Question: please read the case and answer the question in (500 word minimum) with perspective of innovation management. what is wrong with introducing an innovation product
please read the case and answer the question in (500 word minimum) with perspective of innovation management.
what is wrong with introducing an innovation product to a market that was not demanding it ?
please answer in details and it should be as an " introduction, content, conclusion"
** please do not copy other answer from chegg.

Tyvek and "Cold Roofs" in the United Kingdom DuPont's initial success in Europe was in the roof, not the wall. Stone or block walls precluded the use of Tyvek in most systems, but most European houses included insulated attics to extend living space. Tyvek was included in this "warm" roofing system for the same water- management and energy-efficient purposes that it served in U.S. wall systems. That trend applied to most countries, but not the United Kingdom. Most UK walls were stone, like those in the rest of Europe. However, UK roofing systems were similar to U.S. systems in that the roofs were not insulated (or "cold). In the "cold roof design, insulation is placed in the ceiling between the joists (as in a U.S. home) to retain heat in the house. Bitumen felt is layered under the shingles (usually clay or slate) to keep water out. Water vapor generated inside the home through normal use would be trapped in the cold roof since the vapor could not permeate the bitumen felt roof liner. Cold temperatures in the roof would condense the vapor to water, producing the potential for mold and other damage. To avoid condensation and mold accumulation in buildings, construction firms crafted cold roofs with vents on the ridge and sides of the roof that allowed for cross-ventilation and helped moisture escape. See Exhibit 4 for an illustration Construction using cross-ventilation had become the norm in the UK construction market. With the vents in place, there was no reason for builders to switch from bitumen felt to Tyvek, especially when Tyvek was priced significantly higher than felt. Despite being two to five times better at water holdout than felt, Tyvek was an unnecessary expense in addressing the traditional cold roof. The marketplace did not need, nor was it demanding, a more effective solution. As a result, Tyvek sales stagnated