| name | jbv-writing-style |
| description | Use when polishing the prose of a Journal of Business Venturing (JBV) manuscript — front-loading the entrepreneurial phenomenon, writing for a multidisciplinary audience, honoring JBV's openness to narrative/interpretive voice, and applying Elsevier reference conventions and a ≤250-word abstract. Late-stage polish; do not use as a substitute for a real entrepreneurship-theory contribution (jbv-contribution-framing). |
Writing Style (jbv-writing-style)
When to trigger
- The prose buries the entrepreneurial phenomenon under jargon or method detail
- The paper reads as written for one discipline only
- You are tightening the abstract, intro, and discussion before submission
- A reviewer says the argument is "hard to follow" or "the entrepreneurship is lost"
Phenomenon-forward writing
JBV is phenomenon-driven, so the writing must put the entrepreneurial phenomenon first:
- Open on the phenomenon: the first paragraph should make a reader feel the entrepreneurial puzzle (a venture-creation tension, a founder/investor decision under uncertainty), not open on a literature gap or a method.
- Front-load the argument: state the question, the mechanism, and the contribution to entrepreneurship early; do not make the reader wait until the discussion.
- Keep entrepreneurship central in every section — methods and results prose should keep tying back to what is learned about the phenomenon, so the paper never reads as a generic study that happened to use startups.
Write for a multidisciplinary reader
Because JBV spans economics, psychology, and sociology, your reader may not share your home discipline:
- Define discipline-specific constructs on first use; avoid unexplained jargon from one lens.
- When you integrate lenses, signpost the move explicitly so an economist and a psychologist both follow.
Voice: deductive and narrative are both legitimate
JBV welcomes "theories, narratives, and interpretations." Match voice to mode:
- Hypothesis-testing: crisp, active, claim-first sentences; hypotheses stated plainly.
- Narrative/interpretive: a coherent, vivid account is appropriate and valued — but it must still be disciplined theorizing, not storytelling for its own sake.
House style
- Abstract: concise and factual, not exceeding 250 words; convey phenomenon, approach, and contribution.
- References: flexible at first submission if complete and consistent; current Guide for Authors says the journal style after acceptance uses numbered references in square brackets.
- Active voice, present tense for established findings, past tense for what you did.
Checklist
Anti-patterns
- Method-first opening that hides the entrepreneurial stakes.
- Single-discipline jargon that excludes JBV's broader audience.
- Story without theory mistaken for "narrative" — JBV wants disciplined narrative.
- Abstract over 250 words or that omits the contribution.
Style execution pass for Journal of Business Venturing
Treat this skill as an executable review pass, not a prose hint. First lock the entrepreneurial mechanism, level of analysis, evidence design, and boundary conditions for ventures; then judge whether the current manuscript answers the venue's real reader: entrepreneurship reviewers who ask whether the paper advances venture formation, opportunity, founder, or ecosystem theory.
- Do the pass: Rewrite the first two pages so each paragraph starts from the venue-level claim, not from chronology or method inventory; preserve exact source-map limits and move technical overflow to appendix or supplement.
- Return a ledger: give
claim / evidence / risk / manuscript location rows, so the next agent can edit rather than rediscover the issue.
- Sibling guard: compare against Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice for broader entrepreneurship, Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal for strategy interface, AMJ for general management; if a sibling owns the contribution, recommend re-routing before polishing format.
- Stop condition: do not give submission-ready advice until the pack's
resources/official-source-map.md has been checked for volatile rules and the manuscript has one concrete fix for the largest venue-specific risk.
Output format
【Hook】does it open on the phenomenon? fix ...
【Front-loading】question/mechanism/contribution early? ...
【Multidisciplinary clarity】jargon defined; integration signposted ...
【Voice】deductive | disciplined-narrative — consistent? ...
【Abstract】word count ≤250; phenomenon-first? ...
【References】complete/consistent; numbered style ready for revision/proof? ...
【Next step】jbv-submission
