7,649
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This paper came from a presentation that I made to the Kauffman UMM Grant Cohort. I originally attempted to add empirics but this approach necessarily reduced the coverage of material: Although the framework is simple and used in practice, it is also on the frontier of research, so there aren't any published academic papers with the empirics. So I opted to break the original submission in two - breaking the empirics back out and leaving this as the best attempt I could make at a narrative-based exploration of the whole framework. It is, as a consequence, a very unusual paper. But most people I showed it to were enthusiastic. It is also reference-bait. Outside the review process, some readers were both amused and worried about its snarky tone, which I'm still trying to address.==Notice==
===2nd R&R===
====RP Constraints====
====Special Issue Questions====
The files are This paper came from a presentation that I made to the Kauffman UMM Grant Cohort. I originally attempted to add empirics but this approach necessarily reduced the coverage of material: Although the framework is simple and used in practice, it is also on the frontier of research, so there aren't any published academic papers with the empirics. So I opted to break the original submission in: E:\projects\MeasuringHGHTEcosystems /bulk/vcdb4two - breaking the empirics back out and leaving this as the best attempt I could make at a narrative-based exploration of the whole framework. It is, as a consequence, a very unusual paper. But most people I showed it to were enthusiastic. It is also reference-bait. Outside the review process, some readers were both amused and worried about its snarky tone, which I'm still trying to address.
==Notice==This paper had a storied submission process:*The deadline for resubmission was June 15th, 2020. Before this deadline, I emailed the editors and offered them either this version of the paper, which contains no empirics, or an empirical paper without examples or definitions. I received no response.*This version of the paper was broken into twosubmitted as an R&R to a Special Issue of Research Policy on June 10th, 2020, with manuscript number RESPOL-D-19-01438R1. *On September 15th, I sent an email to the editors requesting information but received no response. *I wrote to the editors again on October 27th, this time using the Elvesier form, to request another update. The last status reported by Elvesier (https://ees.elsevier.com/respol/default.asp) was 'Required Reviews Complete' on October 9th, 2020.*Measuring HGHT Entrepreneurship EcosystemsOn October 28th, I received an email saying: "Hello Ed. I hope to get back to you shortly. I have two good reviews and I’m waiting on a third. This most definitely will be another R&R. More soon"*On November 8th, I got an official email about the paper that said: "We have now contains received the definitionsreferees' reports on your paper, measurescopies of which I enclose below for your information. As you will see, the referees make various comments and examplesuggestions for improvement. It is an informalI have given up on the third reviewer and want to return the paper to you." However, by-example theory paperthis email only contained one review. I requested clarification and noted that Reviewer 3 had asked for empirics.*[[Determinants of Future Investment On November 11th I got an email that said: "Hello Ed, This is strange. The comments were in Uthe comments to the editor. Here they are and they are not worth that much. This special issue has a specific purpose.S '''You do not need to run regressions!'''" (Note that the comments are below as Reviewer 1. Startup Cities]]: The empirical analysis of ESOs is now in this They indicate that the reviewer accepted the paper!.)
Measuring High-Growth High-Technology Entrepreneurship Ecosystems (view source)
Revision as of 18:32, 7 December 2020
, 18:32, 7 December 2020no edit summary
|Has paper status=R and R
}}
==Current Version==
<pdf>File:MeasuringHGHTEntrepreneurshipEcosystemsV3-3.pdf</pdf>
===Timeline of Submission=Files== The files are in: E:\projects\MeasuringHGHTEcosystems /bulk/vcdb4
This paper had a storied submission processwas broken into two:*The deadline for resubmission was June 15th, 2020. Before this deadline, I emailed the editors and offered them either this version of Measuring HGHT Entrepreneurship Ecosystems: This now contains the paper, which contains no empirics, or an empirical paper without examples or definitions. I received no response.*This version of the paper was submitted as an R&R to a Special Issue of Research Policy on June 10th, 2020measures, with manuscript number RESPOL-D-19-01438R1and example. *On September 15th, I sent It is an email to the editors requesting information but received no response. *I wrote to the editors again on October 27th, this time using the Elvesier forminformal, to request another update. The last status reported by Elvesier (https://ees.elsevier.com/respol/default.asp) was 'Required Reviews Complete' on October 9th, 2020-example theory paper.*On October 28th, I received an email saying: "Hello Ed. I hope to get back to you shortly[[Determinants of Future Investment in U. I have two good reviews and I’m waiting on a thirdS. This most definitely will be another R&R. More soon"*On November 8th, I got an official email about the paper that saidStartup Cities]]: "We have now received the referees' reports on your paper, copies The empirical analysis of which I enclose below for your information. As you will see, the referees make various comments and suggestions for improvement. I have given up on the third reviewer and want to return the paper to you." However, this email only contained one review. I requested clarification and noted that Reviewer 3 had asked for empirics.*On November 11th I got an email that said: "Hello Ed, This ESOs is strange. The comments were now in the comments to the editor. Here they are and they are not worth that much. This special issue has a specific purpose. '''You do not need to run regressionsthis paper!'''" (Note that the comments are below as Reviewer 1. They indicate that the reviewer accepted the paper.)
Note that there Reviewer 2 never returned any comments.
In my letter to the reviewer, I can explain that this paper is for a special issue and that the editors and I have agreed that this should not be and an empirical paper and that should not contain regressions or other tests. That might tamp down their vitriol somewhat. Whether I deliver back a "major revision" is in the eye of the beholder, and there's no need to draw attention to this demand.
Although no-one has asked me to, I need to cut down the length of the paper. RP asks for a maximum word count of 8,000-10,000, though does allow exceptions. Using pdftotext and wc, or doing a count in the tex file, it looks like I'm up near 17k. However, both approaches drastically inflate the total with table entries, TeX commands, etc. I expect the current true count is closer to 15k. I need to get it down to at most 12k.
Because the last round was also an R&R, I presumably met all the other constraints.
The special issue posed a series of questions (the full list is below) that I might rephrase to statements as follows:
#Beyond direct pipeline components, we should think about universities, corporations, and other participants.
#The measures should be able to assess the question: To what extent is government policy accelerating or inhibiting the progress of entrepreneurial ecosystems?
===Reviewers Comments===
The raw reviewer's comments are as follows:
====Reviewer 1's Comments====
In summary, more skepticism about the usefulness of the metrics and the framework, and more empiricism is necessary.
==FilesTimeline of Submission==
==Research Policy Special Issue==
==Data and Analysis==
The paper will use uses [[vcdb4]] and [[US Startup City Ranking]], as well as a wealth of old McNair material. Sources include (copied to the project folder unless otherwise noted):
*[[Hubs]]: Hubs Data v2_'16.xlsx
*[[Federal Grant Data]], including NIH, NSF and other grant data, especially SBIR/STTR. Possibly also contract data.
