diffusion in developing countries through conferences and professional societies
collaboration and consortias. Such organizations pool their resources to find solutions for
geoservice innovation diffusion based on interorganizational knowledge collaboration and also
extended their initiatives to open innovation awards. lxiii
A platform or spin offs within interorganizational alliance involving upstream and
downstream partners can be created to manage file sharing, classification and security
authorization, as well as advertising different services and products to user groups and manage
associated revenues (Smith L. J., 2011).
3.2. TOE dynamics for innovation diffusion
According to Baker J. (2012) the Technology-Organization-Environment (TOE) model was
introduced in 1990 by Tornatzky and Fleischer to describe the influence of the firm
technological, organizational and environmental context on the adoption and implementation of
innovations.
Chan T. O. (1998) reviewed literature on GIS as an innovation which comprises of technology
components as well as different configurations of organization and social systems. Rajabifard A.
(2002) outlined that SDI is seen as an innovation through the interaction between people,
technology and organization.
3.2.1. The technology dynamic:
The technological context refers to the available technology not only in the firm, but also in
the market place and the role it can play in facilitating the innovation adoption process.
Moreover, it is important to consider the nature and characteristics of innovations and its related
incremental, synthetic, or discontinuous changes. (Baker J., 2012).
Chan T. O. (1998) referred to the technical challenges that may slow down diffusion in which
GIS is based on complex cluster of technologies in addition to the lack of user-friendliness.
Another challenge is the changing nature of this technology whereas innovation may undergo
reinvention to reboost diffusion.
Oyelaran-Oyeyinka B. and Rasiah R. (2009) referred to the enabler and facilitator factors for the
development of complex industries such as machinery, electronics and aerospace. The diffusion
of software systems, electronic components, and precesion tools can all be integrated to help in
the diffusion of Information-Hardware (IH) sector. The diffusion of IH sector and its technology
clusters is growing rapidly in East Asia countries such as China, Indonesia, Malaysia and Taiwan
where many companies there became global IH leaders such as Taiwan Semiconductor
Manifacturing Company. lxiv
 Although the Asia-Pacific in the early mellinium was still in the early slow SDI adoption
phase, the whole world at that time were facing SDI diffusion challenges including
compatability, standardization and interoperability of SDI. The nature of SDI technology is
multidiciplinary and constantly changing by time therefore disruptive innovation and continous
reinvention is important for diffusion to meet the needs of different oranizations and different
social configurations. (Rajabifard A., 2002).
Steinfield (2003) mentioned some of the related LBS technological barriers in which service
operators find difficulty to get the best deal from LBS provider in terms of cost and complex
choices of LBS offerings which also create interoperability issues. Other issues include “privacy
concerns, quality of service problems, fair access to location information, and the lack of
standards for technology and service providers” However, some markets in Europe and Asia is
successfully developing LBS such as Sweden and Japan. The trend is showing a great potential
for LBS diffusion with the development of information and communication technologies if the
technological and policy issues have been dealt with.lxv
Gakstatter (2012) emphasized the technology diffusion issue in which geoservice
applications and related LBS used to have high cost including the GIS and its technologies.
However the proliferation and diffusion of such Geoservice technologies and systems is making
it more available and affordable for a wider range of users, especially when mobile devices and
applications became technologically mature with integrated geoservice functions and available in
lower cost. Other geoservice diffusion trends is the use of free and open source software for
LBS. UAV technologies and systems are another low cost trend for collecting geospatial
information and will likely be more diffused in the future.lxvi
A growing geoservice technology trend is the use of drones or UAVs for commercial
applications and LBS. this emerging trend has a growing potential business opportunities. The
technology is quiet cheap and had blooming results in Europe and Asia. (gulf-times.com, 2013).
The technology trend of geoservice industry focus on aerospace capability development
and diffusion such as in small satellites and its applications for commercial and civilian
purposes. Such small technologies developed, owned and operated by service providers also has
endless business opportunities and applications when it comes to location based services. It
allows academic, government, business leaders and even individuals to easily benefit from the
various commercial applications as well as have many environmental, and socio- economic
benefits to world sustainability issues. Such trend will make LBS capabilities available to less
developing countries with lower cost and lower difficulty including the development, launch and
operation of aerospace technologies and its related LBS applications relying on the use of
commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) components and open source systems. The emerging trend of
small satellites technology has already been adopted by academic and business communities in
Asian countries such as some Indian universities which successfully developed and even lunched
satellites by local Indian students in cooperation with Russian students. Small satellites are the
leading technology in the near future after smartphones and tablets in which it composes of
similar functions and features such as imaging optics, radio communication, battery power
systems as well as processing ICs and other sensors. High processing power microcontrollers are
still not widely available and affordable for commercial diffusion. On the other hand, Small
satellites are turning point for LBS diffusion in which Nano technology is developing rapidly
based on Moore’s law towards more effective functioning and efficient cost. It is worthy of note
that NASA has launched a modified smartphone into orbit as phonesat i.e. Google-HTC Nexus.
Such small satellites can be even more reliable and successful than traditional satellites if they
are integrated and utilized in a fleet of small satellite constellation. On the other hand, privacy
issues raise security concerns for the misuse of such capability. However, some Asian countries
try to legalize, control and monitor aerospace business activities such as the Indian space
authorities. (John, Schingler, and Edgar, 2013) lxvii
Racoma A. (2013) referred to R&D collaboration between Sprooki and YFind in
Singapore to enable indoor GPS and related LBS for the APAC region. Singapore with 150%
mobile penetration rate is becoming a leader market in LBS and its Apps became one of the most
fundamental for smartphone and tablet users. Although GPS is enabled by satellite requiring a
line of sight under the sky, both companies are now developing a wireless based GPS like system
to expand LBS capabilities as an effort for technology diffusion with the possibility to expand its
commercial applications indoors such as tracking for foot traffic, thereby deducing customer
behavior from movement. This could be useful in malls, retail establishments and airports,
among others. Adding indoor LBS marketing and advertising can significantly increase LBS
business opportunities with new innovative Applications such as “showrooming”. Other than
receiving promos and discounts mobile alerts based on location and user preferences, LBS
applications also include Real-time business intelligence such as The Retail HQ App which
tracks shopper movement and behavior in real time. Singapore based LBS companies are
working hard to diffuse such innovative solutions and Apps across APAC as part of its
recent raising S$590,000 to expand its presence in the region. lxviii
3.2.2. The organizational dynamic
The organizational context refers to organizational resources, structure and process that can
facilitate innovation adoption. The organization‘ characteristics and resources such as size, slack
of resources, internal links among employees and organizational units as well as external links
and intra organizational relationships and processes for innovation diffusion. Organizations
aiming at achieving effective and efficent adoption usually follow organic and decentralized
structures to promote flexiblity of responsibilities and smooth lateral communication and
relationship links among employees or stakeholders. informal linking agents and cross functional
teams and employees who can establish formal and informal links with different stakeholders
and units are some of the mechanisms to promote innovation within the organization. Unlike
innovation adoption, innovation implementation tend to be more effective and efficent by
following formal communication and reporting relationships as well as centeralized decision
making. Top management support is also important to promote change culture by setting
organization vision, mission and strategy that can promote innovation. (Baker J., 2012).
Rajabifard A. (2002) provided diffusion analysis on Spatial Data Infrastructure (SDI)
development in the Asia Pacific. The Permanent Committee on GIS Infrastructure
for Asia & the Pacific (PCGIP) had regional initiatives and efforts to implement a regional
geodesy network, policy and guidelines for sharing geospatial fundemental data and technologies
through continous initiatives and projects to increase regional awareness and collaboration.
However those efforts and activities had a relatively low rate of participation based on the
voluntary nature of multinational collaboration and lack of suffecient support from the region‘
members.
In a related context, Chan T. O. (1998) discussed GIS diffusion networks in the initiatives of
some countries like Greece which relied on interorganizational networking and collaboration not
only within the social system i.e. opinion leaders and GIS community but also with the
Europiean Union to gain regional support for GIS diffusion. Those initiatives included
conferences, seminars, awareness rising, continous education and training. Chan reviewed the
literature on the importance of maintaining communication for GIS diffusion where senior
management are required to keep stakeholder informed through formal and informal
communication channels (i.e. media and interpersonal communication) as well as building and
maintaining relationships and links among different departments and units to facilitate the
diffusion, adoption and sharing of GIS.
Oyelaran-Oyeyinka B. and Rasiah R. (2009) mentioned that IH innovation system should
consider diffusion networks with both the social system of national and international markets by
increasing awareness of IH features and use for customers and investors. Diffusion networks
also help integrating IH foreign knowledge into the local system through R&D collaboration and
relationships with key change agents.
Diffusion theory discussed GIS factors related to organizational innovation process
include initiation (agenda setting and Matching, awareness rising, adoption decision, acquisition)
;implementation (configuration, utilization and routinizing) and finally outcome assessment.
Time related research on the rate of adoption varies according to the different organization
innovation processes and adopters decision patterns. The S-Curve is one application of the varied
rate of GIS adoption according to some studies on the European local government. The studies in
1996 shows the region is still in the rapid expansion phase and did not reach saturation yet.
Other than diffusion theory, the managerial rationalist view tackled time and rate of adoption by
focusing on the process of GIS development in organizations in addition to the evolutionist view
regarding GIS development in different settings taking in consideration the direction and
destination of transformation. Pro-innovation bias and socio-technical issues can lead to
diffusion failure; therefore the inclusion of a feedback loop in the organizational innovation
process is important. Chan presented a modified framework with a feedback loop to allow the
unsuccessful GIS diffusion to exit from the process by continuous filtering and learning in order
to identify or clarify the new GIS concept or configuration which can have more successful
diffusion (Chan T. O. 1998). Similarly, this paper presents a conceptual framework that tries to
combine different steps in the organizational diffusion process into three stages within a cycle
using feedback loop.

