Gregory P. Pogue

2 articles
The University of Texas at Austin ORCID: 0000-0002-4196-8873

Loading profile…

Publication Timeline

Co-Author Network

Research Topics

Who Reads Pogue

Gregory P. Pogue's work travels primarily in Other / unclustered (50% of indexed citations) · 8 total indexed citations from 2 clusters.

By cluster

  • Other / unclustered — 4
  • Technical Communication — 4

Counts include only citations from indexed journals that deposit reference lists with CrossRef. Authors whose readers publish primarily in venues without reference deposits will appear less central than they are. See coverage notes →

  1. Linked but Desynched: An OODA Analysis of Associated Entrepreneurship Accelerator Programs
    Abstract

    Accelerators are programs that support fledgling ventures with a set curriculum, moving them through a cycle of venture development that culminates in a Demo Day pitch in which the ventures argue for their viability. Yet firms are often involved in multiple programs with conflicting objectives and cycles. No research has addressed such conflicts. This article examines an accelerator program that is partially linked to others in order to share resources. Drawing on the OODA (observe, orient, decide, act) framework, the authors identify disjunctures between cycles, anchoring this analysis at the final pitch. Working back from this deciding point, they examine interference between the associated programs.

    doi:10.1177/10506519221121813
  2. Go or No Go: Learning to Persuade in an Early-Stage Student Entrepreneurship Program
    Abstract

    Background: Early-stage accelerator programs teach new entrepreneurs how to identify and exploit venture opportunities. In doing so, they implicitly teach these new entrepreneurs how to develop and iterate claims. But since this function of teaching persuasion has been implicit and generally unsystematic, it is unclear how well it works. Literature review: We review related literature on the venture development process, value propositions, and logic orientation (Goods-Dominant vs. Service-Dominant Logic). Research questions: 1. Does an entrepreneurship training program implicitly teach new entrepreneurs to make and iterate persuasive claims? 2. How effectively does it do so, and how can it improve? Research methodology: We examine one such accelerator program via a qualitative case study. In this case study, we collected interviews, observations, and artifacts, then analyzed them with thematic coding. Results/discussion: All teams had received previous entrepreneurship training and mentoring. However, they differed in their problem and logic orientations as well as their stage in the venture development process. These differences related to the extent to which they iterated value propositions in the program. Conclusions: We conclude with recommendations for improving how accelerator programs can better train new entrepreneurs to communicate and persuade.

    doi:10.1109/tpc.2020.2982025