what is business plan competition

The 20 Best Business Plan Competitions to Get Funding

Business plan competitions can provide valuable feedback on your business idea or startup business plan template , in addition to providing an opportunity for funding for your business. This article will discuss what business planning competitions are, how to find them, and list the 20 most important business planning competitions.

On This Page:

What is a Business Plan Competition?

How do i find business plan competitions, 20 popular business plan competitions, tips for winning business plan competitions, other helpful business plan articles & templates.

A business plan competition is a contest between startup, early-stage, and/or growing businesses. The goal of the business plan competition is for participants to develop and submit an original idea or complete their existing business plan based on specific guidelines provided by the organization running the contest.

Companies are judged according to set criteria including creativity, feasibility, execution, and the quality of your business plan.

A quick Google search will lead you to several websites that list business planning competitions. 

Each site has a different way of organizing the business planning competitions it lists, so you’ll need to spend some time looking through each website to find opportunities that are relevant for your type of business or industry.

Finish Your Business Plan Today!

Below we’ve highlighted 20 of these popular competitions, the requirements and how to find additional information. The following list is not exhaustive; however, these popular competitions are great places to start if you’re looking for a business competition.

Rice Business Plan Competition

The Rice University Business Plan Competition is designed to help collegiate entrepreneurs by offering a real-world platform on which to present their businesses to investors, receive coaching, network with the entrepreneurial ecosystem, fine-tune their entrepreneurship plan, and learn what it takes to launch a successful business.

Who is Eligible?

Initial eligibility requirements include teams and/or entrepreneurs that:

• are student-driven, student-created and/or student-managed
• include at least two current student founders or management team members, and at least one is a current graduate degree-seeking student
• are from a college or university anywhere in the world
• have not raised more than $250,000 in equity capital
• have not generated revenue of more than $100,000 in any 12-month period
• are seeking funding or capital
• have a potentially viable investment opportunity

You can find additional  eligibility information on their website.

Where is the Competition Held?

The Rice Business Plan Competition is hosted in Houston, TX at Rice University, the Jones Graduate School of Business.

What Can You Win?

In 2021, $1.6 Million in investment, cash prizes, and in-kind prizes was awarded to the teams competing.

This two-part milestone grant funding program and pitch competition is designed to assist students with measurable goals in launching their enterprises.

Teams must be made up of at least one student from an institution of higher education in Utah and fulfill all of the following requirements:

• The founding student must be registered for a minimum of nine (9) credit hours during the semester they are participating. The credit hours must be taken as a matriculated, admitted, and degree-seeking student.
• A representative from your team must engage in each stage of Get Seeded (application process, pre-pitch, and final pitch)
• There are no restrictions regarding other team members; however, we suggest building a balanced team with a strong combination of finance, marketing, engineering, and technology skills.
• The funds awarded must be used to advance the idea.

The business plan competition will be hosted in Salt Lake City, UT at the Lassonde Entrepreneur Institute at the University of Utah.

There are two grants opportunities:

• Microgrant up to $500
• Seed Grant for $501 – $1,500

Global Student Entrepreneur Awards

The Global Student Entrepreneur Awards is a worldwide business plan competition for students from all majors. The GSEA aims to empower talented young people from around the world, inspire them to create and shape business ventures, encourage entrepreneurship in higher education, and support the next generation of global leaders.

• You must be enrolled for the current academic year in a university/college as an undergraduate or graduate student at the time of application. Full-time enrollment is not required; part-time enrollment is acceptable.
• You must be the owner, founder, or controlling shareholder of your student business. Each company can be represented by only one owner/co-founder – studentpreneur.
• Your student business must have been in operation for at least six consecutive months prior to the application.
• Your business must have generated US $500 or received US $1000 in investments at the time of application.
• You should not have been one of the final round competitors from any previous year’s competition.
• The age cap for participation is 30 years of age.

You can find additional   eligibility information on their website.

Regional competitions are held in various locations worldwide over several months throughout the school year. The top four teams then compete for cash prizes during finals week at the Goldman Sachs headquarters in New York City.

At the Global Finals, students compete for a total prize package of $50,000 in cash and first place receives $25,000. All travel and lodging expenses are also covered. Second place gets US $10,000, while third place earns US $5,000. Additional prizes are handed out at the Global Finals for Social Impact, Innovation, and Lessons from the Edge.

Finish Your Business Plan in 1 Day!

The collegiate entrepreneurs organization business plan competition.

The Collegiate Entrepreneurs Organization Business Plan Competition (COEBPC) exists to help early-stage entrepreneurs develop their business skills, build entrepreneurial networks, and learn more about how they can transform ideas into reality. It also offers cash prizes to reward entrepreneurship, provide an opportunity for recognition of top student entrepreneurs around the world, and provide unique opportunities for networking.

To compete, you must:

• Be a currently enrolled student at an accredited institution
• Have a viable business concept or be the creator of an existing business that generates revenue.

If you are among the top three finalists of the business plan competition and successfully receive prize money, you will be required to submit a class schedule under your name for the current academic semester. Failure to do so will result in the forfeit of the prize money.

All competitions are held online. The finalist will receive a trip to the International Career Development Conference, where they have an opportunity to win additional prizes from CEO’s sponsors.

• First Place – $7,000
• Second Place – $5,000
• Third Place – $3,000
• People’s Choice Award – Collegiate Entrepreneur of the Year – $600

MIT 100k Business Plan Competition and Expo

The MIT 100K was created in 2010 by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology to foster entrepreneurship and innovation on campus and around the world. Consists of three distinct and increasingly intensive competitions throughout the school year: PITCH, ACCELERATE, and LAUNCH. 

• Submissions may be entered by individuals or teams.
• Each team may enter one idea.
• Each team must have at least one currently registered MIT student; if you are submitting as an individual, you must be a currently registered MIT student.
• Entries must be the original work of entrants.
• Teams must disclose any funding already received at the time of registration.

Hosted in Cambridge, MA at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology beginning in October through May of each academic year.

Top finalists will have a chance to pitch their ideas to a panel of judges at a live event for the chance to win the $5,000 Grand Prize or the $2,000 Audience Choice Award.

20 Finalists are paired with industry-specific business professionals for mentorship and business planning and a $1,000 budget for marketing and/or business development expenses.

The 10 Top Finalists participate in the Showcase and compete for the $10,000 Audience Choice Award while the 3 Top Finalists automatically advance to LAUNCH semi-finals.

The grand prize winner receives a cash prize of $100,000 and the runner-up receives $25,000.

Florida Atlantic University (FAU) Business Plan Competition

The FAU business plan competition is open to all undergraduate and graduate student entrepreneurs. The competition covers topics in the areas of information technology, entrepreneurship, finance, marketing, operations management, etc.

All undergraduate and graduate students are eligible to participate.

The business plan competition will be held at Florida Atlantic University in Boca Raton, Florida.

• First prize: $5,000 cash
• Second prize: $500 cash

Network of International Business Schools (NIBS) Business Plan Competition

The Network of International Business Schools (NIBS) Business Plan Competition is designed to offer an opportunity to develop your business plan with the guidance of industry experts. It provides the opportunity for you to compete against fellow entrepreneurs and explore big ideas.

• Participants must be the legal age to enter into contracts in the country of residence.
• Participants may not be employed by an organization other than their own company or business that they are launching for this competition.
• The plan should be for a new business, not an acquisition of another company.

