Discussion: View Thread

Dear Colleagues - 

Like many of you, I have followed this thread with a great deal of interest as it hits quite close to home on a number of issues. I have many thoughts about business plans vs. business models, etc., which have largely been discussed over the past few days. I did want to chime in on the most recent debate - the qualification of professors to teach entrepreneurship who have never personally started a business. In my decade of teaching entrepreneurship, I heard this question a lot from students and entrepreneurs. It is disheartening to hear it now from colleagues as well. 

When asked how I could possibly understand entrepreneurship well enough to teach it when I had never personally started a business, my response is that I reject the premise. Professors are qualified to teach based on their training as researchers and teachers. Professors are the ones who systematically study a field, which gives them a unique, broad based, critical perspective that they can and should impart to their students. How many of us have seen practitioners teach a course in entrepreneurship by simply telling war stories of their personal experiences, giving accounts of their successes and failures that clearly suffer from attribution biases? (not to say that practitioners can't be excellent professors - of course they can. Business schools need both researchers and practitioners to be effective).

Furthermore, students would never think to ask their finance professors whether they had experience in investment banking, or whether their marketing professors had run a campaign for P&G. Holding entrepreneurship professors to this standard hearkens back to the old days when the field was struggling for legitimacy, and was considered merely an applied context devoid of theory, to be taught as a technical vocation. I thought we were beyond those years.

Lastly, as some of you have pointed out, entrepreneurship is a way of thinking and acting that can be applied in all contexts, academia included. Starting or growing entrepreneurship programs is an entrepreneurial activity. In my current gig as dean, I bring my entrepreneurial training and perspective to virtually everything I do.

Let the discussion continue,

Ken Colwell

Ken Colwell, Ph.D.

Dean, School of Business

Central Connecticut State University

(305) 281-9131

http://about.me/KenColwell

http://www.ken-colwell.com

************************************** This message is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of Management. Please do not post messages with attached files. Commercial messages or spammed messages are not allowed on the list. The use of auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also lead to your removal from the list. You can manage your subscription options, including joining or leaving the list here: http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=entrep&A=1 If you have questions or need help, please contact Dr. John Bunch jbunch@benedictine.edu. Ventures HO!

Doan,

As you may recall, I have been studying the contribution of Academic Entrepreneurship Centers as an addition to formal curricula to complement the formation of entrepreneurial students, not published so far, but a Portuguese version report is available under request.

I am currently working in the assessment of alternative schools around the world (some of them not directly related to entrepreneurship), some of them listed below.

http://www.kaospilot.dk/

http://www.thnk.org/

http://teamacademy.nl/

http://eiselab.com.br/en/

http://www.knowmads.nl/

http://estaleiroliberdade.com.br/

https://www.hyperisland.com/

http://amaniinstitute.org/

http://thedoschool.org/

I do believe we can incorporate some of their initiatives to change our way of thinking and modelling entrepreneurship education in the academic world.

It is difficult to say this in this group, but scholars' traditional mindset of the entrepreneurship learning-teaching approach in the academy seems to be locked on the same paradigms, refusing to accept outer alternative models. I wonder if we could join the best of both worlds.

We are open to receive yours' or anybody else contribution to this research, including similar or complementary studies, data collection efforts and other school references suggestions.

Best regards

Marcos Hashimoto

Faccamp

Brazil

-------- Original message --------
From: Brock <coachbrock@GMAIL.COM>
Date: 06/12/2015 11:57 PM (GMT-06:00)
To: ENTREP@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
Subject: Re: Business Plans

************************************** This message is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of Management. Please do not post messages with attached files. Commercial messages or spammed messages are not allowed on the list. The use of auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also lead to your removal from the list. You can manage your subscription options, including joining or leaving the list here: http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=entrep&A=1 If you have questions or need help, please contact Dr. John Bunch jbunch@benedictine.edu. Ventures HO!

Hi Mark:

As I followed the dialogue I was just about to put fingers to keyboard but you covers it all.

