Question Description
Disruptive innovators can hurt successful and immensely profitable incumbents that tend to ignore the markets most susceptible to disruptive innovations. Disruptive innovators offer technologically straightforward solutions consisting of off-the-shelf components put together in a product architecture that is often simpler, initially lower performing, and cheaper than established approaches. Considering disruptive technologies unprofitable, the executives at incumbents often ignored them at their own and companies peril. In 1981, the old 8 inch drives used in mini computers were vastly superior and much more profitable to the new 5.25 inch drives used in desktop computers. However, 8 inch drives were not affordable for the new desktop machines. Slowly, the makers of 5.25 inch drives improved the performance of the drives and moved the 8 inch drive companies that did not invest in the 5.25 inch technology out of the market as the latter could not compete on price. Similarly, digital cameras, when introduced in 1997 performed extremely poorly as compared to traditional film cameras. Consequently, many traditional film companies such as Kodak ignored this market only to be bankrupted by the rise of digital cameras a decade later.Leaders and strategists should be cautious while rejecting a technology that does not seem to be as high performing and hence not as profitable as their dominant technologies. A technology that initially provides low performance can drastically improve over time and often exceed the performance of the dominant technology at a much lower price-point, a scenario that could potentially bankrupt the incumbents who ignored the technology at their peril.The author of the passage would make which of the following recommendations to the managers of the incumbents.a)Before rejecting a technology that performs poorly when compared to an existing technology, the managers should carefully evaluate whether the technology can improve to a point to be disruptive.b)They should only invest in new technologies that have the potential to disrupt their business model and throw them out of business.c)They should take into account the long term shareholder returns before rejecting any new technology.d)They should always be wary of start-ups in their industry as they have a potential to disrupt the incumbents operating business model.e)Before investing huge sums of money in in-house Research and Development, they should evaluate technologies that have the potential to disrupt the enhancements produced by the RD teams.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? for GMAT 2024 is part of GMAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the GMAT exam syllabus. Information about Disruptive innovators can hurt successful and immensely profitable incumbents that tend to ignore the markets most susceptible to disruptive innovations. Disruptive innovators offer technologically straightforward solutions consisting of off-the-shelf components put together in a product architecture that is often simpler, initially lower performing, and cheaper than established approaches. Considering disruptive technologies unprofitable, the executives at incumbents often ignored them at their own and companies peril. In 1981, the old 8 inch drives used in mini computers were vastly superior and much more profitable to the new 5.25 inch drives used in desktop computers. However, 8 inch drives were not affordable for the new desktop machines. Slowly, the makers of 5.25 inch drives improved the performance of the drives and moved the 8 inch drive companies that did not invest in the 5.25 inch technology out of the market as the latter could not compete on price. Similarly, digital cameras, when introduced in 1997 performed extremely poorly as compared to traditional film cameras. Consequently, many traditional film companies such as Kodak ignored this market only to be bankrupted by the rise of digital cameras a decade later.Leaders and strategists should be cautious while rejecting a technology that does not seem to be as high performing and hence not as profitable as their dominant technologies. A technology that initially provides low performance can drastically improve over time and often exceed the performance of the dominant technology at a much lower price-point, a scenario that could potentially bankrupt the incumbents who ignored the technology at their peril.The author of the passage would make which of the following recommendations to the managers of the incumbents.a)Before rejecting a technology that performs poorly when compared to an existing technology, the managers should carefully evaluate whether the technology can improve to a point to be disruptive.b)They should only invest in new technologies that have the potential to disrupt their business model and throw them out of business.c)They should take into account the long term shareholder returns before rejecting any new technology.d)They should always be wary of start-ups in their industry as they have a potential to disrupt the incumbents operating business model.e)Before investing huge sums of money in in-house Research and Development, they should evaluate technologies that have the potential to disrupt the enhancements produced by the RD teams.