Posted: September 28th, 2016

Prepare an analysis and critique of a current debate in entrepreneurship research

Literature Analysis
Task:
Prepare an analysis and critique of a current debate in entrepreneurship research. You are assigned a series of journal article reading which discuss the reasons for and merits of using business plans during the start-up process:
 Delmar, F., & Shane, S. (2003). Does business planning facilitate the development of new ventures? Strategic Management Journal, 24(12), 1165-1185. doi:10.1002/smj.349
 Honig, B., & Karlsson, T. (2004). Institutional forces and the written business plan. Journal of Management, 30(1), 29-48. doi:10.1016/j.jm.2002.11.002
 Honig, B., & Samuelsson, M. (2014). Data replication and extension: A study of business planning and venture-level performance. Journal of Business Venturing Insights, 1–2(0), 18-25. doi:10.1016/j.jbvi.2014.09.006
 Delmar, F. (2015). A response to Honig and Samuelsson (2014). Journal of Business Venturing Insights, 3(0), 1-4. doi:10.1016/j.jbvi.2014.11.002
 Davidsson, P. (2015). Data replication and extension: A commentary. Journal of Business Venturing Insights, 3(0), 12-15. doi:10.1016/j.jbvi.2015.02.00
Please review these articles and discuss the reasons for (and the veracity of) the divergent claims made by these authors regarding the use of business plans. Based on your review and analysis of these articles, you are required to take a position, either for or against the use of business plans in new ventures. Please motivate your response based on the literature and provide support using other scholarly resources. Discuss any limitations of, or conditions for your findings.
Length and Presentation:
Appendices may be used for supporting documents or summary tables of analysis to the extent that is appropriate. The report should be submitted as an electronic version in WORD. All reference material must be correctly cited and referenced in APA style.
Criteria by which your assignment will be marked:
•Analysis & critique (50%): Competent analysis and appropriate critique of the research articles provided.
•Theory & support (30%): Demonstrated use of relevant resources and theory including synthesis of associated literature to support arguments.
•Presentation & clarity (20%): Provision of compelling and coherent arguments for positions taken using clear language and expression.