·         First what do we want to accomplish

·         What are alternatives

·         What works best for each of us (my addition)

·         Then...how best to teach within the frame each of us has chosen (slight rewording)

·         The willingness to pivot (change) as we interact with our students (my addition)

Best,

Ed

Dr. Ed Leach

Director Norman Newman Centre for Entrepreneurship

Dalhousie University

Ed.leach@dal.ca

902-494-1816 Off

902-476-6449 Cell

From: Entrepreneurship Division Listserv [mailto:ENTREP@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Mark Simon
Sent: June-13-15 2:15 PM
To: ENTREP@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
Subject: Re: [ENTREP] Business Plans

************************************** This message is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of Management. Please do not post messages with attached files. Commercial messages or spammed messages are not allowed on the list. The use of auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also lead to your removal from the list. You can manage your subscription options, including joining or leaving the list here: http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=entrep&A=1 If you have questions or need help, please contact Dr. John Bunch jbunch@benedictine.edu. Ventures HO!

Hello Doan,

Your question about how research improves teaching is an interesting one, and one that has been debated extensively for decades (see, for example, Prince et al. (2007), J. of Engineering Education).

I would suggest how much/whether this relationship exists depends a great deal on an individual's research interests, and, as you and others have noted, the goals for a particular course.

1.      In  terms of research that can enhance a class employing the Lean Startup method, not much exists.  Part of this issue, of course, is that Eric Ries didn't publish his book till 2011.  Thus, studies being published now are just beginning to refer to this approach (e.g., van Werven et al. (2015), J. of Business Venturing) and little to no empirical research about its efficacy has been published in the major journals (yet).

2.      In terms of other ways research that could improve teaching, I (and others) would suggest that professors may be able to draw from several sources including:

·         Case studies of/consulting with startups– As Kathleen Eisenhardt notes in her recent Stanford talk, these (as well as large sample empirical studies) can provide professors with a little knowledge about a lot of companies in contrast to the entrepreneurs typically presenting at the DFJ lecture series, who know a lot about one or two (sometimes ten) companies.  (see http://ecorner.stanford.edu/authorMaterialInfo.html?mid=3519)

·         Exercises based on research to use in the entrepreneurship classroom – Heidi Neck, Patricia Greene, and Candida Brush, for example, have a book (Teaching entrepreneurship: A practice-based approach) where they reference theoretical foundations (e.g., effectuation) for the exercises (providing students with $5, $50, or $500) in their book.

·         Theoretical models or empirical results of large sample studies that they or other scholars have developed/conducted –  In terms of the former, for example, I've drawn from research I've conducted on topics like liabilities of newness, environmental shocks, and SME Internet use to provide examples for class discussions at the undergraduate and MBA levels.

In terms of the latter, I am fortunate to work at a university that has an entrepreneurship major, which includes several required and elective classes in entrepreneurship.  Thus, we

·   introduce key entrepreneurship vocabulary and concept (including the Business Model Canvas starting next year) in our freshman class

·   loan our students $100 each so they can "get out of building" to test their business models and learn about effectuation when they're juniors

·   have a capstone course where they further develop their venture's business model during their senior year and write short business plans for our annual competition (see http://bit.ly/NVCtemplate for the business plan template).

·   require at least one entrepreneurship elective in opportunity recognition, social media, or sales.

These myriad courses allow us to discuss multiple entrepreneurship issues, many of which have relevant theoretical models and empirical results.

For example, along with including multiple creativity exercises in the elective course on Opportunity Recognition,, I have drawn from research on opportunity recognition (e.g.,  Haynie, Shepherd, and McMullen (2009, J. of Management Studies) and Baron and Ensley (2006, Management Science)) to walk students through models of the process.  I've even included Baron's (2006, Academy of Management Perspectives) practitioner-oriented piece based on his empirical research as required reading in this undergraduate class.

