Measuring High-Growth High-Technology Entrepreneurship Ecosystems - Revision history

Ed at 19:47, 30 November 2024

2024-11-30T19:47:51Z

Show changes

Ed: /* Data and Analysis */

2021-06-08T20:46:51Z

Data and Analysis

Ed at 17:49, 31 May 2021

2021-05-31T17:49:04Z

Ed: /* Final Version */

2021-05-31T17:45:43Z

Final Version

Ed at 00:16, 23 May 2021

2021-05-23T00:16:38Z

Ed at 00:16, 23 May 2021

2021-05-23T00:16:20Z

Ed: /* Timeline of Submission */

2021-02-07T02:34:26Z

Timeline of Submission

Ed: /* Notice */

2021-02-07T02:31:22Z

Notice

Ed: /* Notice */

2021-02-07T02:31:09Z

Notice

Ed: /* Current Version */

2021-02-07T02:29:53Z

Current Version

@@ Line 190: / Line 190: @@
 ==Data and Analysis==
-The paper 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):
+The paper uses [[VCDB20]] 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.

@@ Line 6: / Line 6: @@
 ==Final Version==
-The final version was accepted to Research Policy on May 17th, 2021. The 50-day share link is: https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1d8SaB5ASINVf
+*The final version was accepted to Research Policy on May 17th, 2021.
-Egan (2021) - A Framework for Assessing Municipal High-Growth High-Tech Entrepreneurship Policy.pdf
+<pdf>File:Egan_(2021)_-_A_Framework_for_Assessing_Municipal_High-Growth_High-Tech_Entrepreneurship_Policy.pdf</pdf>
-<pdf>File:Egan_(2021)_-_A_Framework_for_Assessing_Municipal_High-Growth_High-Tech_Entrepreneurship_Policy.pdf</pdf>
+The BibTeX reference is (pending update with volume and number):
   @article{EGAN2021104292,
@@ Line 25: / Line 27: @@
+  }
-It was file series v4-6-2 in:
+The final file series was v4-6-2 in:
   E:\projects\MeasuringHGHTEcosystems
   /bulk/vcdb4
 Production files (sent to ResPol):

@@ Line 6: / Line 6: @@
 ==Final Version==
-The final version was accepted to Research Policy on May 17th, 2021. It was file series v4-6-2:
+The final version was accepted to Research Policy on May 17th, 2021. The 50-day share link is: https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1d8SaB5ASINVf
-The files are in:
+Egan (2021) - A Framework for Assessing Municipal High-Growth High-Tech Entrepreneurship Policy.pdf
   E:\projects\MeasuringHGHTEcosystems
   /bulk/vcdb4

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 |Has title=Measuring High-Growth High-Technology Entrepreneurship Ecosystems
 |Has author=Ed Egan,
-|Has paper status=R and R
+|Has paper status=Published
 }}
 ==Final Version==

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 }}
-==Current Version==
+==Final Version==
-The current version is a 2nd R&R at Research Policy. It was (re-)submitted on Feb 6th, 2021:
+The final version was accepted to Research Policy on May 17th, 2021. It was file series v4-6-2:
 The files are in:
   E:\projects\MeasuringHGHTEcosystems
   /bulk/vcdb4
 ==Notice==

@@ Line 137: / Line 137: @@
 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.
-This paper had a storied submission process:
+This paper had a storied resubmission 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 submitted as an R&R to a Special Issue of Research Policy on June 10th, 2020, with manuscript number RESPOL-D-19-01438R1.
+*The first revision of the paper was submitted 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.
 *On 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 received the referees' reports on your paper, copies 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 is strange. The comments were 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 regressions!'''" (Note that the comments are below as Reviewer 1. They indicate that the reviewer accepted the paper.)
+*On November 11th, I got an email that said: "Hello Ed,  This is strange. The comments were 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 regressions!'''" (Note that the comments indicate that reviewer 1 accepted the paper.)
 ==Research Policy Special Issue==

@@ Line 20: / Line 20: @@
 The original Measuring HGHT Entrepreneurship Ecosystems paper was broken into two:
-*:'''A Framework for Assessing Municipal High-Growth
+*:'''A Framework for Assessing Municipal High-Growth High-Technology Entrepreneurship Policy''' now contains the definitions, measures, and examples. It is an inductive, case-study paper.
 *[[Determinants of Future Investment in U.S. Startup Cities]]: The empirical analysis of ESOs is now in this paper!

@@ Line 7: / Line 7: @@
 ==Current Version==
-The current version. which lead to a 2nd R&R at Research Policy is:
+The current version is a 2nd R&R at Research Policy. It was (re-)submitted on Feb 6th, 2021:
-<pdf>File:MeasuringHGHTEntrepreneurshipEcosystemsV3-3.pdf</pdf>
+<pdf>File:MeasuringHGHTEntrepreneurshipEcosystemsV4-6.pdf</pdf>
 ==Files==