Duncan Chapple: The Second Most Important Pitch Supervisors: Prof Neil Pollock (UEBS); Prof Rob W...

Get Started. It's Free
or sign up with your email address
Rocket clouds
Duncan Chapple: The Second Most Important Pitch Supervisors: Prof Neil Pollock (UEBS); Prof Rob Williams (ISSTI) Visit: http://bit.ly/DCPhD by Mind Map: Duncan Chapple: The Second Most Important Pitch Supervisors: Prof Neil Pollock (UEBS); Prof Rob Williams (ISSTI) Visit: http://bit.ly/DCPhD

1. What?

1.1. Every major ICT product or service must first be pitched to industry analysts

1.2. What happens when companies pitch to ICT industry analysts?

2. Why?

2.1. Important because analysts are a gatekeeper on the success of ICT firms, yet no research into what happens in and around the pitch

2.1.1. Major contribution to academic research into industry analyst

2.1.2. Potential impact on practitioners

2.1.3. Growing conversation about possible regulation of analysts in the way of US court cases

3. Whose research?

3.1. Substantial parallel research on pitching to entrenpreneurs

3.1.1. Kirsh et al (2009): Emphasis is on oral presentations rather than written submissions

3.1.2. Jourdan, 2012:

3.1.2.1. Interpersonal

3.1.2.1.1. Presentational ability to sell themselves, clarity. structure, personal quality

3.1.2.2. Dispositional

3.1.2.2.1. Social skills, persuasiveness, emotional intelligence, personal appearance, as well as social adaptability.

3.2. New research on industry analysts

3.2.1. Pollock & Williams, 2009, 2010, 2011

3.2.2. Ikeler, 2007

3.3. Substantial body of work by practitioners

3.3.1. Mallach, 2013

3.4. Sociology of Expectations

3.4.1. van Lente (2012): context is saturated with formal and informal expectations.

4. How I'll research

4.1. Paraethnography

4.1.1. Involve firms and analysts in the shaping of the research agenda

4.1.1.1. Gain specific case-studies

4.1.1.2. Initial survey and call for particpants

4.1.1.3. Outline scope

4.1.2. Anticipated scope

4.1.2.1. 'Good' outcomes

4.1.2.1.1. Endorsement

4.1.2.1.2. Learning

4.1.2.2. 'Bad' outcomes

4.1.2.2.1. Falling off the radar

4.1.2.2.2. Being ignored

4.1.2.2.3. Active exclusion

4.1.2.2.4. Learning

4.1.2.3. Good performance

4.1.2.4. Bad performance

4.1.2.5. Impact of artifacts

4.1.2.5.1. Valuation of artifacts

4.1.3. Complex process

4.1.3.1. Category formation

4.1.3.2. Tempo

4.1.3.3. Information used

4.1.3.4. Gender

4.1.3.5. Disposition

4.1.3.6. Interpersonal factors

5. Which journals?

5.1. Raising Capital

5.2. Venture Capital

5.3. Entrepreneurial Executive

5.4. Strategic Management Journal

5.5. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management

5.6. Journal of Promotion Management