I'd be interested in your and others' perspectives on other ways to use research to enhance teaching in entrepreneurship courses.

Cheers,

Franz Lohrke

-------- Original message --------
From: Brock <coachbrock@GMAIL.COM>
Date: 06/12/2015 11:57 PM (GMT-06:00)
To: ENTREP@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
Subject: Re: Business Plans

************************************** This message is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of Management. Please do not post messages with attached files. Commercial messages or spammed messages are not allowed on the list. The use of auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also lead to your removal from the list. You can manage your subscription options, including joining or leaving the list here: http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=entrep&A=1 If you have questions or need help, please contact Dr. John Bunch jbunch@benedictine.edu. Ventures HO!

Hate to dampen the enthusiasm ... but this is worth noting.

Also, there are well-done papers circulating (under review) about the efficacy of accelerators. One notable finding – from personal conversation with author, not from the paper: little, if any, use of lean or canvas in any of them.  

Canadian entrepreneurs can't rely on Silicon Valley 'lean startup' bible, author admits

"Sometimes even a prophet has to leave his own country to better understand the world.

That's certainly the case for startup guru Steve Blank. The retired serial entrepreneur and author is the co-pioneer of the "lean startup" methodology, a customer-first model that has revolutionized the way startup companies come to market.

Mr. Blank now thinks the world needs another revolution, because he no longer believes his model works for startups outside of Silicon Valley."

See;   http://business.financialpost.com/tag/steve-blank   for the rest of the story.

Hello Doan,

Your question about how research improves teaching is an interesting one, and one that has been debated extensively for decades (see, for example, Prince et al. (2007), J. of Engineering Education).

I would suggest how much/whether this relationship exists depends a great deal on an individual's research interests, and, as you and others have noted, the goals for a particular course.

1.      In  terms of research that can enhance a class employing the Lean Startup method, not much exists.  Part of this issue, of course, is that Eric Ries didn't publish his book till 2011.  Thus, studies being published now are just beginning to refer to this approach (e.g., van Werven et al. (2015), J. of Business Venturing) and little to no empirical research about its efficacy has been published in the major journals (yet).

2.      In terms of other ways research that could improve teaching, I (and others) would suggest that professors may be able to draw from several sources including:

·         Case studies of/consulting with startups– As Kathleen Eisenhardt notes in her recent Stanford talk, these (as well as large sample empirical studies) can provide professors with a little knowledge about a lot of companies in contrast to the entrepreneurs typically presenting at the DFJ lecture series, who know a lot about one or two (sometimes ten) companies.  (see http://ecorner.stanford.edu/authorMaterialInfo.html?mid=3519)

·         Exercises based on research to use in the entrepreneurship classroom – Heidi Neck, Patricia Greene, and Candida Brush, for example, have a book (Teaching entrepreneurship: A practice-based approach) where they reference theoretical foundations (e.g., effectuation) for the exercises (providing students with $5, $50, or $500) in their book.

·         Theoretical models or empirical results of large sample studies that they or other scholars have developed/conducted –  In terms of the former, for example, I've drawn from research I've conducted on topics like liabilities of newness, environmental shocks, and SME Internet use to provide examples for class discussions at the undergraduate and MBA levels.

In terms of the latter, I am fortunate to work at a university that has an entrepreneurship major, which includes several required and elective classes in entrepreneurship.  Thus, we

·   introduce key entrepreneurship vocabulary and concept (including the Business Model Canvas starting next year) in our freshman class

·   loan our students $100 each so they can "get out of building" to test their business models and learn about effectuation when they're juniors

·   have a capstone course where they further develop their venture's business model during their senior year and write short business plans for our annual competition (see http://bit.ly/NVCtemplate for the business plan template).

·   require at least one entrepreneurship elective in opportunity recognition, social media, or sales.

These myriad courses allow us to discuss multiple entrepreneurship issues, many of which have relevant theoretical models and empirical results.

