Discussion questions Essay

Do you think Kappmeyer should sign the proposal, and why? What pushed USS to stay with conventional engine room? My recommendation based on analysis of the case and understanding the basic nature of disruptive technologies, and their impact on the general industry is that Kappmeyer should not sign the proposal. The main reason for that is USS is tying itself to an existing, but dying business organization model and technology. While this plan may make sense in the short-term, it does not have long-run sustainability. The market has already indicated that it is changing, adapting to minimills, and this trend would likely continue.As minimill technology becomes more sophisticated, their quality and other disadvantages would strike down and they would start competing with integrated manufacturing even in the high-end markets. Unfortunately for USS, there is no silver bullet. Since USS is already invested in the market, they will have to go through a difficult, and expensive, change , or they will end up perishing as the industry changes around them. USS current decided to stay with conventional continuous casting technology only if because they were looking at the shorter-term future, and was not willing to take the financial hit and risk associated with a rude(a) disruptive technology. Additionally, they were tying themselves to the requirements of the current customers, and ignoring potentially new users for the future.Did USS team get the right answer to the disparage question? What if, rather than whether USS should install CSP in Mon Valley, Kappmeyer has asked whether USS should invest in or participate in this technology? Would you have answered that question differently than you did when the problem was framed as Mon Valley issue? What should USSs near technological move be? Should USS take another long shot to leapfrog ahead of Nucor? Or should it get on the ground neck-to-neck with Nucor, employing a viable commercial technology as soon as possib le incrementally improving CSP?Readings Christensen (1995). Disruptive technologies Catching the wave, HBR