Since the early 2000s, effectuation has gained substantial interest in literature.

Whereas
Sarasvathy in her seminal 2001 article distinguished effectuation from causal decision-making,
still effectuation seems to get confused with ad hoc decision-making or strategy absence. On
the basis of a qualitative study with 12 managers from 10 Swiss small-to-medium enterprises
(SMEs), this manuscript analyzes their decision-making approaches and distinguishes between
causal, effectual, and absence-of-strategy reasoning. Whereas principles for effectuation and
causation are well established, this study reveals new categories on which strategy absence
can be mapped. The three decision approaches and their interplay are then investigated in four
business contexts (founding, takeover, new artifact creation, and existing artifacts). Whereas
causal reasoning is found in all four, signs of strategy absence are apparent in three. Effectual
logic dominates all four contexts. Further, this manuscript finds that choice of the strategic
decision approach does not depend on company size but rather on decision context. Also, firms
demonstrate the ability to switch between effectual and causal decision models according to the
specific decision context. In spite of all the scholarly attention it has garnered, effectuation
research continues to face a series of theoretical and methodological challenges. In order to
help move effectuation research forward, we content-analyze a comprehensive sample of 101
effectuation articles published in JCR®-listed journals between 1998 and 2016 (inclusively), with
the specific aim of uncovering the main conceptual and methodological articulations that have
underpinned effectuation research to date. In doing so, we not only uncover some the field’s
achievements and shortcomings but also examine the extent to which published effectuation
research addresses its most salient criticisms.

We build on these observations to propose three recommendations for future advances, namely
(1) conceiving effectuation as a “mode of action”; (2) developing new methodological indicators
centered on effectuation’s concrete manifestations; and (3) examining the underlying dynamics
explaining effectuation’s antecedents and consequences. Reflecting on the 12 works that
compose this special issue, we are struck by the distinctiveness of effectuation as a theory
native to the domain of entrepreneurship. While theoretical perspectives from disciplines
including economics, psychology, and sociology have been applied to understanding the new
venture phenomenon, entrepreneurship scholars have historically had little to offer in return
beyond the testing bed. The authors in this special issue begin to make the case for
transforming the bed into fertile soil in which the disciplines can grow and bear new fruit.

Moreover, uncertainty, co-creation, resources, goals, and control all represent important and
current issues in management, marketing, organizations, finance, and operations. Effectuation
has something new to offer each of these. In this article, we summarize what we learn from the
works in the special issue in order to construct a research agenda that can move effectuation
from entrepreneurship to the disciplines and beyond into new futures.

This study examines how firms’ decision-making logics and entrepreneurial resourcing
behaviors combine to create value. We conduct a qualitative comparative analysis investigating
configurations of effectuation, causation, and bricolage that are associated with firm
performance. We consider firm size and development stage as contextual factors that
differentiate the effectiveness of ways in which firms combine effectuation, causation, and
bricolage. Using a sample of 305 Chinese firms, we find six solutions explaining entrepreneurial
processes in high-performing firms. Based on a comparison of effective configurations across
firm size and development stages, we theorize three paths along which small early-stage firms
can evolve into large late-stage firms while maintaining high performance.

Scholars have criticized effectuation research for being insufficiently embedded in a nomological
network of practically relevant antecedents. To address this research gap, the current study
uses a mixed-methods design. First, a qualitative study with 20 venturing experts
(entrepreneurs and investors) validates various effectuation logics and uncovers the following
four antecedents of effectuation and causation: founders’ perceived uncertainty, entrepreneurial
experience, management experience, and investor influence. Second, a large-scale quantitative
study of founders in online, software, and high-tech start-ups (n = 435) provides statistical
support for the identified antecedents, using structural equation modeling and multigroup
comparisons over early and later venture stages. The study confirms the multifaceted nature of
effectuation; experimentation is the only effectual logic that reflects influences of all the
determinants. Founders’ prior experiences affect experimentation and causation in the early
venture stage, but not during the later stages. Investor influence displays the broadest array of
effects on the decision logics, offering both theoretical embeddedness for effectuation and a
new, practically relevant driver.