Co-creation by commenting: Participatory ways to write Quicklook&amp;#x00AE; reports

Jakobs, Eva-Maria; Spinuzzi, Clay; Digmayer, Claas; Pogue, Gregory P.

doi:10.1109/ipcc.2015.7235823

Cited by 10 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Such programs implicitly emphasize understanding markets and developing value propositions that speak to the needs of the catchers; they typically provide actual market feedback appropriate for the market dialogue we discussed earlier. For instance, GIP contractors research a target market, identifying and interviewing potential stakeholders, then writing results in the form of what Cornwell calls a Quicklook ® ( [20]; to understand Quicklook ® revisions, see Jakobs et al [36]), a type of technology assessment and commercialization report that articulates market feedback. But when they help entrepreneurs formulate their arguments and revise them to address market feedback and needs, programs such as the GIP typically provide tacit, context-based support rather than explicit, systematic support.…”

Section: Research On Pitching and Marketingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Additionally, the research did not capture training and other informal interactions among entrepreneurs and GCG personnel. We address some of these factors in later studies (Spinuzzi et al [79]; London et al [45]; Jakobs et al [36]). …”

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(For more on this pitch competition, see Spinuzzi et al [79]; Spinuzzi et al [78]; London et al [45]; Jakobs et al [36]. For more on similar pitch competitions, see Gibson & Conceiçao [29]; Park et al [57]; Sung & Gibson [78].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In particular, they were asked to adjust their pitches based on the feedback from the Quicklooks-technology assessment and commercialization reports that contained feedback from selected stakeholders in their target market (see Jakobs et al [36]). They had to adjust their final pitch decks to incorporate this feedback, identifying which claims were problematic, reinforcing the convincing ones and adjusting the unconvincing ones.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Understanding these patterns of reuse, we argue, can help us to understand how this cross-document dialogue helps SMEs to refine their entrepreneur pitches-and, more generally, how reuse across document cycles works rhetorically. Surprisingly, we have found very little research on the process of developing the pitch; the only research we know of that addresses the phenomenon is the research we have conducted (Spinuzzi et al [78], [79]; London et al [45]; Jakobs et al [36]). Although many studies have been done on reuse across documents, none of these studies has addressed the question of pitch decks.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Remaking the Pitch: Reuse Strategies in Entrepreneurs’ Pitch Decks

Spinuzzi

Nelson

Thomson

et al. 2015

IEEE Trans. Profess. Commun.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research problem: Examines how Korean entrepreneurs in an entrepreneurship program revised their English-language slide decks for their competitive presentations ("pitches") by reusing content from professional communication genres, including both their own documents and feedback from potential stakeholders in their target markets. Research question:As entrepreneurs learn to pitch ideas to unfamiliar markets, how do they revise their slide decks by reusing content from other professional communication genres? Specifically, what strategies do they follow when reusing content?Literature review: The professional communication literature demonstrates that reuse tends to take place in documentation cycles in which documents are set in interaction with each other and that reuse itself involves rhetorical choices. Yet such reuse strategies have not been examined in existing studies of entrepreneurial pitches in marketing and technology commercialization. Methodology:In an exploratory qualitative study, researchers textually analyzed 14 sets of five related document genres in the archives of an entrepreneurship program. These genres represented a full cycle of activity: application to the program, initial pitches, initial feedback from program personnel, detailed feedback from representative stakeholders in the target market, and revised pitches. Interviews and surveys of program personnel further contextualize the data. Results and conclusions:Entrepreneurs reused content from professional communication genres, including those that they had generated as well as those generated by market stakeholders. However, reuse went beyond simply accepting and copying feedback; as they learned to make their pitch arguments, these entrepreneurs had to weigh this feedback and engage with it critically. This reuse can be characterized as Accepting (repeating verbatim or in close paraphrase); Continuing (extending lines of argument); and Resisting (rebutting lines of argument). These findings suggest that entrepreneurs need all three strategies as they refine their pitches for their target markets.

show abstract

Section: Research On Pitching and Marketingmentioning

confidence: 99%