In a recent article, I highlighted some of the challenges involved in translating investment in technology and innovation into productivity improvements across the economy.

In an age of smartphones, AI, and genetics, it seems crazy to think that the record sums invested in technology aren’t making more of an impact. One argument is that the technologies themselves are overhyped and nowhere near as impactful as the often breathless commentary would have us believe. Another argument is that technology is actually alright, but too few of us are properly using it.

This need for greater dissemination of technology was recently promoted by a report from MIT’s task force on the work for the future, which argued that there are relatively few organizations that are fully utilizing the technologies of our age, and that productivity stats won’t really move until these technologies are utilized not by the 1% of organizations at the frontier of our economy, but the remainder who are thus far lagging far behind.

A recent exploration of the German economy by the University of Maastricht showed just how big a problem this is, with productivity growth of just 0.3% in 2013, compared to 2.5% in 1992.  The authors suggest that this is predominantly because the majority of investment in new technology is done by a relatively small number of large companies.

Focus on dissemination

In Open Innovation Results Henry Chesbrough, the godfather of open innovation, argues that disseminating innovation should be as important as creating it.

“Something is not right, and the root of the problem is in how we are managing and investing in innovation, both inside individual organizations and also in the larger society,” he argues. “We must extend beyond the creation of new technologies, to also include their broad dissemination and deep absorption, in order to prosper from new technologies.”

This was further emphasized by research from Northwestern University, which found that solutions to many of the world’s problems already exist, but they are not disseminated to the people who need them.

“The challenge is not that we don’t have solutions to solve major societal problems, but that we struggle with how to take a known solution and get a large number of people to use it,” the researchers state. “There is a big gap between what science offers us and what gets applied.”

Minimal adoption

The lack of dissemination was emphasized by a paper from Finland’s VTT, which examines the adoption of digital technology across the Finnish manufacturing sector.

It found that less than 10% of small and medium sized manufacturers were considering introducting new digital tools and systems. Indeed, of the 36 companies the researchers assessed, none were considered advanced users of digital technology, with only two in the next most advanced category.

“The main challenges and barriers to overcome are limited understanding, insufficient resources and gaps in bringing digitalization into practice,” the researchers explain. “This shows clearly that the “digitalization leap” has begun, but it remains in infancy under the scope of manufacturing SMEs in Finland.”

Effective communication

Research from the EU’s OpenUP project highlights the crucial role effective communication of science and innovation plays in helping spread it more widely across society. This includes not only traditional and social media, but also a range of new media formats that can bring research to a new audience. While the research community is broadly supportive of such efforts, this enthusiasm doesn’t always translate into meaningful actions.

“Even though 71% of researchers agreed that it is important to disseminate to non-research audiences, all of the dissemination channels specifically designed for doing so are used only by less than a third of researchers on a regular basis,” the researchers explain. “Communicating to a wider audience seems therefore to be more of a developing norm with enthusiastic early adopters than a widely exercised practice. This is emphasized by the fact that only 12% of respondents reported to having achieved an outstanding result using innovative dissemination channels.”

This is then further exacerbated by the fact that many researchers treat dissemination as something of an afterthought that only begins upon the conclusion of their research. This lack of effective engagement has multiple factors underpinning it, including a lack of time and knowledge, with the researchers believing that more effective incentives are needed to help ensure that science reaches more corners of society. Indeed, it might even require a new class of professionals who aim to communicate science effectively.

“To fill this gap, we propose to create new science communication roles and positions to be staffed with people skilled in science communication and with science expert knowledge,” the researchers explain. “It is important to have, next to Public Relations and marketing staff, trained experts with the necessary scientific background and skills, who are also trained in communicating to and interacting with audiences outside the research community by means of Web 2.0 technologies.”

For society to flourish it’s not enough for technology and innovation to only benefit the already successful. It needs to shine its light across all and improve the fortunes of those out of the spotlight as much as those within it. If we can achieve that, not only will society be fairer, but it will also inevitably be a more productive place.