Abstract

Background: This case study examines the implementation of an early single-source (the reuse across documents and projects of content stored in a database) content-management system among technical communicators and how they influenced the decision to adopt the technology. Research questions: (1) Why was a component content-management system developed and what was the process of its implementation? (2) How did technical communicators, functioning as both adopters and change agents, influence the new system's adoption? What affected their perceptions of agency during the implementation? Situating the case: Diffusion of Innovations Theory defines innovation adoption as a communication process that occurs over time. When participating as change agents in innovation diffusion, technical communicators are uniquely qualified to support technological change because they are skilled in making technologies accessible to users. Technical communicators can also be the recipients of change, particularly when organizations adopt new technologies, such as content-management systems. Given their expertise at the interface of technology and its users, technical communicators are well positioned to impact the adoption of content-management systems. Methodology: A single, retrospective instrumental case design examined the early 2000s' implementation of a single-source content-management system in the technical communication group of a global company. Surveys, interviews, and document analysis were used to examine the case over a six-year period About the case: A single-source system was adopted to contain costly increases in document cycle time resulting from: (1) customized production of complex and varied products and (2) new European Union regulations requiring all product documentation written in the national language at the point of sale. The system stored product information in a central repository as numbered modules that could be reused in future deliverables. Doing so brought greater continuity to authoring, translation, and publication of content. The system eliminated retranslation of information and automatically recorded and applied any subsequent changes to all affected documents. Technical communicators functioned as change agents and adopters during the system's implementation. Technical communicators in the organization had the choice to adopt the system, and adoption rates varied among staff members. Despite preparation for possible resistance, several staff initially rejected the new system. Those who adopted it did so quickly and created a shared meaning about the system with change agents, a meaning not shared with resistors. The decision of whether to adopt was influenced by perceptions of the innovation and of agency (positive and negative) about the change agents. Conclusions: A pro-innovation bias can impede the creation of shared meaning between change agents and adopters. Emphasizing technical knowledge about the innovation over persuasive elements of empathy for the uncertainty it produces and identity of what it means to be a writer can also stifle adoption. As change agents, technical communicators influence adoption through their rhetorical understanding of situation and capacity for establishing contexts that allow for the construction of shared meaning between change agents and potential adopters. Also, a perceived lack of decisive leadership or a champion for the change risks restricting the power of change agents to influence adoption and can create a space for protracted resistance to it.