For example, along with including multiple creativity exercises in the elective course on Opportunity Recognition,, I have drawn from research on opportunity recognition (e.g.,  Haynie, Shepherd, and McMullen (2009, J. of Management Studies) and Baron and Ensley (2006, Management Science)) to walk students through models of the process.  I've even included Baron's (2006, Academy of Management Perspectives) practitioner-oriented piece based on his empirical research as required reading in this undergraduate class.

I'd be interested in your and others' perspectives on other ways to use research to enhance teaching in entrepreneurship courses.

Cheers,

Franz Lohrke

-------- Original message --------
From: Brock <coachbrock@GMAIL.COM>
Date: 06/12/2015 11:57 PM (GMT-06:00)
To: ENTREP@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
Subject: Re: Business Plans

************************************** This message is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of Management. Please do not post messages with attached files. Commercial messages or spammed messages are not allowed on the list. The use of auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also lead to your removal from the list. You can manage your subscription options, including joining or leaving the list here: http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=entrep&A=1 If you have questions or need help, please contact Dr. John Bunch jbunch@benedictine.edu. Ventures HO!

************************************** This message is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of Management. Please do not post messages with attached files. Commercial messages or spammed messages are not allowed on the list. The use of auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also lead to your removal from the list. You can manage your subscription options, including joining or leaving the list here: http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=entrep&A=1 If you have questions or need help, please contact Dr. John Bunch jbunch@benedictine.edu. Ventures HO!

I agree.

Mengsteab

Mengsteab Tesfayohannes, Ph.D. PDCE.

Associate Professor of Management

(Entrepreneurship and Innovation, Business Promotional Research

and Economic Development Strategies)

Sigmund Weis School of Business, Susquehanna University

Selinsgrove, PENN, USA

E-mail: tesfayohannes@susqu.edu

From: Entrepreneurship Division Listserv [mailto:ENTREP@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Brock
Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 11:13 PM
To: ENTREP@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
Subject: Re: [ENTREP] Business Plans

The thoughts on practitioner vs. researcher have been very much appreciated.  I began as a practitioner, having started and operated two businesses, and now consider myself a researcher. I found that, in the beginning, I relied on heuristics.  It hampered my teaching. Research draws on the wisdom of multitudes of successful and unsuccessful entrepreneurs, and offers the researcher's objectivity (overcoming attribution error of individual entrepreneurs).  

--
Brock Stout


************************************** This message is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of Management. Please do not post messages with attached files. Commercial messages or spammed messages are not allowed on the list. The use of auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also lead to your removal from the list. You can manage your subscription options, including joining or leaving the list here: http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=entrep&A=1 If you have questions or need help, please contact Dr. John Bunch jbunch@benedictine.edu. Ventures HO!

I see no incompatibility between "business plans" and "lean start-up". Lean start-up can be used as a feasibility study to ensure customers are getting value the way they want it. Once that is confirmed then you need to plan how to scale the venture. Planning is a part of life. I think we need to remember that a business plan is simply planning how one intends to run or scale a business. "Those who fail to plan, plan to fail". One always needs to plan anything that requires putting resources together to deliver certain outcomes. Let's forget the buzz word "business plan" and keep the principle of planning in mind. I don' think it can ever be bad to plan, whether for the purpose of running a business, writing  journal article or providing a patient with a treatment plan.

Feeling the same pain that Dr. Honig referenced, I researched the difference in performance between teams that used a Lean approach and teams that did not. In the same study, I sought to understand which (if any) elements of the Business Model Canvas are the most vital for nascent ventures. The results, presented at USASBE with a summary published in the Harvard Business Review (https://hbr.org/2016/03/the-limits-of-the-lean-startup-method), suggest that a Lean approach is, indeed, superior. I also found that teams that focused their early attentions on customer segment, value proposition, and channel did better than teams that did not.

