Innovation Resistance Theory, introduced by Ram and Sheth, explains why consumers may oppose innovations even when these innovations are perceived as useful, necessary, or socially beneficial. Rather than viewing adoption as the default outcome of innovation, the theory posits that resistance is a natural response to change, rooted in consumers’ desire to preserve established habits, beliefs, and a satisfactory status quo. Innovations are therefore evaluated not only on their objective performance but also on their perceived compatibility with existing routines and symbolic meanings.

According to this perspective, resistance arises when an innovation disrupts consumption practices or challenges deeply held beliefs. Ram and Sheth conceptualize resistance as stemming from five barriers, grouped into functional and psychological categories.

• Functional barriers relate to practical concerns associated with the innovation. Usage barriers occur when adoption requires changes in routines or additional effort, value barriers emerge when perceived benefits do not outweigh economic or non-economic costs, and risk barriers reflect uncertainty regarding performance, safety, or potential negative consequences.
• Psychological barriers are linked to symbolic and normative conflicts. Tradition barriers arise when innovations are perceived as incompatible with established customs, while image barriers reflect negative associations attached to the innovation, its category, or its perceived social meaning.

Recent research on eco-innovations illustrates these mechanisms in contexts where environmental benefits coexist with consumer hesitation. Pfiffelmann, Untilov, Thøgersen, and Franck (2025) investigate consumer responses to the laser marking of organic products and explicitly mobilize Innovation Resistance Theory to structure their analysis of adoption motives and barriers. Their findings show that, despite strong perceptions of ecological value, consumers frequently express resistance driven by risk barriers and tradition barriers, notably concerns about food safety and a perceived incompatibility between a high-tech labeling process and conventional representations of organic products. This coexistence of positive motives and resistance barriers illustrates how functional and psychological barriers can counterbalance perceived innovation benefits, in line with the core propositions of Innovation Resistance Theory.

Overall, Innovation Resistance Theory remains a valuable framework for understanding why innovations may face opposition despite their advantages. By focusing on barriers rather than adoption alone, it provides a nuanced explanation of consumer behavior and offers important insights for research on marketing, communication, and innovation management.

References

Ram, S., & Sheth, J. N. (1989). Consumer resistance to innovations: The marketing problem and its solutions. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 6(2), 5–14.