The Network of International Business Schools (NIBS) Business Plan Competition is held in the USA.

There is a cash prize for first, second, and third place. There is also a potential for a business incubator opportunity, which would provide facilities and assistance to the winners of the competition.

Washington State University Business Plan Competition

The Washington State University Business Plan Competition has been serving students since 1979. The competition is a great opportunity for someone who is looking to get their business off the ground by gaining invaluable knowledge of running a successful business. It offers a wide range of topics and competition styles.

• Any college undergraduate, graduate, or professional degree-seeking student at Washington State University
• The company must be an early-stage venture with less than $250,000 in annual gross sales revenue.

The Washington State University Business Plan Competition is held in the Associated Students Inc. Building on the Washington State University campus which is located in Pullman, Washington.

There are a wide variety of prizes that could be won at the Washington State University Business Plan Competition. This is because the business plan competition has been serving students for over 30 years and as such, they have offered more than one type of competition. The common prize though is $1,000 which is awarded to the winner of each class. There are also awards for those who come in second place, third place, etc.

Milken-Penn GSE Education Business Plan Competition

The Milken-Penn GSE Education Business Plan Competition is one of the most well-known competitions in the country. They have partnered with many prestigious institutions to provide funding, mentorship, and expertise for the competition.

Education ventures with innovative solutions to educational inequity from around the world are encouraged to apply, especially those ventures founded by and serving individuals from marginalized and historically underrepresented communities.

We encourage applicants working in every conceivable educational setting–from early childhood through corporate and adult training. We also welcome both nonprofit and for-profit submissions.

The competition is held at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania.

All finalists receive $1,000 in cash and $5,000 in Amazon Web Services promotional credits.

Next Founders Business Plan Competition

Next Founders is a competition geared towards innovative startups with a social impact, looking to transform society by addressing key global human needs. The competition inspires and identifies energetic, optimistic entrepreneurs who are committed to achieving their vision.

Next Founders is for Canadian business owners of scalable, high-growth ventures.

Next Founders is held at the University of Toronto.

You could win up to $25,000 CAD in cash funding for your new business.

Hatch Pitch Competition

The Hatch Pitch competition is one of the most prestigious business competitions in the US. The winners of the Hatch Pitch Competition are given access to mentorship courses, discounted office space with all amenities included, incubators for startups, tailored education programs, financial counseling & more.

The competition is for companies with a business idea.

• The company’s product/service must have launched within the past 2 years, or be launched within 6 months after the Hatch Pitch event.
• Founders must retain some portion of ownership in the company.
• Received less than $5 million in funding from 3rd party investors.
• The presenter must actively participate in Hatch Pitch coaching.

The Hatch Pitch Competition is located at the Entrepreneur Space in Dallas.

The grand prize for this business plan competition is access to resources like incubators and mentorships that could prove invaluable in bringing your startup company to the next level.

TechCrunch’s Startup Battlefield

The Startup Battlefield is a business plan competition that is sponsored by TechCrunch.  It awards the winner $50,000. There are two different rounds to this competition:

• First Round – 15 companies from all of the applicants that submitted their business plans for this round.
• Second Round – Two finalist companies compete against each other at TechCrunch Disrupt NY’s main stage.

At the time of the application process, companies must have a functional prototype to demo to the selection committee. In selecting final contestants, we will give preference to companies that launch some part of their product or business for the first time to the public and press through our competition. Companies that are in closed beta, private beta, limited release or generally have been flying under the radar are eligible. Hardware companies can have completed crowdfunding but those funds should have been directed to an earlier product prototype. Existing companies launching new feature sets do not qualify.

TechCrunch’s Startup Battlefield is held at different locations.

The Startup Battlefield rewards the winner with $50,000. In addition, the two runner-ups get a prize of $5,000 each.

New Venture Challenge

New Venture Challenge is a competition hosted by the University of Chicago. There are 3 main categories that will be judged:

• Innovative Concept – Arguably the most important category, this focuses on uniqueness, originality, and suitability.
• Market Fit/Business Model – Are you solving an actual problem for your target market? Does your project have the potential for profit?
• Presentation – Did you make a compelling, impactful presentation? Did you clearly communicate your goals and vision to potential investors?

You can find  eligibility information on their website.

The New Venture Challenge competition is held in Chicago, IL.

Finalists are awarded:

• First Place: $50,000 equity investment and access to industry mentors and other resources.
• Second place: $25,000 equity investment and access to industry mentors and other resources.
• Third place: $15,000 equity investment and access to industry mentors and other resources.

New Venture Championship

The New Venture Championship is hosted by the University of Oregon and has been since 1987. The championship brings new ventures and innovative business ideas to life and the competition offers plan writing as a service to those who need it.

The University of Oregon New Venture Championship is open to university student teams with 2-5 members that have at least one graduate student involved with their venture. Students should be enrolled in a degree program or have finished their studies in the current academic year.

The New Venture Championship hosted by the University of Oregon is held in Eugene, Oregon.

Every business plan has a chance of winning a cash prize from $3,000 to $25,000 and additional benefits like plan coaching and office space rental.

Climatech & Energy Prize @ MIT

The Climatech & Energy Prize @ MIT is a competition that focuses on companies that are involved in the area of energy, environment, and climate change.

• Participants must be a team of two or more people.
• At least 50% of formal team members identified in the competition submission documentation must be enrolled as half-time or full-time college or university students.

The Climatech & Energy Prize @ MIT is held in Cambridge, MA.

The grand prize winner receives $100,000 and other winners may receive other monetary prizes.

Baylor Business New Venture Competition

This competition has been offered by Baylor for the last 20 years. It is designed to help aspiring entrepreneurs refine business ideas, and also gain valuable insights from judges and other entrepreneurs.

Must be a current undergraduate student at Baylor University or McLennan Community College.

The Baylor Business New Venture competition will be held at the Baylor University, Waco, TX.

The grand prize winner will receive $6,000. There are also other prizes given out to the other finalists in each category which are worth $1,500 – $2,000.

13th IOT/WT Innovation World Cup

The 13th IOT/WT Innovation World Cup was organized by the 13th IOT/WT Innovation World Cup Association. It was organized to provide a platform for innovators from all over the world to showcase their innovative ideas and projects. The competition aimed at drawing the attention of investors, venture capitalists, and potential business partners to meet with representatives from different companies and organizations in order to foster innovation.

The revolutionary Internet of Things and Wearable Technologies solutions from developers, innovative startups, scale-ups, SMEs, and researchers across the world are invited to participate. Eight different categories are available: Industrial, City, Home, Agriculture, Sports, Lifestyle, and Transport.

Only those submissions that have a functional prototype/proof of concept will advance in the competition, mere ideas will not be considered. 

The competition is held in Cleveland, Ohio also an important center for innovation and cutting-edge technology.

Win prizes worth over $500,000, connect with leading tech companies, speed up your development with advice from tech experts, join international conferences as a speaker or exhibitor, and become part of the worldwide IoT/WT Innovation World Cup® network. 

The U.Pitch is a competition that gives you a chance to share your idea and for the community of budding entrepreneurs, startup founders, CEOs, and venture capitalists to invest in your enterprise. It also provides mentoring by experts in the field.

• Currently enrolled in an undergraduate or graduate program
• Applicants may compete with either an idea OR business currently in operation
• Applicants must be 30 years of age or under

The U.Pitch is held in San Francisco, California.

