The physician leaders of an organization will often have to nudge members of the Early Majority forward and help them identify one or more compelling reasons to take a risk and move forward. These compelling reasons reside in the domain of intentions. The Early Majority are motivated first and foremost by security. This is their primary career anchor–to engage Edgar Schein’s career model (Schein, 2006). This, however, is not their only anchor. What stirs their passion other than just security? Perhaps it is technical/functional competence, general managerial competence, or even service to other people (to mention three of Schein’s other anchors). The leader might ask: “What are the important rewards that you (member of the Early Majority) envision will be waiting for you at the end of this journey?” “In what way(s) is the journey itself going to be rewarding?”
Physician leaders should be aware of several dynamics that are unique to the Early Majority. First, reasoning is highly valued by most members of the Early Majority. They not only like to linger in the domain of information, those in the Early Majority also like to assign this information in clear and tidy categories. However, with the encouragement of their leader, members of the Early Majority also need to trust and honor their own intuition—as Jonah Lehrer (2009) suggested in his provocative book, How We Decide. Second, those in the Early Majority need to know that they are not alone. A member of the Early Majority wants to know that they are in the Early Majority rather than being an isolated outlier. They want to settle in a community, not live alone out in the wilderness. An effective leader will help this member of the Early Majority to find an enduring network of support amid a challenging healthcare world of innovation and change.
Third, in keeping with their orientation toward rationality and information, those in the Early Majority are likely to be quite tactical in their approach to problems they confront in their healthcare system. As settlers rather than explorers or pioneers, they will look for short-term, low-risk solutions to their problems. They are unlikely to project very far into the future or look very far beyond their settlement. An effective physician leader should encourage these reticent members of their organization to engage in more strategic thinking—to look a bit more into the future and at the big picture. This does not necessarily mean taking more risks; however, it does mean examining and reflecting on how various elements of their healthcare system fit together and how the actions they do take impact other parts of the system (thereby appealing to their desire for reason and information).
Late Majority/Burghers
The term “burgher” was used in Europe to identify a person who resided in a formally chartered town. I will use this European term because it conveys the essence of Rogers’ Late Majority. These people only embrace an innovative idea after it has been fully certified and accepted as a legitimate idea or operation. In Western America, these were the folks who only moved in when the town was “well-established”—with the requisite schools, paved roads, general store, and church. Gladwell uses the term “tipping point” when describing this broad-based acceptance of an idea that has been legitimized. The term “bandwagon” is also appropriate in that the acceptance of a product or service by the Late Majority often means a substantial increase in the number of people using this product or service.
This is the diffusion population most likely to follow leaders (and listen to outside advice) for the wrong reasons. These men and women are also inclined to misuse an innovative product or service or find the experience of using a new procedure to be disappointing. The Late Majority follows the recommendations of leaders or the advice of outside experts for one of three reasons: (1) it is the “thing to do” (“everyone else uses the new version of this software so I guess I should too”), (2) it is the way to “look good” (“maybe it will enable me to get a promotion or at least avoid a negative performance review”) (“it makes me look cooperative, seeking to improve myself, ready to change”), or (3) it is a “shiny new toy” that could keep me “entertained “ or an “exciting” fad that could “really transform me” (an unrealistic expectation often built on the over-promising of those promoting this procedure or program). The Late Majority are often “immature” about innovation and vulnerable to pitches that don’t really represent the real world.