3.2.3. The environment dynamic

 According to Bohle F. (2011)lxix, the enabeling capabilities for innovation diffusion in the
social system are not only limited to organizational processes and communication links but also
extended to include external environment factors such as Political support (i.e. regulators,
governmental and non governmental entities), Economic Support (i.e. investors and fundraisers),
Social support (i.e. leadership, culture, social networks and movements), and Technology
support (i.e. electronic and web based systems and technologies).
The environment context refers to the industry structure, competitors and suppliers as well as
regulatory environment. Industry lifecycle is associated with innovation in which rapidly
changing or disruptive industries requires more intensive innovation while mature or declining
endustries require other strategies such as improving efficency or expanding into new lines of
business. Investment friendly environment in countries which support innovation include
technology and infrastructure readiness, skilled labour and consultants availability, socio-
economic and political stability as well as regulatory support and flexibility towards innovation.
(Baker J., 2012).
Government adopters seek to expand LBS supply chain structure to include: banking and
financial industry, academia and education, healthcare, manufacturing, government and defense,
oil and gas, transportation and logistics, media and advertising, and retail. (PRWeb, 2014).
The political and economic support for IH infrastructure, skills, technology readiness and
maturity level is positioning the East Asia region as a global leader, developer and competitor.
(Oyelaran-Oyeyinka B. and Rasiah R. (2009).
SDI diffusion need to be aligned with social transformation and rehabiliation. SDI and
geospatial technology diffusion in the third world require national investment and international
support for opportunity utilization to create and cupture value from commercial applications as
well as capacity and capability development through improved innovation oriented knowledge
and incentive management systems. SDI adoption decision within a regional collaborative
context rely on a pragmatic, visionary and cost benefit strategy (Rajabifard A., 2002).
Eurosif (2011) referred to Aerospace & Defence industry issues including bribery,
corruption and lack of transparency, as well as inadequate supply chain management, climate
change, regulatory control over controversial weapons and trade, product quality and safety as
well as labor relations issues. lxx
 Danielle (2008) recommended solutions to developing countries willing to develop their
aerospace capacities and capabilities. He started by focusing of aerospace technology as a
national technology priority sector which needed to be developed based on internal capacities
and capabilities. Second if the developing country does not have access to the technology
domestically they can consider technology transfer with other countries. Third a developing
country can also foster a strong National Innovation System NIS for technological capability
building. Fourth, a country needs absorptive capacity through capacity building for technical
learning. The fifth requirement is the government role in facilitating the technological capacity
building. This role should rely on implementing and coordinating:1) the Nurturing of Skills
through education and innovation policy, 2) the Creation of Organizations for providing
technical training, disseminating technical knowledge and improving productive efficiency, and
3) the Installing of Purpose based on information sharing and flow across coordinating parties…
as well as providing sound infrastructure and developing a successful trade, industrial and
macroeconomic policies.lxxi
The dual-use nature of aerospace technology made military and security commanders
more dependable on civilian space sector including ground facilities and vehicles as well as
communication, navigation and observation technologies, to be more effective and efficient in
their operations (Robert, 2009). lxxii
Developing a stable business model for space industry may take long time to achieve
profitable success, however it may have short term achievements if outer space is to serve the
immediate ends of sustainability. In order to achieve industry growth, policies are recently
pushing towards furthering competition towards increased timely access and availability as a
priority then raising the importance of copyright protection and licensing management. issues
such as pricing, revenues and balancing supply with demand according to different users and
needs should be handled within an integrated value-added products and services or within
alliance collaborative structures and not only relying on economic copyrights. Both up and down
streams are looking to develop space markets and products where a successful model requires
both creativity and collaboration between the public and the private sectors (Smith L. J., 2011).
lxxiii

Angelis (2013) referred to public private partnership as a western model for aerospace
industry growth followed successfully by Asian growing aerospace powers in which civilian
space program funded by the government through tax collection, such as NASA in the United
States, ESA in Europe, the Canadian Space Agency in Canada, Indian Space Research
Organisation in India, JAXA in Japan, RKA in Russia, China National Space Administration in
China, SUPARCO in Pakistan, Iranian Space Agency in Iran, and Korea Aerospace Research
Institute (KARI) in South Korea.”.lxxiv
Smith L. J. (2011) proposed the clearing house model which can be applied within a
common interagency project or licensed to an exclusive agent that will do the clearing house job
for the upstream contractors and ensure collecting royalty fees for members or beneficiaries at
national level. It can also enable pooling resources and calculating collective revenues and
distributing royalties based on percentage use of spatial data products and services which can
also be pooled to manage offer and demand.

