Affärsrådgivning : samspel mellan entreprenör och experter

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