MGMT 8805M Week 1 Discussion Post Example

Agile and Disruptive Innovation Management Walden University Free custom sample in 24 to 48h

This MGMT 8805M Week 1 discussion post example argues that Brightwater Medical Imaging, a composite maker of hospital ultrasound carts, will lose its emergency department buyers to $4,000 handheld probes even though no rival can copy its image quality or its 140 applications specialists. The test is overshooting: emergency physicians use three of forty presets. Christensen's account of good-enough entrants is set beside Barney's resource view, and the post shows the two part company at substitution, the fourth of Barney's tests. Walden MGMT 8805M, Agile and Disruptive Innovation Management, begins its PhD in Management run by asking whether an advantage outlasts a cheaper rival, and the post names the purchase records that would prove it wrong.

CourseMGMT 8805M Agile and Disruptive Innovation Management
WeekWeek 1
Paper typeDiscussion post
LengthAbout 550 words, 3 pages
FormatDiscussion post, APA 7 citations
SchoolWalden University
ProgramPhD in Management
UpdatedOctober 2026

Free sample paper for MGMT 8805M Week 1

1

Week 1 Discussion: Will the Advantage Survive a Cheaper Entrant?

An Advantage That Cannot Be Copied but Can Be Ignored: A Discussion Post Arguing That an Ultrasound Maker's Image Quality and Training Network Will Not Survive a Cheaper Handheld Entrant in Emergency Departments, Even Though No Rival Can Imitate Them

The Claim

Brightwater Medical Imaging, a composite maker of cart-based hospital ultrasound systems, will lose its emergency department customers to cheap handheld probes within five years, even though its real advantage, image quality backed by 140 applications specialists who train hospital staff on its machines, is something no rival can easily copy. That advantage lets Brightwater charge $95,000 to $180,000 per system, plus service contracts worth about a fifth of the price each year.

What this page is doingThe post names its firm and its verdict in the first line, so classmates know what they are being asked to dispute.
2

The Overshooting Test

The question is whether mainstream customers already receive more of that performance than they use. In radiology and cardiology, they do not: sonographers there use the full depth of the image and depend on the applications specialists. In emergency departments, the picture differs. Emergency physicians mostly perform focused bedside checks, such as looking for fluid around the heart or in the abdomen after trauma, which need a clear image but not the fine detail a cart system provides. A department buyer told Brightwater's sales team last year that its physicians used three of the system's forty presets. That is overshooting in the sense Christensen (1997) described: the established product improves faster than a segment of customers can absorb, which opens room for a simpler, cheaper offer that is good enough for them.

Where the Two Theories Part

Barney (1991) offers the rival view. A resource that is valuable, rare, hard to imitate and without strategically equivalent substitutes can sustain a competitive advantage. Brightwater's training network passes the first three tests easily: it took twenty years to build, and no handheld maker has anything like it. The theories part company at the fourth test. A handheld probe at around $4,000 does not imitate the network; it makes the network unnecessary for the bedside checks emergency physicians perform. Barney's framework anticipates this case, since a substitute removes the advantage, but managers who apply it often stop at imitability. Christensen's mechanism explains why a substitute appears at all: it serves the customers the incumbent overserves.

What this page is doingThe post sets the rival view out in its own terms before showing where it stops applying.
3

What Would Show I Am Wrong

If emergency departments that bought handhelds continue buying cart systems at the same rate, the handhelds are additions, not substitutes, and Brightwater's advantage holds there. Purchase records over the next two budget cycles would show which is happening. Danneels (2004) asked whether a technology can be judged disruptive before the outcome is known; stating the purchase test now is my attempt to commit to an outcome in advance.

Reply to Dana

You argue that a regional bank's branch network survives digital entrants because customers trust in-person advice. What evidence would show that customers who value that advice still visit branches for routine transactions, rather than only for loans? If routine use has already moved online, the branches may be overshooting.

