From entrepreneurship-theory-and-practice-skills
Polishes prose for Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice manuscripts to achieve a theory-forward, accessible voice. Use when introductions are unfocused, abstracts read as methods summaries, or implications for practice are flat.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/entrepreneurship-theory-and-practice-skills:etp-writing-styleThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
- The introduction takes pages to reach the point; the contribution is buried
ETP prose is theory-forward and accessible. It is more conceptual than a finance journal and more practitioner-aware than a pure-theory management outlet — the USASBE heritage means a reader expects the writing to connect to entrepreneurial reality. The hallmark is a paper that a sophisticated scholar reads for the theory and a thoughtful practitioner reads for the implication, without either feeling shortchanged. Write in APA style, in clear declarative prose, and keep the entrepreneurial phenomenon concrete (real venturing situations, not abstractions about "organizations").
ETP intros reward a tight, signposted opening. A reliable structure:
Write the introduction after the analysis and contribution settle; an intro drafted early almost always promises the wrong paper.
The abstract should state the puzzle, the mechanism, the key finding with a sense of magnitude, and the dual contribution (theory + practice). A common ETP abstract failure is spending most of the words on data and method while never saying what the reader should now believe. Confirm the current abstract length limit on the SAGE author-instructions page before finalizing (检索于 2026-06;以官网为准).
The discussion should (1) restate the theory contribution against the conversation, (2) draw out boundary conditions and a research agenda, and (3) deliver the practice implications as a genuine section — mechanism-derived, actor-named, honest about limits. ETP discussions that end on a perfunctory "managers should pay attention" undercut an otherwise strong paper.
Compare two openings for the same paper. Weak: "Entrepreneurship is important for economic growth. Prior research has studied many factors affecting venture performance. In this paper, we study the effect of founder cognition on outcomes." It is a truism, names no conversation, and hides the contribution. Strong: "Founders routinely bet a venture's survival on intuitions that, by any predictive standard, look reckless — yet some of these bets are exactly what keeps young firms alive. We show that effectual, affordable-loss reasoning extends venture survival in highly uncertain markets but not in stable ones, qualifying the effectuation–causation debate. For investors and accelerators, this means predictive business plans are not a universal quality signal: in uncertain markets, evidence of affordable-loss experimentation is the better bet." The strong version hooks with a real entrepreneurial puzzle, names the conversation, states the matched theory-and-practice contribution within the first paragraph, and keeps the phenomenon concrete — exactly the ETP voice. Note it was written after the analysis settled.
【Journal】Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice
【Intro】contribution stated by page 1-2? hook is a real puzzle? Y/N
【Abstract】states what to believe + magnitude + dual contribution? Y/N
【Construct discipline】names consistent, defined once? Y/N
【Phenomenon visible】claims anchored to concrete venturing? Y/N
【Practice section】mechanism-derived + actor-named? Y/N
【APA / abstract limit】confirmed (待核实)? Y/N
【Next skill】etp-submission
npx claudepluginhub brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills --plugin entrepreneurship-theory-and-practice-skillsPolishes JBV manuscript prose: front-loads entrepreneurial phenomenon, writes for multidisciplinary audience, applies Elsevier reference conventions, and enforces ≤250-word abstract.
Polishes prose and structure for Research Policy manuscripts when writing clarity is the bottleneck for interdisciplinary innovation-studies audiences.
Polishes RAST manuscript prose to front-load the contribution, write an abstract that lands, and adopt the accounting house voice. Use on a near-final pass after results and exhibits are settled.