Semmelweis Reflex

Established hierarchies do not embrace revolutionary ideas. They exist to defend the status quo. They reject revolutionary ideas reflexively, without giving them the slightest thought.

Here’s one historical example. In 1848, Ignaz Semmelweis, a trained physician, collected iron-clad experimental data showing that having a physician wash his hands in a chlorine solution prior to the delivery of a baby reduced the maternal death rate in his clinic from 18% to 1% – yet twelve years later, due to the medical hierarchy’s reflexive rejection of his ideas, the death rate at that same clinic had doubled to 35%. Semmelweis became distraught at the resulting unnecessary deaths, so his “friends” had him committed to an insane asylum, where he fought to be released – as any sane person would – and was beaten to death.

Semmelweis’ experience was not an isolated incident – far from it. To quote Reuven Brenner’s excellent book, Rivalry (with links added):

Murray’s (1925), Tratnner’s (1938), Polanyi’s (1974), Cohen’s (1985), and Ben-Yahuda’s (1985) detailed and systematic studies of scientists reveal the same pattern: In spite of evidence, innovations were frequently greeted with disdain and incredulity by members of the profession where the innovations were to be applied, professions were hierarchies depended on preserving the paradigms. The reaction to Mesmer’s hypnotic cures, Jenner’s An Inquiring into the Cause and Effects of the Varioloe Vaccination (1798), to Simpson’s discovery of chloroform (1847), to Lyell’s publication of Principles of Geology (1830-33), to Helmholtz’s discovery of the conservation of energy (1847), to Joule’s discovery of the mechanical equivalent of heat (1843), to Darwin’s, Pasteur’s, Lister’s, or more recently Barbara McClintock’s and Benoit Mandelbrot’s and other discoveries and innovations shows the same patterns that Morison described in the military and the ones described in this book concerning the world of business.

First, the innovations came frequently from outsiders: Pasteur was a chemist; Helmholtz’ training was in medicine; Darwin started with medicine, arts, then wanted to become a clergyman; Huxley turned from physiology to paleontology; Lamarche from botany to zoology; [Julius] Robert Mayer was a physician (he came up with the idea of conservation of energy, and Helmholtz was annoyed that this idea was conceived by an “unknown physician”); as was Thomas Young, a Quaker to boot; Barbara McClintock, a woman working at a small research institute; and so on.

Polanyi (1974, p. 54), who examines these and additional cases, concludes that the hatred against the discoverers of facts that threatened the cherished beliefs of science was as bitter as that of religious persecutors two centuries before and was of the same character.

These observations are made in numerous studies examining patterns of behavior not only across very different fields but also different countries and times.

In honor of Semmelweis’ tragic but exceedingly common experience, the dismissing or rejecting out of hand any information, automatically, without thought, inspection, or experiment is termed “the Semmelweis Reflex.”

Does the existence of the Semmelweis Reflex mean that innovation is impossible? Obviously not, since you're alive to read this, which you almost certainly would not be if the ideas of Semmelweis, Pasteur, Lister, etc. had continued to be rejected. What it means is that thre's no point attacking established hierarchies directly. Instead, an innovator must build its own hierarchy -- what Bhaskar Chakravorti would call a new equilibrium -- without engaging the established hierarchy directly. Harvard's Clayton Christensen endorses this approach, saying that "disruptive products require disruptive channels."

As Everett Rogers points out in Diffusion of Innovations, the adoption of new ideas is a social process. Invention is just the start of the diffusion process, and quite possibly the easiest part, given the resistance of the status quo. Knowing this, investors and innovators can put their efforts into ideas that offer the greatest chance for successful and profitable diffusion.

Thummer Diffusion

Sales Growth: How Many and How Fast?
How fast and high can sales of the Thummer grow? No theory can provide exact numbers, but the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) can provide a qualitative guide. Here’s a brief, paraphrased summary of UTAUT.

In the UTAUT model, only two characteristics affect a given innovation’s rate and level of adoption:

• Performance Expectancy: “Adopting it will help me attain gains in job performance.”
• Ease Expectancy: “Adopting it will be easy.”

