Things to be cautious of, and also generally acknowledged in Rogers' most recent book.

Pro-innovation bias

Consider that you may be assuming that Office360 is "Better" than anything else available. Neo-Office and similar programs, may be considered more secure than anything offered by Microsoft. Similarly, Google Docs is easy and flexible and well-suited for 99% of wordprocessing tasks.

Classifications often are arbitrary

Innovators are NOT the first 2.5% of adopters, and Early Adopters are NOT the next 13.5%, etc. Those percentages assume a Normal Distribution, which was a very easy simplification for Rogers's PhD in the 1960's. A quick glance at various diffusion curves should persuade anyone that diffusion does not follow a Normal Cumulative Density curve.

Diffusion is about the timing of adoption, not personality or means

Rogers found that personal attributes, especially personality, and the resources to act on one's interest in a potentially risky venture were moderators of the timing of adoption. Categories of adopters is based on the timing of adoption. Timing can be affected by a range of factors - some identifiable and measurable, most unique to the individual. The evidence suggests that Innovators may be different from others with regard to "Innovativeness" and "Risk Aversion" but there are rarely any meaningful differences amongst other adopters. In that regard, often it is better to simply classify adopters into "Innovators" and "The Rest".

With all of that, you may decide that you can get more interesting research by considering more general personality and activity traits such as the four patterns of action (questioning, observing, experimenting, and networking) suggested by

Dyer, Gregersen and Christensen (2009) "The Innovator’s DNA", HBR (December) Online: https://hbr.org/2009/12/the-innovators-dna

Thank you Chaoyun for your answer. Actually the study is quite different from my own research. I am searching for a ready-made survey in universities context. Hope to find one!

Academics means? lecturers/teachers? Classifying? for what purpose? is it to incentivize or create policies that would allow the teachers to be more tech savvy? or to make OFFICE 365 as an initial study for promoting technology in the university? 

What if i am an apple OS software user? would i be categorize as Laggard? just because i don't adopts OFFICE 365? but apple also has word processing and spreadsheet.... or is this OFFICE 365 EDUCATION?

If you are only interested in OFFICE 365 then maybe Technology Acceptance Model would be more appropriate as this will allow you to determine the Software factors in the software. It is also less threatening for the academics.... please take note that they're also busy trying to produce research output in their field apart from teaching.

Anyway, good luck with your research :)

Good thought Harry Fulgencio :)

It is not fair to classify academics as "Laggard" if they don't adopt O365. Of course, that is true because there are many other competitive applications. However, I think Ms Tahani made it clear for me. She didn't say that they will classified as "Laggard" if they don't use O365. Instead, she is searching for a robust well prepared instrument to classify them correctly. And I think that instrument should take this point in consideration.

Mr. Muhammed Kürşad Özlen raised a very interested point also. I think "innovation" is a philosophical concept. If you review some literature on the topic, you may notice that some studies used "Organic Fertilizer" that has been used for a long period but in different society as innovation.

Unfortunately, I can't find the instrument you are searching for, Ms. Tahani. I would if I can help.

Best luck.

I am not aware of such instruments. However, I suggest that you investigate the use of the construct "personal innovativeness" as a surrogate measure. 

Devendra Fakun..Do you mean that there i no such instrument? Innovation Diffusion Theory was presented in 60's. Therefore, I thought that it should be such instrument to classify adopters. However, I am searching for it with no hope until now!

Could you please briefly explain to me  "personal innovativeness"?

Things to be cautious of, and also generally acknowledged in Rogers' most recent book.

Pro-innovation bias

Consider that you may be assuming that Office360 is "Better" than anything else available. Neo-Office and similar programs, may be considered more secure than anything offered by Microsoft. Similarly, Google Docs is easy and flexible and well-suited for 99% of wordprocessing tasks.

Classifications often are arbitrary

Innovators are NOT the first 2.5% of adopters, and Early Adopters are NOT the next 13.5%, etc. Those percentages assume a Normal Distribution, which was a very easy simplification for Rogers's PhD in the 1960's. A quick glance at various diffusion curves should persuade anyone that diffusion does not follow a Normal Cumulative Density curve.

