A better kind of corn took years to spread across Iowa. Two researchers asked the farmers why — and a farm boy turned their answer into the curve every tech company now studies.
← The OODA Loop · All the tools · SWOT Analysis →
Ten items. Say your answer out loud before you reveal it.
Read the sentence, guess the meaning of the word in bold, then reveal.
The three words are: peer · chasm · trend. Read each meaning, say the word, then reveal.
One missing word fits every phrase in the group. Say it, then reveal.
Read each part. After it, answer the quick check from memory, then discuss one question.
In the 1920s, most farmers in Iowa, in the middle of the United States, grew corn in the same way their parents had. After each harvest, they would keep some of the best corn and plant it the next spring. It cost nothing, and it had always worked.
Then scientists developed hybrid seed corn, made by carefully crossing different plants. It was stronger and gave a much bigger yield — around a fifth more corn, according to many reports. It became available to Iowa farmers in the late 1920s.
But there was a catch. Hybrid seed didn't grow well a second time, so farmers had to buy new seed every single year. For people who used to get their seed for free, that felt like a big gamble. Many farmers were sceptical. At first, only a handful tried it. Yet by the early 1940s, almost every farmer in the areas studied was using it. What changed their minds?
1. How did Iowa farmers use to get their seed?
2. What was better about hybrid corn?
3. Why was the new seed a gamble for farmers?
1. They kept some of their best corn from each harvest and planted it the next spring.
2. It was stronger and produced a much bigger yield.
3. They had to buy new seed every year instead of getting it for free.
In 1941, two sociologists at Iowa State College, Bryce Ryan and Neal Gross, decided to find out. They visited two farming communities and interviewed 259 farmers, asking each one when he had first heard about hybrid corn, when he had first planted it, and what had convinced him.
Their results, published in 1943, surprised many people. Most farmers had first heard about the seed from salesmen — but salesmen rarely persuaded them. What persuaded them was seeing the new corn working on a neighbour's farm, and hearing about it from people they trusted. The seed didn't spread like an advertisement. It spread like a conversation.
When Ryan and Gross put the dates on a chart, they found a clear shape. For the first few years, only a few adventurous farmers planted hybrid corn. Then, as more and more neighbours tried it, the numbers rose quickly. Finally, the last farmers joined — slowly, and sometimes only when they had no real choice.
1. How many farmers did Ryan and Gross interview?
2. Where did most farmers first hear about the seed, and what actually persuaded them?
3. Describe the shape of the adoption pattern.
1. 259.
2. From salesmen — but they were persuaded by seeing it work on neighbours' farms and hearing about it from people they trusted.
3. Slow at first, then a quick rise as neighbours joined, then a slow finish with the last farmers.
One young man who read the Iowa study had grown up on an Iowa farm himself: Everett Rogers. He later said that his own father had been slow to trust the new seed — even after a terrible drought in 1936, when the hybrid corn on neighbouring farms survived far better. Rogers began to collect every study he could find about how new ideas spread — among farmers, doctors, teachers and villagers all over the world. In 1962, he brought more than five hundred of them together in a book called Diffusion of Innovations.
Rogers found the same pattern almost everywhere and gave names to the groups. First come the innovators (about 2.5% of people), who love taking risks. Then the early adopters (13.5%), respected people whom others watch and copy. Then the early majority (34%) and the late majority (34%), and finally the laggards (16%), who prefer the old ways.
The book became one of the most cited works in the social sciences. In 1991, a business writer, Geoffrey Moore, added a famous warning: many new products fail at the “chasm” between the early adopters, who love new things, and the early majority, who want proof. Today the curve is used to plan everything from smartphone launches to vaccination campaigns and solar panels.
1. What was Everett Rogers' connection to the Iowa study?
2. Which group do the others watch and copy?
3. What is Geoffrey Moore's “chasm”?
1. He grew up on an Iowa farm, and his own father had been slow to trust the new seed.
2. The early adopters.
3. The gap between the early adopters and the early majority, where many new products fail.
The curve shows when people adopt something new. Each section is a group with its own attitude. The shape is famous; the exact percentages are Rogers' rough guide.
Which group does each person belong to? Choose, then check.
1. Laggards — prefers the old ways, even now.
2. Innovators — loves risk and new things for their own sake.
3. Early adopters — an early user whom others watch and copy.
4. Early majority — waits for proof, but joins before most people.
5. Late majority — joins late, mostly because of pressure or necessity.
6. Early adopters — a trusted person others watch before they decide.
Not a label for life. You can be an innovator with music apps and a laggard with banking.
Some innovations should not spread. The curve says nothing about whether the new thing is actually good.
Access matters. People who can't afford something aren't “laggards” — they may simply be left out.
The story begins with how farmers used to work before the change. English has two special ways to talk about past habits and past states.
Could the gap take would as well as used to? Write used to (only used to is possible) or both.
1. My town have three cinemas; now it has none.
2. Every Sunday, my father wash the car.
3. I have long hair when I was a student.
4. Before phones, people write letters to each other.
1. used to only (a state: have three cinemas)
2. both (a repeated action)
3. used to only (a state)
4. both (a repeated action)
Each sentence has one mistake. Write the correction.
1. Did you used to play football at school? →
2. In 1998, my parents used to buy their first computer. →
3. I'm not used to get up so early. →
4. She would live in Paris before she moved to Rome. →
1. Did you use to play …
2. my parents bought their first computer (one single action)
3. I'm not used to getting up so early
4. She used to live in Paris (a state — not would)
Now describe how you used to do something ten years ago — listen to music, pay for things, meet people — and when you changed.
Use the curve on your own life and your society. Choose a task, start the timer, and talk.
Choose one technology or habit. How did you use to live without it, and what finally made you change?
Describe how people in your family used to shop, travel or talk to each other. Which change spread fastest?
Choose a good habit you'd like more people to adopt. Who are the early adopters, and how would you reach the majority?