CASELET-4: Caveats to 'Crossing the Chasm' In the context of success and failure stories of early or late movers in crossing the chasm with their unique customer value propositions, two CIOs (Chief Innovation Officers) had a heated debate and a quintessential excerpt from their conversation is as follows: Chief Innovation Officer (Siemens Healthineers): "Notwithstanding great customer value propositions (CVPs), none of the Pfizer's Exubera or GE's Mac 400 (ECG) or Novelis beverage cans or EMI's CAT scanner could survive at the market place. Among these, the former two could not cross the chasm while the latter two were able to do so. That way, the last two should have been proclaimed as sizzlers. However, all the four are adjudged as fizzlers. In light of all these, going by a fortiori reasoning, no firm, so far could even dare to contemplate bringing out dual disruption in its CVP, as such a supra-normal goal is seen as obviously utopian and hence impractical". Chief Innovation Officer (Carrier Aircon): "Ultra-early firms like Philips (in the HDTV industry) and Sony (in the e-reader industry) have seen fathoms of failure while ultra-late firms like Intuit (in the personal accounting software industry) and Google (in the search engine industry) have experienced summits of success. All these clearly prove that there are no specific early mover advantages (plums) or particular late mover disadvantages (crumbs) to firms in general".

What is your take on this whole episode? Indicate and vindicate your viewpoint with due support from pertinent sizzler and fizzler benchmarks, if any.