Kittyhawk Case Analysis

1084 Words5 Pages
Background of the Kittyhawk project In early 1990, Hewlett Packard’s (HP) Disk Memory Division (DMD) leaded by Bruce Spenner, held a profitable piece of the market with its high-performance 5.25- and 3.5-inch disk drivers and sales of $519 million (by 1992). Although HP’s DMD had not introduced 2.5-inch drive at all, as competitors within that market were too strong to attack directly, by 1991 Spenser was convinced that new disk-drive architecture with an innovative design could take the computing market by storm and that HP was the company to create it. In June1992, HP presented “Kittyhawk” - the world’s smallest hard drive which has 1,3 diameter and had 20 Mg of storage. Moreover, the drive had a number of unique technologies, including low power consumption and ability to withstand 3-foot fall without data loss. However, despite its significant characteristics, by middle 1994, “Kittyhawk” had failed to meet its targets. Inspiring start From my point of view, HP matched a lot of Christensen’s recommendations. Looking into the planning of the “Kittyhawk” project, we can see that development team did many things correctly to launch the product. First of all, the project had the executive support form top management of the company. In early 1991, Spenser received an approval of Dick Hackborn, executive vice president of the Computer Product Organization (CPO). Secondly, in order to make sure that “Kittyhawk” was not governed by the division’s traditional process, Spenner physically and financially separated development team from the rest of the company and gave them autonomy to develop the drive, find new markets and cultivate a customer base. Core members of the team were “can do” people with quick finking and ability to take the risks. Moreover, in order to establish clarity of purpose and insure team-member commitment, all engineers were asked

More about Kittyhawk Case Analysis

Open Document