Study of Contextual Factors of Pitching Success

The article is devoted to the consideration of the factors, taking into account which an entrepreneur should prepare an idea pitch to ensure the most effective perception by the investor. Since the main task of pitching is to arouse the steady interest of the investor, which must be transformed into a decision to invest, the study of what the investor will evaluate and how it should be taken into account by the entrepreneur when preparing the pitching becomes an urgent scientific task. The article substantiates that in addition to the business factors assessed by the investor during the pitching, the so-called contextual factors play a significant role in making a decision to invest in a project. The authors point out that they should include very diverse factors – from the persuasiveness of verbal and non-verbal communication to the expertise of the team representing the project and the number of cases it has implemented. The article analyzes the pitches of entrepreneurs and feedback from investors in the Sberbank start-up community “Sberstartup-roasting 2022” and feedback on investment pitches from private investors, identifies the factors of pitching that are evaluated by investors, and makes judgments about which of them are insufficiently taken into account by entrepreneurs when preparing a pitch. The concept of contextual factors of pitching has been introduced into scientific circulation, it has been revealed which factors should be referred to as contextual factors, and an indicator of contextual factors has been developed, which can be used to track weaknesses in the preparation of an entrepreneur for pitching. It is noted that important context factors, among others, are the presentation of the “value of the product” and the presentation of the essence of the project from the point of view of the “pain” of the consumer. The content of training programs for entrepreneurs in pitching was analyzed and programs were identified that contain the most comprehensive consideration of the factors that investors are guided by when evaluating pitching.

1. Creswell J. W. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications, Inc., 1994, 472 р.

2. Rubin Yu. B., Mozhzhukhin D. P., Lednev M. V., Alekseeva E. V., Pogorelova A. Yu., Potapova O. N., Puzynya T. A. Specific features of startup competencies as planned outcomes of entrepreneurship learning in bachelor’s degree. Sovremennaya konkurentsiya=Journal of Modern Competition, 2020, vol.14, no.3(79), pp.130-143 (in Russian). DOI: 10.37791/1993-7598-2020-14-3-130-143.

3. Rubin Yu. B. Educational programs in entrepreneurship for bachelor degree students and requirements to their implementation. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii=Higher Education in Russia, 2016b, no.2, pp.15-27 (in Russian).

4. Kovalenko A. I. The design challenges for Russian entrepreneurship education system. Sovremennaya konkurentsiya=Journal of Modern Competition, 2015, vol.9, no.6(54), pp.63-80 (in Russian).

5. Kovalenko A. The current state of Russian entrepreneurship education. Sovremennaya konkurentsiya=Journal of Modern Competition, 2018, vol.12, no.2(68)-3(69), pp.73-82 (in Russian).

6. Lukashenko M. A., Dobrovol’skaya T. Yu. Teaching entrepreneurial communications using educational platforms: Russian and foreign practices. Sovremennaya konkurentsiya=Journal of Modern Competition, 2022, vol.16, no.1, pp.90-107 (in Russian). DOI: 10.37791/2687-0649-2022-16-1-90-107.

7. Denisov S. B., Koreshkov O. V., Platonova E. D., Fedotova O. D. The manager in the system of the special management: who are you and how to educate? Sovremennye issledovaniya sotsial’nykh problem (elektronnyi nauchnyi zhurnal)=Russian Journal of Education and Psychology, 2012, no.10, pp.1-11 (in Russian).

8. Lukashenko M. A. Considering the problem of tutoring in e-learning. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii=Higher Education in Russia, 2009, no.11, pp.65-70 (in Russian).

9. Lukashenko M. A. Corporate communications: to teach impossible to regulate. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii=Higher Education in Russia, 2018, vol.27, no.2, pp.114-122 (in Russian).

10. Clingingsmith D., Scott Sh. Training Aspiring Entrepreneurs to Pitch Experienced Investors Evidence from a Field Experiment in the United States. Management Science, 2017, vol.64, no.11, pp.4967-5460. DOI: 10.12872017.2882.

11. Rose D. S. Angel Investing: The Gust Guide to Making Money and Having Fun Investing in Startups. New York, John Wileyand Sons, 2014, 304 р.

12. Carpentier C., Suret J.-M. Canadian Business Angel Perspectives on Exit: A Research Note. International Small Business Journal, 2015, vol.33, no.5, pp.582-593. DOI: 10.1177/0266242613516140.

13. Clark C. The Impact of Entrepreneurs’ Oral ‘Pitch’ Presentation Skills on Business Angels Initial Screening Investment Decisions. Venture Capital, 2008, vol.10, no.3, pp.257-279. DOI: 10.1080/13691060802151945.

14. Naumova E. V. The essence of the context of social communication. Aktual’nye voprosy obshchestvennykh nauk: sotsiologiya, politologiya, filosofiya, istoriya, 2015, no.44-45, pp.33-38 (in Russian).

15. Kursy po rabote s prezentatsiyami [Courses on working with presentations]. tutortop. Available at: https://tutortop.ru/courses_selection/kursy_po_rabote_s_prezentaciyami/ (accessed 21.01.2023).