Topic Selection & JBV Fit (jbv-topic-selection)
When to trigger
- You have an idea or a dataset but are unsure it belongs in JBV rather than a general management or strategy outlet
- A co-author asks "is this really an entrepreneurship paper?"
- You want to pick which disciplinary lens (economics, psychology, sociology) drives the question
- A desk reject said the work is "off-topic" or "entrepreneurship is incidental"
The JBV fit test
JBV publishes research on the entrepreneurial phenomenon in its myriad of forms — the antecedents, mechanisms, and consequences of entrepreneurship. Before anything else, pass this gate:
- Centrality: Is the creation of new ventures or new economic activity (or entrepreneurial cognition, behavior, financing, teams, social/sustainable/international entrepreneurship, or ecosystems) the heart of the contribution? If entrepreneurship is merely the empirical setting for a general theory of organizations, JBV is the wrong venue — that distinction is the single most common desk-reject reason at this FT50 flagship.
- Phenomenon, not method: The question must matter for understanding entrepreneurship, not exist to showcase a dataset or technique.
- Disciplinary lens: JBV is grounded in economics, psychology, and sociology and welcomes anthropology, geography, history, and multiple functional areas (finance, management, marketing, strategy). Name the primary lens — it shapes the mechanism and likely area-editor domain.
Sharpening the question
- State the question as a tension or puzzle in the entrepreneurial phenomenon, not as "no one has studied X in startups" (gap-spotting reads as weak here).
- Identify the unit and stage of the entrepreneurial process: nascent/pre-founding, founding, early growth, exit/failure. JBV studies span the whole life course.
- Decide whether you are offering "theories, narratives, and interpretations" or testing hypotheses — JBV explicitly welcomes both, so a rich interpretive question is legitimate, not a fallback.
Domain sweep (common JBV territories)
- Opportunity recognition, evaluation, and entrepreneurial judgment/cognition
- New-venture financing (VC, angels, crowdfunding, microfinance, bootstrapping)
- Founding teams, identity, passion, and entrepreneurial behavior
- Social, sustainable, and international/transnational entrepreneurship
- Entrepreneurial ecosystems, institutions, and regional context
Checklist
Fit triage and venue routing
When the centrality gate is borderline, use this table to decide whether JBV is the home or a sibling owns the question.
| Signal in the idea |
Verdict and routing |
| Creating a venture/opportunity under uncertainty. |
Strong JBV fit; build the mechanism in jbv-theory-development. |
| Strategy/competitive advantage of an established firm. |
Likely Strategic Management Journal — entrepreneurship is incidental. |
| Broad entrepreneurship theory or pedagogy/identity. |
Possibly Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice; check whether JBV's micro/process emphasis fits. |
| Reads identically for any organization. |
Off-fit; reframe around the venture primitive or route to a general-management outlet. |
Worked micro-example: a fit decision (illustrative)
An author has Crunchbase data on AI startups and a finding that "advisory-board prestige predicts Series A." Triage:
- Centrality test: as stated, a signaling/legitimacy effect that could describe any firm raising capital — fails the gate.
- The fix that earns fit: reframe to the nascent stage — does advisory prestige substitute for the missing track record that defines the liability of newness, vanishing once a venture has its own operating history? Newness becomes the mechanism.
- Lens: sociology (legitimacy/endorsement) primary, economics (signaling) secondary — a multidisciplinary framing fitting JBV.
- Stage/unit: pre-Series-A nascent ventures, founder-and-venture level.
- Verdict: fit after reframing; the raw "prestige → funding" version is a desk-reject risk.
Calibration anchors (hedged)
- The highest-leverage screen is the centrality gate: if the contribution survives deleting the word "startup," it is probably not yet a JBV paper.
- JBV's identity leans toward micro-foundations and the process of emergence — opportunity, cognition, founding, early financing — differentiating it from strategy-interface entrepreneurship venues.
- Scope and welcomed disciplines evolve; treat any precise scope statement as guidance and confirm against the journal's current aims-and-scope.
Anti-patterns
- Entrepreneurship as window dressing — a generic org/strategy study run on a startup sample.
- Method-first — "I have Crunchbase data, what can I ask?" instead of a phenomenon puzzle.
- Single-discipline tunnel vision when a multidisciplinary framing is stronger.
- Gap-spotting ("understudied") as the sole justification.
Output format
【Phenomenon】the entrepreneurial puzzle in one sentence ...
【Centrality check】entrepreneurship central? yes/no + why ...
【Lens】primary discipline + secondary ...
【Stage/unit】nascent / founding / growth / exit ...
【Mode】hypothesis-testing or narrative/interpretive ...
【JBV fit verdict】fit / borderline / off-fit (→ alternative venue) ...
