UT Dallas Syllabus For Entp6385.0g1.10f Taught by Daniel Bochsler (dcb091000)

Course Syllabus
ENTP/BPS 6385-0G1, Entrepreneurial Business Strategies

School of Management
The University of Texas at Dallas
| Course Info | Tech Requirements | Access & Navigation | Communications | Resources |

Assessments | Academic Calendar | Scholastic Honesty | Course Evaluation | UTD Policies |
Course Information
Course
Course Number Section ENTP/BPS 6385-0G1

Course Title Entrepreneurial Business Strategies
Term and Dates Fall 2010
Professor Contact Information

Professor Mr. Dan Bochsler
Office Phone 972-883-5833
Email Address dan.bochsler@utdallas.edu
Office Location SOM 4.208
Online Office Hours Mon 10am-12noon, Wed 2-3pm
Other Information Other office hours by appointment; in person or teleconference
About the Instructor

Instructor website: http://www.utdallas.edu/~dcb091000/
Course Pre-requisites, Co-requisites, and/or Other Restrictions

This course is equivalent to ENTP 6385 and only one of these may be counted toward a
degree. Prerequisites: (a) ENTP 6370 and BPS 6310 or consent of the instructor, or (b) ENTP
6360 for students not enrolled in the School of Management. (3-0)
Course Description
This course is built around the most recent developments in the field of strategic
management. Although framed in the context of the entrepreneurial business, these ideas are
also broadly applicable to the strategic challenges of innovation and competitive dynamics
faced by established firms in rapidly growing or evolving markets.
An existing firm in an established and stable industry is faced with a limited set of choices – in
all likelihood, the competitive landscape is reasonably well defined, the scope and
segmentation of markets has been established, and the firm’s competitive strengths and
limitations are understood. Technology (“will it work?) and market (“will they buy”?) risks are
more or less manageable; competitive actions and the firm’s ability to execute are the
principal areas of uncertainty. Strategy options are partially constrained by established
industry structure and prior choices.
Course Syllabus Template updated on 9/3/2009 Page 1

In rapidly evolving competitive environments, entrepreneurs and established firms will often
face multiple unknowns (technology, market, and competitive risks) and possess limited
resources to manage these risks. The good news is that there are relatively few constraints on
strategic choice; the bad news is that each choice is critical and each in turn constrains future
options and flexibility. Often, the innovator or entrepreneur is faced with a “David and Goliath”
challenge where the resources and legitimacy of incumbents and established business
models create substantial barriers for a challenger firm with limited resources and capabilities.
The strategic choices that are made in these situations have much to do with the ultimate
success or failure of the innovator or entrepreneurial firm.
This course will examine these strategic choices utilizing recent case studies and the latest
concepts of strategic management from the Harvard Business Review, Sloan Management
Review and similar sources. The course may have a mixture of mostly new and a few "classic"
cases. The latter ones offer the opportunity to discuss fundamental and timeless issues and
challenges faced by companies. Please study them in that spirit and do not dismiss them out
of hand simply because they seem "old." Ask yourself - as we will examine in class - What can
I learn from this situation that is relevant to companies that I am interested in today?
Student Learning Objectives/Outcomes
Upon successful completion of this course, students will:
 Understand the strategic challenges of innovation and the unique competitive dynamics of
entrepreneurial market entry, new product introduction and business model innovation in
the context of rapidly growing or evolving markets.
 Understand the limitations of conventional strategy models and frameworks in addressing
these challenges and how emerging entrepreneurial strategy models can overcome these
limitations.
 Demonstrate the ability to analyze market and competitive environments, assess
organizational capabilities, and evaluate and select the most appropriate strategic models
for a given situation.
 Demonstrate the ability to apply the concepts, tools and frameworks presented in the
readings and lectures to the analysis, interpretation and prioritization of strategic issues,
and to develop and communicate appropriate recommendations for action with respect to
the strategic challenges presented in case studies.
Required Textbooks and Materials

Required Texts
 Textbook: Moore, Geoffrey A. 2002. Crossing the Chasm: Marketing and Selling High-
Tech Products to Mainstream Customers. HarperBusiness. New York. ISBN 978-0-06-
051712-0 (paperback).
 Optional, second textbook: Drucker, Peter F., Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Harper
Business, 1985, ISBN 978-0-06-085113-2, (paperback).
Required Materials
 Electronic Readings: Download eJournals as required from the McDermott Library
Website (see Academic Calendar section below for details).
 Course Pack: Cases and selected readings (available at University of Texas at Dallas

Bookstore).
The electronic readings (Harvard Business School and other journal articles) are available for
download at no charge on the UTD McDermott Library website
(http://www.utdallas.edu/library/collections/journals.htm).
Textbooks and some other bookstore materials can be ordered online through Off-Campus
Books or the UTD Bookstore. They are also available in stock at both bookstores.
Course Policies
Make-up exams
None.
Extra Credit
None.
Late Work
Written assignments will be due on the date assigned and must be accessed and submitted
through the Assignments icon in the corresponding unit of the eLearning system. Late work
will not be accepted. If you have a conflict, you need to contact the Instructor before the due
date and the Instructor will find an earlier date for you to turn it in.
Class Participation
Students are required to login regularly to the online class site. The instructor will use the
tracking feature in eLearning to monitor student activity. Students are also required to
participate in all class activities such as discussion board, chat or conference sessions and
group projects.
Virtual Classroom Citizenship

The same guidelines that apply to traditional classes should be observed in the virtual
classroom environment. Please use proper netiquette when interacting with class members
and the professor.
Policy on Server Unavailability or Other Technical Difficulties

The university is committed to providing a reliable online course system to all users. However,
in the event of any unexpected server outage or any unusual technical difficulty which
prevents students from completing a time sensitive assessment activity, the instructor will
extend the time windows and provide an appropriate accommodation based on the situation.
Students should immediately report any problems to the instructor and also contact the UTD
eLearning Help Desk: http://www.utdallas.edu/elearninghelp, 1-866-588-3192. The instructor
and the UTD eLearning Help Desk will work with the student to resolve any issues at the
earliest possible time.
Top
Technical Requirements

