| Course | EDO 812 Innovation and Entrepreneurship |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 4 |
| Paper type | Doctoral theory application |
| Length | About 1,003 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Aspen University |
| Program | Doctor of Education |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for EDO 812 Module 4
Found or Made? Theories of Entrepreneurial Opportunity and the Redesign of a Beginning-Farmer Incubator
Student Name
Doctor of Education Program, Aspen University
EDO 812: Innovation and Entrepreneurship
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Found or Made? Theories of Entrepreneurial Opportunity and the Redesign of a Beginning-Farmer Incubator
The extension service's beginning-farmer incubator leases forty acres a few miles from campus. Each year it accepts about eight new farmers, mostly in their twenties and thirties and many without farm backgrounds, and gives them a half-acre to two-acre plot, shared tools and irrigation, and a winter course in which each writes a business plan. The plans are thorough: target markets, crop plans, pricing, cash flow projections. Yet across five cohorts, 31 of 42 participants changed their businesses substantially within a year, and most abandoned the plan they had written. Some failed; many of the eleven who now farm on their own land succeeded with businesses that look nothing like their plans. This paper uses theories of entrepreneurial opportunity to explain that pattern and to redesign the program. The service, the incubator and the participants are invented for this course.
Discovery and Creation
Alvarez and Barney (2007) identified two theories of entrepreneurial action that make different assumptions about opportunities. In discovery theory, opportunities exist objectively, created by shocks to markets or technologies, and wait to be found by alert individuals who differ from others in what they notice. Because the opportunity exists before the entrepreneur acts, the conditions are risky, with outcomes that can be estimated, and careful research and planning are sensible. In creation theory, opportunities do not exist until entrepreneurs create them through action, testing ideas, observing responses and adjusting. The conditions are uncertain, with outcomes that cannot be estimated in advance, and detailed plans are of limited use. They argued that each theory describes some real situations, and that the right approach depends on which conditions an entrepreneur faces.
| Assumption | Discovery theory | Creation theory |
|---|---|---|
| Nature of opportunities | Exist before action, waiting to be found | Formed through the entrepreneur's own actions |
| What sets entrepreneurs apart | Alertness and information | Willingness to act and learn under uncertainty |
| Decision conditions | Risky; outcomes can be estimated | Uncertain; outcomes unknowable in advance |
| Role of planning | Central | Limited; plans change as action reveals information |
| Role of resources | Gathered to pursue a known opportunity | Started with whatever is at hand |
| What the incubator assumed | This column | Not considered |
Prior Knowledge and What People See
Shane (2000) studied eight sets of entrepreneurs who formed firms to exploit a single invention, a three-dimensional printing process developed at a university. Although each had access to the same technology, they identified very different opportunities in it, in markets as different as architectural models and pharmaceuticals, and none had searched systematically. What each saw depended on prior knowledge of markets, of ways to serve those markets and of customer problems. Opportunities, in this account, were recognized through the lens of what entrepreneurs already knew.
The incubator's participants had the same land, tools and course. Those who succeeded often did so in directions their backgrounds suggested: a former restaurant cook built a business selling microgreens and herbs to chefs she knew; a participant raised on a ranch added pastured poultry; a former teacher built a farm-to-school supply business. The winter plans, written before participants had grown anything or met a buyer, rarely drew on those backgrounds.
Effectual Reasoning
Sarasvathy (2001) contrasted two ways of reasoning about action. Causation begins with a given goal and selects among means to achieve it, the logic of the business plan. Effectuation begins with a given set of means, who I am, what I know and whom I know, and selects among possible effects that those means could create. Effectual reasoners focus on what they can afford to lose rather than on expected returns, build partnerships and precommitments with stakeholders who help shape the venture, treat surprises as opportunities and seek to control the future rather than predict it. Sarasvathy argued that effectuation fits situations in which the future is unpredictable, goals are unclear and the environment is shaped by human action.
The successful participants reasoned effectually without the vocabulary. The microgreens grower began by asking two chefs what they could not buy locally, grew a few trays, and let the business grow from their orders. The farm-to-school supplier started from a former colleague's question about whether her school could buy local carrots.
The Mismatch
The incubator was designed on discovery assumptions: that opportunities in local food markets exist and can be identified through research, and that a plan written before acting would guide success. Its participants faced the conditions of creation theory. Local food markets in the region are small, buyers' needs are often unspoken until someone offers something, and a new farmer's capacity is unknown until a season is grown. The plans failed not because participants planned badly, but because planning before acting suited the wrong conditions.
A Redesign
The redesign also changes what the service measures. Instead of counting completed business plans, it will track experiments run, buyer commitments secured and participants farming on their own land three years after leaving.
| Change | Theoretical basis | What participants do |
|---|---|---|
| Intake inventory of means: skills, networks, resources | Shane; effectuation's starting point | Map what they know and whom they know before choosing products |
| Replace the winter plan with three small experiments a season | Creation theory | Test a product with a real buyer each time |
| Affordable loss budget | Effectuation | Set the most they will risk on each experiment |
| Early commitments | Effectuation | Seek a pre-order or agreement from at least one buyer before scaling |
| Business plan in year three | Discovery theory, when uncertainty falls | Write a plan once markets and capacity are known |
Conclusion
The incubator's participants abandoned their plans because the program assumed opportunities were waiting to be discovered while participants actually had to create them. Shane shows that what each person sees depends on what they already know, Sarasvathy shows how successful entrepreneurs reason from their means under uncertainty and Alvarez and Barney explain when each approach fits. Starting from participants' means, testing ideas with real buyers within an affordable loss and saving the plan for later fits the program to the conditions its farmers face.