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for GMAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Disruptive innovators can hurt successful and immensely profitable incumbents that tend to ignore the markets most susceptible to disruptive innovations. Disruptive innovators offer technologically straightforward solutions consisting of off-the-shelf components put together in a product architecture that is often simpler, initially lower performing, and cheaper than established approaches. Considering disruptive technologies unprofitable, the executives at incumbents often ignored them at their own and companies peril. In 1981, the old 8 inch drives used in mini computers were vastly superior and much more profitable to the new 5.25 inch drives used in desktop computers. However, 8 inch drives were not affordable for the new desktop machines. Slowly, the makers of 5.25 inch drives improved the performance of the drives and moved the 8 inch drive companies that did not invest in the 5.25 inch technology out of the market as the latter could not compete on price. Similarly, digital cameras, when introduced in 1997 performed extremely poorly as compared to traditional film cameras. Consequently, many traditional film companies such as Kodak ignored this market only to be bankrupted by the rise of digital cameras a decade later.Leaders and strategists should be cautious while rejecting a technology that does not seem to be as high performing and hence not as profitable as their dominant technologies. A technology that initially provides low performance can drastically improve over time and often exceed the performance of the dominant technology at a much lower price-point, a scenario that could potentially bankrupt the incumbents who ignored the technology at their peril.The author of the passage would make which of the following recommendations to the managers of the incumbents.a)Before rejecting a technology that performs poorly when compared to an existing technology, the managers should carefully evaluate whether the technology can improve to a point to be disruptive.b)They should only invest in new technologies that have the potential to disrupt their business model and throw them out of business.c)They should take into account the long term shareholder returns before rejecting any new technology.d)They should always be wary of start-ups in their industry as they have a potential to disrupt the incumbents operating business model.e)Before investing huge sums of money in in-house Research and Development, they should evaluate technologies that have the potential to disrupt the enhancements produced by the RD teams.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Disruptive innovators can hurt successful and immensely profitable incumbents that tend to ignore the markets most susceptible to disruptive innovations. Disruptive innovators offer technologically straightforward solutions consisting of off-the-shelf components put together in a product architecture that is often simpler, initially lower performing, and cheaper than established approaches. Considering disruptive technologies unprofitable, the executives at incumbents often ignored them at their own and companies peril. In 1981, the old 8 inch drives used in mini computers were vastly superior and much more profitable to the new 5.25 inch drives used in desktop computers. However, 8 inch drives were not affordable for the new desktop machines. Slowly, the makers of 5.25 inch drives improved the performance of the drives and moved the 8 inch drive companies that did not invest in the 5.25 inch technology out of the market as the latter could not compete on price. Similarly, digital cameras, when introduced in 1997 performed extremely poorly as compared to traditional film cameras. Consequently, many traditional film companies such as Kodak ignored this market only to be bankrupted by the rise of digital cameras a decade later.Leaders and strategists should be cautious while rejecting a technology that does not seem to be as high performing and hence not as profitable as their dominant technologies. A technology that initially provides low performance can drastically improve over time and often exceed the performance of the dominant technology at a much lower price-point, a scenario that could potentially bankrupt the incumbents who ignored the technology at their peril.The author of the passage would make which of the following recommendations to the managers of the incumbents.a)Before rejecting a technology that performs poorly when compared to an existing technology, the managers should carefully evaluate whether the technology can improve to a point to be disruptive.b)They should only invest in new technologies that have the potential to disrupt their business model and throw them out of business.c)They should take into account the long term shareholder returns before rejecting any new technology.d)They should always be wary of start-ups in their industry as they have a potential to disrupt the incumbents operating business model.e)Before investing huge sums of money in in-house Research and Development, they should evaluate technologies that have the potential to disrupt the enhancements produced by the RD teams.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for GMAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for GMAT Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of Disruptive innovators can hurt successful and immensely profitable incumbents that tend to ignore the markets most susceptible to disruptive innovations. Disruptive innovators offer technologically straightforward solutions consisting of off-the-shelf components put together in a product architecture that is often simpler, initially lower performing, and cheaper than established approaches. Considering disruptive technologies unprofitable, the executives at incumbents often ignored them at their own and companies peril. In 1981, the old 8 inch drives used in mini computers were vastly superior and much more profitable to the new 5.25 inch drives used in desktop computers. However, 8 inch drives were not affordable for the new desktop machines. Slowly, the makers of 5.25 inch drives improved the performance of the drives and moved the 8 inch drive companies that did not invest in the 5.25 inch technology out of the market as the latter could not compete on price. Similarly, digital cameras, when introduced in 1997 performed extremely poorly as compared to traditional film cameras. Consequently, many traditional film companies such