Examining the outcomes of entrepreneur pitch training: an exploratory field study

David Clingingsmith (), Will Drover () and Scott Shane
Additional contact information
David Clingingsmith: Case Western Reserve University
Will Drover: University of Oklahoma
Scott Shane: Case Western Reserve University

Small Business Economics, 2023, vol. 60, issue 3, No 6, 947-974

Abstract: Abstract With the rise of accelerators, angel groups, and business plan competitions, pitching has become an important step for most entrepreneurs raising capital. In this exploratory study, we investigate the effects of pitch training, exploring a variety of outcomes over two time horizons. We conducted a field experiment that randomly assigned 271 would-be entrepreneurs at four elevator pitch competitions to receive one of four pitch training treatments or a null treatment. We observe that pitch training — when received the day of the competition — leads entrepreneurs to improve their pitches, although it causes short-term disruption to pitch delivery. Over the following 30 months, all varieties of pitch training cause entrepreneurs to work more on their pitches, to participate in more business plan competitions and accelerator programs, and to engage in entrepreneurial learning beyond the pitch itself. Entrepreneurs who receive pitch training also are less likely to have employees and are more likely to abandon their initial ventures and founder roles. We discuss the implications of these exploratory observations for the development of theory about pitch training. Plain English Summary With the rise of accelerators, angel groups, and competitions, pitching has become a crucial skill for entrepreneurs raising capital. What are the short- and long-run consequences of training entrepreneurs to pitch? We conducted a field experiment to explore this question. Participants in four pitch competitions randomly received a pitch training treatment or a null treatment. They then delivered their pitch to real-world investors. We observe that pitch training leads entrepreneurs to improve their pitches but also causes short-term disruption to pitch delivery as they incorporate information. Thirty months later, pitch training caused entrepreneurs to work more on their pitches, participate in more pitch competitions and accelerator programs, and engage in entrepreneurial learning. The main messages for practitioners are, first, that training helps but the effects are nuanced. Absorbing training may take time. Second, pitch training can act as a catalyst for further development outside the pitch itself.

Keywords: Pitching; Startups; Investment; Training; Experiment; Theory development; C93; G24; L26 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2023
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11187-022-00619-4 Abstract (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:kap:sbusec:v:60:y:2023:i:3:d:10.1007_s11187-022-00619-4

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer. ... 29/journal/11187/PS2

DOI: 10.1007/s11187-022-00619-4

Access Statistics for this article

Small Business Economics is currently edited by Zoltan J. Acs and David B. Audretsch

More articles in Small Business Economics from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().