1) What was the biggest surprise for you in the reading? In other words, what did you read that stood out the most as different from your expectations?
For me, what stood out most was the section where the chapter said how research has shown a distinct lack of planning on the part of new ventures, especially where entrepreneurs had lack of expertise or skills. If I want to start a venture in a certain industry I would obviously want to know as much as possible about that industry.
2) Identify at least one part of the reading that was confusing to you.
I was confused in how the reading said that entrepreneurial ventures can prosper by occupying a position that a competitor once held but has ceded through years of imitation and straddling. If a competitor's position has been imitated before, why would someone want to occupy this competitor's position?
3) If you were able to ask two questions to the author, what would you ask? Why?
I would ask, why have entrepreneurs shown in reports lacked so much strategic planning? Is it because it is something they are not taught to do or do they just focus on the end results of making money right away rather than the long-term of a business?
4) Was there anything you think the author was wrong about? Where do you disagree with what she or he said? How?
It's hard for me to disagree with what the author says because these aren't things I already knew about beforehand so I don't have anything to compare the information to.
No comments:
Post a Comment