In addition to a confident level of computer and Internet literacy, certain minimum technical
requirements must be met to enable a successful learning experience. Please review the
important technical requirements and the web browser configuration information.
Top
Course Access and Navigation
This course was developed using a web course tool called eLearning. It is to be delivered
entirely online. Students will use their UTD NetID account to login to the course through UTD
Galaxy: http://galaxy.utdallas.edu or directly at http://elearning.utdallas.edu. Please see more
details on course access and navigation information.
To get started with an eLearning course, please see the Getting Started: Student eLearning
Orientation.
UTD provides eLearning technical support 24 hours a day/7 days a week. The services
include a toll free telephone number for immediate assistance (1-866-588-3192), email
request service, and an online chat service. The UTD user community can also access the
support resources such as self-help resources and a Knowledge Base. Please use this link to
access the UTD eLearning Support Center: http://www.utdallas.edu/elearninghelp.
Top
Communications
This eLearning course has built-in communication tools which will be used for interaction and
communication. Some external communication tools such as regular email and a web
conferencing tool may also be used during the semester. For more details, please see
communication tool information.
Another communication tool available to students is live voice chat in the 3D virtual world of
Second Life. Instructions for accessing the UTD SOM Island in Second Life can be found at
http://som.utdallas.edu/somResources/eLearning/faculty/secondLife.php.
Interaction with Instructor: The instructor will communicate with students mainly using the
Announcements and Discussions tools. Students may send personal concerns or questions to
the instructor using the course email tool. The instructor will reply to student emails or
Discussion board messages within 3 working days under normal circumstances.
The Instructor will generally attempt to check eLearning email daily during the regular Monday
through Friday week period. The other form of regular interaction will be through the
discussion boards for each course unit. The Instructor may post one or more questions,
comments, notes, etc. during a course unit pertaining to the readings for that week. You will
need to participate in the discussion function in order to get credit for participation.
A web conferencing tool, Adobe Connect, will be used in this course for real-time
communications and interaction for group meetings related to the Group Project. This
powerful tool combines Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) application and desktop sharing,

instant messaging and whiteboard functionality to create a powerful, easy-to-use,
collaborative learning environment. A group will communicate and arrange with the Instructor
an agreed upon time for each teleconference meeting of each group. See Academic Calendar
section for more details, and see the following link for web conference resources:
http://som.utdallas.edu/somResources/eLearning/eLearningCurrent/gettingStarted.php#webco
n
Top
Student Resources
The following university resources are available to students:
UTD Distance Learning: http://www.utdallas.edu/oee/distance/students/cstudents.htm
McDermott Library: Distance Learners (UTD students who live outside the boundaries of
Collin, Dallas, Denton, Rockwall, or Tarrant counties) will need a UTD-ID number to access all
of the library’s electronic resources (reserves, journal articles, ebooks, interlibrary loan) from
off campus. For UTD students living within those counties who are taking online courses, a
Comet Card is required to check out materials at the McDermott Library. For more information
on library resources go to http://www.utdallas.edu/library/distlearn/disted.htm.
Top
Student Assessments
The list of assigned readings and cases is attached. Discussion questions are provided for
each of the cases. Supplemental materials may be provided or posted electronically. Advance
preparation and enthusiastic participation in unit discussions is an important part of the
learning experience in this course and will be evaluated.
The course has been designed to allow flexible management of your time. Your grade will be
based on group and individual written assignments, and your contributions to course
discussions. These assignments and their relative weights in determining your final grade is
summarized in the table below (see Academic Calendar for details):
Grading Information
Weights
WA-1. Case: Scott Cook and Intuit, HBS Paper: group (outline form) 12%
9-396-282
WA-2. Case: TIVO, HBS 9-501-038 Paper: Individual (outline form) 12%
WA-3. Case: Browser wars 1994-1998, Paper: Group (outline form) 12%
HBS 9-798-094
WA-4. Case: Charles Schwab & Co. Inc. Paper: Individual (essay form) 12%
in 1999, SM-35
WA-5. Case: Handspring – Paper: Group (outline form) 12%

“Partnerships”, SM-79 (A)
WA-6. Cases: Vinod Khosla and Sun Paper: Group (outline form) 15%
Microsystems (A), HBS 9-390-049
WA-7. Cases: Wild Card Presentation Paper: Group (outline form) + 15%
(units 7, 9, 11, 12, 14) presentation
Participation in Course Unit Topic Assignment: Individual 10%
Discussions Open discussion among all
students in response to unit
questions/concepts posed by
Instructor and students.
Total 100%
Grading Scale
Scaled Score Letter Equivalent

>=94 - 100 A
>=90 - <94 A-
>=87 - <90 B+
>=83 - <87 B
>=80 - <83 B-
>=77 - <80 C+
>=73 – <77 C
>=70 - <73 C-
Less than 70 F
Grading Policy
A peer evaluation process will be utilized to adjust individual grades on all group assignments.
The peer evaluation form should be completed individually and submitted through eLearning
online using the Peer Evaluation assignment in Unit 15.
Evaluation
Most of your grade will be based on group and individual written assignments. Assignments
will be evaluated on multiple factors, including (a) fully addressing the requirements; (2) critical
evaluation and effective insights into the case situation; (3) demonstrated ability to apply the
course concepts and frameworks in your analysis; (4) logical conclusions and effective
recommendations; and (5) effective presentation. Particular care should be taken to fully
address the requirements for each paper as detailed in the assignment.
Evaluations of case analyses will utilize the following general format:
Approxi Points
Evaluation Criteria:
mate Earned
Possible
Points
1. 1.5-2.0

2. 1.5-2.0
3. 1.5-2.0
4. 1.5-2.0
5. 1.5
6. .5 -1.0
OVERALL EVALUATION 100
The first several evaluation criteria will generally consist of the questions listed for individual
and group case analysis assignments. Points possible for an item will vary from cases to case
based on the number of questions and the nature of the assignment itself, and the overall
grade weight for the assignment. There will be additional consideration of items like:
demonstrated understanding of client’s business, analysis of strategic issues/concerns,
development and presentation of useful recommendations, and effective use of course
concepts. Communications evaluation will look at clear and to the point delivery, organization,
presentation and effectiveness. The overall evaluation may then be followed by additional text
commentary from the Instructor.
Accessing Grades
Students can check their grades by clicking “My Grades” under Course Tools after the grade
for each assessment task is released.
Assignments
Self Introduction
Each student should post a Self-Introduction in the Discussion area of eLearning prior to the
first class Unit, and no later than the end of the first Unit week as noted in the Academic
Calendar. Guidelines are provided on the eLearning group formation section. This information
will assist in the formation of groups for the course and includes things like:
NAME: (per the University records)

PREFERRED NAME: (what do you want to be called)
PHONE: (optional, but useful)
EDUCATION: (what, when, where)
EMPLOYMENT: (current)
TOTAL WORK EXPERIENCE: (what you did, where, number of years)
SPECIAL SKILLS/EXPERIENCE:
MOTIVATION: (why are you here? why in this course?)
EXPECTATIONS: (what do you expect to learn in/gain from this course?)
PERSONAL NOTES: (tell us a little about yourself).
Formation of Groups
Much of the work in this course will be performed in groups. Students should form small
groups (4 members maximum) during the first two weeks of the course. It is important that you
select your groups to include a diverse set of skills and make sure that at least one member is
proficient in accounting and spreadsheet analysis. With the self-introduction information