4. Research methodology: the DOI-TOE-Process Virtualization framework

There are several methodologies tackling innovation adoption and diffusion which are often
associated with Information and Communication Technologies including but not limited to:
Technology Aceptance Model and its extended versions, Theory of Reasoned Action, Theory of
Planned Behavior, Diffusion Of Innovation and Technology-Organization-Environment models.
Gangwar H. et al. (2014) reviewed the literature on TOE limitations indicating that it should be
complemented by other innovation diffusion related models, tools and or theories to be more
reliable and effective.lxxv
Studies combining both DOI and TOE include: Oliveira T., et al. (2014)lxxvi; Oliveira T.
and Martins M. F. (2011)lxxvii; Chong A. Y. L. et al. (2009) lxxviii; Zhu K. et al (2006)lxxix ; Li, Y. H.
(2008)lxxx; Wang Y.M., et al. (2010)lxxxi; Bradford, M. and Florin, J. ( 2003.)lxxxii ; Chan, S.C.H.
and Ngai, E.W.T. (2007)lxxxiii ; Chwelos, P. et al. (2001)lxxxiv ; Kuan, K.K.Y. and Chau, P.Y.K.
(2001)lxxxv; Lertwongsatien, C. andWongpinunwatana, N.(2003) lxxxvi; Premkumar, G. and
Roberts, M.(1999 )lxxxvii; Scupola, A.(2003) lxxxviii; Soares-Aguiar and PalmaDos-Reis (2008)lxxxix;
Thong J. Y. L. (1999)xc, Azadegan A. and Teich J. (2010)xci; Chong A.Y.L. et al. (2009)xcii, and
Low C. et al. (2011)xciii . Other studies which add other theories to the DOI-TOE framework
include Hsu P.F. et al (2006)xciv and Salimonu R.I. et al. (2013)xcv adding Iacovou et al. (1995)
model. Also, Picoto W. Ng., et al. (2014)xcvi adding Resource Based View; Karahanna, E., et al.
(1999)xcvii adding Theory of Reasoned Action, and Bose R. and Luo X. (2011)xcviii adding
Process Virtualization Theory. This paper attempts to use Overby, E. ( 2008)xcix process
virtualization theory as complementary for the DOI-TOE theories, so that the integrated
framework does not only show a strategic picture for decision makers but also extends to define
a deeper operational level analysis for a more comprehensive picture.
The TOE model is seen as an extension of DOI model in which DOI is mainly concerned with
innovation and technology related factors, while TOE adds to the Technology factors, more
emphasis on the Organizational and Environment related aspects to fit for the macro industry and
interorganizational analysis level. DOI theory is also consistant with TOE whereas Roger (2003)
refered to the organizational attributes for innovation and the external organizational factors such
as system openness and diffusion networks. DOI also complements TOE by emphasizing the role
of social system and adopters’ decision.
Innovation Diffusion Process and the Process Virtualization Theory
The process of innovation diffusion differs wheather innovation is generated from within
the organization (i.e. idea generation, project definition, design, development, marketing and
commercialization) or imported and adopted from external source (i.e. awareness of innovation,
attitude, formulation, evaluation, decision to adopt, trial implementation, and sustained
implementation). On the other hand, Rogers’ approach to understand the diffusion process is
through: recognition of a problem or need, basic and applied research, development,
commercialization, diffusion and adoption, and consequences. In general, different approaches to
innovation diffusion process are not always firm concepts. The process can be mulled or
overlapped if the innovation is from within the organization, while on the contrary can be
extended if the innovation is imported or adopted from external source. Some steps may also be
skipped in case of particular innovations (Askarany D., 2003).
Process Virtualization Theory
Overby E. (2008) distinguished process virtualization from process automation in which
the former may require active human interaction in selecting a decision from alternatives and
customizing preferencies dynamically. Moreover, Process Virtualization is actually performed
using virtual tools (i.e. IT\IS) unlike simulation which is merely simulated even if it is conducted
within a process. Overby described the theory of process virtualization as an approach to
understand which and how physical processes can fit for virtualization (to be conducted virtually
via IT\IS). The dependant variable is process virtualizability which describes the applicability of
conducting a process without physical interaction among people and each other or between
people and objects. Process virtualizability can be measured either through process adoption rate
or process output quality. Hence, Process Virtualization Theory attempts to identify what
independent variables affecting the amenability or resistance regarding physical processes to be
conducted virtually (process virtualizability). In general those independent factors have a
negative effect on process virtualizability in which the process would be more applicable and
fitting for virtualization if those requirements are minimized.
Bose R. and Luo X. (2011) summarized those 4 independent constructs as follows:
1- Sensory requirement: how rich participants can enjoy a full process sensory experience.
2- Relationship requirement: how effective participants can have interaction in the process.
3- Synchronism requirement: how fast process activities occur and processed quickly.
4- Identification and control requirement: the degree of authentication and personalized
identification with ability to exert control/ influence the behavior of process participants.
Moreover, the moderating effects include representation (IT’s capacity to present process related
information), reach (IT’s capacity to allow process participation across time and space), and
monitoring capability (IT’s capacity to authenticate process participants and track their activity).
Bose R. and Luo X. applied those four independent variables within their TOE-DOI integrated
framework in order to assess a firm readiness in adopting Green policy using IT virtualization
throughout the Green business process transformation. Their framework illustrates how sensory
readiness, relationship readiness, synchronism readiness, and identification and control readiness
can influence Green IT Initialization process which will in turn influence Green IT Integration
and latter Maturation. The framework included those four independent variables within the
technology context, while in the organizational context they include champion support, resource
commitment and firm size. Finally they included in the environmental context the regulatory
support and competition intensity.
Modeling Geoservice Industrial Diffusion Process:
For the purpose of simplification, this research tackles the enabeling and facilitating factors and
drivers of innovation througout the innovation diffusion process within three main stages: the
first stage is about defining innovation issues and ideas. This starting level can be considered
before innovation development as an assessment and at the end of the innovation diffusion
process as an evaluation before the new innovation development cycle. The second stage is about
innovation design and development where basic and applied research is made to develop the
innovative solutions. Finally the third stage is about marketing and commercialization for
adoption and diffusion which include initiation (agenda setting and Matching, awareness rising,
adoption decision, acquisition) ; implementation (configuration, utilization and routinizing) and
finally outcome assessment..
TOE dynamics and Overby, E., (2008) process virtualization theory: (1) the innovation and
technology attributes adopted from Rogers characteristics of innovation and the E- value chain
model (porter M., 2001).c (2) Other than Rogers’ diffusion networks, Askarany D. (2003)
referred to other organizational attributes using adopters’ organizational attributes which are:
organizational strategy ( i.e. innovation portfolio, R&D and branding strategies), organizational
structure (i.e. decentralization, complexity, formalization, interconnectedness, slack, size) and
organizational culture (leadership, adapting or resisting changing and system openess). (3)
Finally, the social system and environment attributes adopted from Rogers’ diffusion network in
addition to the nature of social system and adopters’ decision as well as communication channels
and change agents (Rogers, 2003). In accordance with Chan T. O. (1998) diffusion process
model, The following figure summarizes the innovation diffusion process in 3 steps with
feedback loop: 1) defining innovation issues and ideas, 2) design and development, and 3)
commercialization and diffusion. Each of those stages is influenced by diffusion factors from
TOE, DOI and TPV theories. Also each of those stages influence the diffusion of geoservice
industry. The following figure illustrates this Geoservice Industry Diffusion Process:
 Technology Technology
(DOI\TPV) (DOI\TPV)
Organization Organization
1
Environment 3 Environment

Technology
(DOI\TPV)
2
Organization
Environment
Figure 5: Geoservice Industry Diffusion Process

Understanding the characteristics of different individuals involved in GIS diffusion is

important in addition to the structure, norms and culture of the social system or organization.
Aligning those individual, cultural and social characteristics with the technical and
organizational factors is helpful to make GIS diffusion succeed. Chan (1998) summarizes related
success factors and drivers for GIS diffusion in the following table:
Table 1: GIS diffusion factors

Chan T. O. (1998)
The following figure lists the factors influencing Geoservice industry diffusion process
according to the TOE diffusion dynamics:

Technology Factors:
1*Access to knowledge\learning\skills for staff
2*Access to knowledge\learning\skills for users
3*Access to technology\infrastructure
4*system interoperability\standardization
5* Ease of use\complexity
6*compatability with society needs\norms
7* Unility\benefits to developers
8* Unility\benefits to users in different markets
9* trailability
10*observability
11*Cost for developers i.e. cost sharing
12*Cost for users
13*involve users in design\open innovation
14* Sensory requirement
15* Relationship requirement
16* Synchronism requirement
17* Identification and control requirement
Organizational factors:
18*Management commitment to allocate resources (time, space,
money, facilities, training, information, authority)
19*Assigning GIS project\knowledge manager
20*create innovation teams from different deciplines
21*Develop a project organization of cooperation& consensus
(consortia)
22*organizational conflict (internal\external)
23*flexible& dynamic structure towards change
24*flexible& open culture towards change
25*proactive dynamic organizational planning\ strategy (evaluate
risks\technology impact)
26* organizational learning (documentation system for success\
failure)
27*fallback options
28*incentive package for staff (IP\money\ promotion, etc)
29*incentive package for partners (IP\money\ market share, etc)
30*communication channels& behavior (mass\ social media, ICT,
interpersonal, change agents& diffusion networks)
31*organization size
32* manage IP
Environment factors:
33*local government\legal\political support
34*global legal& political support
35*external funding
36*economic value i.e. ROI rate, profitability and potentiality for
sustainable demand, etc
37*competition\coopetition
38*system\industry openness to spillover
39* social concerns (i.e. privacy and security)
40* environment concerns (i.e. risks of aerospace debris)

