子谦译文｜创业教什么：六种主流创业方法的比较(5)

所以，为了进一步开发创业方法领域，本文从九个关键的概念维度，对效果逻辑与其他五种创业方法从相似性、差异性、优势、劣势、重叠和差距等方面进行了非常详细的比较和探讨，这个过程有助于学者和实践者以更容易理解的方式梳理创业方法领域，各种创业方法的清晰度和可见度的提高可以作为一种灵感来源，以促进和改善现有的创业方法并开发新的方法。因此，本文为创业方法的支持者在未来的工作中奠定了一个基础，实践派创业方法的支持者可以通过借鉴学术派创业方法来提高它在理论上的严谨性；同样，学术派创业方法的支持者可以借鉴实践派创业方法来增加它们的实践相关性，在此比较基础上开展的工作，可以看做是相对独立的情况下不同创业方法之间的一座桥梁。
In order to avoid bias toward any one particular entrepreneurial method, a conceptual framework is developed through an in-depth analysis of effectuation and five other purposefully selected entrepreneurial methods. These are discovery-driven planning (McGrath and MacMillan 1995), prescriptive entrepreneurship (Fiet 2008), business planning (Steinhoff 1971), the lean startup ethodology (Ries 2011), and design thinking (Brown2008). Choices of entrepreneurial methods were based on the following: citation analysis, appearance on entrepreneurship courses’syllabi (see footnote in Section 2.3), perceived alignment with the definition of entrepreneurial method, and informal inquiries with a number of experienced entrepreneurship researchers around frequency of use in their educational practices. Three entrepreneurial methods with Scholarly origins were included alongside three methods introduced by practitioners. The conceptual framework consists of nine dimensions and is used as a means to elucidate similarities and differences. The discussion will then delve more deeply into the subject of effectuation, contrasting it to the five other entrepreneurial methods.