Teague, B., Gorton, M. D., & Liu, Y. (2020). Different pitches for different stages of entrepreneurial development: the practice of pitching to business angels. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 32(3-4), 334-352.

Teague, B., Gorton, M. D., & Liu, Y. (2020). Different pitches for different stages of entrepreneurial development: the practice of pitching to business angels. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 32(3-4), 334-352.

OK, so this is an ethnography of an angel organization. Three authors. Two spent 27 months in the organization, while the other one stayed outside in order to offer an outsider's perspective. They respond to this assumption in the literature that pitching can be studied positivistically ("a transactional activity"; "the transactional perspective"), by objectively isolating variables and testing hypotheses. This assumption has led scholars thinking that the pitch either causes or fails to cause investment through the angel's rational choice ("the pitch is not directly connected to the investment decision"). To buck this trend, Teague, Gordon & Liu rely on practice theory (Schatzki) in order to understand the pitch relationally. 

Evidence for the relational importance of the pitch comes from Wiltbank and Boeker (2007), who found that the professional industry expertise of the angel played a significant role in determining whether to move forward into due-diligence. Therefore, the decision to enter due-diligence phase is not typically made in response to the investment quality of the pitch alone (i.e. an objective and rational decision), but rather is interpreted relationally based on perceived fit between the pitch and the investor’s own personal history. This failure to adequately understand the socially constructed environment within which the pitch to business angels takes place has previously been identified as a weakness in the literature (Mitteness et al. 2016). The result is that we still know little about how the shared practical concerns explain pitching practices. To address this gap in the literature, we reconceive the pitch as an entrepreneurial practice which we study through direct observation, which allows the researcher(s) to experience the practitioners, the praxis, and the practice in situ. 

Yet some prior research has provided evidence indicating that the pitch is not directly connected to the investment decision, but rather that the relationship between the pitch and the investment decision is mediated by the process of due diligence {Kawasaki 2015 #550}. 

In doing this, they find "four different types of pitch that appear to be processually related across time: 

• pre-investment, 
• investment, 
• update, and 
• developmental."

Pre-investment

• "Pre-investment pitches differed in their inclusion of a slide related to traction. One of the companies had early sales and chose to include this information; the other was still hoping to negotiate a contract with a large utility company for initial trial. This difference between the companies also showed up in the decision to include a discussion of financial projections for the company. The company that had early sales, SnowBuzz, included this information, whereas the company without initial sales, ShockProof, did not. Finally, neither pitch included an investment request or any discussion about an exit strategy for the business."
• "Pre- investment pitches involved sharing the business with angel organization members under with the explicit understanding that the business was not seeking investment at the time. These pitches allowed entrepreneurs to identify major weaknesses that would prevent them from obtaining investment without damaging potential investment relationships or initiating due diligence before they were ready."

Investment

• "As can be seen in Table 5, numerous elements were common to every investment pitch observed. These included a statement of the vision for the organization, a description of the market opportunity, a clear statement of the problem, a description of the product or service. Investment pitches differed from other categories in three key ways. First, content of the pitches (the pitch decks) were far more consistent than other categories. Additionally, all investment pitches included an ask, or a statement about the amount of money the business was seeking to raise, the percentage of equity in the business (ownership stake) that was being offered in exchange for the investment, and the amount – if any – that had already been raised. This information also allowed attendees at the lunches to understand the valuation that the entrepreneur was attempting to establish for the company (how much they believed it to be worth). Additionally, almost every investment pitch – there was a single exception – clearly stated a plan for exit within three to ten years. The only exception communicated a plan for paying a return to investors that would include a gain, but believed it could be through growth rather than eventual sale of the company."
• "far more consistent than other categories"--could this mean that the consistency is not related to the development of the genre itself? but rather whether the startup is ready for investment or not?
• "Additionally, almost every investment pitch – there was a single exception – clearly stated a plan for exit within three to ten years."--this also differs from what I've heard on medium
• "Investment pitches made up the largest category observed throughout our study, but only by a slim margin (27 investment pitches versus 23 update pitches)."
• "First, content of the pitches (the pitch decks) were far more consistent than other categories."
• yea look at table 5, every category but two is "AI"
• "Investment pitches, as has been posited elsewhere in the literature {Clark 2008 #348; Mason and Harrison 2002 #320}, involved presenting the business along with an offer of a specified percentage of ownership in exchange for a specific total investment from all investors (e.g. 15% for $750,000)."

Update

• "Unlike other categories of pitch, these were unique in that they served to reinforce the success of the angel organization as an investment group."
• "update pitches served to inform existing angel investors as to how the business was doing. Additionally, entrepreneurs often presented different types of pitch at different points in time."