Figure 2: TOE Factors Influencing Geoservice Industry Diffusion Process

Table 1 further outlines the application of TOE factors in each stage of the Geoservice diffusion
process as follows:

Table 1: TOE factors influencing each stage of the Geoservice diffusion process
1st stage: defining innovation Issues and ideas
Technology Organization Environment
Enabeling organizational Organizational Integrating stakeholders in idea
infrastructure (ERP& online Project\ portfolio generation& project definition;
stakeholder relations); structure; the changing environment of
HRM system integrating customers in organizational policies, economies and societies;
technology development and testing Project\ portfolio porter 5 forces; value network;
via web based open innovation culture; system openness; Nature of social
Relative advantage; compatability; organizational system; communication channels;
complexity& TPV factors Project\ portfolio government political, economic
strategy and infrastructure support
nd
2 stage: design and development
Technology Organization Environment
organizational KMS; collaborative Organizational Communication channels (change
R&D; integrating R&D with other R&D structure agents& diffusion networks);
SBU; online procurement; online Organizational system openness; government
logistics& operations; integrating R&D culture political, economic and
customers in technology development Organizational infrastructure support
and testing via web based open R&D strategy
innovation; compatability;
complexity; trialability& TPV factors
3rd stage: commercialization and diffusion
Technology Organization Environment
Communication channels (mass & Organizational Alligning communication channels
social media\ E-learning); online Branding to the innovation decision process:
marketing, sales& after sales; structure advertising& media promotion;
integrating customers in technology Organizational change agents& diffusion networks;
feedback and testing via web based Branding culture system openess ;nature of social
open innovation systems; relative Organizational system; government political,
advantage; compatability; complexity; Branding economic and infrastructure support
trailability; observability& TPV strategy
factors
 5. Analysis and discussion: DOI-TOE application on the Asia-Pacific Geoservice
industry
1st stage of defining innovation issues& ideas:
Technology dimension:
The increasing number of geoservices users contributes to the increase of network externality
generating more geoservice adopters in the region. The improvement of infrastructure in Asia-
Pacific through 4G, GPS, smartphone, LBS Apps and technologies which are getting more
diffused contributes to the increase of relative advantage where those applications and
technologies is getting more useful and valuable to many internet users. This transformation is
consistant with the modernization of societies, especially in the Asia-Pacific. Hence, geoservice
applications is compatable with the region’ modern lifestyle. Moreover, the level of complexity
is minimized due to the increase of internet literacy and users in this region as well as the
improvement of LBS Apps. In early development phase, trailability& observability are also
important to understand users’ issues and needs. Web-based systems such as CRM and
integrating customers feedback in value chain through ERP and other open innovation systems
is also useful during and after this phase. The diverse benefits of geoservice applications should
be utilized within a system of systems platform where many government and non government
entities in the Asia-Pacific region can pool their aerospace resources& technologies as well as
improve their infrastructure and skills collectively to acquire, develop, implement and diffuse
geoservice applications in various fields.
Organization dimension:
Technology and knowledge sharing during the early stage of defining innovation issues and
ideas should be based on interorganizational and multinational collaboration to be able deal with
the complex issues of geospatial diffusion and find innovative, effective and efficient solutions.
Diffusion driven networks and organizations are useful in fostering such collaboration and
knowledge dialogue including consortias, alliances and international initiatives i.e. open
innovation awards. There are increasing efforts and initiatves to improve organizational
collaboration on geospatial activities at international and regional levels. The Asia-Pacific region
is one of the most active in such multinational organizational collaboration to support geospatial
infrastructure and skills development as well as geospatial diffusion issues and other related
political, economic, social, technical, legal, and environmental challenges. In the early atage of
defining geoservice innovation issues and ideas, organizational portfolio structure should be
decenteralized to facilitate the knowledge sharing and flow for decision making and problem
solving. Moreover, the organization should possess high complexity capabilities and skills for
knowledge management and sharing as well as analysis, assessment and forecasting to improve
decision making quality. Regarding formalization, The organization should foster openness to
innovation rather than adopting a beraucratic and constrained system in order to be able find
innovative problems and solutions in a more effective and efficient way. On the other hand,
organizational interconnectedness is very useful for geospatial innovation and diffusion by
strengthening links and relationships among different organizational units and employees as well
as between the organization and its external stakeholders. Such links can improve situational
awareness and expand the outreach to utilize potential internal and external knowledge. The
bigger the organization size and slack, the better the influence on organizational innovation and
diffusion. Organizational culture regarding leadership and top management support empowers
everyone to enrich innovation and give feedback through openness and incentive systems. Such
systems can minimize resistance to change and maximize compatability towards innovation.
Organizational portfolio strategy should aim at defining innovation issues and solutions by
collaborating all possible sources of knowledge to collect business intelligence, assess the
business environment and analyze the industry strength, weaknesses, opportunities and threats.
Consequently, the strategy can conclude high priority trends and issues related to the geoservice
industry in the Asia-Pacific in order to define the scope of solutions required for such issues.
Environment dimension:
In the Asia-Pacific, Governments are expanding efforts for collaboration and infrastructure
development. The system of systems should pool existing systems and organizations as a
multinational consortia with a legal and policy framework to deal with issues of soverginity,
security, privacy, corruption, intellectual property, technology transfer and commercialization, as
well as fostering collaboration and innovation openness in dealing with geoservice diffusion
issues. Utilizing civil-military cooperation protocols at an international scale to monitor and
control the ethical use of aerospace technologies including serservice applications. On the other
hand, further enforecement of the government role and its military and aerospace agencies can
contribute effectively towards sustainability issues such as humanitarian and environmental
needs, by sharing their aerospace assets and skills with weaker consortium members. It is also
necessary to leverage and manage the investment and public private partnership between
government and non government entities where some military administrations may lease or offer
commercial geoservices to the private investors and vise versa. Open innovation awards
combined with the support from geoservice technology developers such as japan, china, india,
and south korea can be an incentive for the downstream and smaller government and non
government entities in the region to join the consortium. The big 4 countries should lead and
coordinate the consortium activities based on the legal and policy framework as well as setting a
regional innovation system roadmap for everyone to follow as astandard guideline. The system
should include political, technological, legal and socio-economic reforms to support geoservice
diffusion. It is important to assess the business environment by understanding the knowledge and
information flow and relationshipps of value chain among the porter 5 market forces as well as
within each company and among the value network entities. Understanding the social system of
the Asia-Pacific region and market is important, especially during the early assessment phase in
which cultures and values should be compatable with geoservice innovations as well as
considering related issues of privacy and the different categories of users’ needs and
requirements.
2nd stage of design& development:
Technology dimension:
According to Porter M. (2001) the electronic tools and intlligent systems used to facilitate R&D
in this stage include collaborative design tools, KMS, and ERP systems. Moreover, web-based
procurement, logistics and operations can also be integrated and used. On the other hands, the
technology factors for users is to consider their feedback during design and development stages
through CRM systems as well as integrate customers in managing the value and supply chain
including operations and manufacturing process. Top leaders in the Information Hardware
industry from Asia-Pacific also follow similar techniques such as the virtual factory and
fabrication by the online system of Taiwan Semiconductor Manifacturing Company (Hsieh Y.
C., Lin N. P., Chiu H. C., 2002).ci On the other hand, users feedback collected in the previous
stage should be taken into account in design and development including relative advantage and
compatability factors.
Organization dimension:
The R&D organizational structure in this phase should be different than previous phase where it
is preferred to be more centeralized and formalized. Other factors such as knowledge
complexity, interconnectedness, organization’ size and slack should also be higher to support
innovation. However, measures of intellectual property protection such as confidentiality
agreements and trade secrets should be followed. The R&D organizational culture should be also
directed towards generating innovative solutions through leadership motivation and top
management support including incentive systems and systematic knowledge sharing and
collaboration rather than informal communication. The R&D organizational strategy should aim
at collaborating all possible knowledge sources to design and develop innovative solutions,
products and services to deal with geospatial issues in the Asia-Pacific region.
Environment dimension:
During the design and development stage, it is important for developers in the Asia-Pacific
geoservice industry to establish a formal interorganizational collaboration such as alliance or
consortia to include both government and non-government investors who can support the
diffusion of this industry. This interorganizational alliance or network should have legal and
policy framework to govern knowledge sharing and transfer as well as operating standards and
procedures. Diffusion networks can be useful to import external knowledge and integrate
different organizations and units in collaborative research and development. The alliance or
consortia should develop a regional innovation system for all members to follow in order to
improve multinational standardization to improve the quality of innovation development.
3rd stage of commercialization& diffusion:
Technology dimension:
In this level, using Electronic systems such as the internet, information systems and other related
technologies such as RFID can be very useful in delivery, sales, marketing and after sales
services including CRM, awareness raising and feedback systems. Similar to the TSMC online
system, Intelligent sales and order systems as well as delivery and logistics such as build to order
and customized to order can also be used (Chen R. S. et al., 2003) cii. Moreover, the final product
or service should have an added value to attract users by providing a relative advantage and
compatable features to their culture and lifestyle. Innovations with new features are usually
expensive in the early launch period, however marketing and communication campaigns are
always important throughout the whole decision phases to feed the potential user with more
knowledge about how they can use and benefit from such technology or service to enrich their
knowledge complexity and absorbtive capacity for more diffusion in the social system. However,
the innovation shouldnt be difficult to understand and use. In the early commercialization and
diffusion phase, traialability for testing the early versions of the new innovations should be
coupled with promotion and marketing incentives. On the other hand, the observability of their
behavior and evaluation of such experience and innovation will help developers to improve this
innovation in future versions and sustain its position in the market.
Organization dimension:
The organizational branding structure for innovation commercialization and diffusion is a
combination of different communication functions such as marketing, public relations and
advertising. There are other technical communication links for the use of ICT in the front office
interorganizational interaction between the company and potential customers or users including
feedback links. Information and knowledge management should be bridged between the
developer and potential customers to keep educating and informing them about the innovation
and its related updates or notices. In this sense, links among relivant units within the organization
should be established to provide consistant and quick information flow to facilitate organization
branding for innovation commercialization and diffusion.
Top management culture for organizational branding should be innovative and encourage all
employees to engage in generating attractive messages for marketing, advertising and promotion.
Less formal decenteralized structures should therefore be useful in this stage. Other factors such
as knowledge complexity, interconnectedness, organization’ size and slack should also be higher
to support innovation.
Environment dimension:
In this stage, innovation commercialization and diffusion efforts should penetrate and spread in
the social system to maximize market share and improve branding for both the developer and its
innovation solutions. Aligning and leveraging communication tools and channels throughout
adopters decision process is important. For instance, change agents and opinion leaders are
needed to promote the innovation especially in the early stage of adoption and diffusion (i.e.
innovation awareness, attitude formulation, and evaluation). The use of media should be
extensive in the early stage and decreases after generating network externalities and critical mass
which will in turn continue to grow and promote for innovation from early to latter adopters.
After the adoption decision and during the final stages of trail and sustained implementation, the
developer should maintain links with customers and users for after sale services, feedback,
maintaining awareness rising and marketing to maximize market share and improve branding for
both the developer and its innovation solutions. Change agents and opinion leaders can establish
diffusion networks and organizations to foster and sustain commercialization and diffusion. The
nature of the social system for each market in the Asia-Pacific region should be carefully
considered, especially in commercialization and diffusion phase where different countries and
areas has its unique social norms, values and culture. Therefore designing marketing and
advertising messages should address different segments of potential customers accordingly.
Consequently, there should be different lines of followup and feedback to monitor the trailability
and observe the diffusion and adoption process in order to improve it. During this phase,
developers should improve and maintain relationships and networks with key stakeholders such
as government, academia and industry people to facilitate the diffusion process in the social
system. It is important to keep pushing for more government reforms and collaboration in order
to decrease the price and support the innovation of geoservice industry in the region.