as Kodak ignored this market only to be bankrupted by the rise of digital cameras a decade later.Leaders and strategists should be cautious while rejecting a technology that does not seem to be as high performing and hence not as profitable as their dominant technologies. A technology that initially provides low performance can drastically improve over time and often exceed the performance of the dominant technology at a much lower price-point, a scenario that could potentially bankrupt the incumbents who ignored the technology at their peril.The author of the passage would make which of the following recommendations to the managers of the incumbents.a)Before rejecting a technology that performs poorly when compared to an existing technology, the managers should carefully evaluate whether the technology can improve to a point to be disruptive.b)They should only invest in new technologies that have the potential to disrupt their business model and throw them out of business.c)They should take into account the long term shareholder returns before rejecting any new technology.d)They should always be wary of start-ups in their industry as they have a potential to disrupt the incumbents operating business model.e)Before investing huge sums of money in in-house Research and Development, they should evaluate technologies that have the potential to disrupt the enhancements produced by the RD teams.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Disruptive innovators can hurt successful and immensely profitable incumbents that tend to ignore the markets most susceptible to disruptive innovations. Disruptive innovators offer technologically straightforward solutions consisting of off-the-shelf components put together in a product architecture that is often simpler, initially lower performing, and cheaper than established approaches. Considering disruptive technologies unprofitable, the executives at incumbents often ignored them at their own and companies peril. In 1981, the old 8 inch drives used in mini computers were vastly superior and much more profitable to the new 5.25 inch drives used in desktop computers. However, 8 inch drives were not affordable for the new desktop machines. Slowly, the makers of 5.25 inch drives improved the performance of the drives and moved the 8 inch drive companies that did not invest in the 5.25 inch technology out of the market as the latter could not compete on price. Similarly, digital cameras, when introduced in 1997 performed extremely poorly as compared to traditional film cameras. Consequently, many traditional film companies such as Kodak ignored this market only to be bankrupted by the rise of digital cameras a decade later.Leaders and strategists should be cautious while rejecting a technology that does not seem to be as high performing and hence not as profitable as their dominant technologies. A technology that initially provides low performance can drastically improve over time and often exceed the performance of the dominant technology at a much lower price-point, a scenario that could potentially bankrupt the incumbents who ignored the technology at their peril.The author of the passage would make which of the following recommendations to the managers of the incumbents.a)Before rejecting a technology that performs poorly when compared to an existing technology, the managers should carefully evaluate whether the technology can improve to a point to be disruptive.b)They should only invest in new technologies that have the potential to disrupt their business model and throw them out of business.c)They should take into account the long term shareholder returns before rejecting any new technology.d)They should always be wary of start-ups in their industry as they have a potential to disrupt the incumbents operating business model.e)Before investing huge sums of money in in-house Research and Development, they should evaluate technologies that have the potential to disrupt the enhancements produced by the RD teams.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Disruptive innovators can hurt successful and immensely profitable incumbents that tend to ignore the markets most susceptible to disruptive innovations. Disruptive innovators offer technologically straightforward solutions consisting of off-the-shelf components put together in a product architecture that is often simpler, initially lower performing, and cheaper than established approaches. Considering disruptive technologies unprofitable, the executives at incumbents often ignored them at their own and companies peril. In 1981, the old 8 inch drives used in mini computers were vastly superior and much more profitable to the new 5.25 inch drives used in desktop computers. However, 8 inch drives were not affordable for the new desktop machines. Slowly, the makers of 5.25 inch drives improved the performance of the drives and moved the 8 inch drive companies that did not invest in the 5.25 inch technology out of the market as the latter could not compete on price. Similarly, digital cameras, when introduced in 1997 performed extremely poorly as compared to traditional film cameras. Consequently, many traditional film companies such as Kodak ignored this market only to be bankrupted by the rise of digital cameras a decade later.Leaders and strategists should be cautious while rejecting a technology that does not seem to be as high performing and hence not as profitable as their dominant technologies. A technology that initially provides low performance can drastically improve over time and often exceed the performance of the dominant technology at a much lower price-point, a scenario that could potentially bankrupt the incumbents who ignored the technology at their peril.The author of the passage would make which of the following recommendations to the managers of the incumbents.a)Before rejecting a technology that performs poorly when compared to an existing technology, the managers should carefully evaluate whether the technology can improve to a point to be disruptive.b)They should only invest in new technologies that have the potential to disrupt their business model and throw them out of business.c)They should take into account the long term shareholder returns before rejecting any new technology.d)They should always be wary of start-ups in their industry as they have a potential to disrupt the incumbents operating business model.e)Before investing huge sums of money in in-house Research and Development, they should evaluate technologies that have the potential to disrupt the enhancements produced by the RD teams.