Reply to Felix

Your claim that a textbook publisher's faculty relationships protect it from open-access texts is persuasive for upper-level courses. For introductory courses, though, would adoption data show instructors choosing free texts when the content is adequate? That pattern would indicate overshooting in exactly the tier where most volume sits.

References

Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99-120. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108

Christensen, C. M. (1997). The innovator's dilemma: When new technologies cause great firms to fail. Harvard Business School Press.

Danneels, E. (2004). Disruptive technology reconsidered: A critique and research agenda. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 21(4), 246-258. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0737-6782.2004.00076.x

MGMT 8805M Week 1 instructions, in plain terms

The first discussion asks whether one firm's competitive advantage would survive a cheaper entrant. Name the firm and the advantage in your first line, and describe the advantage by what it lets the firm charge for. Then test whether mainstream customers, or some segment of them, already receive more of that performance than they use. Use disruption theory for the mechanism and the resource-based view as the rival position, and say where the two reach different conclusions. Commit to a verdict and state what evidence would show you were wrong. The main post should be about three hundred words or a little more. Post two short replies asking classmates what evidence would show their advantage overshooting its customers.

How the MGMT 8805M Week 1 example is put together

The sample opens with Brightwater, its carts and the prices its advantage supports. An overshooting section separates radiology, where users need the full image, from emergency departments, where physicians perform focused bedside checks and use a handful of presets. A section states Barney's four tests and shows that the training network passes three of them but fails the fourth, because a handheld substitutes for the network rather than copying it. A short section names the evidence that would refute the claim: emergency departments buying handhelds while still renewing carts. Danneels' question about judging disruption in advance explains why the test is stated now. Two replies ask classmates about a bank's branches and a publisher's faculty relationships.

Where the marks sit in the MGMT 8805M Week 1 rubric

Graders reward a clear verdict about one firm, stated in the first line. The advantage should be described concretely, with what it lets the firm charge. Strong posts test overshooting with evidence about how customers actually use the product, not with a general claim that customers want cheaper options. Accurate use of both theories matters, and the best posts show exactly where they diverge rather than calling them compatible. A stated condition for being wrong demonstrates the claim can be tested. Credit for the two replies depends on asking for evidence of overshooting in the classmate's own case. Posts that use disruption vocabulary without evidence, or that describe a company's strengths without testing them against an entrant, score in the middle.

MGMT 8805M Week 1 help from the desk

Many drafts of this post label a rival disruptive and never test the label. Choose a firm where you can find evidence about how customers use the product, such as usage data, buyer comments or feature adoption. Ask which customers pay for more than they need; that is where an entrant can start. Read Barney's article before using it, since its fourth condition, substitutes, is often skipped. Write your verdict as a sentence a classmate could dispute, and then write the evidence that would change your mind. Keep replies focused on one question. Tutors can help you find usage evidence and compare the two theories, and the ultrasound post above shows each move in a short space.

Get a MGMT 8805M Week 1 example written to your instructions

Send the Week 1 discussion prompt with its rubric and reply rules, and a sample thread comes back in 24-48h, free the first time. Name the firm you plan to test, or ask for one, and give the reply count and deadline. The advantage you pick has to be yours; the test transfers, the verdict does not.

Request this week free All MGMT 8805M weeks Finished samples

More MGMT 8805M papers and PhD in Management samples

MGMT 8805M Week 1 questions, answered

Where can I find a free MGMT 8805M Week 1 sample paper?

The Brightwater ultrasound discussion post, with two replies, appears in full above as the opening-week sample.

What does the MGMT 8805M Week 1 sample predict?

That handheld probes will take Brightwater's emergency department customers within five years despite its hard-to-copy advantage.

What is overshooting?

Christensen's term for a product improving faster than some customers can use, leaving room for a simpler, cheaper offer.

Where do Christensen and Barney part company in the sample?

At substitution: the handheld does not imitate Brightwater's training network but makes it unnecessary for bedside checks.

What would prove the post wrong?

Emergency departments buying handhelds while continuing to buy cart systems at the same rate.