Limitations and future research: The paper tried to support the scarce literature regarding
geoservice diffusion in the Asia-Pacific region. Providing updates on this direction is very useful
especially because this market is very promising.The categorization of diffusion factors related
to the geoservice industry according to TOE dynamics was done in previous studies. However,
this study presents an original contribution in the conceptual framework by categorizing those
factors according to each stage of the diffusion process. In this regard, the technology dynamic
includes not only innovation diffusion factors but also Theory of Process Virtualization’ factors.
On the other hand, this explaratory research needs further emperical packing in the future by
validating the reliability of different combination of relationships represented in this framework.
Moreover, the framework suggests the inclusion of other tools to complement the technology
dimension such as knowledge and E-value chain analysis, while on the environment dimension
considering the 5 forces and value network analysis, in addition to the industrial service
blueprinting as complementary for the organization dimension. Future research related to the
application of those tools in geoservice industry in the Asia-Pacific can be very useful.
 6. Conclusion and implications
This research focus on the diffusion of geoservice industry in the Asia-Pacific region. The
paper tries to allign the diffusion process stages with diffusion factors from TOE , DOI and TPV
theories to provide a more comperhensive and integrated framework for better analysis. The
literature review did not only discuss those theories, but also referred to the situation in the Asia-
Pacific geoservice industry, in which several challenges and opportunities were discussed.
The first issue is about developing a sustainable business model and innovation system
for both upstream aerospace contractors and downstream geospatial companies considering the
links and benefits to industry, academia, society and government stakeholders. Therefore the
second problem is about developing a secure, efficient and effective knowledge sharing and
technology collaboration platform among upstream and downstream industry players to support
such business model and innovation system. The paper highlights the factors which can facilitate
sustainable innovation diffusion, innovation system and business model, which in turn can
facilitate geoservice industry diffusion the the Asia-Pacific. The analysis and discussion of this
paper provide a comprehensive insight for decision makers on the Asia-Pacific geoservice
industry and how to understand the contemporary development of innovation and industry
diffusion based on innovation diffusion theories as well as process virtualization. The analysis
did not only emphasize the internal organizational factors and processes in the case of Asia-
Pacific , but also extended to include related Political, Economic, Social and Technological
factors within the TOE analysis.
The contribution of this paper focus on the importance and role of diffusion factors in
each stage of the diffusion process, with reference to the Asia-Pacific Geoservice industry.
Therefore the implication of this contribution to academia is that identifying those factors
according to different dynamics such as technology, organization and environment is not enough.
Innovation diffusion research should find more comprehensive and deeper analysis methods to
go beyond describing the success factors for diffusion and explain how those factors can work
and be implemented in each stage of the diffusion process. On the other hand, the implications
for practitioners is to learn and implement such industry diffusion analysis tool in order to not
only explore and understand the macro dynamics influencing innovation and industry diffusion,
but also how to relate this macro elements to their micro business and organization through
sustainable relationships and communications with potential stakeholders. Understanding and
utilizing diffusion factors which are tailored to each stage of the organizational diffusion process
is important to improve the rate of innovation acquisition, development, implementation and
diffusion to the market.

