Jbv Theory Development

---
name: jbv-theory-development
description: "Use when building the theoretical argument for a Journal of Business Venturing (JBV) manuscript — constructing a multidisciplinary mechanism (economics, psychology, sociology) for an entrepreneurial phenomenon, and choosing between hypothesis-testing and narrative/interpretive theorizing. Builds the argument; it does not pick the question (jbv-topic-selection) or run the analysis (jbv-data-analysis)."
category: business-and-finance
source_repo: brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
source_path: "Journal-of-Business-Venturing-Skills/skills/jbv-theory-development/SKILL.md"
source_url: https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/blob/HEAD/Journal-of-Business-Venturing-Skills/skills/jbv-theory-development/SKILL.md
---


# Theory Development (jbv-theory-development)

## When to trigger

- Your "hypotheses" are descriptive ("A relates to B in startups") with no entrepreneurial mechanism
- You need to choose the disciplinary engine — agency/real-options (economics), cognition/affect (psychology), networks/legitimacy (sociology)
- A handling editor or reviewer says the theory "could be about any organization, not entrepreneurship"
- You are deciding whether to write a deductive model or a narrative/interpretive theory

## JBV's theory bar

JBV elevates **"theories, narratives, and interpretations"** of the antecedents, mechanisms, and consequences of entrepreneurship. Two legitimate paths:

- **Hypothetico-deductive**: derive testable hypotheses from an explicit mechanism. The mechanism must be *about the entrepreneurial phenomenon* — opportunity, judgment under Knightian uncertainty, resource assembly under resource constraints, legitimacy of the new and unknown (liability of newness), founder identity, etc. — not a generic organizational process.
- **Narrative / interpretive**: build an interesting, internally coherent account or process theory of how entrepreneurial action unfolds. JBV's stance is broader than the strict deductive template of many top management journals — a compelling reconceptualization can be the contribution.

## Pick the disciplinary engine (and combine deliberately)

JBV is multidisciplinary *by design*. Make the lens explicit and consider integrating two:

- **Economics**: uncertainty vs. risk, search and experimentation, real options, information asymmetry and signaling in financing, incentives, selection markets.
- **Psychology**: entrepreneurial cognition, judgment and heuristics, self-efficacy, passion, affect, regulatory focus, grit, overconfidence.
- **Sociology**: networks, embeddedness, institutional logics, legitimacy, categories, status, social movements, regional/ecosystem structure.

State a clear mechanism: a causal/process chain with a why, scope conditions, and the entrepreneurial actor or activity at its center.

## Build moderation/mediation around the phenomenon

- Moderators should reflect entrepreneurial context — uncertainty, resource scarcity, novelty, ecosystem support, founder/team attributes — not generic firm covariates.
- Mediators should trace the entrepreneurial process (opportunity belief → action → outcome), making the mechanism observable.

## Checklist

- [ ] Mechanism is specific to the entrepreneurial phenomenon (not any organization)
- [ ] Primary disciplinary engine named; integration justified if multidisciplinary
- [ ] Mode chosen (deductive hypotheses vs. narrative/interpretive theory) and executed consistently
- [ ] Scope/boundary conditions of the theory stated
- [ ] Moderators/mediators reflect entrepreneurial context, not generic covariates
- [ ] Assumptions surfaced; a tension or orthodoxy is challenged, not just confirmed

## Anti-patterns

- **Generic-org theory in a startup costume** — the mechanism would read identically for an incumbent.
- **Hypothesis salad** — many predictions, no unifying entrepreneurial mechanism.
- **Borrowing a construct without a boundary** — importing a psychology/sociology construct with no scope for the entrepreneurial setting.
- **Pretend deduction (HARKing)** — hypotheses reverse-engineered from results.


## Theory pass for Journal of Business Venturing

Treat this skill as an executable review pass, not a prose hint. First lock the entrepreneurial mechanism, level of analysis, evidence design, and boundary conditions for ventures; then judge whether the current manuscript answers the venue's real reader: entrepreneurship reviewers who ask whether the paper advances venture formation, opportunity, founder, or ecosystem theory.

- **Do the pass:** Name the construct, mechanism, boundary condition, and falsifiable implication separately; do not let a literature summary masquerade as theory.
- **Return a ledger:** give `claim / evidence / risk / manuscript location` rows, so the next agent can edit rather than rediscover the issue.
- **Sibling guard:** compare against Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice for broader entrepreneurship, Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal for strategy interface, AMJ for general management; if a sibling owns the contribution, recommend re-routing before polishing format.
- **Stop condition:** do not give submission-ready advice until the pack's `resources/official-source-map.md` has been checked for volatile rules and the manuscript has one concrete fix for the largest venue-specific risk.

## Output format

```
【Phenomenon mechanism】the entrepreneurial why, in one chain ...
【Engine】economics / psychology / sociology (+ integration) ...
【Mode】deductive hypotheses | narrative-interpretive theory ...
【Hypotheses or propositions】H1..Hk / P1..Pk ...
【Boundary conditions】...
【Tension challenged】...
【Next step】jbv-literature-positioning
```

---

**Source:** [`brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills`](https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) → `Journal-of-Business-Venturing-Skills/skills/jbv-theory-development/SKILL.md`