【Next step】jbv-theory-development
Source: brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills → Journal-of-Business-Venturing-Skills/skills/jbv-topic-selection/SKILL.md
1---2name: jbv-topic-selection3description: Use when shaping or stress-testing a research question for the Journal of Business Venturing (JBV) — confirming the entrepreneurial phenomenon is central, picking a multidisciplinary lens, and checking fit before investing in theory or data. Defines the question; it does not build the mechanism (jbv-theory-development) or frame the contribution (jbv-contribution-framing).4---567# Topic Selection & JBV Fit (jbv-topic-selection)89## When to trigger1011- You have an idea or a dataset but are unsure it belongs in JBV rather than a general management or strategy outlet12- A co-author asks "is this really an entrepreneurship paper?"13- You want to pick which disciplinary lens (economics, psychology, sociology) drives the question14- A desk reject said the work is "off-topic" or "entrepreneurship is incidental"1516## The JBV fit test1718JBV publishes research on the **entrepreneurial phenomenon in its myriad of forms** — the antecedents, mechanisms, and consequences of entrepreneurship. Before anything else, pass this gate:1920- **Centrality**: Is the creation of new ventures or new economic activity (or entrepreneurial cognition, behavior, financing, teams, social/sustainable/international entrepreneurship, or ecosystems) the heart of the contribution? If entrepreneurship is merely the empirical setting for a general theory of organizations, JBV is the wrong venue — that distinction is the single most common desk-reject reason at this FT50 flagship.21- **Phenomenon, not method**: The question must matter for understanding entrepreneurship, not exist to showcase a dataset or technique.22- **Disciplinary lens**: JBV is grounded in economics, psychology, and sociology and welcomes anthropology, geography, history, and multiple functional areas (finance, management, marketing, strategy). Name the primary lens — it shapes the mechanism and likely area-editor domain.2324## Sharpening the question2526- State the question as a tension or puzzle in the entrepreneurial phenomenon, not as "no one has studied X in startups" (gap-spotting reads as weak here).27- Identify the unit and stage of the entrepreneurial process: nascent/pre-founding, founding, early growth, exit/failure. JBV studies span the whole life course.28- Decide whether you are offering "theories, narratives, and interpretations" or testing hypotheses — JBV explicitly welcomes both, so a rich interpretive question is legitimate, not a fallback.2930## Domain sweep (common JBV territories)3132- Opportunity recognition, evaluation, and entrepreneurial judgment/cognition33- New-venture financing (VC, angels, crowdfunding, microfinance, bootstrapping)34- Founding teams, identity, passion, and entrepreneurial behavior35- Social, sustainable, and international/transnational entrepreneurship36- Entrepreneurial ecosystems, institutions, and regional context3738## Checklist3940- [ ] Entrepreneurship / new venture creation is the *central* contribution, not the setting41- [ ] Primary disciplinary lens (econ / psych / sociology / other) named42- [ ] Stage of the entrepreneurial process specified43- [ ] Question framed as a phenomenon-puzzle, not a literature gap44- [ ] Plausible area-editor domain identified for routing45- [ ] Decision made: hypothesis-testing vs. narrative/interpretive theorizing4647## Fit triage and venue routing4849When the centrality gate is borderline, use this table to decide whether JBV is the home or a sibling owns the question.5051| Signal in the idea | Verdict and routing |52|-----------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|53| *Creating* a venture/opportunity under uncertainty. | Strong JBV fit; build the mechanism in `jbv-theory-development`. |54| Strategy/competitive advantage of an established firm. | Likely Strategic Management Journal — entrepreneurship is incidental. |55| Broad entrepreneurship theory or pedagogy/identity. | Possibly Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice; check whether JBV's micro/process emphasis fits.|56| Reads identically for any organization. | Off-fit; reframe around the venture primitive or route to a general-management outlet.|5758## Worked micro-example: a fit decision (illustrative)5960An author has Crunchbase data on AI startups and a finding that "advisory-board prestige predicts Series A." Triage:6162- **Centrality test**: as stated, a signaling/legitimacy effect that could describe any firm raising capital — fails the gate.63- **The fix that earns fit**: reframe to the *nascent* stage — does advisory prestige substitute for the missing track record that defines the **liability of newness**, vanishing once a venture has its own operating history? Newness becomes the mechanism.64- **Lens**: sociology (legitimacy/endorsement) primary, economics (signaling) secondary — a multidisciplinary framing fitting JBV.65- **Stage/unit**: pre-Series-A nascent ventures, founder-and-venture level.66- **Verdict**: fit *after* reframing; the raw "prestige → funding" version is a desk-reject risk.6768## Calibration anchors (hedged)6970- The highest-leverage screen is the **centrality gate**: if the contribution survives deleting the word "startup," it is probably not yet a JBV paper.71- JBV's identity leans toward **micro-foundations and the process of emergence** — opportunity, cognition, founding, early financing — differentiating it from strategy-interface entrepreneurship venues.72- Scope and welcomed disciplines evolve; treat any precise scope statement as guidance and **confirm against the journal's current aims-and-scope**.7374## Anti-patterns7576- **Entrepreneurship as window dressing** — a generic org/strategy study run on a startup sample.77- **Method-first** — "I have Crunchbase data, what can I ask?" instead of a phenomenon puzzle.78- **Single-discipline tunnel vision** when a multidisciplinary framing is stronger.79- **Gap-spotting** ("understudied") as the sole justification.8081## Output format8283```84【Phenomenon】the entrepreneurial puzzle in one sentence ...85【Centrality check】entrepreneurship central? yes/no + why ...86【Lens】primary discipline + secondary ...87【Stage/unit】nascent / founding / growth / exit ...88【Mode】hypothesis-testing or narrative/interpretive ...89【JBV fit verdict】fit / borderline / off-fit (→ alternative venue) ...90【Next step】jbv-theory-development91```9293---9495**Source:** [`brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills`](https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) → `Journal-of-Business-Venturing-Skills/skills/jbv-topic-selection/SKILL.md`