referenced above, which is accessible via eLearning system, each student should join a group
or communicate with others to self-form a group.
Wild Card Presentation
Each group will need to choose one “wild card” presentation (see Academic Calendar and
Discussion Questions for Case Analyses). Each group needs to notify the Instructor via
eLearning system discussion board or email of the case you want (including a second choice
as well) – first come, first served. The Instructor will notify groups of the assigned case. The
assigned group will prepare and submit an outline form paper for the assigned case and also
submit a Powerpoint presentation (15-20 slides) of their analysis of the case. For each case
assigned as a wild card, all groups (other than assigned group) should read and prepare an
outline paper for that case to support course discussions during that unit; however, this outline
will not be graded or turned in.
Participation/Discussions
You will be expected to participate regularly in online discussions. A great deal of learning
takes place when you share your experiences with others. The Instructor will post questions
and comments to each Unit discussion board which you can respond to. It is absolutely
necessary that you participate regularly. In order to receive full participation points you must
post 1-2 value-added comments during at least 8 different discussion Units during the course.
You will not get full credit for doing comment posting many times in the last few Units. It is
often the case that students lose a letter grade because they are not participating, so please
make a point to do this.
Rules for Participation in Discussion:
1) Participation points will be given for both responses to discussion postings by students
and for responses to questions submitted by Instructor.
2) When a question is posted, the first five replies can answer the question directly, posts
after that need to respond to the answers given by other students to mimic an in class
discussion. Look at this as a conversation with one another rather than trying to impress
the Instructor with the “right” answer.
3) Grading is done on quality of responses, not quantity. So, posts such as “I agree” or
“sounds good to me” do not count towards participation (although you can certainly use
these to advance the conversation). In order to count as participation, your post has to be
well thought out and pertain to the topic for the Unit. You should reference some of the
concepts currently being examined in class, not just offer vague assessments. You can
also refer back to a previous Unit’s material if relevant. Integration of concepts is
encouraged since most issues don’t operate completely independent of one another.
4) Keep discussion on topic and factual in nature. No flaming allowed. Opinions are fine as
long as they are supported by facts. For example, stating that you think that a specific
course of action is correct because of x, y, z is acceptable; stating that the previous
commentator is not important or not an intelligent person is not acceptable.
5) Grammar and spelling are not graded in the discussion section, so don’t feel that you have
to spend hours editing your response. However, please use full words, not acronyms and
abbreviations – not everyone is familiar with shorthand text message language.
6) Limit your response to 150 words – any more than that and readers lose the point (and
interest).
7) In order to receive full participation points you must post 1-2 value-added comments to at
least 8 discussions.

8) While you can continue to post to a topic of interest, in order to receive credit for
participation, you must post during the week the topic is being discussed.
Case Analysis Guidelines

Written assignments will often require the analysis of case situations. Preparation for course
units will also frequently require the analysis of a case situation. Case analysis assignments
are designed to evaluate and develop your skills in:
 identifying key organizational issues (decisions or actions required in a given
situation).
 analyzing the situation (identifying problems; understanding the underlying causal
factors; and identifying and evaluating options)
 recommending specific actions (what should be done, by whom, when and in what
sequence) to address the key issues.
Specific questions for each case have been provided to focus your analysis. In general, there
are no “right” or “wrong” answers for a specific case. Different approaches and insights are
possible, depending on your individual perspective and approach. Regardless of your
approach and conclusions, the Instructor expects you to make recommendations that: (1)
address the identified issues; (2) follow logically from your analysis and conclusions; and (3)
make sense (are feasible) in the context of the case situation.
The group and individual written assignments will require case analysis and
recommendations. For the individual assignments, you may discuss the case with your study
group. But, the papers (including tables and figures) are to be prepared and written
individually. The following general approach to case analysis is recommended:
1) Read the case quickly Identify key issues and decisions/action required (the case
preparation questions will help you focus on the key issues). Prioritize the issues in terms
of urgency and importance.
2) Decide what kind of recommendations should be made (and to whom).
3) Choose appropriate analytical tools/frameworks from those introduced in the course.
4) Analyze the situation thoroughly using the frameworks provided in the readings.
5) Draw logical conclusions based on your analysis.
6) Make specific recommendations for action in response to the questions posed in the case
or the preparation questions (what should be done, who should do it, when and in what
sequence).
Discussion Questions for Case Analyses

The following discussion questions are provided to help you complete a structured analysis
focusing on the key issues in each case. It is important, in written assignments and
discussions, to address each of these points.
Case: Scott Cook and Intuit (HBS 9-396-282)

1. What are the key elements of Intuit’s business strategy? Consider it from the perspective
of Hamel’s “Strategy as Revolution”. How does Intuit create competitive advantage? Is
their advantage sustainable?

2. Consider Intuit’s strategy in the context of Porter’s “What is Strategy?”. Does this model
fit? If so, why? If not, why not?
3. Evaluate Intuit’s approach to the market and relationship with its customers in terms of
the ideas contained in “Knowing a Winning Business Idea When You See One”? How
important has Intuit’s unique relationship to customers been to the success of its
strategy?
4. Consider how Intuit’s competitive environment had changed from its early days (1984-
1992) to its later period (beginning with the ChipSoft acquisition). What had changed
compared to the original strategy? What had remained the same?
Case: TIVO (HBS 9-501-038)

1. What are the key elements of Tivo’s business strategy? Are they pursuing a complex-
systems or a volume-operations model?
2. How does Tivo intend to create competitive advantage? Is their competitive advantage
sustainable? How is their strategy different from those of their competitors?
3. Consider Tivo’s marketing strategy in the light of the Technology Adoption Life Cycle
model Where are they in the process? What have they done right? What have they done
wrong? What do they need to do next?
4. Would you characterize Tivo’s business strategy as a true “Blue Ocean Strategy” or
merely the introduction of a substitute product that replaces and upgrades the
functionality of the VCR? Address these issues from the differing perspectives of “Blue
Ocean Strategy”, Gourville’s ideas about new-product adoption, and “Knowing a Winning
Business Idea”. Do you come to the same conclusion from each point of view?
5. Subsequent to the events described in the case, satellite TV providers have entered the
market with their own versions of the Tivo device, bundled into a basic satellite receiver.
Should this evolution of the competitive market been reasonably foreseen by Tivo? How
significant is the threat? How should they counter these new entrants?
Case: Compaq Computer 1995 IVEY (9A95A011)

1. Evaluate Compaq’s early marketing strategy (1982-1985) in view of the ideas outlined in
“Crossing the Chasm”. How do you explain the Company’s early success (relative to
IBM and its other competitors)? Are Gourville’s ideas applicable?
2. How did their strategy change/evolve with the introduction of the Deskpro 386 line? How
did the competitive rivalry with IBM influence their strategy?
3. How did their strategy change/evolve with the introduction of the 80486 microprocessor?
4. How would you characterize the evolution of their strategy over the period of the case,
from the perspective of “Three Strategies for Managing Fast Growth” and “Growth
Outside the Core”?
Case: Browser Wars 1994-1998 (HBS 9-798-094)

1. The first-mover in the browser market was Mosaic, which was quickly eclipsed by
Netscape, which was ultimately bested by Microsoft. Trace the evolution of the strategy
of “creative imitation” in the drive to market leadership during the period 1993-1997.
2. Evaluate the strategies of Netscape and Microsoft based on the ideas contained in
“Value Innovation”. How did each market leader, in turn, create competitive advantage?
How did the successor negate those advantages and create a new “value curve” for the
industry?

