ENT-435 – Proposing, Evaluating, and Selecting an Innovation
During Phase 1, each individual will submit their own idea for an innovation along with a model they find useful for evaluating its merits. Each team member is responsible for completing research on various models. While there are several models in circulation for evaluating innovations, such as The Lean StartUp Plan, NOMMAR, SNIFF, and the linear and mental models of innovation, innovators should not feel constrained by any particular model. Feel free to borrow elements from multiple models to develop one that would work best to most effectively evaluate your own innovation.
BUY A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE
Teams will then review all of the submissions and choose the most promising idea to pursue. The idea should be selected by application of one of the evaluation models submitted by team members. You will then write a report of 1,500-2,500 words that describes the team’s selection process and identifies the final choice ENT-435 – Proposing, Evaluating, and Selecting an Innovation. The report must contain the following components:
1. A one- or two-paragraph summary of each team member’s idea, a description of the model used to evaluate the idea, and the results of the evaluation. Specifically, the evaluation should identify the merits, drawbacks, and challenges associated with the idea.
2. Identification of the selected idea for the project accompanied by a description of the model used to evaluate the idea. Include the results of the evaluation, which will serve as the justification for the team’s selection. Preliminarily forecast the most significant challenges that could impede the development of the selected idea.
3. A project plan that summarizes the roles or tasks assigned to each team member that must be accomplished to complete Phase 2 of the project due in Module 6.
4. In-text citations from at least five reputable secondary sources. Each person on the team must contribute an article from the research that was completed on innovation implementation/evaluation models. ENT-435 – Proposing, Evaluating, and Selecting an Innovation.
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.
My idea
Transition shades/windows
Shades/windows should change their opacity based on the strength of the sunlight so that rooms stay at optimal brightness for consistent, optimal temperature control, visibility, etc.
Ebone
Intelligent speed limit signs
Intelligent speed limit signs – Smart Speed limit signs: Speed limit signs should change depending on road conditions, traffic and/or the time of day. ENT-435 – Proposing, Evaluating, and Selecting an Innovation.
Champagne
To create a warehouse where people are able to use a kiosk to bring clothes forward to try on in person before purchasing them. This will eliminate the chaos of having to shuffle through clothes that aren’t in the right section. Also, you will be able to narrow down what you are looking in seconds versus minutes or even hours.
Daniel
School/speed zone notifications
School/speed zone notifications from your smart device to inform you that the speed limit changed or that you entered a school zone
This website is the list of ideas that we got them from.:
http://heineventures.com/new-business-and-product-ideas-list/
The idea we choose is Intelligent speed limit signs by Ebone.
| Course Code | Class Code | Assignment Title | Total Points | |||
| ENT-435 | ENT-435-XC0827W1 | CLC: Phase 1-Proposing, Evaluating, and Selecting an Innovation | 130.0 | |||
| Criteria | Percentage | Unsatisfactory (0.00%) | Less than Satisfactory (65.00%) | Satisfactory (75.00%) | Good (85.00%) | Excellent (100.00%) |
| Content | 70.0% | |||||
| Content Subject Knowledge: As a group, research and describe product or service tool, methodology, and model; select model; identify and explore product or service; create a description of product or service. | 40.0% | Paper content omits the requirements stated in the assignment criteria. Innovation idea is outlined poorly and lacks research. ENT-435 – Proposing, Evaluating, and Selecting an Innovation | Paper content omits some requirements stated in the assignment criteria. Innovation lacks supporting evidence and research. | Paper content is complete. All assignment requirements are met. Innovation is outlined and supported with research. | Paper content is comprehensive and accurate. All assignment criteria are met. Innovation is explained and supported with relevant research. | Paper content is thoughtfully evaluated and accurate. All assignment criteria are met. Innovation is explained, analyzed, and supported with timely research and ideas. |
| Content Comprehension | 30.0% | Content is incomplete or omits most of the requirements stated in the assignment criteria | Content is incomplete or omits some requirements stated in the assignment criteria. | Content is complete, but could use additional development with specific detail. Research is inadequate in relevance, quality, and/or timeliness. | Content is comprehensive and accurate, and definitions are clearly stated. Research is adequate, timely, and relevant, and addresses all of the issues stated in the assignment criteria. | Content is comprehensive, accurate, and persuasive; definitions are clearly stated. Research is adequate, timely, and relevant, and addresses all of the issues stated in the assignment criteria. |
| Participation and Effectiveness | 20.0% | |||||
| Participation as Evident in the CLC Discussion Forum | 15.0% | Participation is not evident. | Posts do not encourage further discussion and dialogue with other students in the class. Posts are critical, argumentative, or confrontational. Individual group contributions are submitted extremely late, affecting the group?s ability to accomplish a successful task. Cooperative teamwork is not evident. | Most posts encourage further discussion and dialogue with other students in the class. Posts are professional and exhibit a positive attitude that is respectful of others. Individual contributions are submitted but not on time. Cooperative teamwork is exhibited but limited. | All posts encourage further discussion and dialogue with other students in the class. Posts are professional and exhibit a positive attitude that is respectful of others. Individual contributions are provided by the designated timeline. Cooperative teamwork is exhibited but not consistently. | All posts encourage further discussion and extensive dialogue with other students in the class. Posts demonstrate a critical analysis of classmates? postings and provide relevant and constructive feedback. Individual contributions are provided before the designated timeline. Cooperative teamwork is exhibited in order to complete the project. |
| Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) | 5.0% | Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used. | Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, and/or word choice are present. | Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used. | Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used. | Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. |
| Format | 10.0% | |||||
| Research Citations (In-text citations for paraphrasing and direct quotes, and reference page listing and formatting, as appropriate to assignment and style) | 10.0% | No reference page is included. No citations are used. | Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently used. ENT-435 – Proposing, Evaluating, and Selecting an Innovation | Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented, although some errors may be present. | Reference page is present and fully inclusive of all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct. | In-text citations and a reference page are complete and correct. The documentation of cited sources is free of error. |
| Total Weightage | 100% |