| Course | ENT 588 Innovation and Design: Capstone Project (ENT/588) |
|---|---|
| Week | 3 |
| Paper type | Graduate prototyping and testing report |
| Length | about 1,166 words, 4 double-spaced pages plus title page and references |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | University of Phoenix |
| Program | MBA |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for ENT 588 Week 3
Fix-It-Fast, Trip Kits and Trade-Up: Prototyping and Testing a Circular Gear Program
[Student Name]
University of Phoenix
ENT/588: Innovation and Design: Capstone Project
Week 3 Assignment
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
Timberline Outfitters, its customers, tests and results are composites written for a model paper.
Week 2's design thinking work at Timberline produced three concepts for a circular gear program: Trade-Up, which swaps old gear for store credit and resells it after inspection; Trip Kits, which lends out premium shells and packs for a trip at a time; and Fix-It-Fast, which mends broken zippers, seams and buckles while customers wait. This paper reports how each was prototyped and tested.
Experimentation as a Method
Camuffo et al. (2020) ran a randomized controlled trial with early-stage entrepreneurs, training one group to frame their ideas as theories, form hypotheses and test them rigorously and comparing it with a control group that received standard training. The trained entrepreneurs were more likely to pivot or abandon ideas when evidence warranted and achieved better outcomes, suggesting that a scientific approach improves entrepreneurial decisions. Ries (2011) described the build-measure-learn loop, in which teams build a minimum viable product to test their riskiest assumptions and use validated learning to decide what to do next. Elsbach and Stigliani (2018) reviewed research linking design thinking and organizational culture and noted that prototyping and testing work best in cultures that accept experimentation and learning from failure, which is why Week 1's leadership changes matter.
Hypotheses and Measures
For each concept, the team wrote the assumptions that would sink it if false and set success thresholds before testing.
Trade-Up. Hypothesis 1: owners will bring in used Timberline gear for credit; threshold, 150 items in two weekends at two stores. Hypothesis 2: buyers will purchase certified used gear at 50 to 60 percent of new price; threshold, 30 percent of items sold within four weeks.
Trip Kits. Hypothesis: young adventurers will pay $65 to $90 for a one-week rental of a premium shell and pack; threshold, 40 bookings in three weeks with no paid advertising beyond social posts.
Fix-It-Fast. Hypothesis: customers with damaged gear will come to a store for same-day repair and pay modest fees; threshold, 60 repairs over three weekends at one store, with satisfaction above 4 of 5.
Prototype 1: Trade-Up
The team ran trade-in weekends at two Denver-area stores, offering store credit of 20 to 30 percent of original price. Staff inspected and graded items. For resale, the team built a simple web page listing graded items with photos and a "Certified Pre-Owned" label, without a full e-commerce system; orders were processed by hand.
Results: 238 items traded in, well above the threshold. But only 19 percent of listed items sold within four weeks, below the 30 percent target. Buyers asked for more sizes and more photos of wear; several said prices were too close to sale prices on new gear.
Prototype 2: Trip Kits
The team created a web form describing rental kits and promoted it on Timberline's social accounts. Staff hand-delivered kits from the flagship store and collected them after trips, a concierge test requiring no software or warehouse.
Results: 56 bookings in three weeks, above the threshold, with 71 percent of renters under 30. Two-thirds said they would rent again; 12 asked about buying the rented item at a discount. Cleaning and inspection took about 40 minutes per kit, longer than planned.
Fifty-six renters in three weeks, most of them under 30, reached exactly the customers Timberline had been losing.
Prototype 3: Fix-It-Fast
A technician set up at the flagship store counter for three weekends with common parts. Customers brought in jackets and packs for zipper, seam and buckle repairs at $10 to $35.
Results: 74 repairs, above the threshold, with satisfaction of 4.7. Unexpectedly, about a quarter of repair customers bought something while waiting, adding about $3,900 in sales over three weekends. Several lapsed customers said the fast repair changed their view of the brand.
What the Customers Said
Short follow-up calls added detail the numbers missed. Renters liked the hand delivery but said they would happily pick up kits from a store to save the fee. Several trade-in customers said they cared less about the credit than about knowing their old jacket would be used, which suggests the program's story matters as much as its price. Repair customers repeatedly mentioned speed: "I came in at noon and had my jacket back before I finished lunch." These comments point to which features to keep as the concepts grow and which can be simplified.
Costs Observed
The tests also measured costs. Trade-in grading took about six minutes per item, workable at store scale. Rental cleaning and inspection, at 40 minutes per kit, would cost about $14 per rental in labor, leaving a thin margin at $65 but a healthy one at $90. The repair technician completed about four repairs an hour; at average fees of $22, the counter covered its labor and parts with room to spare, before counting add-on sales.
Interpreting the Evidence
Trip Kits and Fix-It-Fast passed their thresholds and reached the intended customers. Trade-Up passed on supply but failed on demand at the tested prices and presentation. The tests also revealed operational costs, especially rental cleaning time, that would affect economics at scale.
Decisions
Fix-It-Fast: persevere and expand to three flagship stores, measuring repair volume, satisfaction and add-on sales.
Trip Kits: persevere and build simple booking software and a cleaning workflow; test pricing at $75 and $95.
Trade-Up: pivot. Keep trade-ins, but route certified used gear into the Trip Kits rental fleet and an in-store used rack rather than a separate website, testing whether in-person shopping sells more.
