Affärsrådgivning samspel mellan entreprenör och experter

Sammanfattning: A frequent subject in the domestic as well as in the international political debate is thediscussion about economic growth. In these discussions entrepreneurship is often pointed outas one of the most important factors for economic growth. To stimulate entrepreneurship anumber of networks have been arranged, which support the entrepreneur with businesscompetence. One of these networks is the international network of CONNECT. The coreactivity in this network is the springboard. During the springboard session the entrepreneurmeets a number of different experts who judge the entrepreneur’s business idea and businessconcept. Will it stand for commercialisation? The purpose of this study is to describe andanalyse the form of competence support which occurs during meetings between entrepreneursand experts. The analysis focuses on the interaction which appears during these meetings andthe effects that it creates.11 springboards where examined closely. These springboards were videotaped and theiractors were interviewed. This study has a constructive perspective. A combination ofconversation analysis (CA) and discourse analysis (DA) is used to examine the interactionduring these springboards. To get a deeper understanding of the interplay between theentrepreneur and the springboard panel theoretical concepts of institutional theory,institutionalised conversation, boundary objects, group polarisation are used. The logic whichthe springboard builds on is also discussed. In this case the notions of causation andeffectuation play a central role.The patterns of interaction differed between the springboards which concerned venture capitaland those which only concerned strategic advice. These differences could also be connectedto the company’s stage of development. The interaction differences seem to be inherent in thediscursive practice which appears between the entrepreneur and the springboard panel. Theentrepreneurs, who applied for venture capital, generally experienced the springboard as lessconstructive. In these springboards, the panel were highly focused on the risks and theproblems connected with the business project. This criticism could be related to the termgroup polarisation and institutional factors.A proposal of how these negative effects could be reduced is presented. According toresearch, companies which build their activities on a new business idea or are in an early stageof development, have more use of a logic which pays more attention to contingencies and thecreation of strategic alliances. The conclusion is that the springboard should adjust to thecompany’s situation.