a. Plot the “value curve” for Netscape vs. that of Mosaic (using an appropriate set of
parameters) to illustrate how Netscape created new value for its customers.
b. Plot the “value curve” for Microsoft’s Internet Explorer vs. that of Netscape to
illustrate how Microsoft changed the basis of competition in the Browser wars.
3. Compare the business models of Netscape and Microsoft using Moore’s “two hands”
framework. How are they similar? How are they different?
4. Late in the battle, Netscape posted its source code on a public Web site, in an effort to
enlist customers and other developers in the technology battle. Did Netscape
successfully “Skate to Where the Money Will Be” as their strategy evolved over the
period of the case?
Case: Disruptive Technology a Heartbeat Away: Ecton, Inc. (HBS 9-699-018)

1. Does Ecton, Inc. have a truly disruptive technology? Consider the criteria set forth in the
two readings about disruptive technologies.
2. Develop a “value curve” for Ecton’s product and for the industry standard products
following the methodology laid out in “Value Innovation”. Does Ecton’s product really
have a very different package of attributes? To what market segments might this
different package appeal?
3. Does Ecton’s technology have a chance of sufficient price/performance improvement to
challenge the established market leaders? Consider Gourville’s ideas in your
assessment. Evaluate the risks in their approach using Adner’s model (interdependence,
initiative, integration).
4. Given Ecton’s broad strategic objectives (sale of the company to a major player), what
kind of product launch strategy should they pursue, assuming that the patient trials were
successful?
5. If Ecton decided to go it alone, what should their product launch strategy be (which
markets, channels, etc.)?
Case: Charles Schwab and Co. Inc. in 1999 (SM-35)

1. For nearly 30 years, Charles Schwab & Company has pursued a strategy of technology-
enabled innovation in challenging traditional brokerage firms. Outline the core elements
of their strategy. Have these elements been consistent over the years?
2. Has Schwab driven, or been driven by changes in the competitive market environment?
How have the ideas of time pacing been illustrated in their approach to innovation and
ability to “turn on a dime” in the industry?
3. Evaluate Schwab’s competitive positioning vs. its competitors using the ideas reflected
in Kim and Mauborgne’s “Value Innovation”. Use value curves to plot Schwab’s position:
(a) in 1995 (pre-internet) vs. Merrill Lynch and the other full-service brokers; and (b) in
1999 vs. E*Trade, Merrill Lynch and WingspanBank.com.
4. Use your value curves to explain how Schwab’s positioning created competitive
advantage in 1995? How did this positioning change by 1999? How was their
competitive position affected? Do you expect it to change further in response to the
changing competitive dynamics?
5. Can the evolution of Schwab’s strategy and competitive positioning be explained in the
context of Prahalad and Ramaswamy’s ideas, as articulated in “The New Frontier of
Experience Innovation”? To what extent has the behavior of consumers played a role in
the evolution of Schwab’s strategy and service offerings?

Case: Dell Computer Corporation (HBS 9-596-058)
1. Dell Computer’s strategy has evolved significantly over the years, as the company has
continued to experience rapid growth to a current position of market leadership. Trace
the evolution of Dell’s strategy in the context of a changing competitive landscape from
its inception in 1983 to the end of the case in 1994.
2. Show how many of the ideas contained in “Judo Strategy” and “Maneuver Warfare” were
important in Dell’s strategy.
3. Why was Dell’s entry into the retail channel unsuccessful? What can we learn from this?
4. Analyze the strategic issues posed at the end of the case. What would you recommend
regarding each?
Case: Firefly Network (A) (BSBSU OIT-22A)

1. How has Firefly Network positioned itself in the competitive market space? Consider two
different models: “Crossing the Chasm”, Chapter 6; and “The New Frontier of
Experience Innovation”. How does their positioning differ from that of Broadvision?
2. How does Firefly’s current strategic direction conform to the idea of a “toll gate” strategy,
as defined in the lecture notes? What are the risks, issues and potential rewards of such
a strategy? Is this direction appropriate?
3. If you were a member of Firefly’s Board of Directors, what are the top three questions
you would pose to Nick Grouf, regarding the strategic direction of the company?
4. What recommendations would you make?
Case: Handspring – “Partnerships” (SM-79 (A))

1. What is Handspring’s basic strategy (within the overall course framework)? What is their
goal? How do they intend to create and sustain competitive advantage?
2. Evaluate Handspring’s strategy from the perspective of “Leveraged Growth”. How
closely do they follow the model? Where have they taken a different path? What are the
implications?
3. At the time of the Visor’s launch, Palm was clearly the platform leader in the industry. In
the beginning, did Handspring support or challenge that leadership? How do you
anticipate that the Springboard modules will impact the industry’s platform architecture?
Evaluate their approach from the perspective of Gourville’s model of technology
adoption.
4. Evaluate Handspring’s channel strategy in the light of the observations contained in
“Crossing the Chasm”, Chapter 7). Consider the changes in distribution channels
between the time “Chasm” was originally written (1991) and the time of the case.
Case: Staples: A Year in the Life of a Startup (HBS 9-800-241)

1. What is Staples’s fundamental business strategy? How do they plan to create and
sustain competitive advantage? What actions do they plan to ensure that these
advantages are sustainable?
2. The traditional office products industry was essentially “unbundled” already. Staples’
strategy is based on “rebundling” this industry in a way that fundamentally changes the
industry structure – in effect creating a new market space. In what ways does Staples’
strategy reflect the ideas from Kim and Mauborgne’s “ Value Innovation” and “ Blue
Ocean Strategy”? How would you characterize Staple’s business model following
Moore’s “two hands” perspective?

3. Construct the value curves for: (a) the traditional office supply industry (retailers); and (b)
Staples. Can you clearly demonstrate how Staples created a new value proposition for
its customers?
Case: Vinod Khosla and Sun Microsystems (A) (HBS 9-390-049)

1. This description of the early years of Sun Microsystems provides insights into the early
years of a bootstrap startup, and outlines the key strategic principles Sun pursued in its
initial business plan (see Exhibit 3). Evaluate Vinod Khosla and the early startup against
the criteria set forth in “The Questions Every Entrepreneur Must Answer”.
2. Evaluate Sun’s initial strategy using the concepts from “What is Strategy?” and “Strategy
as Revolution”. Does your analysis provide insights into the company’s ultimate
success?
3. Evaluate Sun’s initial marketing efforts using the concepts articulated in “Crossing the
Chasm”, “Eager Sellers – Stony Buyers” and “Blue Ocean Strategy”. Did they pursue the
right strategy? Did they implement effectively?
4. At the end of the case, Khosla has just learned that he has lost a critical sale to an
established competitor. Outline a competitive strategy for Sun Microsystems to compete
effectively with Apollo using the concepts outlined in “Judo Strategy”, “Maneuver
Warfare”, and “The Elements of Platform Leadership”
Group Projects
Groups will be assigned either at the beginning of the class and will be announced under
Announcements, or the Instructor may use a group sign-up sheet to form groups for group
assignments or projects. A private discussion area will be set up on the discussion board for
internal group communications. A group chat room can also be created for each group to use.
A web conference system is available for use. Teams can schedule a live web conference for
team work. Please see communication tool information for instructions on making a
reservation and other web conference information. Meeting spaces have also been set up on
the UTD SOM Island in the virtual world of Second Life. Instructions for accessing the island
can be found at http://som.utdallas.edu/somResources/eLearning/faculty/secondLife.php.
Assignment submission instructions
You will submit your assignments (in the required file format with a simple file name and a file
extension) by using the Assignments tool on the course site. Please see the Assignments link
on the course menu or see the icon on the designated page. You can click each assignment
name link and follow the on-screen instructions to upload and submit your file(s). Please refer
to the Help menu for more information on using this tool. Please note: each assignment link
will be deactivated after the assignment due time. After your submission is graded, you may
click each assignment’s “Graded” tab to check the results and feedback.
For the team assignments, one group member will submit the assignment for the group and all
group members will be able to view the results and feedback once it’s been graded.
Document Formats
Effective written and oral communications are critically important in the business world. It is
equally important that students "put their best foot forward" in written presentations and

