子谦译文｜创业教什么：六种主流创业方法的比较(3)

最近，在创业领域内，规范性方法引起了人们很大的兴趣，因为方法是指导人类行为理论和实践的思考和行动原则。规范性方法的一个主要来源是广泛的学术成果，即对创业过程进行经验描述和分类，然后将结果转化为说明性的方法，指导创业者应该如何推理和践行这种方法，进而创造出价值，一个典型例子就是效果逻辑。作为一种启发式的方法，它让创业者可以在面对不确定性的情况下创业。规范性方法的另一个主要来源创业者本身，他们将个人的和特殊经验提炼成相对连贯的规范性建议，精益创业就是典型的例子，创业者通过与客户的互动来制定和测试风险假设。
Prescriptive methods of entrepreneurship have been criticized, however, for their lackof rigor and relevance. Practitioner-grounded entrepreneurial methods have met with criticism for lacking theoretical rigor (Wood 2000), which has led to undesirable consequences, such as entrepreneurs giving up prematurely (Heitmann 2014). Scholarly grounded entrepreneurial methods have been said to lack both practical relevance (Frank and Landstrm 2016) and theoretical rigor (Arend et al. 2015). One shortcoming of methods is a lack of trust worthiness due to the context-specific nature of entrepreneurship and thus the limited applicability of largely untested prescriptions. Another frequently cited shortcoming is a lack of practical usefulness dueto limited concrete actionable advice (Wolf and Rosenberg 2012). An illustrative example is a recent debate concerning effectuation, which has been cast as an underdeveloped theory lacking practical managerial tools and with the potential to lead to dangerous practices among entrepreneurs (Arend et al. 2015). The concern has been that it could tempt entrepreneurs to ignore the risks of competition and to neglect the need for even the most rudimentary planning practices.