Enter to win a part of the $10,000 prize pool.

At the core of CodeLaunch is an annual seed accelerator competition between individuals and groups who have software technology startup ideas.

If your startup has raised money, your product is stable, you have customers, and revenue, you are probably not a fit for CodeLaunch.

CodeLaunch is based in St. Louis, Missouri. 

The “winner” may be eligible for more seed capital and business services from some additional vendors.

New York StartUP! Business Plan Competition

The New York StartUP! is a competition sponsored by the New York Public Library to help entrepreneurs from around the world to develop their business ideas.

• You must live in Manhattan, The Bronx, or Staten Island
• Your business must be in Manhattan, The Bronx, or Staten Island
• All companies must have a big idea or business model in the startup phase and have earned less than $10,000

The New York StartUP! competition is held in New York, NY.

Two winners are chosen: 

•  Grand Prize – $15,000  
•  Runner-up – $7,500  

First, determine if the competition is worth your time and money to participate.

• What is the prize money?
• Who will be on the judging panel?
• Will there be any costs associated with entering and/or presenting at the competition (e.g., travel and lodging expenses)?

Once you’ve determined the worth of the competition, then shift to focusing on the details of the competition itself.

• What are the rules of the competition?
• Are there any disqualifying factors?
• How will you be judged during the different parts of the competition?

After conducting this research, it’s best to formulate an idea or product that appeals to the judges and is something they can really get behind. Make sure you thoroughly understand the rules and what is expected from your final product. Once you know what is expected from you, you’ll be able to refine and practice your pitch to help you move through the stages of the competition.

These competitions are a fantastic method to get new business owners thinking about business possibilities, writing business plans, and dominating the competition. These contests may assist you in gaining important feedback on your business concept or plan as well as potential monetary prizes to help your business get off the ground.  

How to Finish Your Business Plan in 1 Day!

Don’t you wish there was a faster, easier way to finish your business plan?

With Growthink’s Ultimate Business Plan Template you can finish your plan in just 8 hours or less!

The Art of Creating a Pitch Deck Team Slide

The Startup’s Guide to Hiring a Pitch Deck Writer

The Airbnb Pitch Deck: An Expert Breakdown

Expert Tips: How To Launch A Startup

• Business Planning

How To Win A Business Plan Contest

A well-developed business plan creates the foundation on which a successful startup will be able to establish itself, and is especially necessary when considering participation in a business plan contest or pitch event. When every factor is considered – market and industry, finance, marketing, operations, and etc. – success becomes a long-term plan as opposed to a hope for a stroke of startup luck. Along with a solid pitch and pitch deck, a business plan is a critical element in your journey to landing a successful seed funding round. Writing an  investor-ready business plan  can be difficult, but securing funding without a solid plan in place is pretty much impossible.

Once you finally get the perfect business plan written, what’s next? For those who are far enough along in their business, submitting the plan directly to investors might be a wise step. For those who aren’t quite ready to approach VCs yet, but could use a financial boost to get things going, participating in business plan contests can be a tremendous help. Not only do these competitions often provide significant rewards for the winners, but they also often draw the attention of angels, VCs, and even corporations looking to invest in or partner with the next billion-dollar startup.

Unfortunately, where there is honey there are bees – business plan contests often attract some of the brightest minds, and the higher the reward, the more competition you can expect. In this post, we’ll explore everything you need to know to find a great business plan contest, enter it with confidence, and win against other participating startups!

The Benefits of Winning A Business Plan Contest

Business plan competitions are beneficial platforms that allow entrepreneurs to showcase their idea, product, or startup to a group of judges. Often, these competitions involve pitching the idea or startup to judges over one or more rounds. Once each competing startup has presented, judges vote on which business (or businesses) will receive the offered reward.

While business plan competitions highly benefit winning startups, they offer immense benefits to investors who attend them also – access to early-stage businesses that they can invest in before others have the opportunity. Furthermore, these competitions work to even out the playing field for entrepreneurs who otherwise may not have access to investors – winning a business plan contest could be the difference between funding your business’ launch or failing before you even get the chance to begin.

The most obvious benefit of winning a business plan contest is winning the offered reward. The reward value of these contests can vary from small amounts to extremely large amounts.  For example, the Panasci Business Plan Competition by Syracuse University offers around $35,000 in total rewards, while the Rice Business Plan Competition offers over $1.2 million in seed funding to its winners and runner-ups. Winning the right competition can impact your business greatly; providing you with the  app funding  required to progress your business from the app idea phase to launch and beyond. There is something that should be considered though – some business plan competitions may come with specific conditions that must be met to receive the funding; such as headquartering the business in a certain location, offering up an equity percentage, or being involved in a startup incubator for some length of time.

High-profile angels and VCs often attend larger business plan competitions, and even participants that don’t win the contest may attract the attention of an investor. In some cases, teams that don’t win may end up with larger investments than those that the judges selected for first place. Investors aren’t always looking for the same things in a startup; your idea might not be of much interest to the judges, but may be exactly what an attending investor was looking for! These investors aren’t only good for the funds they bring – some of them may provide a critical mentorship component to your startup; helping to advise your team for greater success down the line.

Lastly, one of the least recognized but most effective benefits of participating in a business plan competition is having your business plan and startup critically reviewed by experienced judges, entrepreneurs, and investors. Even if you don’t win, the insight provided by the panel of judges will offer different perspectives regarding your startup. Ultimately, by applying this insight, you can further position your startup for success when participating in future events.

Finding The Right Business Plan Contest

The unique beauty of business plan contests is that they are relatively ubiquitous – and today, more competitions are popping up than ever before. A variety of organizations, educational institutions, and even individuals organize business plan competitions to seek out investable and fundable business ideas. In general, most business plan contests can be grouped into two categories:

• University Competitions: Many major universities organize some type of business plan contest through their business school. Eligibility may vary from contest to contest, but these contests are typically only available to those connected to the business program – students, alumni, and in some cases, even on-staff professionals. Due to these eligibility requirements, competition is generally limited – which means that participants have a much larger chance of winning when compared to contests with less regulation. Furthermore, universities know that any successful startups launched through these contests will give their business program a major boost in visibility and credibility. As a result, universities often go a step above to support winners of these programs – providing additional on-campus resources or even access to alumni professionals that can help them advance their businesses.
• Sponsored Contests: Sponsored business plans are those that are planned and hosted by an organization, corporation, individual or other entity. Specifically, these organizers ‘sponsor’ the competition – organizing the event, involving investors and judges, and securing rewards to incentivize winners and participants. Sometimes, these competitions may be sponsored by companies within a specific sector such as biotech, healthcare, urban transit, architecture, and etc.; while other times they may be part of a larger  startup incubator  or accelerator program.  

Business plan and  pitch deck  competitions take place several times each year in most major cities – and even in many less popular upcoming startup regions. If you are a student or alumni, check with your university to see if they have a business plan competition in place – if not, maybe you can help them organize one! For those who are not eligible to join a university-sponsored competition, a simple Google search will provide you with several options. Search for “industry name + business plan contest” or “city + business plan contest” to see what upcoming business plan contest events you may be eligible to participate in.

Winning Big At Your First Business Plan Contest

Participating in a business plan contest can be extremely valuable, but the real goal is to win – and to win big! The key to winning a business plan competition of any type is to know what the judges are looking for and to position your startup, business plan, and pitch to exceed their expectations.

