子谦译文｜创业教什么：六种主流创业方法的比较(61)

为了超越目前的创业方法，研究人员需要承认创业方法是一个传统的学术研究领域。有一种方法，可以将各种不同方法融合成一个更综合性的元方法，它既有“理论驱动性，又有实证分析性”，可以在一个更宽泛的环境和情境下使用，而这项工作就可以在本文提出的三层框架和九大概念维度的指导下进行，并可以借鉴现有的文献，如《创业成功因素》及《创新和创业生态系统》等，而且这个方法还是可以进一步完善实践派方法和更务实的创业观。所以本文认为, 综合性的方法可能是最准确和最有效的。也许创业就是个人通过从不断从反馈中学习，以迭代和互动的方式来扩展他们的知识和资源库，通过密切的合作者的参来管理不确定性，为自己和他人创造新的价值。

6.2Implications for practice 对实践的影响
Some key implications for practice are also evident. Entrepreneurs should reflect critically on advice given to them to decide if and when an entrepreneurial method is suitable for their purposes, taking into consideration development stage and context (Reymen et al. 2015). Ease of use does not imply future venture success. The lack of theoretical rigor among the entrepreneurial methods, especially in the areas of uncertainty management and team collaboration, suggests that entrepreneurs might need to develop their own comprehensive understanding of these two key issues. For example, the methods have a tendency to provide ready-made answers instead of inspiring entrepreneurs to undertake their own processes of discovery when facing an unknown situation. Entrepreneurs could also benefit from being aware of the shortcomings of business planning, in terms of its misalignment with many key dimensions of the entrepreneurial process. Early-stage financiers could take stock of this discrepancy and draw upon other entrepreneurial methods when assessing which ventures to fund. If scholars act upon the theoretical implications mentioned above, entrepreneurs will have access to more comprehensive and empirically studied meta-methods that place the context and development stage of the venture at the center of prescriptive efforts.