References:
 i
Kerski J. (2014, March 13) The Size of the Geospatial Industry, http://blogs.esri.com/esri/gisedcom/2014/03/13/the-size-
of-the-geospatial-industry/
ii
Oxera (2013a), “what is the economic impact of Geo-Services”, geoservice industry revenue executive summery prepared
for Google, http://www.oxera.com/Oxera/media/Oxera/downloads/reports/What-is-the-economic-impact-of-Geo-services---
summary_2.pdf
iii
Brimicombe, A., and Li, C. (2009) Location-Based Services and Geo-Information Engineering: Mastering GIS
Technology Applications & Management. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, UK. http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?
sid=8146880e-7eac-4cee-b30a-2c11c72d602f
%40sessionmgr115&vid=1&hid=119&bdata=Jmxhbmc9emgtdHcmc2l0ZT1laG9zdC1saXZl#db=nfh&AN=16PU13531550
62
iv
Vrček N., Bubaš G. and Bosilj N. (2009), “User Acceptance of Location-based Services”, International Journal of Social
Sciences, 4:2,
http://pdf.aminer.org/000/329/447/acceptance_and_perceptions_of_advanced_mobile_services_alterations_during_a.pdf
v
Buczkowski A. (2012), Location-Based Services: Applications, http://geoawesomeness.com/knowledge-base/location-
based-services/location-based-services-applications/
vi
Matt Ball (2013), “Google Invests in Market Research on the Global Geo Services Industry“,asmmag.com, 01 Feb,
http://www.asmmag.com/2012-12-30-14-40-18/feature/4754-google-invests-in-market-research-on-the-global-geo-services-
industry.html
vii
Oxera (2013 b), “Oxera quantifies the benefits of Geo services to global consumers and businesses on behalf of
Google”, news release, http://www.oxera.com/Latest-Thinking/News/January-2013/Oxera-quantifies-the-benefits-of-Geo-
services-to-g.aspx
viii
Rori D., David P. and Daniel R. (2013), “Location Based Marketing”, HAVAS MEDIA – GLOBAL MEDIA TRENDS,
http://www.havasmedia.com/documents_library/insights/location-based-marketing.pdf
ix
PRWeb (2014, October 26), The Asia-Pacific Location Based Services (LBS) market is estimated to grow from $1,572.4
million in 2014 to $11,257.3 million by 2019 , http://www.prweb.com/releases/location-based/market/prweb12240127.htm
x
Ha’ayin R (2000), CT Motion delivers Asia Pacific's first ASP location-based services platform, BUSINESS WIRE,
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/CT+Motion+delivers+Asia+Pacific's+first+ASP+location-based+services...-a064995340
xi
Turner A. (2007 Juny) Location-based services to grow in Asia-Pacific countries, http://www.gomonews.com/location-
based-services-to-grow-in-asia-pacific-countries/
xii
Lourdes S. (2008, November), Growing Demand for Location-based Services (LBS) in Advanced Mobile Markets,
http://www.directionsmag.com/pressreleases/growing-demand-for-location-based-services-lbs-in-advanced-mobile-
markets/116680
xiii
BWild (2014 October) GEOLOCATION TECHNOLOGY BASED SERVICES TO SPIKE IN ASIA PACIFIC
REGION, http://www.mobilecommercepress.com/geolocation-technology-based-services-spike-asia-pacific-region/
8514332/
xiv
Lee E. (2014, October) Location-based Mobile Advertising Service AdNear Raises Series B Funding for Market
Expansion, http://technode.com/2014/10/16/location-based-mobile-advertising-service-adnear-raises-series-b-funding-
market-expansion/
 xv
Golich l. and Pinelli e. (1998), „WHO IS MANAGING KNOWLEDGE? THE IMPLICATIONS FOR KNOWLEDGE
PRODUCTION AND MANAGEMENT OF GLOBAL STRATEGIC ALLIANCES IN KNOWLEDGE-DEPENDENT
INDUSTRIES“, Paper presented at the International Studies Association's 39th Annual Convention, held 17-21 March,
Minneapolis, Minnesota, http://www.dtic.mil/get-tr-doc/pdf?AD=ADA350083
xvi
Rogers M. (2003), “Diffusion of Innovation”, 5th edition, Free Press, USA, ISBN: 978-0743222099
xvii
Askarany D. (2003), An Overview of the Diffusion of Advanced Techniques, in Tan F. (eds.) Advanced Topics in
Global Information Management, Idea Group Publishing, USA.
xviii
Wachter S. et al. (2006 May 18) The Geospatial Industry: A Perspective on Technology Diffusion, Citeseer digital
library, http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.133.2081&rep=rep1&type=pdf
xix
Masser, I. and Onsrud, H.J. (1993) Diffusion and Use of Geographic Information Technologies, Proceedings of the
NATO Advanced Research Workshop on Modeling the Diffusion and Use of Geographic Information Technologies, (Eds.),
Sounion, Greece, April 8-11, 1992 Series: Nato Science Series D:, Vol. 70, springer , ISBN 978-0-7923-2190-3,
http://www.springer.com/earth+sciences+and+geography/geography/book/978-0-7923-2190-3
xx
Parr D. A. (2008) Innovation Diffusion in Geographic Information Science Research, Master Thesis, Texas State
University, USA, https://digital.library.txstate.edu/bitstream/handle/10877/3354/fulltext.pdf?sequence=1
xxi
Chan T. O. (1998), The Dynamics of Diffusion of Corporate GIS, Doctoral Thesis, University of Melbourne
xxii
Chan, T. O. and I.P. Williamson. (1999 a) The different identities of GIS and GIS diffusion. International Journal of
Geographical Information Science 13(267-281).
http://www.geom.unimelb.edu.au/research/publications/IPW/ToChanIntGIS_1.pdf
xxiii
Chan, T. O. and I.P. Williamson. (1999b) A Model of the Decision Process for GIS Adoption and Diffusion in a
Government Environment. Journal of the Urban and Regional Information Systems Association 11(2):7-16.
http://www.geom.unimelb.edu.au/research/publications/IPW/URISA%20Journal%2099_Chan_.pdf
xxiv
Onsrud, H. J. and Pinto, J. K., 1993, Evaluating correlates of GIS adoption success and the decision process of GIS
aquisition. URISA Journal, 5(1, Spring), 18±39.
xxv
Chambers K. et al. (2004) Indigenous Knowledge, Mapping, and GIS: A Diffusion of Innovation Perspective,
Cartographica: The International Journal for Geographic Information and Geovisualization, Volume 39, issue 3, p.19-31,
http://utpjournals.metapress.com/content/N752N693180TN843
xxvi
ONSRUD H. J. and PINTO J. K. (1991) Diffusion of geographic information innovations, International Journal of
Geographical Information Systems, Volume 5, Issue 4, pages 447-467, DOI:10.1080/02693799108927868
xxvii
Nedovic-Budic, Zorica. (1998) The Likelihood of Becoming a GIS User. Journal of Urban and Regional Information
Systems Association 10(2). http://www.urisa.org/Journal/protect/vol11no1/GISLiklihood.htm
xxviii
Budic-Nedovic Z. (1995) GIS Technology and Organisational Context: Interaction and Adaptation, NCGIA/GISDATA
International Young Scholars Institute. Maine, US., pp.1-17
xxix
Obermeyr, N.J. (1990) Bureaucratic Factors in the Adoption of GIS by Public Organizations: Preliminary Evidence
from Public Administrators and Planners. Comput., Environ. and Urban Systems 14:261-271.
xxx
van Helden, P. (1999) “GIS for Development: An Analysis of GIS Diffusion in Government Organisations in South
Africa”, presented at the Earth Data Information Systems Conference, Pretoria, South Africa, 12-14 July.
 xxxi
Musinguzi M. 2011, A Tree Model for Diffusion of Spatial Data Infrastructures in Developing Countries. In the
proceedings of AET2011 Conference January 30 – February 1, 2011, Entebbe, Uganda ,
http://mak.ac.ug/documents/Makfiles/aet2011/Musinguzi_I.pdf
xxxii
Eria S.( 2012) The state of GIS in developing countries: a diffusion and GIS & society analysis of Uganda, and the
potential for mobile location-based services, Doctoral Thesis, UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA,
http://conservancy.umn.edu/bitstream/handle/11299/142282/Eria_umn_0130E_13214.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
xxxiii
Cavric B. I. et al. (2003) Diffusion of GIS technology in Botswana, International Development Planning Review, 25(2),
195-219.
xxxiv
ASSIMAKOPOULOS D, (1997) GIS Diffusion in Greece: The Development of a Greek GIS Community, in
Geographic Information Research: Bridging the Atlantic, edited by Craglia M, Couclelis H (Eds), pp.111-128.