assignments. Poor organization, convoluted sentence structures, mangled grammar and
misspelled words have no place in effective communications, and will be considered in the
evaluation of your work and ideas.
All Documents. Your name (or the group identification and names of all group members)
the course number and the date should appear in a header at the beginning of each page
of a document.
General Written Documents. The body of each written assignment should comply with
the page length guidelines specified for the assignment. The use of charts and exhibits is
encouraged, to the extent that they help you make your points. Charts and exhibits should
be numbered and appropriately referenced in the document. A list of references should be
attached as required. Cover pages, charts or exhibits, and lists of references are not
included in the page count. The manuscript should use 11-12 point type, double-spaced,
with 1” margins all around. Appropriate titles and section headings should be used.
Number the pages.
Presentation Format. Use MS Powerpoint. Keep it simple (no videos, sound effects, etc.)
Limit animation to that required for an effective presentation.
Outline Form Response. Most of the assignments specify an outline form response. The
Instructor will expect a statement of the question followed by a prioritized, key bullet
points(or numbered) list of the key items in your response.
Essay Form Response. Other assignments specify an essay form response. The
Instructor will expect a well organized paper that addresses the case questions and uses
section headings, bulleted lists, charts and exhibits as appropriate to clearly communicate
your message.
File Names to Identify Submissions. When you submit your assignments in eLearning
system, the file name should identify the course, assignment number, your name or
group ID, and date you submitted it. For example, “ENTP 6385_2_JSmith_091010.doc”
would identify John Smith’s written assignment #2 submitted on September (09), 10th
(10), 2010 (10).
Turnitin eLearning Assignment Submission Instructions
Some assignment(s) may be submitted and examined through the integrated plagiarism
detection tool called Turnitin. Please find the Turnitin assignment submission icon, if used, on
the designated course page and click to open it. You can click the assignment title to view the
assignment information. To submit your file, please click the submit icon, on the next page,
select the option of “file upload” (or “cut and paste”), enter the submission title, click Browse to
locate your file and click Submit button. You can then review (click “cancel, go back” if
needed) and confirm your submission. (Note: only one single file may be submitted. Some
common file types accepted are: Word, HTML, PDF, TXT and RTF.) You can go back to the
assignment page to check the Originality Report (showing the percentage of similarity match
and the sources detected) when it becomes available. Please note it may take some time for
Turnitin to generate the originality report especially during the semester end busy time. For
overwritten or resubmitted paper, it takes 24 hours. For more information and assistance on
using Turnitin, please go to: http://www.turnitin.com/static/training.html.

Top
Academic Calendar
WEEK/ TOPIC/LECTURE READINGS/ ASSESSMENT / DUE DATE

DATES CASES ACTIVITY
(dd/mm
format)
Unit 0 Course Access and Self- Complete Self

16/08- Orientation Introduction on
eLearning
23/08
(individual)
Unit 1 ENTREPRENEURIAL  Bhide, Amar. Form or join a 29 Aug

23/08- BUSINESS STRATEGIES 1994. How group (individuals)
29/08 Entrepreneurs
Craft Strategies Course Unit Student Choice
that Work. Discussion Topic (see
Harvard Business Participation Assignments)
Review. Mar-Apr (individual)
1994. 150-161.
R94202.
(eJournal)
 Bhide, Amar.
1996. The
Questions Every
Entrepreneur
Must Answer.
Harvard Business
Review. Nov-Dec
1996. 120-130. R
96603 (eJournal)
 Lecture slide
supplement:
Drucker concepts
Unit 2 PERSPECTIVES ON  Porter, Michael E. 5 Sept

30/08- STRATEGY: 1996. What is
CONVENTIONAL WISDOM Strategy?
05/09 Course Unit Student Choice
Harvard Business Discussion Topic (see
Review. Nov-Dec Participation Assignments)
1996. 61-78. (individual)
R9660 (eJournal)
 Collis, David J.
and Cynthia A.
Montgomery.
1995. Competing
on Resources:
Strategy in the
1990’s. Harvard
Business Review.
Jul-Aug 1995.
118-128. R95403
(eJournal)

 Porter, Michael E.
Strategy and the
Internet. 2001.
Harvard Business
Review. Mar
2001. 62-78.
R0103D.
(eJournal)
Unit 3 PERSPECTIVES ON  Hamel, Gary. 12 Sept

06/09- STRATEGY: 1996. Strategy as
CHALLENGING Revolution.
12/09 CONVENTIONAL WISDOM Course Unit Student Choice
Harvard Business
Review. Jul-Aug Discussion Topic (see
1996. 69-82. Participation Assignments)
R96405. (individual)
(eJournal)
 Eisenhardt, K.M.
and Donald N.
Sull. 2001.
Strategy as
Simple Rules.
Harvard Business
Review. January
2001. 106-116.
R0101G
(eJournal)
 Courtney, Hugh,
Jane Kirkland and
Patrick Viguerie.
1997. Strategy
Under
Uncertainty.
Harvard Business
Review. Nov-Dec
1997. 66-79.
R97603.
(eJournal)
 Teaching Note:
Weighted
Criterion Decision
Matrix
Unit 4 UNDERSTANDING THE  Moore, Geoffrey Case 19 Sept

13/09- INDUSTRY CONTEXT: A. 2002. Crossing WA#1,
MARKETS AND the Chasm: Paper-outline form,
19/09 CUSTOMERS Marketing and 4-6 pages
Selling High-Tech (each group)
Products to
Mainstream Class Unit Student Choice
Customers. Discussion Topic (see
HarperBusiness. Participation Assignments)
New York. (Ch 1- (individual)
2; pp 3-59)
 W. Chan Kim and
Renee
Mauborgne.
Knowing a
Winning Business
Idea When You

See One.
Harvard Business
Review. Sept-Oct
2000. 129-138.
R00510.
(eJournal)
 Gourville, John T.
2006. Eager
Sellers – Stony
Buyers:
Understanding
the Psychology of
New-Product
Adoption.
Harvard Business
Review. June
2006. 99-106.
R0606F.
(eJournal))
Case Study: Scott

