Background: Early-stage accelerator programs teach new entrepreneurs how to identify and exploit venture opportunities. In doing so, they implicitly teach these new entrepreneurs how to develop and iterate claims. But since this function of teaching persuasion has been implicit and generally unsystematic, it is unclear how well it works. Literature review: We review related literature on the venture development process, value propositions, and logic orientation (Goods-Dominant vs. Service-Dominant Logic). Research questions: 1. Does an entrepreneurship training program implicitly teach new entrepreneurs to make and iterate persuasive claims? 2. How effectively does it do so, and how can it improve? Research methodology: We examine one such accelerator program via a qualitative case study. In this case study, we collected interviews, observations, and artifacts, then analyzed them with thematic coding. Results/discussion: All teams had received previous entrepreneurship training and mentoring. However, they differed in their problem and logic orientations as well as their stage in the venture development process. These differences related to the extent to which they iterated value propositions in the program. Conclusions: We conclude with recommendations for improving how accelerator programs can better train new entrepreneurs to communicate and persuade.

中文翻译：

---

去或不去：在早期学生创业计划中学习说服

背景：早期加速器计划教会新企业家如何识别和利用风险机会。在这样做的过程中，他们暗中教导这些新企业家如何开发和迭代声明。但是，由于这种教学说服的功能是隐含的，而且通常是不系统的，因此不清楚它的效果如何。文献综述：我们回顾了有关风险投资发展过程、价值主张和逻辑取向（商品主导与服务主导逻辑）的相关文献。研究问题： 1. 创业培训计划是否暗中教导新创业者提出和重复有说服力的主张？2. 这样做的效果如何，如何改进？研究方法：我们通过定性案例研究来检验一个这样的加速器计划。在这个案例研究中，我们收集了采访、观察、和文物，然后用主题编码对其进行分析。结果/讨论：所有团队之前都接受过创业培训和指导。然而，他们在问题和逻辑取向以及在风险发展过程中所处的阶段不同。这些差异与他们在程序中迭代价值主张的程度有关。结论：我们最后提出了一些建议，以改进加速器计划如何更好地培训新企业家进行沟通和说服。这些差异与他们在程序中迭代价值主张的程度有关。结论：我们最后提出了一些建议，以改进加速器计划如何更好地培训新企业家进行沟通和说服。这些差异与他们在程序中迭代价值主张的程度有关。结论：我们最后提出了一些建议，以改进加速器计划如何更好地培训新企业家进行沟通和说服。