************************************** This message is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of Management. Please do not post messages with attached files. Commercial messages or spammed messages are not allowed on the list. The use of auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also lead to your removal from the list. You can manage your subscription options, including joining or leaving the list here: http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=entrep&A=1 If you have questions or need help, please contact Jeff Pollack (jeff_pollack@ncsu.edu) or Kevin Cox (kcox24@my.fau.edu). Ventures HO!

I too have been concerned about the lack of research on the canvas, which is why I am leading a special issue on it in the Journal of Research in Marketing and Entrepreneurship (more info at the end). I've been using the canvas in my classes for about four years. I've heard many people say the business plan is dead and in my initial enthusiasm for the canvas I agreed. But over time I've come to realize that these are just two tools for entrepreneurs. So rather than either/or, the answer is "both". However, I would say that the canvas is more appropriate in the beginning as a brainstorming tool, whereas the plan is more appropriate after conducting some validation of the concept. I also see that the canvas can be used in a business plan class, particularly if that class can be taken with little to no prerequisites in entrepreneurship (i.e. they don't come in with a tested business concept/model). So ideally students take a course on the canvas and lean startup where they research, develop and test a business model. Then they go on to a business plan class and write a business plan for it. That's roughly how we do it here, though we've set it up so that students can take the planning and modeling classes in any order or simultaneously.

I do look forward to seeing more research on lean startup and business model canvases.

Dave

David J. Hansen, Ph.D.

Associate Professor of Entrepreneurship

College of Charleston

Associate Editor of the Journal of Research in Marketing and Entrepreneurship (JRME)

Editor of the Special Issue in JRME on "The Business Model Canvas and Customer Development"

Special issue call for papers from Journal of Research in Marketing and Entrepreneurship:  The Business Model Canvas and Customer Development

Purpose of the special issue

The consideration of business models has catapulted into the public consciousness over the last decade and a half (Teece, 2010).  Over that same time period, questions emerged regarding the role and efficacy of business plans. The Business Model Canvas (BMC) (Osterwalder, 2004), along with Lean Startup (Reis, 2011) and Customer Development (Blank, 2013), have emerged as a more nimble precursor to business planning to help businesses create a repeatable and scalable business model. 

The BMC tool and Customer Development methodology have been growing in use in entrepreneurship classes throughout the world.  Furthermore, they both draw heavily from marketing, particularly the recently published Value Proposition Design book (Osterwalder, et al. 2013). However, very little research has been done considering these concepts.  The purpose of this special issue is to encourage such academic research, which might explain the individual and holistic efficacy of their related topics, particularly in regards to the marketing and entrepreneurship interface.

Topics for the paper

We invite both (a) theoretical papers and (b) empirical papers, both qualitative and quantitative in methodology. Attention to practitioner issues and implications are important. Some suggested topics may concern (special thanks to attendees of the 2014 Global Research Symposium on Marketing and Entrepreneurship):

·         How can the BMC tool be used for research?

·         Does the BMC accelerate the start-up process?

·         How do equity investors (VCs & angels) respond to use of the BMC?

·         How does using the BMC affect success/effectiveness?

·         How does use of the BMC differ between teams and individuals?

·         Can the BMC enhance effectiveness between service-oriented vs. product-oriented start-ups?

·         Are there business models (using the canvas) that generate perceived value as opposed to actual value?

·         Are there external market conditions or consumer factors that provide insights for which type of business model would be most effective?

·         How is the business model impacted by the life cycle of the industry?

·         How does the life cycle of the industry impact 'gain creation' or 'pain relief'?

·         What most drives consumer decisions: 'gain creation' or 'pain relief'?

·         Does the use of the BMC lead to a better business pitch? Does it vary based on industry?

·         Does the use of the BMC lead to more innovative or creative (novel and useful) ideas?

·         How does use of the BMC lead entrepreneurs towards brainstorming and execution?

·         Does using BMC in a divergent deconstructive approach result in different, qualitatively better results than traditional critical linear thinking?

·         Can the same BMC result in different implementations?

·         When is the right time to involve the customer in BMC development?

·         At what point does the BMC development lose its effectiveness? 

