WGU C980 Hackensack Innovation Assessment Worksheet
Assignment 2 | 2026 Latest Update with Complete Solution
Instructions:
In order to assess the potential impact of an innovation (in items 4 and 5 below), a brief
analysis should first be completed that includes a description of the innovation,
determination of the type of innovation, and Herzlinger’s six-factor analysis (items 1–3
below).
1. Describe the innovation. Describe the innovation and the problem it addresses.
The technology produced by HIMSS, the mHealth tablet, allows providers at Hackensack
Alliance ACO to monitor and treat patients who are chronically ill in an outpatient setting.
Patients living with chronic illness are frequently admitted and readmitted to hospitals for
treatment. The mHealth tablet allows not only the provider to help the patient in an
outpatient setting but it allows the patient to acknowledge their health issues and become
responsible for their own care too. The readmission rates for this chronically ill population
is a great cost to hospitals and if the patient can monitor and treat their symptoms early,
they can forgo readmittance to the hospital and save the hospital in readmission costs.
2. Determine the type of innovation. Determine and justify whether the innovation is
sustaining or disruptive.
The mHealth tablet is a sustaining innovation. HIMSS implemented a new program on an
existing piece of technology that created improvements in the healthcare system. The
overall goal of Hackensack Alliance ACO of lowering readmission rates was met and
consequently the patients enhanced their health.
3. Analyze the innovation. Complete a six-factor analysis of the innovation (based on
Herzlinger’s “Innovating in Health Care—Framework”).
The consumer is a friend in the Hackensack
case study as this is the population the
mHealth tablet was designed for. They have
significant power to help the innovation as
Structure they use it as it is designed and follow the
Who is a friend? A foe? How much power do program. They could potentially hurt the
they have to help or hurt the new venture? new innovation if they decide it isn’t for
them. In the end, the consumer (patient) is
a friend as they are the driving force behind
the need for the innovation (Herzlinger,
2013). Foe: other potential competition
1
, Financing The Hackensack Alliance ACO spends a
How is the innovation reimbursed? Does the good deal of money on chronically ill
innovation use appropriate sources for patients, in regards to their readmission
financing? What are those sources? expenditures. By decreasing the
readmission rates, it ultimately saves the
hospital monetarily (Hackensack ACO,
2014). Hackensack used outside funding to
test the product on a control group and
once the innovation was deemed viable
they took over the financing as an
organization. Third party payors such as
HRS and the Verizon grant funded the initial
program of the Hackensack case study
(Hackensack ACO, 2014).
Each variable has a hand in how it can/will
affect public policy in this innovation. The
impact that the regulatory and legislative
process dynamics can be great especially
Public Policy with technology in healthcare (Herzlinger,
How relevant is each variable (political 2013). The mHealth tablet’s platform helped
environment, stakeholder dynamics, the providers manage chronically ill patients
regulatory and legislative process dynamics, in a cost-effective way. There are
and biases of key policy makers) in directing regulations that the HIMMS program must
public policy for the problem the innovation operate by not only to protect the providers
addresses? but also the patients. The biases of key
policy makers allowed for the Verizon grant
to assist in funding the pilot group for the
case study therefore their part is relevant as
well.
The production and use of the tablet has
been well established in the realm of
technology. There is a good relationship
between the supply of this technology and
the demand from providers as well as the
patient population targeted in the
Technology
Hackensack Case Study. The competitors
When is the opportune time to invest in the
are other organizations working on a similar
technology? Who are the competitors?
project as the mHealth tablet and others
who hear of this innovation and begin the
implementation process of it into their
hospitals. As Herzlinger would state, the
“infrastructure needed to support the
innovation” (2013, p.3). is apparent.
The patient is responsible for inputting
information daily and tracking their health
Consumers trends. This empowers the patient with
How does the innovation address having knowledge of their condition and
consumers’ increased sense of signs and symptoms. They are able to
empowerment and lack of leisure time? interact with their provider through the
tablet which saves them significant waiting
room time (Herzlinger, 2013).
