Digital startups launching original value propositions can test out and validate their business model using a recent and emerging set of practices known as Lean Startup Approaches (LSAs), which consist of Customer Development and the Lean Startup. While LSAs are gaining momentum in the ecosystem surrounding digital startups, they still suffer from poor theoretical foundations and operational issues that hinder their adoption and implementation. The aim of this study is to go beyond recalling anecdotal and single-case examples and, through mixed-methods research involving 227 digital startups, provide a first large-scale analysis of: (i) if and how digital startups apply Lean Startups Approaches; (ii) the ensuing results; (iii) the main advantages and disadvantages that stem from adopting and implementing LSAs; and (iv) how digital startups connect and combine the LSAs with other entrepreneurial approaches and tools for launching startups. The findings reveal that most of the sample has adopted LSAs and obtained several benefits from their use. A list of practical guidelines on how to solve the existing drawbacks and enhance the effectiveness of adopting and implementing LSAs is hence proposed. To conclude, a framework for organizing the empirical findings is put forward, where LSAs are inserted into the entrepreneurship theory debate on Effectuation, Entrepreneurial Bricolage and Opportunity Creation. Suggestions are then provided on how to sequence and bridge effectuation and causation logics and decision-making tools in an “entrepreneurial opportunities space”.

Digital startups and the adoption and implementation of Lean Startup Approaches: Effectuation, Bricolage and Opportunity Creation in practice

Ghezzi A.
2019-01-01

Abstract

Digital startups launching original value propositions can test out and validate their business model using a recent and emerging set of practices known as Lean Startup Approaches (LSAs), which consist of Customer Development and the Lean Startup. While LSAs are gaining momentum in the ecosystem surrounding digital startups, they still suffer from poor theoretical foundations and operational issues that hinder their adoption and implementation. The aim of this study is to go beyond recalling anecdotal and single-case examples and, through mixed-methods research involving 227 digital startups, provide a first large-scale analysis of: (i) if and how digital startups apply Lean Startups Approaches; (ii) the ensuing results; (iii) the main advantages and disadvantages that stem from adopting and implementing LSAs; and (iv) how digital startups connect and combine the LSAs with other entrepreneurial approaches and tools for launching startups. The findings reveal that most of the sample has adopted LSAs and obtained several benefits from their use. A list of practical guidelines on how to solve the existing drawbacks and enhance the effectiveness of adopting and implementing LSAs is hence proposed. To conclude, a framework for organizing the empirical findings is put forward, where LSAs are inserted into the entrepreneurship theory debate on Effectuation, Entrepreneurial Bricolage and Opportunity Creation. Suggestions are then provided on how to sequence and bridge effectuation and causation logics and decision-making tools in an “entrepreneurial opportunities space”.
2019
Bricolage; Business model; Digital entrepreneurship; Digital startups; Effectuation; Entrepreneurial opportunity; Lean Startup Approaches; Minimum viable product; Pivoting
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Ghezzi, 2018 - Digital Startups and the adoption and implementation of Lean Startup Approaches - TFSC.pdf

Open Access dal 25/09/2020

: Post-Print (DRAFT o Author’s Accepted Manuscript-AAM)
Dimensione 770.25 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
770.25 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11311/1117150
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 125
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 86
social impact