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Disruptive innovators can hurt successful and immensely profitable incumbents that tend to ignore the markets most susceptible to disruptive innovations. Disruptive innovators offer technologically straightforward solutions consisting of off-the-shelf components put together in a product architecture that is often simpler, initially lower performing, and cheaper than established approaches. Considering disruptive technologies unprofitable, the executives at incumbents often ignored them at their own and companies peril. In 1981, the old 8 inch drives used in mini computers were vastly superior and much more profitable to the new 5.25 inch drives used in desktop computers. However, 8 inch drives were not affordable for the new desktop machines. Slowly, the makers of 5.25 inch drives improved the performance of the drives and moved the 8 inch drive companies that did not invest in the 5.25 inch technology out of the market as the latter could not compete on price. Similarly, digital cameras, when introduced in 1997 performed extremely poorly as compared to traditional film cameras. Consequently, many traditional film companies such as Kodak ignored this market only to be bankrupted by the rise of digital cameras a decade later.Leaders and strategists should be cautious while rejecting a technology that does not seem to be as high performing and hence not as profitable as their dominant technologies. A technology that initially provides low performance can drastically improve over time and often exceed the performance of the dominant technology at a much lower price-point, a scenario that could potentially bankrupt the incumbents who ignored the technology at their peril.The author of the passage would make which of the following recommendations to the managers of the incumbents.a)Before rejecting a technology that performs poorly when compared to an existing technology, the managers should carefully evaluate whether the technology can improve to a point to be disruptive.b)They should only invest in new technologies that have the potential to disrupt their business model and throw them out of business.c)They should take into account the long term shareholder returns before rejecting any new technology.d)They should always be wary of start-ups in their industry as they have a potential to disrupt the incumbents operating business model.e)Before investing huge sums of money in in-house Research and Development, they should evaluate technologies that have the potential to disrupt the enhancements produced by the RD teams.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Disruptive innovators can hurt successful and immensely profitable incumbents that tend to ignore the markets most susceptible to disruptive innovations. Disruptive innovators offer technologically straightforward solutions consisting of off-the-shelf components put together in a product architecture that is often simpler, initially lower performing, and cheaper than established approaches. Considering disruptive technologies unprofitable, the executives at incumbents often ignored them at their own and companies peril. In 1981, the old 8 inch drives used in mini computers were vastly superior and much more profitable to the new 5.25 inch drives used in desktop computers. However, 8 inch drives were not affordable for the new desktop machines. Slowly, the makers of 5.25 inch drives improved the performance of the drives and moved the 8 inch drive companies that did not invest in the 5.25 inch technology out of the market as the latter could not compete on price. Similarly, digital cameras, when introduced in 1997 performed extremely poorly as compared to traditional film cameras. Consequently, many traditional film companies such as Kodak ignored this market only to be bankrupted by the rise of digital cameras a decade later.Leaders and strategists should be cautious while rejecting a technology that does not seem to be as high performing and hence not as profitable as their dominant technologies. A technology that initially provides low performance can drastically improve over time and often exceed the performance of the dominant technology at a much lower price-point, a scenario that could potentially bankrupt the incumbents who ignored the technology at their peril.The author of the passage would make which of the following recommendations to the managers of the incumbents.a)Before rejecting a technology that performs poorly when compared to an existing technology, the managers should carefully evaluate whether the technology can improve to a point to be disruptive.b)They should only invest in new technologies that have the potential to disrupt their business model and throw them out of business.c)They should take into account the long term shareholder returns before rejecting any new technology.d)They should always be wary of start-ups in their industry as they have a potential to disrupt the incumbents operating business model.e)Before investing huge sums of money in in-house Research and Development, they should evaluate technologies that have the potential to disrupt the enhancements produced by the RD teams.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice GMAT tests.