Jbv Writing Style

---
name: jbv-writing-style
description: Use when polishing the prose of a Journal of Business Venturing (JBV) manuscript — front-loading the entrepreneurial phenomenon, writing for a multidisciplinary audience, honoring JBV's openness to narrative/interpretive voice, and applying Elsevier author–date conventions and a ≤250-word abstract. Late-stage polish; do not use as a substitute for a real entrepreneurship-theory contribution (jbv-contribution-framing).
---

# Writing Style (jbv-writing-style)

## When to trigger

- The prose buries the entrepreneurial phenomenon under jargon or method detail
- The paper reads as written for one discipline only
- You are tightening the abstract, intro, and discussion before submission
- A reviewer says the argument is "hard to follow" or "the entrepreneurship is lost"

## Phenomenon-forward writing

JBV is phenomenon-driven, so the writing must put the **entrepreneurial phenomenon first**:

- **Open on the phenomenon**: the first paragraph should make a reader feel the entrepreneurial puzzle (a venture-creation tension, a founder/investor decision under uncertainty), not open on a literature gap or a method.
- **Front-load the argument**: state the question, the mechanism, and the contribution to entrepreneurship early; do not make the reader wait until the discussion.
- **Keep entrepreneurship central in every section** — methods and results prose should keep tying back to what is learned about the phenomenon, so the paper never reads as a generic study that happened to use startups.

## Write for a multidisciplinary reader

Because JBV spans economics, psychology, and sociology, your reader may not share your home discipline:

- Define discipline-specific constructs on first use; avoid unexplained jargon from one lens.
- When you integrate lenses, signpost the move explicitly so an economist and a psychologist both follow.

## Voice: deductive and narrative are both legitimate

JBV welcomes "theories, narratives, and interpretations." Match voice to mode:

- **Hypothesis-testing**: crisp, active, claim-first sentences; hypotheses stated plainly.
- **Narrative/interpretive**: a coherent, vivid account is appropriate and valued — but it must still be disciplined theorizing, not storytelling for its own sake.

## House style

- **Abstract**: concise and factual, **not exceeding 250 words**; convey phenomenon, approach, and contribution.
- **References**: author–date style; at first submission, "Your Paper Your Way" allows flexible formatting provided each reference is complete (author, title, year, journal/book, volume, pages/article number).
- Active voice, present tense for established findings, past tense for what you did.

## Checklist

- [ ] Opening makes the entrepreneurial phenomenon vivid (not a gap or a method)
- [ ] Question, mechanism, and contribution front-loaded
- [ ] Entrepreneurship stays central across methods/results prose
- [ ] Cross-discipline constructs defined; integration signposted
- [ ] Voice matches mode (deductive crispness vs. disciplined narrative)
- [ ] Abstract ≤ 250 words, phenomenon-first
- [ ] Author–date references complete and consistent

## Anti-patterns

- **Method-first opening** that hides the entrepreneurial stakes.
- **Single-discipline jargon** that excludes JBV's broader audience.
- **Story without theory** mistaken for "narrative" — JBV wants disciplined narrative.
- **Abstract over 250 words** or that omits the contribution.

## Output format

```
【Hook】does it open on the phenomenon? fix ...
【Front-loading】question/mechanism/contribution early? ...
【Multidisciplinary clarity】jargon defined; integration signposted ...
【Voice】deductive | disciplined-narrative — consistent? ...
【Abstract】word count ≤250; phenomenon-first? ...
【References】author–date complete/consistent? ...
【Next step】jbv-submission
```