Judging The Judges

In general, whether you win a business plan contest or not will hinge upon how your business idea is perceived by the panel of judges, and how they perceive you as an entrepreneur and presenter. It is worth noting that judges often come from various backgrounds with varied experiences; what may be a top consideration for one judge may make little difference to another. However, most judges compare businesses on at least the following three factors:

• Originality: Successful business ideas need to be original in nature and able to improve upon an existing solution, solve a wide-scale problem, or effectively meet the current market demand. Businesses that simply spin-off from other successful ideas are not looked upon favorably by judges or investors – since they usually have little advantage to compete against already established players. To win a business plan contest, it is essential that your idea is fresh, scalable, sustainable and eventually, profitable.
• Ability To Generate Profit: Even the most creative ideas need to be able to turn a profit at some point. Understandably, most investors aren’t interested in funding businesses that won’t provide them with a return in the long-run. In order to gain interest in your business during a contest, your business plan should show exactly how your business will provide a return for investors in the long-term. While some investors may be interested in other aspects of a business, such as their social consciousness or involvement, the majority of investors are looking for opportunities to grow their portfolio by investing in businesses that are capable of generating strong profits.
• Effective Presentation : It’s not always the best idea that wins a business plan competition. A perfect business plan and an exciting idea means very little if an entrepreneur can not properly convey their message during their presentation. In most contests, participants are given a set time limit (such as 10 minutes) to present – and expressing all the necessary information within this time period can be rather difficult. Judges look for confident entrepreneurs who can articulate their business enough to convey the efficacy and scalability of their idea properly. The knowledge an entrepreneur needs to possess doesn’t end with just the text presented in their business plan or  pitch deck . Most often, there is a Q&A portion during these events in which the entrepreneur will be required to answer specific questions by judges and investors. The inability to answer these questions properly and confidently can quickly dissuade an investor from investing, or can cause a judge to give a lower score than they would have otherwise.

Preparing For Business Plan Contest Success

Success at these events is often linked to how well an entrepreneur has prepared themselves beforehand. One thing is certain – your competitors will be prepared; and if you aren’t, it will be embarrassingly noticeable. Unfortunately, in a business plan contest, there is no way to mask unpreparedness, especially among an audience of experienced entrepreneurs and investors. To best prepare for an upcoming business plan competition, consider the following tips:

• Sell A Strong Team:  There is one thing that’s more important than having a great business plan – having a strong and experienced team that can actually execute it. Management teams are what bind all the elements of a business plan together; combining the skills necessary to put the plan into action successfully. It is vital that your team encompasses a broad range of skills and that each team member has a specific job that will lead to the startup’s success.
• Present The Problem First : Startups that win (in contests and in general) are those that truly solve an existing problem – whether the problem is shared by a mass group of people, or by a niche audience. There’s a lot of “cool tech” out there, but even simple ideas can solve major problems. Taxis have existed for decades, but a simple idea like ride-sharing changed the way the world views personal transportation. Prepare a pitch that is challenge/solution heavy by focusing on what the problem is, why individuals experience the issue, why current solutions don’t solve the challenges effectively, and why your product/service is the right solution for the problem.
• Know Your Funding Requirements : Investors don’t want their funds to just sit in an account; they want to know that there is a plan in place to use these funds and effectively scale a startup from its current position. Have a funding plan in place – know how much funding is required, what actions need to be completed to successfully progress the business, and how each dollar will be spent to meet your launch or growth objectives.
• Be The Expert : If there is any gap in your business plan, it will be uncovered during the Q&A stage. Investors and judges are highly experienced in asking the right questions to get a full picture of your startup and to gauge whether you are well-informed about your business, market and the issue that you are attempting to solve. It’s not a good sign when an investor or judge knows more about your business than you do. Ensure that your business plan is all-encompassing with vital information, and that you can answer any necessary questions without needing to reference your business plan. During the Q&A session, you should be able to answer questions proficiently, confidently, and with enough expertise to prove that you know exactly what you are talking about.
• Listen, Learn and Apply : You can’t win every business plan or pitch contest, but you can definitely take the insights given during one competition and use it to propel your potential for success in future contests. It’s not everyday that you’re able to receive critical feedback from a group of investors, and when you can, you should take advantage of it as much as possible. Even if you don’t win anything in a business plan competition, the insights gained can be used to catapult your business to the next level.

Writing A Business Plan That Wins

Even if everything else is perfect – if you want to win, you must begin with a well-thought-out, perfectly articulated, and investor-ready business plan that tells your startup’s story in an effective manner. There are many factors to consider when writing a business plan from proper market analysis to financial projections – and any weak point in your plan will decrease your chances of winning. If you need more advice on writing a business plan, contact one of our experts today for a free business plan consultation!

You may also like

What Is The Best Business Plan Format?

The 5 Best Kickstarter Alternatives for App Startups

What Is Seed Money and Is Your Startup Ready for It?

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Enter a Search Term

Rice Business Plan Competition

Congrats Grand Prize Winner: Protein Pints

Showcasing The Best University Startups from Around the US and the World  | April 4-6, 2024 | Rice University, Houston, Texas

The competition, entering its 24th year, gives collegiate entrepreneurs real-world experience to pitch their startups, enhance their business strategy and learn what it takes to launch a successful company. Hosted and organized by the Rice Alliance for Technology and Entrepreneurship —which is Rice University's internationally-recognized initiative devoted to the support of entrepreneurship—and Rice Business . Over 23 years it has grown from nine teams competing for $10,000 in prize money in 2001, to 42 teams from around the world competing for more than $1 million in cash and prizes. It is the largest and richest student startup competition in the world.

Congrats to the Winners of the 2024 RBPC

Shaping the future.

Congrats to the winners

Read About the Prizes

Watch 2024 Elevator Pitches and Final Round

Stay up to date with rbpc 2024, funding. mentorship. connections..

Billion In funding raised by startups

Still in business or with successful exits 

Jobs created

Explore the Rice Business Plan Competition

Get involved, explore the judge network, learn more about the $1.5 million in prizes, hear about successful rbpc competitors, meet our alumni—the 2022 competitors.

The RBPC is unique in its stature, size, format, participants—and especially, our judges. RBPC judges act as (and often are) early-stage investors, evaluating startups investment potential.

In total, more than $1.3 million in investment, cash and in-kind prizes was awarded to the teams at the 2020 Rice Business Plan Competition—with seven teams winning $100,000 or more in prizes. 

From our first startup going public to IPOs, grants and more than $4.6 in funding, our startups are progressing and achieving success. 

The 2022 competition provided the mentorship, guidance and access to capital that RBPC is known for and brought everyone back together on campus at Rice University! Check out the startups for the 2022 competition. 

Featured Sponsors

Follow Along with #RBPC24

• Business Plan Competitions – Rice University & Others With Large Prize Pools

B-School Search

For the 2023-2024 academic year, we have 118 schools in our BSchools.org database and those that advertise with us are labeled “sponsor”. When you click on a sponsoring school or program, or fill out a form to request information from a sponsoring school, we may earn a commission. View our advertising disclosure for more details.

To help finance an MBA degree that now costs more than $200,000 at some of the best private business schools, future entrepreneurs could do what most MBA students typically do: apply for scholarships or take out student loans—or, they could enter a business plan competition.

