Analysis HP Kittyhawk
Background
The attempt to launch the biggest disruptive technological change in the hard drive industry in 1992, was aimed to be reached according to Hewlard Packard (HP) by launching Kittyhawk- smallest hard disk ever. They realized that they had the strength of having the flexibility of entrepreneurs but financial support of a large high-tech company. The aim was to create a product that is not the same as competitors but instead revolutionary strategic insight was made by the commercial failure.
Analysis
1.3-inch Hard Drive- Disruptive or Sustaining Technology
One can argue that since the industries performance trajectory was mainly size-orientated improvements and not revolutionary in creating new demands that it was a sustaining technology. Management’s strategic choice of not wanting to take a “fortified hill” directed KittyHawk to target market demands in the Personal digital assistant (PDA) segment, which was a big success assumption because of experts speaking about PDA trends. KittyHawks actual offering was to give customers an “existing” product in the smallest size available and beat competitors to it. I therefor consider it a sustaining technological improvement because the intention they initially had was to improve the product attribute size and storage capacity. The contribution they made to the market could be compared to Seagate size improvement of the 5.25 inch to 3-inch drive, the smallest then. They did although have a unique attribute: ruggedness. Realizing that durability/ ruggedness actually was their unique selling point (USP) could have led them to a start of disruptive thinking. The strategy chosen was a limited one as the costs were to inferior to the demand out there in the instable PDA market. Realizing that they were just sustaining instead of disrupting technology would have made management strategize accordingly. Market research for sustainable technologies versus disruptive technologies differs grandly and that is why
The attempt to launch the biggest disruptive technological change in the hard drive industry in 1992, was aimed to be reached according to Hewlard Packard (HP) by launching Kittyhawk- smallest hard disk ever. They realized that they had the strength of having the flexibility of entrepreneurs but financial support of a large high-tech company. The aim was to create a product that is not the same as competitors but instead revolutionary strategic insight was made by the commercial failure.
Analysis
1.3-inch Hard Drive- Disruptive or Sustaining Technology
One can argue that since the industries performance trajectory was mainly size-orientated improvements and not revolutionary in creating new demands that it was a sustaining technology. Management’s strategic choice of not wanting to take a “fortified hill” directed KittyHawk to target market demands in the Personal digital assistant (PDA) segment, which was a big success assumption because of experts speaking about PDA trends. KittyHawks actual offering was to give customers an “existing” product in the smallest size available and beat competitors to it. I therefor consider it a sustaining technological improvement because the intention they initially had was to improve the product attribute size and storage capacity. The contribution they made to the market could be compared to Seagate size improvement of the 5.25 inch to 3-inch drive, the smallest then. They did although have a unique attribute: ruggedness. Realizing that durability/ ruggedness actually was their unique selling point (USP) could have led them to a start of disruptive thinking. The strategy chosen was a limited one as the costs were to inferior to the demand out there in the instable PDA market. Realizing that they were just sustaining instead of disrupting technology would have made management strategize accordingly. Market research for sustainable technologies versus disruptive technologies differs grandly and that is why