Diffusion is about the timing of adoption, not personality or means

Rogers found that personal attributes, especially personality, and the resources to act on one's interest in a potentially risky venture were moderators of the timing of adoption. Categories of adopters is based on the timing of adoption. Timing can be affected by a range of factors - some identifiable and measurable, most unique to the individual. The evidence suggests that Innovators may be different from others with regard to "Innovativeness" and "Risk Aversion" but there are rarely any meaningful differences amongst other adopters. In that regard, often it is better to simply classify adopters into "Innovators" and "The Rest".

With all of that, you may decide that you can get more interesting research by considering more general personality and activity traits such as the four patterns of action (questioning, observing, experimenting, and networking) suggested by

Dyer, Gregersen and Christensen (2009) "The Innovator’s DNA", HBR (December) Online: https://hbr.org/2009/12/the-innovators-dna

Regarding the need for ready-to-use instrumentation for measuring the adoption/use of technology or other educational interventions, you may be interested in exploring The Concerns-Based Adoption Model (CBAM).

CBAM is a research-based framework for measuring change in educational environments associated with the implementation of innovation (Hall, Dirksen, & George, 2006; Hall & Hord, 1987, 2015). The reality, as they describe it: Successfully implementing a new program involves more than providing staff with materials, resources, and training. An often overlooked factor is the human element – the people actually doing the work. Each person will respond to a new program with unique attitudes and beliefs, and each person will use a new program differently.

The diagnostic dimensions of CBAM are three components for assessing and guiding this process:

• Innovation Configurations: An Innovation Configuration Map provides a clear picture of what constitutes high-quality implementation. It serves as an exemplar to guide and focus staff efforts.

• Stages of Concern: The Stages of Concern process, which includes a questionnaire, interview, and open-ended statements, enables leaders to identify staff members’ attitudes and beliefs toward a new program or initiative. With this knowledge, leaders can take actions to address individuals’ specific concerns.

• Levels of Use: The Levels of Use interview tool helps determine how well staff, both individually and collectively, are using a program. Levels range from nonuse to advanced use. When combined with the Innovation Configuration and first-hand observations, this information can help staff effectively implement a new program.

You can learn more, and request a demo account for the online instruments at http://www.sedl.org/cbam/

References

Hall, G.E., Dirksen, D.J., & George, A.A. (2006). Measuring implementation in schools: Levels of use. Austin, TX: SEDL.

Hall, G.E., & Hord, S.M. (2015). Implementing change: Patterns, principles and potholes (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Hall, G.E., & Hord, S.M. (Eds.). (1987). Change in schools: Facilitating the process. SUNY Press.

Roger´s work was developed for markets (macro scale) and you are working at the organizational level (micro scale). Rogers supposed a statistical distribution precisely because he was working at the macro level. What this means is that, even if you found a survey,it would not be  appropriate to use it at a single organization- even if it has a big amount of academics, since this amount would not be big enough

Also, I do not think that you will find the type of study that you are looking for because the cost-benefit ratio for this type of software would probably be marginal for your target population. However, I think that you will probably find studies for the adoption of other types of software that might be more intrinsically related to academic work, such as Learning Management Systems (LMS), learning portfolios and lab software.

Dear Tahani, you may want to consider incorporating the technology acceptance model in your research. It should be possible to adapt one of the existing scales for your survey. Good luck.

http://edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/Technology_acceptance_model

http://scholar.google.co.za/scholar?as_ylo=2011&q=Technology+acceptance+and+faculty&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5

Thank you all for your answers.

Really, They are helpful and fruitful. I got benefit  from your suggestions to search for measuring Innovativeness to classify adopters. Fortunately, I found Individual Innovativeness (II) Scale designed by Hurt, Joseph and Cook (1977). The purpose of this scale is to measure individuals' orientations toward change and classifying individuals according to their their level of innovativeness into Roger's five categories.

I also found some studies that used this scale in higher education context.

Please find the scale in the following link:

http://www.jamescmccroskey.com/measures/innovation.htm

http://www.jamescmccroskey.com/measures/innovation.htm

Thank you Tahani for posting the links - very helpful.