Exploring the relative efficacy of ‘within-logic contrasting’ and ‘cross-logic analogizing’ framing tactics for adopting new entrepreneurial practices in contexts of poverty

• Published in: Journal of business venturing Vol. 39; no. 1; p. 106341
• Main Authors: Slade Shantz, Angelique, Zietsma, Charlene, Kistruck, Geoffrey M., Cruz, Luciano Barin
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Elsevier Inc 01-01-2024
• Subjects: Entrepreneurship; Entrepreneurship education and training; Framing; Institutional logics; Institutional theory; Poverty; Institutional logics; Poverty; Framing; Institutional theory; Entrepreneurship; Entrepreneurship education and training
• ISSN: 0883-9026; 1873-2003
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2023.106341

Entrepreneurship education and training targeting individuals living within impoverished regions has proliferated. However, empirical results suggest recipients are failing to adopt the newly prescribed practices, particularly the practice of experimenting with product, process, and marketing innovations. Research on institutional logics suggests the way practices are framed plays an important role in adoption. In a field experiment involving 683 entrepreneurs within rural Sri Lanka, we compared the effectiveness of two framing tactics: within-logic contrasting, and cross-logic analogizing. We find that cross-logic analogizing is more effective, and suggest our findings likely extend to other contexts where logics are highly institutionalized.
•The use of entrepreneurship training to help alleviate global poverty is failing.•To be effective it must frame new behaviors as more attractive than existing ones.•We compared two framing tactics: within-logic contrasting and cross-logic analogizing.•Cross-logic analogizing increased the attractiveness and use of micro-experimentation.