Cook and Intuit HBS
9-396-282
Unit 5 WHY BUSINESS MODELS  Magretta: Why 26 Sept

20/09- MATTER: CAPTURING Business Models
VALUE Matter (HBR
26/09
R0205F) HBR Class Unit
May 2002 Student Choice
Discussion Topic (see
(eJournal) Participation
 Moore, Geoffrey Assignments)
(individual)
A. 2005. Strategy
and Your
Stronger Hand.
Harvard Business
Review.
December 2005.
62-72. R0512C.
(eJournal) (focus
on the two
different business
and
organizational
models)
 Shafer, Smith &
Linder: The
Power of
Business Models.
Business
Horizons (2005)
48, 199-207
(eJournal)
Unit 6 EARLY STAGE  Kim, W. Chan Case 3 Oct

27/09- STRATEGIES: CREATING and Renee WA#2,
NEW MARKETS Mauborgne.
03/10 2004. Blue Ocean
Paper-outline form,
4-6 pages
Strategy. Harvard
(individual)
Business Review.
Oct. 2004. 76-84.
R0410D Class Unit Student Choice

(eJournal) Discussion Topic (see
Case Study: TIVO Participation Assignments)
HBS 9-501-038 (individual)
Unit 7 EARLY STAGE  Moore, Geoffrey Case 10 Oct

04/10- STRATEGIES: DRIVING A. 2002. Crossing Wild Card
FOR MARKET the Chasm: WA#7-1,
10/10 LEADERSHIP Marketing and Paper-outline form,
Selling High-Tech 4-6 pages,
Products to Presentation, 10-12
Mainstream slides
Customers. (assigned group)
HarperBusiness.
New York. (CH Class Unit Student Choice
3-5; pp 63-135) Discussion Topic (see
 Zook, Chris and Participation Assignments)
James Allen. (individual)
2003. Growth
Outside the Core. Teleconference: if As scheduled by
Harvard Business assigned, group assigned group
Review. with this Wild Card with Instructor
December 2003. case will present
66-73. R0312E. online in week after
(eJournal) it is due.
 von Krogh, Georg
and Michael A.
Cusumano. 2001.
Three Strategies
for Managing
Fast Growth.
Sloan
Management
Review. Winter
2001. 53-61.
Reprint 4224.
(eJournal)
Case Study:
Compaq Computer
1995 IVEY
9A95A011
Unit 8 GROWTH STAGE  Kim, W. Chan Case 17 Oct

11/10- STRATEGIES: FAST and Renee WA#3,
FOLLOWER (CREATIVE Mauborgne. Paper-outline form,
17/10 IMITATION) 1997. Value 4-6 pages,
Innovation: The (each group)
Strategic Logic of
High Growth. Class Unit
Harvard Business Discussion Topic Student Choice
Review. Jan-Feb Participation (see
1997. 103-112. (individual) Assignments)
R97108.
(eJournal)
 Christensen,
Clayton M.,
Michael Raynor,
and Matt
Verlinden. Skate
to Where the
Money Will Be.
Harvard Business

Review.
November 2001.
73-81. R0110D.
(eJournal)
Case Study:
Browser Wars 1994-
1998 HBS 9-798-094
Unit 9 GROWTH STAGE  Bower, Joseph L. Case 24 Oct

18/10- STRATEGIES: DISRUPTIVE and Clayton M. WILD CARD
TECHNOLOGIES Christensen. WA#7-2,
24/10
1995. Disruptive Paper-outline form,
Technologies: 4-6 pages,
Catching the Presentation, 10-12
Wave. Harvard slides
Business Review.
(assigned group)
Jan-Feb 1995.
43-62. R95104.
(eJournal) Class Unit Student Choice
 Gilbert, Clark.
Participation Assignments)
2003. The
Disruption (individual)
Opportunity.
Teleconference: if As scheduled by
Sloan
assigned, group assigned group
Management
with this Wild Card with Instructor
Review. Summer
2003. 27-32. case will present
Reprint 4443 online in week after
(eJournal) it is due.
 Adner: Match
your Innovation
Strategy to Your
Innovation
Ecosystem (HBR
R0604F April
2006) (eJournal)
Case Study:
Disruptive
Technology a
Heartbeat Away:
Ecton, Inc. HBS 9-
699-018
Unit 10 GROWTH STAGE  Eisenhardt, Case 31 Oct

25/10- STRATEGIES: Kathleen N. and WA #4,
CONTINUOUS Shona L. Brown. Paper-essay form,
31/10 INNOVATION 1998. Time 7-8 pages,
Pacing: (individual)
Competing in
Markets that Class Unit
Won’t Stand Still. Discussion Topic Student Choice
Harvard Business Participation (see
Review. Mar-Apr (individual) Assignments)
1998. 59-69.
R98202
(eJournal)
 Prahalad, C.K.
and Venkatram
Ramaswamy.
2003. The New
Frontier of

Experience
Innovation. Sloan
Management
Review. Summer
2003. 12-18.
Reprint 4442
(eJournal)
Case Study: Charles
Schwab & Co. Inc. in
1999. SM-35
Unit 11 GROWTH STAGE  Yoffie, David B. Case 7 Nov

01/11- STRATEGIES: and Michael A. WILD CARD WA#7-
ENTREPRENEURIAL JUDO Cusumano. 1999. 3,
07/11 (SPEED AND AGILITY) Judo Strategy: Paper-outline form,
The Competitive 4-6 pages,
Dynamics of Presentation, 10-12
Internet Time. slides
Harvard Business (assigned group)
Review. Jan-Feb Student Choice
1999. 70-81. Class Unit (see
R99110. Discussion Topic Assignments)
(eJournal) Participation
 Clemons, Eric K. (individual)
and Jason A.
Santamaria. Teleconference: if As scheduled by
2002. Maneuver assigned, group assigned group
Warfare: Can with this Wild Card with Instructor
Modern Military case will present
Strategy Lead online in week after
You to Victory? it is due.
Harvard Business
Review. April
2002. 57-65.
R0204D.
(eJournal)
Case Study: Dell
Computer
Corporation HBS 9-
596-058)
Unit 12 NICHE MARKET  Moore, Geoffrey Case 14 Nov

08/11- STRATEGIES: BUILDING A A. 2002. Crossing WILD CARD WA#7-
TOLL BRIDGE the Chasm: 4,
14/11 Marketing and Paper-outline form,
Selling High-Tech 4-6 pages,
Products to Presentation, 10-12
Mainstream slides
Customers. (assigned group)
HarperBusiness.
New York. (CH Student Choice
Class Unit
6-7; pp 136-192) (see
Discussion Topic
Case Study: Firefly Assignments)
Participation
Network (A) GSBSU
(individual)
OIT-22A
Teleconference: if As scheduled by
assigned, group assigned group
with this Wild Card with Instructor
case will present
online in week after
it is due.