References
Alvarez, S. A., & Barney, J. B. (2007). Discovery and creation: Alternative theories of entrepreneurial action. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 1(1-2), 11-26. https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.4
Sarasvathy, S. D. (2001). Causation and effectuation: Toward a theoretical shift from economic inevitability to entrepreneurial contingency. Academy of Management Review, 26(2), 243-263. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2001.4378020
Shane, S. (2000). Prior knowledge and the discovery of entrepreneurial opportunities. Organization Science, 11(4), 448-469. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.11.4.448.14602
EDO 812 Module 4 instructions, in plain terms
Module 4 of EDO 812 is about entrepreneurship and opportunity, and the assignment usually asks students to compare theories of where opportunities come from and apply them to a real entrepreneurial setting. Your Aspen classroom's Module 4 prompt overrides this example; the incubator is fictional. Present the main theories accurately from their sources. Compare their assumptions about opportunities and entrepreneurs. Examine evidence on how prior knowledge shapes what people see. Apply the theories to a real program, venture or organization. Recommend changes that follow from the theory that best fits, citing scholarly sources in APA 7 form.
How the EDO 812 Module 4 example is put together
The incubator leases forty acres near the university and gives beginning farmers small plots, shared equipment and a winter business planning course for three years. In five cohorts, 31 of 42 participants changed their business substantially within a year, most abandoning the plan they wrote. Shane (Organization Science) explains why participants with different backgrounds saw different markets in the same land. Sarasvathy (Academy of Management Review) explains why the successful participants reasoned from what they had and whom they knew. Alvarez and Barney (Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal) show that the program was built on discovery assumptions while its participants faced conditions that fit creation theory. A table compares the two theories on six assumptions. The redesign replaces the winter plan with a sequence of small experiments within an affordable loss, early commitments from buyers and a prior-knowledge inventory at intake.
Where the marks sit in the EDO 812 Module 4 rubric
Doctoral application papers are graded on whether theories are presented precisely and whether the application produces a defensible redesign. This example compares discovery and creation theories on explicit assumptions, uses Shane's evidence on prior knowledge and Sarasvathy's account of effectuation to explain observed results in the program and diagnoses a mismatch between the program's design and its participants' conditions. The redesign follows from the diagnosis, each change linked to a theoretical principle. The paper also considers when the original planning approach remains useful, which shows judgment rather than enthusiasm for one theory, and it changes the program's measures so the redesign can be judged.
Common EDO 812 Module 4 mistakes, and how to avoid them
Entrepreneurship theory papers often treat planning as either always good or always useless. Explain under which conditions each theory applies, since discovery and creation theories rest on different assumptions about uncertainty. Another weakness is describing effectuation's principles in the abstract without showing them in real decisions. Use evidence, such as Shane's study, rather than anecdotes about famous founders. Apply the theories to a specific program or venture and show how the design would change, including what would be measured differently afterward. Finally, keep the people involved in view: a redesign should fit the backgrounds and resources of the entrepreneurs it serves, and should be tested with a cohort before it replaces the old design entirely.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Aspen University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
More EDO 812 and Doctor of Education sample papers
- EDO 812 Module 1: Defining Innovation and Entrepreneurship
- EDO 812 Module 2: Theories of Innovation
- EDO 812 Module 3: Diffusion and Adoption of Innovations
- EDO 812 Module 5: Corporate Entrepreneurship
- EDO 812 Module 6: Leadership for Innovation
- EDO 812 Module 7: Systems and Structures That Sustain Innovation
- EDO 812 Module 8: An Innovation Leadership Plan
- EDN 820 Module 4: Reading Patient Outcome Data
- EDN 814 Module 4: Choosing an Accrediting Body
- EDO 818 Module 3: Leadership Across Societies
- EDN 818 Module 1: Authentic Leadership Self-Assessment
EDO 812 Module 4 questions, answered
What does EDO 812 Module 4 usually ask for?
Aspen's EDO 812 covers entrepreneurship and opportunity in this module, so comparing theories of where opportunities come from and applying them to a real setting is typical. Your classroom prompt sets the task.
Are entrepreneurial opportunities discovered or created?
Alvarez and Barney described both views: discovery theory says opportunities exist to be found; creation theory says entrepreneurs make them by acting.
What is effectuation?
Sarasvathy's name for building a venture outward from the resources and contacts already in hand, letting its aims form along the way rather than fixing them first.
Where can I find a free EDO 812 Module 4 sample paper?
The one above is free: theories of entrepreneurial opportunity applied to redesigning an invented beginning-farmer incubator.
Does prior knowledge shape what opportunities people see?
Shane found that eight entrepreneurs exploiting the same invention saw different opportunities based on their prior knowledge.