More from the Author

• Case | HBS Case Collection | January 2018 (Revised March 2018)

  ZappRx

  Jeffrey J. Bussgang and Olivia Hull

  In October 2015, ZappRx founder Zoe Barry is deciding between two business models for her health technology start-up. Her product, a software application that aims to expedite the prescription fulfillment process for patients with rare diseases, has attracted interest from specialty drug manufacturers who wish to build an exclusive platform for patients taking their medications. But Barry, against the advice of her management team, is considering an alternative business model, which would open the platform up to all manufacturers in a given disease area. Instead of financing product development through individual contracts, the comprehensive platform would be free to doctors and pharma alike and financed via an aggressive fundraising strategy and through the sale of the prescription data collected on the app. Barry is willing to take the risk, but her management team is staunchly opposed. Which path should ZappRx take? The case is a window into the early go-to-market and business model decisions that an entrepreneur must make, in this case in the face of pushback from her own management team. The case also provides a detailed picture of the specialty pharmaceutical industry and challenges students to think about target customer identification and talent management in a start-up environment.

  Keywords: Speciality Drugs; Hub Services; business model; Pivot; Speciality Prescriptions; Health Care and Treatment; Customization and Personalization; Online Technology; Business Model; Decision Choices and Conditions; Pharmaceutical Industry; Massachusetts;

  Citation:

  Bussgang, Jeffrey J., and Olivia Hull. "ZappRx." Harvard Business School Case 818-001, January 2018. (Revised March 2018.)  View Details

  CiteView DetailsEducatorsPurchase

  Related

• Case | HBS Case Collection | March 2014 (Revised March 2018)

  Red Bull (A)

  Eric Van den Steen and Carin-Isabel Knoop

  Despite facing giants like Coke, Pepsi, and Budweiser—with obvious potential sources of competitive advantage—Red Bull had established itself as the U.S. market leader in energy drinks. By 2008, however, Red Bull's dominance was challenged as Monster drinks surpassed it in volume. The case considers judo strategy both from the perspective of a small player (when up-start Red Bull faces Coke, Pepsi, and Bud) and as a large player (when market leader Red Bull faces up-start Monster).

  Keywords: Judo strategy; Judo economics; sustainable competitive advantage; imitation; Strategy; Competitive Strategy; Competitive Advantage; Market Entry and Exit; Food and Beverage Industry; United States;

  Citation:

  Van den Steen, Eric, and Carin-Isabel Knoop. "Red Bull (A)." Harvard Business School Case 714-401, March 2014. (Revised March 2018.)  View Details

  CiteView DetailsEducatorsPurchase

  Related

• Supplement | HBS Case Collection | March 2018

  McKinsey & Company: Early Career Choices (B)

  Prithwiraj Choudhury, Carin-Isabel Knoop and Nathaniel Schwalb

  The (B) case outlines the choices made by the associates in real life and the consequences of such choices.

  Keywords: Early Career Experiences; Career Progression; experiences; Personal Development and Career; Decisions; Outcome or Result; Consulting Industry;

  Citation:

  Choudhury, Prithwiraj, Carin-Isabel Knoop, and Nathaniel Schwalb. "McKinsey & Company: Early Career Choices (B)." Harvard Business School Supplement 618-038, March 2018.  View Details

  CiteView DetailsPurchase

  Related