子谦译文｜创业教什么：六种主流创业理论的对比研究(57)

在图4中，我们可以清楚地看到经观察创业阶段得到的关键差异。基于表2和图2，这张图表显示了对六种创业方法的评价，包括核心、显性、隐性和非焦点重定向。这里的一个关键含义是，创业方法的选择在很大程度上取决于创业所处的阶段。现存文献中所阐述的现有创业阶段模型，或许可以在决定哪种创业方法比较适合使用。最近也有人在基于创意阶段、启动前阶段、启动阶段和启动后阶段组成的四阶段模型的基础上的提出了一个设想，在这种情况下，效果逻辑理论在想法之初和创业前阶段可以是有用的；在创业前和启动阶段，设计思维和精益创业方法可能是有用的；在启动阶段和创业后阶段，探索驱动型规划和商业计划可能是有用的。然而这仅仅是一个试探性的提议，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关系，目前尚无实证研究。创业阶段模型也可能会产生误导，如果它是建立在一个错误的假设之上，即创业是一个线性的、预先就确定的成长旅程。
此外，一些创业方法反对阶段模型中隐含的创业过程是线性的主张。
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).