TRABAJO DE LABORATORIO

The mediators are external actors who facilitate, block, or reshape the meaning of or opinion about the invention. The mediator does not merely forward the meaning as received. Mediators may contribute to the substance of the innovation or merely to the perception of it. Still, they are not in the role of a buyer of the product and they do not sit around the table where product development is being discussed. The mediators are found in the role of the receiver, but also as the sender of a meaning to the firm. The discussion during our interviews revealed who these agents were and how they made themselves known.

167

The association with those agents who formulated opinion appeared to have been a special relationship in every case. Talk about this relationship was discreet, and the agents were treated with respect, partly because of their power in attracting public attention and partly because of their valuable wisdom. Some agents actually shaped the product, whereas others merely influenced the perception of the product. Both these factors were present in the expression, ’The cooperation with Archie Angel has improved our acceptance and awareness. With his connections, he makes us presentable in design circles where we had not made it alone’. It is evident in this case of Plumber, that the actors influenced the design with their skills and the image of the novel product, because of the media attention to these personalities. The shallower mode of interaction was seen when only an opinion was in play. To quote an interviewee from Humanist: ’The editors were thrilled; they saw new products. It was like they had waited to be able to tell about the new coming of Humanist Company’. This statement indicated that there was a general expectation in the company that had yet to be fulfilled. The editors appeared to be the determiners of a development happening or not happening, and they shaped the common perception of the firm’s product range.

The concern of mediators goes beyond those who create community opinion; it extends to how to be seen. The media and the way of conveying the message was a topic of discussion. As a chief designer at Gardener said:

’We smuggle our cutter discreetly into gardening TV programs, where a famous gardener is hosting the program. When he demonstrates the product, it gives us tremendous TV visibility’. The selected program host, it was assumed, would portray an independent judge of the product.

Two limitations were raised: the limited time of impact and the limited control. ’The races continuously generate editorials and free

publicity, all of which fuels our brand. A launch of a new yacht model gives publicity in the yachting press, but that only lasts for awhile’, continued the chief designer. Once it had been passed to the mediator, the firm could no longer control the message. The host or the editors could present

168

an adverse opinion, for example. But that risk was compensated by the improved credibility of the host’s testimonial. Courtesy appeared to be the accepted manner of communication in this field, therefore, as the message went from mouth to mouth purely at the discretion of the actor.

Because of the long chain of reshaping the meaning, the term mediator is seen here as being more appropriate than the expression of opinion leaders. There is a large overlap in the two terms, yet the label of opinion leader assumes that one actor would be in control of the transmission of meaning.

Patterns of Observations: Of all the interview discussions categorized, the discussion about the mediators is the only one that received little attention across all the cases studied (see Table 29). Despite the peripheral attention to this category of discussion, it was recognized in the structure of this report, as it was valuable to position the opinion leader in the landscape of the leaders.

Player Humanist Plumber Gardener Guardian Adventurer

M M M M M M

Table 29. Cross–Case Comparison of Significance of Category of Mediators.

The mediators were more often talked about in terms of the person, and less often in terms of the mediator’s influence in the reshaping of meaning (see Table 30).

169 Mediators Player Humanist Plumber Gardener Guardian Adventurer

Opinion Opinion … Expectations Interior press Photographs Credentials Their minds

Table 30. Cross–Case Comparison of Observations of Mediators.

One hurdle associated with the mediators of a meaning was the ability to recognize and understand the organization’s incoming impulses. To quote a technical director: ’When we read the speech about Margaret Thatcher’s vision—that the micro chip would revolutionize our lives—it was hard for us to imagine that the chip would also be in our products one today. Now it is’. In this case, Thatcher’s words mediated a meaning by those who later integrated the chip into a faucet.

Another aspect of the same barrier is seen when ’the same language’

does not exist between the individual of the environment and the individual of the firm. As a managing director said, ’Very experienced customers gladly give us their advice on how to improve the product, but it requires new communication skills of our own people’.

The leaders discussed another, opposite barrier associated with the mediators that was primarily associated with the difficulty in controlling the message, or even getting it through. As a project manager put it: ’The officials in the education world are hard to come by, but their recommenda-tion is essential for us to enter local schools’. And when the message did get through, it did not land unfavorably, but also was misinterpreted, as a managing director mentioned: ’George Gray claimed that we brought a hybrid product, to market that was far from complete and not Humanist Company quality. And they were right’. Or the chain of the

170

communication stopped halfway, because of limiting rules of the game, like good manners. To quote Gardener’s managing director: ’We have a good cooperation with the gardener of the presidential summer palace, but we cannot publicly refer to this’. The transmission between the sender and a mediating receiver is only a simplification of the phenomenon of opinion shaping. As one division director said, ’The inner circle of security spheres is very narrow, and its members tend to give recommendations to each other’. It goes to show that there is probably a village, a large set of connections, or a network of contacts behind many mediators. To some extent, all of these mediators tended to reformulate the meaning along the chain.