In April 2019, two teams from the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University won combined prizes from Rice University’s business plan competition that totaled over $500,000. Incredibly, neither of Kellogg’s two teams—one a neurology medical device startup firm and the other a coffee vendor—won the competition. That honor went to a team from Minnesota’s Mitchell Hamline School of Law who walked away with an even larger award for their innovation in helicopter safety: almost $700,000.

What’s even more interesting is that large prize pools for business plan competitions for student startups appear to be increasingly common, including the Hult Prize, the Hello Tomorrow Global Challenge, the International Business Model Competition, the Baylor New Venture Competition, and perhaps the most lucrative: the Rice University Business Plan Competition (RBPC).

The Rice Business Plan Competition: A Money Machine for Student Startups?

So just what is this competition, anyway? According to Rice University, the Rice Business Plan Competition (RBPC) amounts to “the world’s richest and largest graduate-level student startup competition.” The event began 19 years ago as a joint initiative between the university’s Jones Graduate School of Business, the Brown School of Engineering, and the Wiess School of Natural Sciences, along with the school’s sponsored projects office. That year, in 2001, only nine teams competed for a paltry $10,000 prize pool.

Times have certainly changed for the RBPC. In 2013, another Northwestern University team that enhanced rechargeable lithium batteries took home almost 100 times that much —$1,000,000—after winning first-place honors. In the most recent 2019 event, the total prize pool amounted to a record $2.9 million, with the top seven finalists winning $355,000 on average and none of these teams receiving less than $100,000.

The RBPC appears to owe many of its larger awards in recent years to a single investor organization. A major sponsor of the competition is the oddly-named GOOSE Society of Texas; the acronym stands for “Grand Order of Successful Entrepreneurs.” Started by Jack Gill—the principal behind Vanguard Ventures, one of Silicon Valley’s first early-stage venture capital firms—this investor network funded $1,275,000 (or about 44 percent of the event’s awards) in 2019.

But the GOOSE gravy train doesn’t necessarily stop at the awards banquet. The network’s executive director, Samantha Lewis, told Houston’s online business magazine InnovationMap that the GOOSE Society may invest more after wrapping up their due diligence investigations . For example, the RBPC’s 2017 winning team from Carnegie Mellon University received a $300,000 GOOSE grand prize during the awards ceremony, but eventually netted $2 million from the network overall.

What is the RBPC’s Track Record in Creating Successful Companies?

Are the RBPC’s contestants mainly student projects or do these ventures live on as successful companies? Clearly, most of these teams experience considerable success long after the competition.

This interesting infographic summarizes the track record of the RBPC’s success stories. It illustrates how about 60 percent of the teams transformed into companies that raised about $2.36 billion in capital. Of the 239 successful firms, 197 continue to operate and 32 firms successfully “exited,” meaning they were acquired or conducted successful initial public offerings (IPOs). The value of these exits amounts to over $1.18 billion.

The chart also shows how two industries (tech innovation and life sciences) have the highest percentages of successful firms, with the life sciences and energy industries accounting for most of the funding.

These success stories are also geographically diverse. RBPC’s alumni teams represent 162 universities from 36 U.S. states and 18 nations on six continents. And despite the way that startups cluster in Western states like California and Washington, only three universities dominate the awards: Pennsylvania’s Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois, and the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor.

Role of Angel Investors as Judges and Donors

Traditionally, as this classic Harvard Business Review article points out, the venture capital industry has not provided the earliest seed funding to startups . Instead, angel investors typically invest in startups at the earliest stages, long before venture capital firms. Sometimes referenced by names like “angel funders,” “business angels,” or “seed investors,” angel investors often tend to be high net-worth individuals and families , sometimes with personal connections to the entrepreneurs they fund. They typically inject capital into startup firms in exchange for convertible debt —loans that can be converted to stock—or a proportion of the stock in the startup company.

For example, in 1977 former Intel electrical engineer Mike Markkula helped launch Apple with arguably the best investment of any angel in history. According to Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak , Markkula provided $250,000 to Wozniak and Steve Jobs. Of that sum, only $80,000 was an equity investment and the balance was a loan. In exchange, Markkula received a third of the company’s stock as the third employee, ran the company as CEO from 1981 to 1983, and served as chairman of the board from 1985 to 1997.

So-called “super angel” investor networks such as the GOOSE Society represent a blend between venture capital firms and angel investors. Here is how Fast Company described this newer breed of firms:

These crafty interlopers represent a hybrid between the two investing models that have long ruled the normally placid world of startup funding. Super angels raise funds like venture capitalists but invest early like angels and in sums between the two, on average from $250,000 to $500,000. By being smaller, faster, and less demanding of entrepreneurs than VCs, super angels are getting first dibs on the best new ideas.

So it’s not surprising that at RBPC’s 2018 competition, 40 percent of judges were angel or super angel investors . That’s more than double the proportion of judges from the venture capital industry and triple the proportion from the next highest sector: legal and financial services. It’s also not surprising that—barring some notable exceptions like Cisco Systems, NASA, and the Texas Medical Center—angel investors donated most of the largest prizes.

Other Business Plan Competitions With Large Prize Pools

Although our research disclosed no other competitions with prize pools quite as substantial as the RBMC’s nearly $3 million, we did find several events offering prizes large enough to provide compelling incentives for starving graduate students. Here are a few examples:

The objective behind the Hult Prize is to “launch a start-up enterprise that can radically change the world and breed the next generation of social entrepreneurs.” The prize is known for the involvement of the United Nations and President Bill Clinton, who presents awards to recipients. The top prize is $1 million for the winner.

Hello Tomorrow Global Challenge

The focus in the Hello Tomorrow Global Challenge , a Paris-based competition, encompasses launching “deep tech” emerging technology ventures with funding requirements far greater than cloud- or mobile-based Web applications. The current prize pool is about $235,000.

International Business Model Competition

The IBMC isn’t a business plan competition, per se. Technically, it’s a business model competition, which means that startup teams must adhere to lean startup methodologies and organize their pitches using a lean canvas framework. This Utah-based event offered a 2019 prize pool of $200,000. ( Learn more from our article about how the lean canvas approach provides an alternative to traditional business plans.)

Baylor New Venture Competition

Another Texas-based event, Baylor University’s New Venture Competition only offers about $100,000 in cash prizes. However, IBM has kicked in $120,000 in cloud credits for each of the top three finalists, making this competition especially attractive for cloud-based technology startups.

Douglas Mark

While a partner in a San Francisco marketing and design firm, for over 20 years Douglas Mark wrote online and print content for the world’s biggest brands , including United Airlines, Union Bank, Ziff Davis, Sebastiani, and AT&T. Since his first magazine article appeared in MacUser in 1995, he’s also written on finance and graduate business education in addition to mobile online devices, apps, and technology. Doug graduated in the top 1 percent of his class with a business administration degree from the University of Illinois and studied computer science at Stanford University.

Related Programs

• 1 AACSB-Accredited Online MBA Programs 1">

Related FAQs

• 1 How Do I Become a Certified Business Process Professional (CBPP)?
• 2 How Do I Get into Business School?
• 3 How Do I Secure an MBA Internship?
• 4 How Much Do Online MBA Programs Cost?
• 5 What Can I Do with an MBA Degree?
• 6 What are MBA Program Yield Management and Yield Protection?
• 7 What are MBA Yield Comparisons, Connotations, and Stakeholders?