London: Taylor & Francis.
xxxv
ASSIMAKOPOULOS D, (2000) Social network analysis as a tool for understanding the diffusion of GIS innovations:
the Greek GIS community, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design , volume 27, pages 627 -640,
DOI:10.1068/b2667
xxxvi
Miellet Philippe, (1996) France: a historical perspective on GIS diffusion. In I. Masser, H. Campbell and M. Craglia
(eds), "GIS Diffusion, The adoption and Use of GIS in Local Government in Europe", Taylor &Francis, London, pp. 163-
182.
xxxvii
JohanssonT. P. (2012) Finland: Diffusion of GIS in Schools from Local Innovations to the Implementation of a
National Curriculum, in Milson A. J. et al. (eds.) International Perspectives on Teaching and Learning with GIS in
Secondary Schools, Springer, ISBN 978-94-007-2119-7, DOI 10.1007/978-94-007-2120-3
xxxviii
Favier, T. et al. (2012) The Netherlands: Introduction and Diffusion of GIS for Geography Education, 1980s to the
Present, in Milson A. J. et al. (eds.) International Perspectives on Teaching and Learning with GIS in Secondary Schools,
Springer, ISBN 978-94-007-2119-7, DOI 10.1007/978-94-007-2120-3
xxxix
Masser I. et al. (1996) GIS Diffusion: The Adoption And Use Of Geographical Information Systems In Local
Government in Europe, CRC Press, ISBN 9780748404957
xl
I Masser and H Campbell (1996) Great Britain: the Dynamics of GIS Diffusion In I. Masser, H. Campbell, and M.
Cragila (eds) GIS Diffusion: The Adoption and use of Geographical Information Systems in Local Government in Europe.
London, UK; Bristol, PA: Taylor & Francis
xli
Masser, I., (1993) The diffusion of GIS in British Local Government. In Diffusion and Use of Geographic Information
Technologies, edited by I. Masser and H.J. Onsrud. (Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers), 99-116.
xlii
Vonk, G. et al. (2007) New Technologies Stuck in Old Hierarchies: The Diffusion of Geo-Information Technologies in
Dutch Public Organizations, Public Administration Review, Vol 67 Issue 4, pp. 745-758, DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-
6210.2007.00757.x
xliii
Brunn S. D. et al. (1998) GIS Uses and Constraints on Diffusion in Eastern Europe and the Former USSR, Post-Soviet
Geography and Economics, Volume 39, Issue 10, pages 566-587, DOI:10.1080/10889388.1998.10641094
xliv
L. Wiggins 1993 Diffusion and use of geographic information systems in public sector agencies in the United States, in
Masser, I. and Onsrud, H. (Eds.) Diffusion and Use of Geographic Information Technologies, Proceedings of the NATO
Advanced Research Workshop on Modeling the Diffusion and Use of Geographic Information Technologies, (Eds.),
Sounion, Greece, April 8-11, 1992, Series: Nato Science Series D:, Vol. 70, springer , ISBN 978-0-7923-2190-3,
http://www.springer.com/earth+sciences+and+geography/geography/book/978-0-7923-2190-3
xlv
Budic, Z.D. and D.R Godshalk. (1994) Implementation and Management Effectiveness in Adoption of GIS Technology
in Local Governments. Comput., Environ. and Urban Systems 18(5):285- 304. doi:10.1016/0198-9715(94)90011-6
xlvi
Roche S. (2000) The Diffusion of GIS: A French Canadian Cross-Cultural Comparison of the Impact of National GI
Policies, 3rd AGILE Conference on Geographic Information Science – Helsinki/Espoo, Finland, May 25th – 27 th;
http://plone.itc.nl/agile_old/conference/2000-helsinki/54.pdf
xlvii
Convery M. and Ives-Dewey D. (2008) Champions of GIS: Municipal Implementation and Organizational Diffusion of
GIS in Pennsylvania Governments, Middle States Geographer, 41, 9-18. Retrieved from
http://digitalcommons.wcupa.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1012&context=geog_facpub&sei-redir=1&referer=http%3A
%2F%2Fscholar.google.com.tw%2Fscholar%3Fstart%3D50%26q%3D%2522diffusion%2522%2Bgeospatial%2Bgis%26hl
%3Den%26as_sdt%3D0%2C5#search=%22diffusion%20geospatial%20gis%22
xlviii
Johnson C. A. (2013) "The Diffusion of Geospatial Technologies Among Louisiana Assessors" , Available at:
http://works.bepress.com/craig_johnson/1
xlix
WHITE S. H. (2005) GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (GIS) AND INSTRUCTIONAL TECHNOLOGY
(IT) DIFFUSION: K-12 STUDENT AND EDUCATOR CONCEPTUALIZATIONS, Doctoral Thesis, North Carolina State
University, http://www4.ncsu.edu/~shwhite/profdev/media/SWhiteMay05.pdf
l
Hasenack, H. (1992 March) Some Comments Concerning the Diffusion of GIS Technology in Brazil, in United Advanced
Seminar EM GIS. Frutillar Bajo, Chile.
li
Camara G. et al. (2006) Networks of Innovation and the Establishment of a Spatial Data Infrastructure in Brazil,
Information Technology for Development, Vol. 12, (4) 255-272, Wiley Periodicals, Inc. DOI: 10.1002/itdj.20047
lii
Tiwari C. and Tewari V. (2012) India: Localized Introduction of GIS in Elite Urban Private Schools and Prospects for
Diffusion, in Milson A. J. et al. (eds.) International Perspectives on Teaching and Learning with GIS in Secondary Schools,
Springer, ISBN 978-94-007-2119-7, DOI 10.1007/978-94-007-2120-3
liii
Wang Z Y, Wang J F (2007). Temporal-spatial diffusion of technology: an example of GIS diffusion in sector of
colleges and institutions in China. Economic Geography 27(1): 15-21.
liv
Wu, C. H. (2012) Acceptance of real-time location-based advertising service: a conceptual examination, Journal of
Location Based Services, Volume 6, Issue 4, PP. 250-269, DOI: 10.1080/17489725.2012.744474
lv
Escobar, F., Williamson, I., Green, J., and Waters, E. (1998) "The Use of the Internet in the diffusion of GIS for General
Practices in Victoria, Australia". 8th International Conference of the Internet Society. 21-24 July 1998, Geneva.
lvi
Baby N. and Peterson J. (2012) Advancing the Diffusion of Digital Spatial Data Handling for Upgrade of Decision
Support for the Regional Environmental Managers, Nature Environment and Pollution Technology, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 51-
58, ISSN: 0972-6268, http://neptjournal.com/upload-images/NL-37-9-(9)-B-1826.pdf
lvii
Dooley P. (2001) The effective implementation of GIS in Local Government using diffusion theory, Master Thesis, The
University of Melbourne, Australia,
file:///C:/Users/tweety/Downloads/The+effective+implementation+of+GIS+in+Local+Government+-+Phillip+Dooley.pdf
lviii
Rajabifard A. (2002) Diffusion of Regional Spatial Data Infrastructures: with particular reference to Asia and the
Pacific, Doctoral Thesis, The University of Melbourne,
http://www.csdila.unimelb.edu.au/publication/theses/Rajabifard_PhD_Thesis.pdf
lix
Coordinates (2012, May), Consumers in Asia eager to adopt location-based services, http://mycoordinates.org/lbs-34/
lx
Computerworld (2002, December) Asia-Pacific gears up for location-based services,
https://www.computerworld.com.au/article/48687/asia-pacific_gears_up_location-based_services/
lxi
Mahajan V., Muller E. and Bass F (1990), New Product Diffusion Models Marketing: A Review and Directions for
Research, Journal of Marketing , Vol. 54, No. 1 , pp. 1-26,
http://mail.tku.edu.tw/jodytsao/HitechMarketing/papers/1252170.pdf
lxii
Man W. H. and Toorn W. H. (2002), Culture and the adoption and use of GIS within organizations, International Journal
of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation 4, 51–63
lxiii
GSDI (2013), News from the GSDI Association and the International Geospatial Society,
GSDI and IGS Newsletter, Vol. 3, No. 8 , http://memberservices.gsdi.org/files/?artifact_id=1321
lxiv
Oyelaran-Oyeyinka B. and Rasiah R. (2009), Uneven Paths of Development Innovation and Learning in Asia and
Africa, Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd. UK, ISBN 978 1 84720 906 1
lxv
Steinfield, C., "The Development of Location Based Services in Mobile Commerce", Michigan State University, USA,
2003. https://www.msu.edu/~steinfie/elifelbschap.pdf