Developmental

• "Beyond the changes observed during pre-lunch communication and in the behaviour of the angel president, there were also differences in the pitch content (pitch deck) that were observed. For starters, none of the developmental pitches included a discussion about traction. This was not surprising, as the businesses had not begun selling at the time of the presentation. Also, only two of the three developmental pitch teams specifically discussed a growth strategy, only one included financial projections, and only one specifically discussed the competitive landscape (the competi- tion) facing the new business. Finally, none of the developmental pitches mentioned an exit strategy (a plan to liquidate the business to return invested dollars to the investor with a gain)." OK, you'll have to cite this
• relates to the business plan students, the winners of the competition
• Developmental pitches emerged late in the field study as an innovation on the part of the angel organization to more effectively develop investable businesses within the regional ecosystem. As the name indicates, these involved interactions that were intended to help direct the aspiring student entrepreneurs as they made early decisions about how to develop the business.  

Back to the method

• 3 years of ethnographic study
• 3 person research team
• 41 interviews & follow up interviews
• No triangulation (they didn't use the WORD at least, but they did collect different types of data, but there's no mention of assessing the different types of data against each other)
• No IRB (that I can see)
• participant observation
• weak collection of artifacts (just websites, looks like)
• unit of analysis is practice: i.e., an assemblage
• "Reconsidering the pitch through the lens of practice theory changes our view of the problem substantially. Prior studies have started from the assumption of individuals as self-interested and rational actors. This assumption has led researchers to focus on the individual and specific behaviours as the focal unit of analysis while seeking broadly generalizable constructs deemed to explain variation in the dependent outcome. Practice theory, on the other hand, seeks to deeply understand the practice. This leads us to study the pitch as, ‘an assemblage of performances made durable by being inscribed in human bodies and minds, objects and texts, and knotted together in such a way that the results of one performance become the resource for another’ (Nicolini 2012, 2). Therefore, we expect that the pitch is routinely created and recreated using bodies, tools, and discourse, while not relying on, or being reducible to any specific body, tool, or discourse."
• studied an ecosystem rather than just a single organization. the following are a part of the BROADER ecosystem rather than the MAIN organization they studied
• student business plan competition
• incubator
• seed capital fund
• 37 hours observation at the broader organizations, 46 hours at the main organization

"By drawing upon social practice theory to reframe the pitch as a practice that connects the entrepreneur with numerous individuals and organizational entities, we offer the first study to demonstrate longitudinal, ongoing, and persistent relationships that are created and recreated around different kinds of pitch."--FALSE!!!!!!!

"These commonalities allowed them to ‘hang together’ as a practice, while differences in stated purpose and content led us to clearly identify different versions of the practice."--‘hang together’=Schatzki

"Whereas prior research has assumed a singular transaction-based exchange, our research indicates that investment pitches are simply one exchange among many that serve to develop businesses, entrepreneurs, and relationships between entrepreneurs and the angel organization over time."--no shit, read Spinuzzi

Transition(s)

"Our work highlights new and distinct types of pitch, while also highlighting the longitudinal relationship that develops between entrepreneurs and angel organizations over time as entrepreneurs reconnect with the angel organization over time through the guise of different pitches"

• I'll repeat that, that's important, "...the longitudinal relationship that develops between entrepreneurs and angel organizations over time as entrepreneurs reconnect with the angel organization over time through the guise of different pitches"

"the connection between pitches and entrepre- neurial development over time"

"Our work also has practical implications for entrepreneurs. The findings in this study suggest that entrepreneurs who are building high-growth, investment type businesses, would benefit from efforts to add angel organization influencers – especially gatekeepers – to their personal network. Additionally, rather than simply assuming they must pitch for investment on a one-time spin of the roulette wheel, our work suggests that opportunities frequently exist to develop the business for a pre-investment pitch. This pre-investment pitch not only builds familiarity with organizational members, but allows entrepreneurs to identify fatal flaws and to fix them before they actually pitch for investment. Finally, entrepreneurs should view the pitch as a communication practice that maintains relational ties and support over time, and should recognize the significance of the update pitch. This pitch was the second most common in our study, representing only slightly fewer pitches than did investment pitches."--so they've "discovered" the importance of revision, that revision is supposed to come early and often

"relational dynamics that play out over years"

"shifting the focus on the pitch from the behaviour of an individual, to a practice that is enacted in a community-based context"

https://utexas.box.com/s/g3unuj1h7s3vmr4bnvk0xl8j9ltl97oe