Related Posts

Guide to mba scholarships for 2024.

Given that higher education has now become the second-largest expense for an individual in their lifetime, only topped by buying a home, it’s no wonder why so many students now look to scholarships and fellowships for help. Fortunately, research compiled for our profiles below revealed many scholarships that can help defray the cost of earning an MBA.

Guide to MBA Careers – Business Administration Career Paths

Over the last couple of years, the technology industry has begun to chip away at the share of MBA graduates joining the finance world, and more specifically, investment banking. Some studies even suggest that tech has already, or soon will, become the top recruiter of MBA graduates.

Online MBA Programs Ranked by Affordability (2023-2024)

These online programs ranked by affordability can be a viable alternative to more expensive programs while still receiving an excellent education and providing the flexibility working professionals need to balance work, family, and higher education demands.

List of MBA Associations and Organizations (2024)

Students should not limit themselves by relying exclusively on their school’s clubs for networking opportunities. Compelling arguments exist for joining local chapters of global, national, and regional professional organizations while students are still in business school.

MBA Salary Guide: Starting Salaries & Highest Paying MBA Concentrations (2023)

Specializations amount to critical choices in an MBA student’s career. They permit students to immediately deliver highly marketable skills to an employer upon graduation, the value for which most employers will gladly pay handsome salaries.

List of MBA Conferences for 2023-2024

MBA fairs are all about personal connections. School gatekeepers travel to these events to meet well-qualified applicants. Moreover, the savviest candidates understand that connecting in a personal way with a school's admissions team can award those applicants with their most critical advantage in the admissions process: a great lasting impression.

Harvard Professor Sues University for Defamation Over Misconduct Allegations

A superstar Harvard Business School professor accused of research misconduct has filed a defamation lawsuit against Harvard University, the school’s dean, and the three blog authors who levied the allegations. Tenured faculty member Dr. Francesca Gino—a famous leadership expert and author of two books plus more than 100 scholarly research papers—filed the suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts on August 2 after HBS had placed her on administrative leave.

Advertisement

Business plan competitions and nascent entrepreneurs: a systematic literature review and research agenda

• Open access
• Published: 28 February 2023
• Volume 19 , pages 863–895, ( 2023 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Léo-Paul Dana   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-0806-1911 1 , 2 ,
• Edoardo Crocco   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9797-3962 3 ,
• Francesca Culasso   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-8357-1914 3 &
• Elisa Giacosa   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-0445-3176 3  

3652 Accesses

Explore all metrics

Business plan competitions (BPCs) are opportunities for nascent entrepreneurs to showcase their business ideas and obtain resources to fund their entrepreneurial future. They are also an important tool for policymakers and higher education institutions to stimulate entrepreneurial activity and support new entrepreneurial ventures from conceptual and financial standpoints. Academic research has kept pace with the rising interest in BPCs over the past decades, especially regarding their implications for entrepreneurial education. Literature on BPCs has grown slowly but steadily over the years, offering important insights that entrepreneurship scholars must collectively evaluate to inform theory and practice. Yet, no attempt has been made to perform a systematic review and synthesis of BPC literature. Therefore, to highlight emerging trends and draw pathways to future research, the authors adopted a systematic approach to synthesize the literature on BPCs. The authors performed a systematic literature review on 58 articles on BPCs. Several themes emerge from the BPC literature, including BPCs investigated as prime opportunities to develop entrepreneurial education, the effects of BPC participation on future entrepreneurial activity, and several attempts to frame an ideal BPC blueprint for future contests. However, several research gaps emerge, especially regarding the lack of theoretical underpinnings in the literature stream and the predominance of exploratory research. This paper provides guidance for practice by presenting a roadmap for future research on BPCs drawing from the sample reviewed. From a theoretical perspective, the study offers several prompts for further research on the topic through a concept map and a structured research agenda.

Similar content being viewed by others

Trends and patterns in entrepreneurial action research: a bibliometric overview and research agenda

Lancaster University

Re-thinking university spin-off: a critical literature review and a research agenda.

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

Business plan competitions (BPCs) give nascent entrepreneurs the chance to present their business ideas to an industry and investment peer group tasked with judging each project and picking the most viable one (Overall et al., 2018 ). Winners are awarded various prizes (McGowan & Cooper, 2008 ). The purpose of BPCs is to stimulate new entrepreneurial activity and support novel entrepreneurial ideas (Kwong et al., 2012 ). In return, BPC organizers emphasize the benefits of participating, such as cash prizes and financing (McGowan & Cooper, 2008 ), visibility and reputational benefits (Parente et al., 2015 ), networking with other aspiring entrepreneurs (Thomas et al., 2014 ), and meeting potential stakeholders, including customers and investors (Passaro et al., 2020 ).

BPCs have been used by new entrepreneurs to kickstart their business ideas (Cant, 2018 ). They have been popular throughout the years, especially during the global recession in the first decade of the 2000s. BPCs have become widely popular across both developed (Licha & Brem, 2018 ) and developing countries (Efobi & Orkoh, 2018 ; McKenzie & Sansone, 2019 ), as poor economic conditions have driven young entrepreneurs toward any opportunity they can find (Cant, 2018 ). Since the origin of BPCs in the USA in the 1980s (Buono, 2000 ), several universities have implemented them in their educational ecosystem to foster practical learning. From there, BPCs have rapidly spread in Europe (Riviezzo et al., 2012 ) and within developing nations in Asia (Wong, 2011 ) and Africa (House-Soremenkun & Falola, 2011 ). Despite contextual peculiarities, the significance of BPCs is equally pertinent for developed and emerging economies (Tipu, 2018 ), as they contribute to shaping a lively local entrepreneurial fabric (Barbini et al., 2021 ).

Opportunities arising from BPC participation come in various forms, including knowledge (Barbini et al., 2021 ), networking, and promotion (Cant, 2016a ); however, finding economic resources to finance entrepreneurial ventures has proven to be the main concern (Kwong et al., 2012 ; McGowan & Cooper, 2008 ). BPCs are attractive to entrepreneurs, as they can be prime opportunities not only to receive feedback on their ideas, but also to get the monetary funds needed to realize them (Mosey et al., 2012 ). In addition, a successful BPC does not merely identify the most intriguing business idea but also supports entrepreneurs during the early stages of their new ventures, whether or not they win the competition (Watson et al., 2015 ).

Several research streams have emerged around the topic of BPCs (Cant, 2018 ). For example, entrepreneurial education has been investigated in several studies (Licha & Brem, 2018 ; Olokundun et al., 2017 ) as a way to effectively provide learning support to nascent entrepreneurs and boost their chances of success. Moreover, university-based BPCs are being explored in terms of their potential as learning experiences and how specific lessons learned during these competitions may affect future entrepreneurial orientations (Overall et al., 2018 ). For example, some argue that promoting sustainable production during BPCs has a tangible impact on the integration of sustainability practices into future business activities (Fichter & Tiemann, 2020 ).