Next Round of Tests
The next round runs for eight weeks. Trip Kits will test store pickup against delivery and two price points, measuring bookings, margin per rental and repeat rates. Fix-It-Fast will run at three stores to see whether volumes and add-on sales hold outside the flagship. The redesigned Trade-Up will place certified used gear on a rack in two stores and in the rental fleet, measuring sell-through and how many rental customers ask to buy their kit. Each test again has thresholds set in advance and a date for the decision.
How the Culture Responded
The tests also changed how people inside Timberline talked about new ideas. Store staff volunteered for the repair counter, and two product designers asked to join the rental team. Leaders who had dismissed repair as off-brand saw lines at the counter. Elsbach and Stigliani's point that prototyping thrives where experimentation is accepted worked in both directions here: visible, low-cost tests made experimentation easier to accept.
What the Tests Could Not Show
Small tests in Denver cannot predict demand in other markets, long-term repeat behavior or effects on new gear sales. Week 5's scaling plan will address these.
Conclusion
Treating each concept as a set of hypotheses and testing it cheaply gave Timberline clear evidence within six weeks. Two concepts passed and one needs redesign. Research on scientific entrepreneurial decision making supports acting on these results rather than on enthusiasm, and the next round of tests will refine pricing and operations before financing is sought in Week 4.
References
Camuffo, A., Cordova, A., Gambardella, A., & Spina, C. (2020). A scientific approach to entrepreneurial decision making: Evidence from a randomized control trial. Management Science, 66(2), 564-586. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2018.3249
Elsbach, K. D., & Stigliani, I. (2018). Design thinking and organizational culture: A review and framework for future research. Journal of Management, 44(6), 2274-2306. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206317744252
Ries, E. (2011). The lean startup: How today's entrepreneurs use continuous innovation to create radically successful businesses. Crown Business.
What the ENT 588 Week 3 instructions ask
The third ENT 588 paper focuses on building and testing prototypes. Students are often asked to explain the purpose of prototyping, choose prototype types such as storyboards, mock-ups, landing pages, pilots or concierge tests, design tests with hypotheses and measures, run or describe the tests and interpret results to decide whether to pivot, persevere or stop. Some versions ask for a minimum viable product. Base the prototypes on concepts from earlier weeks, state what each test was meant to learn, report results honestly, including failures, and cite research on experimentation and innovation in APA. End with the decision the evidence supports and the next round of tests.
How this ENT 588 Week 3 example is built
Our model paper treats each concept as a set of hypotheses. Research comparing entrepreneurs trained to use a scientific approach, forming hypotheses and testing them, with a control group found that the trained group made better decisions about when to pivot or stop. Trade-Up is tested with a trade-in event at two stores and a mock certified resale page; Trip Kits with a concierge rental, staff hand-delivering shells and packs to 40 renters booked through a simple web form; Fix-It-Fast with a technician at a store counter for three weekends. Results: trade-ins exceeded targets but resale buyers were fewer than expected; rentals booked out with strong repeat interest; repairs drew lines and sales of new gear rose. The paper recommends developing Trip Kits and Fix-It-Fast now and redesigning Trade-Up.
ENT 588 Week 3 grading rubric: where the points go
Graduate graders reward prototyping treated as disciplined experimentation. Strong papers state hypotheses and success measures before testing, choose low-cost prototypes that can produce clear evidence and report results with numbers, including disappointing ones. Credit goes to interpreting results honestly, to decisions to pivot, persevere or stop that follow from evidence and to plans for the next round of tests. Graders also value research on experimentation and attention to what tests cannot show. Graders also look for operating lessons, such as time and cost per unit, recorded alongside customer results. Specific results and APA citations of peer-reviewed sources complete a strong paper.
ENT 588 Week 3 help: mistakes to avoid
Prototyping papers often describe building a polished version and asking people whether they like it. Instead, test the riskiest assumption as cheaply as possible and measure behavior, such as bookings or payments. Another frequent gap is running tests without success criteria set in advance, which invites reading results favorably. Set thresholds first. Students also hide failed tests; report them, since they save money and time. Some papers ignore operational lessons, such as how long tasks took or what broke. Record them. Finally, state the decision each test supports and what you will test next. A tutor can help you write testable hypotheses for each concept and choose thresholds you would accept in advance.
Related ENT 588 sample papers
Other ENT 588 week samples
- ENT 588 Week 1: Leading Innovation
- ENT 588 Week 2: Applying Design Thinking
- ENT 588 Week 4: Financing Innovation
- ENT 588 Week 5: Planning to Scale
- ENT 588 Week 6: Capstone Innovation Proposal
More MBA sample papers
- ECO 535 Week 3: Pricing Information Goods
- ENT 527 Week 3: Assessing Opportunities
- FIN 571 Week 3: Valuing a Business
- FIN 591 Week 3: Debt and Equity Financing
ENT 588 Week 3 questions, answered
What does ENT 588 Week 3 usually cover?
It usually covers building and testing prototypes: hypotheses, low-cost prototype types, test design and measures and deciding whether to pivot, persevere or stop based on results.
Where can I find a free ENT 588 Week 3 sample paper?
The ENT 588 Week 3 report on testing three circular gear prototypes is above, complete and free.
What is a concierge test?
A prototype in which the team delivers a service manually to a small number of customers before building systems, to learn whether people want it and what it really takes.
Why set success criteria before testing a prototype?
So results are judged against a standard chosen in advance, reducing the temptation to interpret ambiguous evidence in favor of a preferred idea.
What does it mean to pivot?
To change a key element of a concept, such as the customer, offer or business model, based on evidence that the current version will not work.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official University of Phoenix document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
Request this one custom, free · All ENT 588 week samples · All courses