精益假设与有效承诺:划分科学与创业方法的综合框架

IF 9.3 1区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS Journal of Management Pub Date : 2024-03-27 DOI:10.1177/01492063241236445
Saras D. Sarasvathy
{"title":"精益假设与有效承诺:划分科学与创业方法的综合框架","authors":"Saras D. Sarasvathy","doi":"10.1177/01492063241236445","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recently, there is increasing interest in building theories that offer actionable guidance to the practice of entrepreneurship. Here I present a general theoretical framework, called CAVE, for understanding, assessing, and enhancing existing tools that offer such guidance. The framework encompasses a two-dimensional space with prediction and control as its axes. The CAVE framework accommodates a wide variety of extant practical tools as well as relevant concepts from psychology and economics. Specifically, I compare and contrast effectuation with lean startup within this framework. Whereas lean startup centers around hypothesis testing, effectuation focuses on cocreative commitments from self-selecting stakeholders. In other words, the former takes markets as exogenous, while the latter explicates how they can be made endogenous and why that matters. More generally, I show how these differences connect with and delineate the scientific method from the entrepreneurial method.","PeriodicalId":54212,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":9.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Lean Hypotheses and Effectual Commitments: An Integrative Framework Delineating the Methods of Science and Entrepreneurship\",\"authors\":\"Saras D. Sarasvathy\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/01492063241236445\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Recently, there is increasing interest in building theories that offer actionable guidance to the practice of entrepreneurship. Here I present a general theoretical framework, called CAVE, for understanding, assessing, and enhancing existing tools that offer such guidance. The framework encompasses a two-dimensional space with prediction and control as its axes. The CAVE framework accommodates a wide variety of extant practical tools as well as relevant concepts from psychology and economics. Specifically, I compare and contrast effectuation with lean startup within this framework. Whereas lean startup centers around hypothesis testing, effectuation focuses on cocreative commitments from self-selecting stakeholders. In other words, the former takes markets as exogenous, while the latter explicates how they can be made endogenous and why that matters. More generally, I show how these differences connect with and delineate the scientific method from the entrepreneurial method.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54212,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Management\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063241236445\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063241236445","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

最近,人们对建立能为创业实践提供可操作指导的理论越来越感兴趣。在此,我提出了一个名为 CAVE 的总体理论框架,用于理解、评估和改进提供此类指导的现有工具。该框架包含一个以预测和控制为轴心的二维空间。CAVE 框架包含多种现有实用工具以及心理学和经济学的相关概念。具体而言,我将在此框架内对效应化与精益创业进行比较和对比。精益创业以假设检验为中心,而效应化则侧重于自我选择的利益相关者的共同创造性承诺。换句话说,前者将市场视为外生因素,而后者则解释了如何使市场成为内生因素,以及为什么这很重要。更广泛地说,我将展示这些差异如何与科学方法相联系,以及如何将科学方法与创业方法相区分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Lean Hypotheses and Effectual Commitments: An Integrative Framework Delineating the Methods of Science and Entrepreneurship
Recently, there is increasing interest in building theories that offer actionable guidance to the practice of entrepreneurship. Here I present a general theoretical framework, called CAVE, for understanding, assessing, and enhancing existing tools that offer such guidance. The framework encompasses a two-dimensional space with prediction and control as its axes. The CAVE framework accommodates a wide variety of extant practical tools as well as relevant concepts from psychology and economics. Specifically, I compare and contrast effectuation with lean startup within this framework. Whereas lean startup centers around hypothesis testing, effectuation focuses on cocreative commitments from self-selecting stakeholders. In other words, the former takes markets as exogenous, while the latter explicates how they can be made endogenous and why that matters. More generally, I show how these differences connect with and delineate the scientific method from the entrepreneurial method.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
22.40
自引率
5.20%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Journal of Management (JOM) aims to publish rigorous empirical and theoretical research articles that significantly contribute to the field of management. It is particularly interested in papers that have a strong impact on the overall management discipline. JOM also encourages the submission of novel ideas and fresh perspectives on existing research. The journal covers a wide range of areas, including business strategy and policy, organizational behavior, human resource management, organizational theory, entrepreneurship, and research methods. It provides a platform for scholars to present their work on these topics and fosters intellectual discussion and exchange in these areas.
期刊最新文献
Developing Problem Representations in Organizations: A Synthesis across Literatures and an Integrative Framework A Roadmap for Navigating Phenomenon-Based Research in Management Old Habits Die Hard: A Review and Assessment of the Threat-Rigidity Literature How and Why Top Executives Influence Innovation: A Review of Mechanisms and a Research Agenda Mitigating Cognitive Bias to Improve Organizational Decisions: An Integrative Review, Framework, and Research Agenda
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1