Purpose Current approaches to understanding and resolving the problem of poverty have not proved effective. This paper aims to provide a new explanation of why we have failed and what must be done to improve our understanding, decision-making, action and success. Design/methodology/approach Integrative propositional analysis is used to evaluate and synthesize theoretical and practical perspectives on poverty from five academic disciplines and five disparate organizations. Findings Individual theoretical perspectives were found to have low levels of complexity and systemicity. Research limitations/implications Clear research directions are shown to accelerate improvements in understanding. Additionally, results may provide a useful guide for developing computer models of poverty. Practical implications The causal knowledge map of synthesized theories suggests where practice may be relatively effective and where unanticipated consequences are more likely to occur. Social implications Policy decision-making to address the problem of poverty is not likely to lead to successful resolution. Thus, poverty is likely to continue until we develop a more systemic understanding. Originality/value This interdisciplinary paper provides a new structural perspective on why we have not been able to solve the poverty problem – and shows how far we have yet to go to reach success.

Previous studies have noted a proliferation of disparate theories of entrepreneurship. This makes it difficult to find the best theory for application in teaching, practice, and research. Choosing the right entrepreneurship theories to teach and encourage is critical to providing entrepreneurs with the knowledge they need to succeed. Scholars have recommended integrating entrepreneurship theories across disciplines and across practice; however, rigorous methods to assess and integrate the best theories are lacking. Integrative propositional analysis is an emerging method to assess and improve theories using the theory structure as data, rather than relying on empirical data and opinion alone. This exploratory study pilot tested this approach with a sample of nine entrepreneurship theories. Several insights emerged that entrepreneurship researchers, educators, and practitioners can use to synthesize and improve theories for their specific needs and to collaboratively integrate the best theories from research and experience to create better theories.

Background: A long research stream has shown that when knowledge is more structured it is more likely to be effective in practical application. Building on that research, the authorsapplied Integrative Proposition Analysis to visualize, integrate, and assess the quality and usefulness of knowledge gained from the NMAC (formerly National Minority AIDS Council) Strong Communities evaluation. Purpose: Demonstrate an innovative method to rigorously integrate and strengthen knowledge gained from evaluation and to encourage discussion of future directions for developing stronger theories for more effective evaluation and more effective action. Setting: Birmingham, Alabama Intervention: A project to identify local strategies for community-based organizations and community health centers that serve African American and Latinx gay and bisexual men and transgender women to collaboratively meet HIV-related community needs. Research Design:  The researchers applied Integrative Propositional Analysis to integrate and map concepts and causal connections emerging from the evaluation findings. The authorsthen analyzed the resulting map to identify top-mentioned concepts, better understood concepts, reinforcing loops, and knowledge gaps. Data Collection and Analysis: Integrative Propositional Analysis applied to a literature review and stakeholder interview transcripts collected for the evaluation. Findings: Integrating literature and interview results helped to identify several actions where providers of HIV-related services could increase their impact on combating the HIV epidemic among the communities they serve. The authorsalso identified a reinforcing loop; this shows opportunity to improve two desired outcomes by increasing one. In addition, the authorsidentified blank spots on the map; these show where additional research could strengthen the quality and usefulness of the mapped knowledge. Keywords: evaluation syntheses; Integrative Propositional Analysis; complexity; systems thinking; HIV; African American; Latinx; gay men; bisexual men; transgender women