lxvi
Gakstatter E. (2012), “Thoughts on Mobile Devices, UAVs, and Cheap Data-Collection Software”, geospatial-
solutions.com, May 8, http://geospatial-solutions.com/thoughts-on-mobile-devices-uavs-and-cheap-data-collection-
software/
lxvii
John D., Schingler R., and Edgar T. (2013), „Small Satellites: All Set To Spur Innovation“, electronicsforu.com,
November 5, http://electronicsforu.com/electronicsforu/circuitarchives/view_article.asp?sno=1563&title%20=
%20Small+Satellites%3A+All+Set+To+Spur+Innovation&b_type=new&id=12439
lxviii
Racoma A. (2013, Jan), Location-based marketing startup Sprooki gets a big push from YFind indoor GPS tech,
http://e27.co/location-based-marketing-startup-sprooki-gets-a-big-push-from-yfind-indoor-gps-tech/
lxix
Bohle F. (2011) Management of Uncertainty- a Bling Spot in the Promotion of Innovations, in Isenhardt, I.; Hees, F.;
Trantow, S. (Eds.) Enabling Innovation Innovative Capability - German and International Views, P.S.J. , PP. 1-16, RWTH
Aachen University
lxx
Eurosif (2011), Aerospace & Defence:13th in a series, , [Online], Available
at:http://www.environmental-finance.com/download.php?files/pdf/4e0d9298751e6/Eurosif_Aerospace-
Defence_2011_WEB.PDF
lxxi
Danielle, R. (2008), The Use of Satellite-Based Technology in Developing
Countries, Master Dissertation, MIT, [Online], Available at:
http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/46371/422549683.pdf?sequence=1
lxxii
Robert, L. (2009), Space and U.S. Security Net Assessment, IFPA, [Online], Available at:
http://www.ifpa.org/pdf/Space_and_U_S_Security_Net_Assessment_Final_Dec15_08.pdf
lxxiii
Smith L. J. (2011), Business innovation symposium ‘At what price? IP-related thoughts on new business models for
space information’, Acta Astronautica, Volume 69, Issues 7–8, Pages 714–721, doi:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2011.04.013
 lxxiv
Angelis , A. D., (2013), “Global Aerospace Market”, Companiesandmarkets , Fri, Jun 21,
http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/global-aerospace-market-000000035.html
lxxv
Gangwar H. et al. (2014) Review on IT adoption: insights from recent technologies, Journal of Enterprise Information
Management, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 488-502, Emerald, DOI 10.1108/JEIM-08-2012-0047
lxxvi
Oliveira T., Thomas M. and Espadanal M. (2014), Assessing the determinants of cloud computing adoption: An
analysis of the manufacturing and services sectors, Information & Management Journal, 51, 497–510, Elsevier,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2014.03.006
lxxvii
Oliveira T. and Martins M. F. (2011) “Literature Review of Information Technology Adoption
Models at Firm Level” The Electronic Journal Information Systems Evaluation Volume 14 Issue 1, (pp110121)
lxxviii
Chong A. Y. L. et al. (2009) Influence of interorganizational relationships on SMEs’ e-business adoption, Internet
Research, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 313-331, Emerald, DOI 10.1108/10662240910965379
lxxix
Zhu K. et al (2006) Innovation diffusion in global contexts: determinants of post-adoption digital transformation of
European companies, European Journal of Information Systems,15, 601–616, Operational Research Society Ltd.
doi:10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000650
lxxx
Li, Y. H. (2008) An Empirical Investigation on the Determinants of E-procurement Adoption in Chinese Manufacturing
Enterprises, 15th International Conference on Management Science & Engineering , September 10-12 , Long Beach, USA
lxxxi
Wang Y.M., Wang Y. S. and Yang Y. F. (2010) Understanding the determinants of RFID adoption in the
manufacturing industry, Technological Forecasting & Social Change 77, 803–815, Elsevier,
doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2010.03.006
lxxxii
Bradford, M., Florin, J., 2003. Examining the role of innovation diffusion factors on the implementation success of
enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 4 (3), 205–225.
lxxxiii
Chan, S.C.H., Ngai, E.W.T., 2007. A qualitative study of information technology adoption how ten organizations
adopted web-Based training. Information Systems Journal 17 (3), 289–315.
lxxxiv
Chwelos, P., Benbasat, I., Dexter, A.S., 2001. Research report: empirical test of an EDI adoption model. Information
Systems Research 12 (2), 304–321.
lxxxv
Kuan, K.K.Y., Chau, P.Y.K., 2001. A perception-based model for EDI adoption in small businesses using a
technology-organization-environment
framework. Information & Management 38 (8), 507–521.
lxxxvi
Lertwongsatien, C., Wongpinunwatana, N., 2003. E-commerce adoption in Thailand: an empirical study of small and
medium enterprises (SMEs). Journal of Global Information Technology Management 6 (3), 67–83.
lxxxvii
Premkumar, G., Roberts, M., 1999. Adoption of new information technologies in rural small businesses. The
International Journal of Management Science 27 (4), 467–484.
lxxxviii
Scupola, A., 2003. The adoption of internet commerce by SMEs in the South of Italy: an environmental,
technological and organizational perspective. Journal of Global Information Technology Management 6 (1), 52–71.
lxxxix
Soares-Aguiar, A., & Palma-Dos-Reis, A. (2008). Why Do Firms Adopt EProcurement Systems? Using Logistic
Regression to Empirically Test a Conceptual Model. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 55(1), 120-133.
 xc
Thong, J.Y.L. (1999) An integrated model of information systems adoption in small businesses, "Journal of Management
Information Systems", Vol. 15, No. 4, pp. 187-214.
xci
A. Azadegan, J. Teich, Effective benchmarking of innovation adoptions: a theoretical framework for e-procurement
technologies, Benchmarking: Int. J. 17, 2010, pp. 472–490.
xcii
A.Y.L. Chong, K.B. Ooi, B.S. Lin, M. Raman, Factors affecting the adoption level of c-commerce: an empirical study,
J. Comput. Inf. Syst. 50, 2009, pp. 13–22.
xciii
C. Low, Y. Chen, M. Wu, Understanding the determinants of cloud computing adoption, Ind. Manage. Data Syst. 11,
2011, pp. 1006–1023.
xciv
Hsu, P.F., Kraemer, K.L. and Dunkle, D. (2006) Determinants of e-business use in us firms, "International Journal of
Electronic Commerce", Vol. 10, No. 4, pp 9-45.
xcv
Salimonu R.I. et al. (2013) Adoption of E-Voting System in Nigeria: A Conceptual Framework, International Journal of
Applied Information Systems (IJAIS) Volume 5– No. 5, Foundation of Computer Science FCS, New York, USA, ISSN :
2249-0868
xcvi
Picoto W. Ng., Bélanger F. and Palma-dos-Reis A. (2014) An organizational perspective on m-business: usage factors
and value determination, European Journal of Information Systems 23, 571-592, doi:10.1057/ejis.2014.15
xcvii
Karahanna, E., Straub, D.W., Chervany, N.L., 1999. Information technology adoption across time: a cross-sectional
comparison of pre-adoption and post-adoption beliefs. MIS Quarterly 23 (2), 183–214.
xcviii
Bose R. and Luo X. (2011) Integrative framework for assessing firms’ potential to undertake Green IT initiatives via
virtualization – A theoretical perspective, Journal of Strategic Information Systems 20, 38–54, Elsevier,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2011.01.003
xcix
Overby, E., 2008. Process virtualization theory and the impact of information technology. Organization Science 19 (2),
277–291.
c
Porter M. (2001) strategy and the internet, harvard business review, (March): 63-78.
ci
Hsieh Y. C., Lin N. P., Chiu H. C. (2002) Virtual factory and relationship marketingFa case study of a Taiwan
semiconductor manufacturing company, International Journal of Information Management 22, 109–126, Elsevier
cii
Chen R. S. et al. (2003) A case study in the design of BTO/CTO shop floor control system, Information & Management
41, 25–37, Elsevier, doi:10.1016/S0378-7206(03)00003-X