In addition to the characteristics of the innovation itself, two environmental factors also matter:

• Social Influence: “Influential people say I should adopt it.”
• Satisfactory Infrastructure: “My adoption of it is supported by a satisfactory infrastructure.”

The first three factors above determine an individual’s intention to adopt the innovation. That intention, plus the fourth factor above (satisfactory infrastructure) determine whether the innovation is adopted or not.

Personal factors including experience, gender, and age all tend to moderate a given individual’s (or population’s) willingness to adopt a given innovation. For example, generally speaking,

1. everyone values performance – especially men and young people of both genders;
2. women value ease more than men do;
3. older people value ease more than young people do;
4. inexperienced people value ease more than experienced people do; and
5. experienced people value performance and infrastructure more than inexperienced people do.

Application to the Music Products Industry
The UTAUT model explains why the music products industry sells relatively little product to girls and older folks. The industry has focused relentlessly on delivering better products to its most-demanding customers – experienced, professional instrumentalists – who are overwhelmingly male. These experienced guys want performance, and will sacrifice everything else to get it. The resulting twiddly-fiddly instruments are attractive to young males, but turn off everyone else, producing exactly the demographic holes that the UTAUT model predicts.

On the other hand, the Thummer delivers ease to girls and older folks (especially when combined with the ThumMusic System), while also delivering unprecedented expressive performance to young males. This means that the appeal of Thumtronics’ innovations is potentially universal – so there may be no upper bound on its potential rate of adoption or saturation sales level, especially once (a) the Thummer-specific infrastructure has grown organically over time, and (b) the fully-integrated Pocket Thummer puts ease in your pocket.

Diffusion of Innovations
The Thummer’s high scores in the UTAUT model are repeated in other models. For example, the older Diffusion of Innovations (DOI) model, popularized by Everett Rogers’ book of the same name, lists five characteristics that affect the rate and level of a given innovation’s adoption: relative advantage, compatibility, simplicity, observability, and trialability.

The Thummer scores high on all five of these criteria.

• Relative Advantage: “Is it better?” Experts say so. See for yourself.
• Compatibility: “Does it work with what I already have?” Yes! It’s MIDI and USB-MIDI compatible; it is compatible with your computer and video-game controlling skills; and it is compatible with traditional notation and music theory.
• Simplicity: “Will it be easy to learn and use?” Experts say so – and if you’re a novice musician, it will be even easier if you use the ThumMusic System, too.
• Observability: “Can I observe others using it?” Absolutely! Check out these demos – and soon, live performances, music videos, and more YouTube videos, from the creative musicians who buy the first Thummers. This is one of the Thummer’s most important characteristics: that its relative advantage will be demonstrated in an emotionally-charged manner by high-status individuals in public. That’s marketing nirvana.
• Trialability: “Can I give it a test drive, free?” Yes, right here – and these test-driving apps will get better and better over time.

Any way you slice it, the Thummer has all of the characteristics necessary to spread like wild fire.

Order of Product Introduction
These criteria also explain why Thumtronics is releasing the Freedom and eMotion Thummers first, rather than the Pocket Thummer. Although the Pocket Thummer is likely to have much wider consumer appeal, the performance of the Freedom Thummer and especially of the eMotion Thummer will be much higher. This raw performance power is attractive to the experienced Music Brains who can drive the Thummer into live performances, music videos, and user-created YouTube demos. The Music Brain’s output, not Thumtronics’ advertising (which it can’t afford), will create consumer demand for Pocket Thummers.

Same with the ThumMusic System. If the ThumMusic System were released first, then its performance expectancy, ease expectancy, and satisfactory infrastructure ratings would all be pathetically low. It just doesn’t make sense to learn the ThumMusic System unless you want to learn to play the Thummer (except for vocal music instruction using tonic solfa, perhaps). But once the Thummer takes off and consumer demand for Thummer-lessons grows, the performance expectancy, ease expectancy, and satisfactory infrastructure ratings of the ThumMusic System all skyrocket.

Conclusions
The order in which Thumtronics plans to introduce its products is based on an analysis of their strengths and weaknesses using the latest proven scientific techniques. These techniques also suggest that the Thummer’s sales could grow rapidly, and to a very high level.