Start-up competitions have gained global prominence since the 1980s (Kraus & Schwarz, 2007 ; Ross & Byrd, 2011 ). Today, they are a popular form of support for nascent entrepreneurs (Dee et al., 2015 ), featuring steady growth in numbers over recent years (Fichter & Tiemann, 2020 ). Consistent with BPCs’ importance, the literature examining them is growing, with an increasing number of empirical studies published each year. However, despite the attention from policymakers and academics, no attempts have been made thus far to review the literature on BPCs systematically. Additionally, there is a need for a structured research agenda that could shed light on currently unexplored topics in entrepreneurship research, such as the role of institutions in emergent entrepreneurial intentions (Audretsch et al., 2022 ; Barbini et al., 2021 ), contextual factors stimulating nascent entrepreneurial intentions (Zhu et al., 2022 ), and the development of richer theory about practical entrepreneurial training (Clingingsmith et al., 2022 ).

To the best of our knowledge, the only previous attempt at synthesizing BPC literature was performed by Tipu ( 2018 ). While their contribution is of absolute importance, its scope was limited to 22 papers published in the early 2000s and late 90 s, thus leaving a consistent portion of recent academic literature unexplored. Consequently, we believe that a systematic review of the BPC literature could be of interest to both practitioners and academics. Building on previous systematic literature reviews (SLRs) from the entrepreneurship field, we aim to provide a detailed analysis of the relevant literature on BPCs. We focus on several key aspects of BPCs that emerged from the analysis, starting with the ways in which they are currently implemented, the benefits they provide to new entrepreneurs, and the role played by BPC promotion in the early stages of the entrepreneurial life cycle (Cant, 2016a ). Our analysis reveals several factors that influence the successful implementation of BPCs as ways to boost the effectiveness of novel entrepreneurial ventures, including entrepreneurial education for individuals who take part in the program (McGowan & Cooper, 2008 ) and entrepreneurs’ personal traits and dispositions (Kwong et al., 2012 ). Therefore, our study is not limited to a synthesis of the existing literature on the topic; rather, it develops a comprehensive framework for both professionals and academic researchers to guide future projects on BPCs. This study is guided by four main research questions (RQs):

RQ1: What is the current research profile of BPC literature?

RQ2: What are the key emerging topics to be found in BPC literature?

RQ3: What research gaps are currently present in the BPC literature and what future research agenda can be set according to said gaps?

RQ4: Can a comprehensive conceptual framework be synthesized from the literature to help academics, practitioners, and other relevant stakeholders?

Drawing on previous SLR research on entrepreneurship (Kraus et al., 2020 ), we synthesized the literature to reach our research goal and answer the questions listed above. RQ1 was addressed by gathering all the available literature that satisfied the inclusion criteria in terms of research scope, relevance, and keywords. The research profile was then obtained by conducting several descriptive observations meant to understand the volume of annual scientific production, the most cited sources, the geographical focus, the theoretical frameworks used by the authors, and the emerging themes across the sample. RQ2 was addressed by reviewing the literature presented in the sample through in-depth content analysis techniques. From the analysis, the following themes emerged across the sample: (1) BPCs as opportunities for entrepreneurial education, (2) the role of BPCs in the promotion and visibility of nascent entrepreneurs, (3) the contexts surrounding BPCs, and (4) methodological choices and research design in BPC publications. Regarding RQ3, we manually reviewed each document to identify relevant research gaps in the BPC literature. This allowed us to suggest several research questions that could serve as a foundation for future studies. Finally, RQ4 was addressed by developing a framework that synthesized the thematic findings of our SLR.

The present SLR can contribute significantly to both theory and practice. Overall, SLRs critically assess and synthesize extant research, developing a comprehensive theoretical framework that can guide scholars and practitioners. In other words, a systematic review highlights the different thematic areas of prior research, delineates the research profile of the existing literature, identifies research gaps, projects possible avenues for future research, and develops a synthesized research framework on the topic (Dhir et al., 2020 ). Thus, from a theoretical perspective, our study should interest a broad range of researchers, as it links back to the ongoing global conversation regarding BPCs. It does so by synthesizing the knowledge on the topic and formulating a structured research agenda that could serve as a reference for researchers to conduct future studies and address issues of topical interest that have yet to receive sufficient attention from authors. The research agenda is built upon extant gaps found in our in-depth analysis of the sample. Similarly, practitioners can use the findings to recognize the drivers and outcomes of BPC programs and shed light on their core characteristics when designing one. Likewise, policymakers should use the present work as a blueprint for BPC planning, as the findings presented in this paper summarize how to set up a BPC effectively.

The article begins by outlining the scope of the research and explaining what types of studies will be included in the SLR in terms of content. We then explain the methodology used to gather the research sample and provide a descriptive overview of the data. Next, we provide a thematic review of the studies featured in the SLR. We identify gaps in the literature and avenues for further research before finally discussing the study’s limitations, as well as its theoretical and practical implications.

Scope of the review

Specifying the scope of the SLR and outlining its conceptual boundaries enhance the search protocol's transparency and academic rigor (Dhir et al., 2020 ). We achieved the above by clearly defining the theoretical background of the phenomenon under investigation, thus establishing the definition of the term BPC and employing it as the conceptual boundary of the review.

The BPC literature is part of a broader stream of competition-based learning in higher education institutions (Connell, 2013 ; Olssen & Peters, 2005 ). The peculiarities of BPCs consist in the presence of rewards for participation (Brentnall et al., 2018 ), the development of core entrepreneurial competencies (Arranz et al., 2017 ; Florin et al., 2007 ), and the overall effectiveness in terms of entrepreneurial survival (Jones & Jones, 2011 ; Russell et al., 2008 ). Previous research has focused on the core elements of BPC programs, such as mentoring, feedback, and networking; the way they affect future entrepreneurial lives (McGowan & Cooper, 2008 ; Watson et al., 2015 ; Watson & McGowan, 2019 ); and the rewards from BPC participation (Russell et al., 2008 ).

From a geographical perspective, the significance of BPCs is equally pertinent for developed and emerging economies (Tipu, 2018 ), albeit nascent entrepreneurs face unique challenges in developing countries, such as the lack of educational support (Hyder & Lussier, 2016 ) and institutional instability (Farashahi & Hafsi, 2009 ). We find the most significant levels of literary production in the USA (Buono, 2000 ), where BPCs originated back in the 1980s, and Europe (Riviezzo et al., 2012 ). BPC programs are also gaining traction in developing countries, especially in Asia (Wong, 2011 ) and Africa (House-Soremenkun & Falola, 2011 ). In China, for instance, BPCs are recognized as a reasonable means to obtain practical entrepreneurial knowledge (Fayolle, 2013 ). Similarly, in Kenya, there is an unprecedented level of interest in BPCs, especially from stakeholders involved in entrepreneurial education (Mboha, 2018 ). Finally, in Australia, Lu et al. ( 2018 ) noted the importance of funding from the federal government, such as the New Colombo Plan or the Endeavour Mobility funding schemes, in terms of support and promotion of BPC programs.

Despite the broad geographical scope of BPC literature, there is still a considerable paucity of research on the impact of BPCs on local entrepreneurship and enterprise development. Additionally, the few published studies feature mixed results. For instance, the study by Russell et al. ( 2008 ) reported a positive impact of the MI50K Entrepreneurship Competition in terms of job creation and overall funding obtained. However, the results of the study by Fayolle and Klandt ( 2006 ) are contradictory, as they note how entrepreneurial training via BPC participation does not always equate to a successful future venture. In this regard, BPC literature echoes decades-old controversial stances in entrepreneurship research, such as the perceived usefulness of business plans (Gumpert, 2003 ; Leadbeater & Oakley, 2001 ).

