子谦译文｜创业教什么：六种主流创业方法的比较(57)

在图4中，我们可以清楚地看到创业阶段的主要差异。基于表2和图2，这张图显示了对六种创业方法的评价，包括核心、显性、隐性和非焦点重新定向等方面。这里的一个关键暗示是，创业方法的选择在很大程度上取决于创业所处的阶段。在选择用哪种方法的时候，现存文献显示的创业阶段模型会比较准确，但是最近也有人提出了一个创意阶段、启动前阶段、启动阶段和启动后阶段等由四个阶段组成的假设模型。在这个模型下，效果逻辑在创意初期阶段和启动前阶段占据重要位置；在启动前和启动阶段，设计思维和精益创业占据要位；在启动阶段和启动后阶段，发现性驱动计划和商业计划是最有用的。然而这仅仅是一个实验性的提议，一方面，是因为关于创业年龄、规模和增长率与多种创业方法成功运用之间的变量没有实证研究；另一方面，如果这个模型是建立在一个错误的假设之上的话，那么它就可能会产生一个误解，即创业是一个线性的、预先就确定的成长旅程。
此外，一些创业方法也反对这个模型中隐含的创业过程是线性的主张的说法。
Despite the challenges in aligning entrepreneurial methods to existing venture phase models, the methods do seem to be complementary over time. When the stakes are low in a new venture, the applicable method might be effectuation, followed by a move to applying the lean startup methodology when the stakes are slightly higher. Then the time arrives for a venture ramp-up, for example, when bringing in large amounts of venture capital. At this stage, few investors would be willing to commit resources unless they were shown a detailed plan or proposal of some kind. Furthermore, having no explicitly stated goals necessitates constant change (i.e., effectuation viewed as a nonteleological endeavor),having fluid goals facilitates change (i.e., the lean startup methodology and design thinking), and having fixed goals leads to inflexibility in the face of change (i.e., business planning, discovery-driven planning, and prescriptive entrepreneurship).