子谦译文｜创业教什么：六种主流创业理论的对比研究(46)

5.1Analytical visual comparison across methods and dimensions
跨方法和跨维度的可视化分析比较
In order to more powerfully illustrate the conceptual similarities and differences in Tables 2 and 3, the authors created a figure to show the weights assigned to each of The nine conceptual dimensions according to the extent to which they are emphasized by a given entrepreneurial method. A set of qualifying criteria was developed to assign a grade （2） for each dimension on a scale of 0 to 3. If a dimension was deemed fundamental to the theory or prescriptions of a given method, then it was considered a backbone dimension and was given a grade of “3” for that particular method. If an entrepreneurial method directly referred to a dimension in iscussions or prescriptions, that dimension was given a grade of “2” for that particular method. If a method made indirect or implicit reference to a dimension by touching upon similar or related concepts, a grade of “1” was given to that dimension for that particular method. And lastly, if an entrepreneurial method did not explicitly or implicitly address any aspects of a dimension, and it could be safely assumed that this dimension did not inform any relevant aspect of that particular method, a grade of “0” was given to that dimension. This quantitative exercise resulted in Fig. 2, which shows how the entrepreneurial methods compare to one another and to effectuation.