Unit 13 NICHE MARKET  Hagel III. John. Case 21 Nov
15/11- STRATEGIES: UNIQUE 2002. Leveraged WA#5,
SKILLS OR MARKET Growth: Paper-outline form,
21/11 KNOWLEDGE Expanding Sales 4-6 pages,
without (each group)
Sacrificing Profits.
Harvard Business
Class Unit Student Choice
Review. Oct
2002. 68-77.
R0210E.
(individual)
(eJournal)
 Cusumano,
Michael A. and
Annabelle Gawer.
2002. The
Elements of
Platform
Leadership.
Sloan
Management
Review. Spring
2002. 51-58.
Reprint 4335.
(eJournal)
Case Study:
Handspring –
“Partnerships” SM-79
(A)
Unit 14 EXPLOITING CHANGE:  Hagel III, John Case 28 Nov

22/11- CULTURE, and Marc Singer. WILD CARD WA#7-
DEMOGRAPHICS, 1999. Unbundling 5,
28/11 INDUSTRY STRUCTURE the Corporation. Paper-outline form,
Harvard Business 4-6 pages,
Review. Mar-Apr Presentation, 10-12
1999. 133-141 slides
R99205. (assigned group)
(eJournal)
 McGahan, Anita Class Unit Student Choice
M. 2004. How Discussion Topic (see
Industries Participation Assignments)
Change. Harvard (individual)
Business Review.
October 2004. Teleconference: if As scheduled by
87-94. R0410E. assigned, group assigned group
(eJournal) with this Wild Card with Instructor
Case Study: case will present
Staples: A Year in online in week after
the Life of a Startup it is due.
HBS 9-800-241
Unit 15 STRATEGY Case Study: Vinod Case 5 Dec

29/11- IMPLEMENTATION: Khosla and Sun WA#6,
MAKING IT HAPPEN Microsystems (A) Paper-outline form,
05/12 HBS 9-390-049 7-8 pages
(each group)
Peer evaluation 1 through 4 Dec

submission due

Class Unit Student Choice
(individual)
Top
Scholastic Honesty
The University has policies and discipline procedures regarding scholastic dishonesty.
Detailed information is available on the UTD Judicial Affairs web page. All students are
expected to maintain a high level of responsibility with respect to academic honesty. Students
who violate University rules on scholastic dishonesty are subject to disciplinary penalties,
including the possibility of failure in the course and/or dismissal from the University. Since
such dishonesty harms the individual, all students and the integrity of the University, policies
on scholastic dishonesty will be strictly enforced. See further details in the University Policies
section.
Top
Course Evaluation
As required by UTD academic regulations, every student must complete an evaluation for
each enrolled course at the end of the semester. An online instructional assessment form will
be made available for your confidential use. Please look for the course evaluation link on the
course Home Page towards the end of the course.
Top
University Policies
Student Conduct & Discipline
The University of Texas System and The University of Texas at Dallas have rules and
regulations for the orderly and efficient conduct of their business. It is the responsibility of
each student and each student organization to be knowledgeable about the rules and
regulations which govern student conduct and activities. General information on student
conduct and discipline is contained in the UTD publication, A to Z Guide, which is provided to
all registered students each academic year.
The University of Texas at Dallas administers student discipline within the procedures of
recognized and established due process. Procedures are defined and described in the Rules
and Regulations, Board of Regents, The University of Texas System, Part 1, Chapter VI,
Section 3, and in Title V, Rules on Student Services and Activities of the university’s
Handbook of Operating Procedures. Copies of these rules and regulations are available to
students in the Office of the Dean of Students, where staff members are available to assist
students in interpreting the rules and regulations (SU 1.602, 972/883-6391).

A student at the university neither loses the rights nor escapes the responsibilities of
citizenship. He or she is expected to obey federal, state, and local laws as well as the
Regents’ Rules, university regulations, and administrative rules. Students are subject to
discipline for violating the standards of conduct whether such conduct takes place on or off
campus, or whether civil or criminal penalties are also imposed for such conduct.
Academic Integrity
The faculty expects from its students a high level of responsibility and academic honesty.
Because the value of an academic degree depends upon the absolute integrity of the work
done by the student for that degree, it is imperative that a student demonstrate a high
standard of individual honor in his or her scholastic work.
Scholastic dishonesty includes, but is not limited to, statements, acts or omissions related to
applications for enrollment or the award of a degree, and/or the submission as one’s own work
or material that is not one’s own. As a general rule, scholastic dishonesty involves one of the
following acts: cheating, plagiarism, collusion and/or falsifying academic records. Students
suspected of academic dishonesty are subject to disciplinary proceedings.
Plagiarism, especially from the web, from portions of papers for other classes, and from any
other source is unacceptable and will be dealt with under the university’s policy on plagiarism
(see general catalog for details). This course will use the resources of turnitin.com, which
searches the web for possible plagiarism and is over 90% effective.
Email Use
The University of Texas at Dallas recognizes the value and efficiency of communication
between faculty/staff and students through electronic mail. At the same time, email raises
some issues concerning security and the identity of each individual in an email exchange.
The university encourages all official student email correspondence be sent only to a student’s
U.T. Dallas email address and that faculty and staff consider email from students official only if
it originates from a UTD student account. This allows the university to maintain a high degree
of confidence in the identity of all individual corresponding and the security of the transmitted
information. UTD furnishes each student with a free email account that is to be used in all
communication with university personnel. The Department of Information Resources at U.T.
Dallas provides a method for students to have their U.T. Dallas mail forwarded to other
accounts.
Withdrawal from Class
The administration of this institution has set deadlines for withdrawal of any college-level
courses. These dates and times are published in that semester's course catalog.
Administration procedures must be followed. It is the student's responsibility to handle
withdrawal requirements from any class. In other words, I cannot drop or withdraw any
student. You must do the proper paperwork to ensure that you will not receive a final grade of
"F" in a course if you choose not to attend the class once you are enrolled.
Student Grievance Procedures
Procedures for student grievances are found in Title V, Rules on Student Services and
Activities, of the university’s Handbook of Operating Procedures.

In attempting to resolve any student grievance regarding grades, evaluations, or other
fulfillments of academic responsibility, it is the obligation of the student first to make a serious
effort to resolve the matter with the instructor, supervisor, administrator, or committee with
whom the grievance originates (hereafter called “the respondent”). Individual faculty members
retain primary responsibility for assigning grades and evaluations. If the matter cannot be
resolved at that level, the grievance must be submitted in writing to the respondent with a
copy of the respondent’s School Dean. If the matter is not resolved by the written response
provided by the respondent, the student may submit a written appeal to the School Dean. If
the grievance is not resolved by the School Dean’s decision, the student may make a written
appeal to the Dean of Graduate or Undergraduate Education, and the deal will appoint and
convene an Academic Appeals Panel. The decision of the Academic Appeals Panel is final.
The results of the academic appeals process will be distributed to all involved parties.
Copies of these rules and regulations are available to students in the Office of the Dean of
Students, where staff members are available to assist students in interpreting the rules and
regulations.
Incomplete Grade Policy
As per university policy, incomplete grades will be granted only for work unavoidably missed
at the semester’s end and only if 70% of the course work has been completed. An incomplete
grade must be resolved within eight (8) weeks from the first day of the subsequent long
semester. If the required work to complete the course and to remove the incomplete grade is
not submitted by the specified deadline, the incomplete grade is changed automatically to a
grade of F.
Disability Services
The goal of Disability Services is to provide students with disabilities educational opportunities
equal to those of their non-disabled peers. Disability Services is located in room 1.610 in the
Student Union. Office hours are Monday and Thursday, 8:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m.; Tuesday and
Wednesday, 8:30 a.m. to 7:30 p.m.; and Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
The contact information for the Office of Disability Services is:

The University of Texas at Dallas, SU 22
PO Box 830688
Richardson, Texas 75083-0688
(972) 883-2098 (voice or TTY)
Essentially, the law requires that colleges and universities make those reasonable
adjustments necessary to eliminate discrimination on the basis of disability. For example, it
may be necessary to remove classroom prohibitions against tape recorders or animals (in the
case of dog guides) for students who are blind. Occasionally an assignment requirement may
be substituted (for example, a research paper versus an oral presentation for a student who is
hearing impaired). Classes enrolled students with mobility impairments may have to be
rescheduled in accessible facilities. The college or university may need to provide special
services such as registration, note-taking, or mobility assistance.
It is the student’s responsibility to notify his or her professors of the need for such an
accommodation. Disability Services provides students with letters to present to faculty

members to verify that the student has a disability and needs accommodations. Individuals
requiring special accommodation should contact the professor after class or during office
hours.
Religious Holy Days
The University of Texas at Dallas will excuse a student from class or other required activities
for the travel to and observance of a religious holy day for a religion whose places of worship
are exempt from property tax under Section 11.20, Tax Code, Texas Code Annotated.
The student is encouraged to notify the instructor or activity sponsor as soon as possible
regarding the absence, preferably in advance of the assignment. The student, so excused,
will be allowed to take the exam or complete the assignment within a reasonable time after the
absence: a period equal to the length of the absence, up to a maximum of one week. A
student who notifies the instructor and completes any missed exam or assignment may not be
penalized for the absence. A student who fails to complete the exam or assignment within the
prescribed period may receive a failing grade for that exam or assignment.
If a student or an instructor disagrees about the nature of the absence [i.e., for the purpose of
observing a religious holy day] or if there is similar disagreement about whether the student
has been given a reasonable time to complete any missed assignments or examinations,
either the student or the instructor may request a ruling from the chief executive officer of the
institution, or his or her designee. The chief executive officer or designee must take into
account the legislative intent of TEC 51.911(b), and the student and instructor will abide by the
decision of the chief executive officer or designee.
Off-Campus Instruction and Course Activities
Off-campus, out-of-state, and foreign instruction and activities are subject to state law and
University policies and procedures regarding travel and risk-related activities. Information
regarding these rules and regulations may be found at the website address given below.
Additional information is available from the office of the school dean.
(http://www.utdallas.edu/BusinessAffairs/Travel_Risk_Activities.htm)
These descriptions and timelines are subject to change at the discretion of the
Professor.
Top

UT Dallas Syllabus For Entp6385.0g1.10f Taught by Daniel Bochsler (dcb091000)

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

UT Dallas Syllabus For Entp6385.0g1.10f Taught by Daniel Bochsler (dcb091000)

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Course Syllabus

ENTP/BPS 6385-0G1, Entrepreneurial Business Strategies

| Course Info | Tech Requirements | Access & Navigation | Communications | Resources |

Course Number Section ENTP/BPS 6385-0G1

Professor Contact Information

About the Instructor

Course Pre-requisites, Co-requisites, and/or Other Restrictions

Course Syllabus Template updated on 9/3/2009 Page 1

Student Learning Objectives/Outcomes

Upon successful completion of this course, students will:

Required Textbooks and Materials

Course Syllabus Template updated on 9/3/2009 Page 2

Virtual Classroom Citizenship

Policy on Server Unavailability or Other Technical Difficulties

Course Syllabus Template updated on 9/3/2009 Page 3

Course Access and Navigation

Course Syllabus Template updated on 9/3/2009 Page 4

The following university resources are available to students:

UTD Distance Learning: http://www.utdallas.edu/oee/distance/students/cstudents.htm

Course Syllabus Template updated on 9/3/2009 Page 5

Scaled Score Letter Equivalent

Evaluations of case analyses will utilize the following general format:

Course Syllabus Template updated on 9/3/2009 Page 6

NAME: (per the University records)

Course Syllabus Template updated on 9/3/2009 Page 7

Rules for Participation in Discussion:

Course Syllabus Template updated on 9/3/2009 Page 8

Case Analysis Guidelines

Discussion Questions for Case Analyses

Case: Scott Cook and Intuit (HBS 9-396-282)

Course Syllabus Template updated on 9/3/2009 Page 9

Case: TIVO (HBS 9-501-038)

Case: Compaq Computer 1995 IVEY (9A95A011)

Case: Browser Wars 1994-1998 (HBS 9-798-094)

Course Syllabus Template updated on 9/3/2009 Page 10

Case: Disruptive Technology a Heartbeat Away: Ecton, Inc. (HBS 9-699-018)

Case: Charles Schwab and Co. Inc. in 1999 (SM-35)

Course Syllabus Template updated on 9/3/2009 Page 11

Case: Firefly Network (A) (BSBSU OIT-22A)

Case: Handspring – “Partnerships” (SM-79 (A))

Case: Staples: A Year in the Life of a Startup (HBS 9-800-241)

Course Syllabus Template updated on 9/3/2009 Page 12

Case: Vinod Khosla and Sun Microsystems (A) (HBS 9-390-049)

Assignment submission instructions

Course Syllabus Template updated on 9/3/2009 Page 13

Turnitin eLearning Assignment Submission Instructions

Course Syllabus Template updated on 9/3/2009 Page 14

WEEK/ TOPIC/LECTURE READINGS/ ASSESSMENT / DUE DATE

Unit 0 Course Access and Self- Complete Self

Unit 1 ENTREPRENEURIAL  Bhide, Amar. Form or join a 29 Aug

Unit 2 PERSPECTIVES ON  Porter, Michael E. 5 Sept

Course Syllabus Template updated on 9/3/2009 Page 15

Unit 3 PERSPECTIVES ON  Hamel, Gary. 12 Sept

Unit 4 UNDERSTANDING THE  Moore, Geoffrey Case 19 Sept

Course Syllabus Template updated on 9/3/2009 Page 16

Case Study: Scott

Unit 5 WHY BUSINESS MODELS  Magretta: Why 26 Sept

Unit 6 EARLY STAGE  Kim, W. Chan Case 3 Oct

Course Syllabus Template updated on 9/3/2009 Page 17

Unit 7 EARLY STAGE  Moore, Geoffrey Case 10 Oct

Unit 8 GROWTH STAGE  Kim, W. Chan Case 17 Oct

Course Syllabus Template updated on 9/3/2009 Page 18

Unit 9 GROWTH STAGE  Bower, Joseph L. Case 24 Oct