2
Assignment 2 | 2026 Latest Update with Complete Solution
Instructions:
In order to assess the potential impact of an innovation (in items 4 and 5 below), a brief
analysis should first be completed that includes a description of the innovation,
determination of the type of innovation, and Herzlinger’s six-factor analysis (items 1–3
below).
1. Describe the innovation. Describe the innovation and the problem it addresses.
The technology produced by HIMSS, the mHealth tablet, allows providers at Hackensack
Alliance ACO to monitor and treat patients who are chronically ill in an outpatient setting.
Patients living with chronic illness are frequently admitted and readmitted to hospitals for
treatment. The mHealth tablet allows not only the provider to help the patient in an
outpatient setting but it allows the patient to acknowledge their health issues and become
responsible for their own care too. The readmission rates for this chronically ill population
is a great cost to hospitals and if the patient can monitor and treat their symptoms early,
they can forgo readmittance to the hospital and save the hospital in readmission costs.
2. Determine the type of innovation. Determine and justify whether the innovation is
sustaining or disruptive.
The mHealth tablet is a sustaining innovation. HIMSS implemented a new program on an
existing piece of technology that created improvements in the healthcare system. The
overall goal of Hackensack Alliance ACO of lowering readmission rates was met and
consequently the patients enhanced their health.
3. Analyze the innovation. Complete a six-factor analysis of the innovation (based on
Herzlinger’s “Innovating in Health Care—Framework”).
The consumer is a friend in the Hackensack
case study as this is the population the
mHealth tablet was designed for. They have
significant power to help the innovation as
Structure they use it as it is designed and follow the
Who is a friend? A foe? How much power do program. They could potentially hurt the
they have to help or hurt the new venture? new innovation if they decide it isn’t for
them. In the end, the consumer (patient) is
a friend as they are the driving force behind
the need for the innovation (Herzlinger,
2013). Foe: other potential competition
1
, Financing The Hackensack Alliance ACO spends a
How is the innovation reimbursed? Does the good deal of money on chronically ill
innovation use appropriate sources for patients, in regards to their readmission
financing? What are those sources? expenditures. By decreasing the
readmission rates, it ultimately saves the
hospital monetarily (Hackensack ACO,
2014). Hackensack used outside funding to
test the product on a control group and
once the innovation was deemed viable
they took over the financing as an
organization. Third party payors such as
HRS and the Verizon grant funded the initial
program of the Hackensack case study
(Hackensack ACO, 2014).
Each variable has a hand in how it can/will
affect public policy in this innovation. The
impact that the regulatory and legislative
process dynamics can be great especially
Public Policy with technology in healthcare (Herzlinger,
How relevant is each variable (political 2013). The mHealth tablet’s platform helped
environment, stakeholder dynamics, the providers manage chronically ill patients
regulatory and legislative process dynamics, in a cost-effective way. There are
and biases of key policy makers) in directing regulations that the HIMMS program must
public policy for the problem the innovation operate by not only to protect the providers
addresses? but also the patients. The biases of key
policy makers allowed for the Verizon grant
to assist in funding the pilot group for the
case study therefore their part is relevant as
well.
The production and use of the tablet has
been well established in the realm of
technology. There is a good relationship
between the supply of this technology and
the demand from providers as well as the
patient population targeted in the
Technology
Hackensack Case Study. The competitors
When is the opportune time to invest in the
are other organizations working on a similar
technology? Who are the competitors?
project as the mHealth tablet and others
who hear of this innovation and begin the
implementation process of it into their
hospitals. As Herzlinger would state, the
“infrastructure needed to support the
innovation” (2013, p.3). is apparent.
The patient is responsible for inputting
information daily and tracking their health
Consumers trends. This empowers the patient with
How does the innovation address having knowledge of their condition and
consumers’ increased sense of signs and symptoms. They are able to
empowerment and lack of leisure time? interact with their provider through the
tablet which saves them significant waiting
room time (Herzlinger, 2013).
2