·         What factors moderate or mediate BMC development effectiveness?

·         How does effectual selling fit into the BMC development process?

·         What marketing mix comes out of the BMC process?

·         Does a business model advantage lead to a strategic advantage?

The deadline for submission is November 30, 2016.

Paper submission and review process

All papers will be reviewed by an editor and if judged suitable will be reviewed by two independent referees in a blind peer review process. Papers submitted must not have been published, accepted for publication, or presently be under consideration for publication elsewhere. Submissions should be between 6,000 and 8,000 words in length including references, figures, tables and appendices. Please see http://emeraldgrouppublishing.com/products/journals/author_guidelines.htm?id=jrme for more information regarding author guidelines and manuscript submission.

Guest Editors
David Hansen
College of Charleston
E-mail: hansend@cofc.edu

Joe Giglierano
San Jose State University
E-mail: joseph.giglierano@sjsu.edu

Peter Whalen
Penn State University
E-mail: peter.whalen@psu.edu

References

Blank, S. (2013), "Why the lean start-up changes everything", Harvard Business Review,  Vol. 91 No. 5, pp. 63-72.

Osterwalder, A. (2004), "The business model ontology: A proposition in a design science approach", Institut d'Informatique et Organisation. Lausanne, Switzerland, University of Lausanne, Ecole des Hautes Etudes Commerciales HEC, 173.      

Osterwalder, A., Pigneur, Y., Bernard, G. and Smith, A.  (2014), Value Proposition Design, Wiley, Hoboken, New Jersey.

Reis, E. (2011), The Lean Startup, Crown Business, New York.     

Teece, D. J. (2010), "Business models, business strategy and innovation", Long range planning, Vol. 43 No. 2, pp. 172-194.           

About the Journal of Research in Marketing and Entrepreneurship (JRME)

The JRME publishes research that contributes to our developing knowledge of entrepreneurial and small business marketing. Even though research into the relationship between marketing and entrepreneurship is still relatively young, the subject has thus far proved exciting and thought provoking, and critical thinking has progressed rapidly. The journal stands at the interface of research in marketing and entrepreneurship.

Coverage may include, but is not limited to:

• The size and structure of the entrepreneurial enterprise. 
• SMEs and micro businesses approach marketing
• Intrapreneurship
• The role of entrepreneurship in marketing
• The role of marketing in entrepreneurship
• How do successful entrepreneurs market their product and services?
• Competencies necessary for the successful entrepreneur
• The role of entrepreneurship (and, as appropriate, intrapreneurship) in the development of organizations
• Life cycles of organizations: the stages in the growth of firms and the analysis of critical episodes
• The influence of external help, support, and personal contact networks
• Opportunity recognition
• Relationships between SMEs and larger firms: how SMEs interact successfully with larger firms and how these larger firms in turn manage their relationships with SMEs
• Strategic and management issues that pertain to marketing
• Cultural and sociological perspectives of the entrepreneur
• Cross-cultural studies and work on developing economies
• Appropriate research methodologies

Feeling the same pain that Dr. Honig referenced, I researched the difference in performance between teams that used a Lean approach and teams that did not. In the same study, I sought to understand which (if any) elements of the Business Model Canvas are the most vital for nascent ventures. The results, presented at USASBE with a summary published in the Harvard Business Review (https://hbr.org/2016/03/the-limits-of-the-lean-startup-method), suggest that a Lean approach is, indeed, superior. I also found that teams that focused their early attentions on customer segment, value proposition, and channel did better than teams that did not.

************************************** This message is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of Management. Please do not post messages with attached files. Commercial messages or spammed messages are not allowed on the list. The use of auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also lead to your removal from the list. You can manage your subscription options, including joining or leaving the list here: http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=entrep&A=1 If you have questions or need help, please contact Jeff Pollack (jeff_pollack@ncsu.edu) or Kevin Cox (kcox24@my.fau.edu). Ventures HO!