At this juncture, we also consider it prudent to formulate the definition of BPC that will be used as a conceptual boundary for the present study. While BPCs worldwide share a core definition and essence, they come in various forms (McKenzie, 2017 ). We adopted Passaro et al.'s ( 2017 ) definition of BPC, highlighting three essential structural and procedural features. The first is the presence of an organizing committee overseeing the competition and sponsors willing to invest in the most promising entries (Bell, 2010 ). Second, the participants are required to submit business plans to participate in the competition, and participants often consist of teams, as knowledge sharing across multiple people is deemed a crucial component of entrepreneurial success (Weisz et al., 2010 ). Third, after an initial screening, only participants with the most promising ideas are asked to further develop their business plans in the final stages of the competition (Burton, 2020 ). Thus, with the above conceptual scope in mind, our study includes contributions that have examined BPCs, their core characteristics, their implications for entrepreneurship education, and both the antecedents and consequences of BPC participation. However, we do not include studies investigating entrepreneurship education, universities' incubators, and generic entrepreneurial themes. Such studies have already been discussed at length by previous researchers.

The SLR approach was undertaken in an attempt to present the current literature in a comprehensive and extensive way. SLRs have been widely used in entrepreneurship research, and we use previously published SLRs as a methodological reference to guide our study (Mary George et al., 2016 ; Paek & Lee, 2018 ; Tabares et al., 2021 ). In accordance with previous work (Hu & Hughes, 2020 ), we performed a systematic review of BPC literature divided into two distinct steps. We first extracted the dataset required to perform the study, in what we will refer to as the data extraction phase. We later profiled the sample obtained in terms of descriptive statistics, such as annual scientific production, most cited countries, authors’ networks, and collaborations. Additional analyses were conducted by using the VOSviewer software tool (version 1.6.10., Leiden University, Leiden, the Netherlands) and Microsoft Excel (Dhir et al., 2020 ). The tools make use of bibliographic data to determine the frequencies of the published materials, design relevant charts and graphs, construct and visualize the bibliometric networks, and calculate the citation metrics.

Data extraction

The three central databases utilized for the present study are Web of Science (WoS), Scopus, and Google Scholar, as per the suggestions by Mariani et al. ( 2018 ). The first step in order to conduct the extraction of data was to identify the appropriate set of keywords. Based on the conceptual boundaries of the SLR, we determined an initial set of keywords. The keywords included ‘business plan competitions', ‘business plan contests’, and ‘business creation competitions’. The above keywords were used to perform an initial search on Google Scholar to examine if our keywords were sufficient. The first 50 results were taken into consideration (Dhir et al., 2020 ). We also searched the exact keywords in top journals, such as Entrepreneurship, Theory and Practice ; Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal ; International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal ; and Entrepreneurship Research Journal . Subsequently, we updated the list with keywords from the above sources. We consulted the panel to finalize the set of keywords, which ultimately resulted in the following: business plan competition*, business creation competition*, social business plan competition*, business plan contest*, business creation competition*, pitch competition*, pitch contest*. Data were collected from two databases, Scopus and WoS, which are generally well renowned in previous SLR studies on entrepreneurship (Hu & Hughes, 2020 ). Then, a rigorous set of inclusion and exclusion criteria was established. As for the inclusion criterion, we wanted to include only peer-reviewed works. This decision was made to strengthen the validity of the findings. Consequently, all forms of literature that may not have been subjected to a rigorous review process were excluded. This exclusion criterion thus filtered out conference proceedings, book chapters, editorials, websites, and magazine articles from the sample. The English language was used as an additional inclusion criterion to avoid language bias (Dhir et al., 2020 ). A complete list of the inclusion/exclusion criteria can be found in Table 1 .

Data collection and screening of literature

The search for keywords, abstract, and title was done in selected databases using the search string featured in Table 2 . An initial search in Scopus attained 195 distinct records, including full-length articles, book chapters, conferences proceedings, review articles, and research notes. We filtered out three publications written in languages other than English. Further, after manually reviewing each record, we excluded 36 publications that were not related to BPCs and 29 publications other than peer-reviewed journal articles. This step allowed us to reduce the overall number to 76 unique records. The same research protocol was performed on the WoS database and provided an initial total of 68 records, all of which were published in English. We filtered out 24 records as they were conference proceedings, review articles, book chapters, or meeting abstracts. Subsequently, we merged the two collections and removed any duplicate records we found in the process. As a final step, we performed chain referencing to identify further relevant studies that were not found in the previous steps. We then reviewed each publication title to identify and exclude journals that could be referred to as gray literature. This brought the total number of publications to 58, which we agreed to as the definitive number to be considered for the SLR. While somewhat limited, the final sample size is in line with the standards set for management studies (Hiebl, 2021 ) and previously published SLRs in entrepreneurship research (Paek & Lee, 2018 ; Poggesi et al., 2020 ).

Research profiling

Research profiling allowed us to review the sample in terms of several descriptive statistics meant to give us a comprehensive understanding of the current state of the art of BPC research (Dhir et al., 2020 ). Starting with Fig. 1 , we address the annual scientific production of papers included in the sample. Data suggest how BPC literature has been steady over the past two decades, with a sharp increase in recent years. The year 2018 features a significant spike in publications, with 11 distinct records to consider. These trends are in line with the consistent growth in broader entrepreneurship literature, as policymakers have shown increasing levels of interest in BPCs as effective means to create new jobs, foster innovation, and recover from economic crisis (Barbini et al., 2021 ).

Year of publication of the selected studies

Figure 2 shows the distribution of articles throughout the various sources included in the sample. The International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal , International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior and Research , Journal of Entrepreneurship Education , and International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business rank at the top.

Journals publishing the selected studies

In terms of publishing outlets, the variety of journals publishing relevant research on BPC further highlights the increasing attention scholars have devoted to this domain. Through a closer analysis, we note how leading entrepreneurship journals feature most of research articles on BPCs, thus testifying the intersection between the BPC stream and entrepreneurial education literature.

Establishments examined by the selected studies

The examination of the geographic scope of the prior studies is featured in Fig. 3 and it suggests that the majority focused on a single country, with most conducted in the United States. The United Kingdom, China, and Germany also feature a significant number of publications in terms of corresponding authors’ nationality. Other countries include South Africa, Australia, Canada, Italy, Switzerland, Argentina, Brazil, France, Nigeria, and Venezuela. The above results corroborate extant research, as it sees the USA as predominant due to them being where BPC first originated (Buono, 2000 ), thus having a more prosperous and profound history. Consistently with previous research, we also find a solid scientific presence in Europe (Riviezzo et al., 2012 ; Waldmann et al., 2010 ) and China (Fayolle, 2013 ). However, developing countries are lagging, possibly because BPCs have only recently become popular there (House-Soremenkun & Falola, 2011 ).

Figure 4 illustrates the top 10 most cited publications. The three most cited papers were published over a decade ago, thus acting as a theoretical foundation for development of the literature stream. More specifically, the work of Liñán et al. ( 2011 ) on factors affecting entrepreneurial intention levels and education is the most cited. In their work, Liñán et al. ( 2011 ) consider and establish empathy as a necessary precursor to social entrepreneurial intentions. At the time of publication, their findings were exploratory in nature, thus prompting several additional studies to expand upon their results and further develop their conclusions.

Most cited global documents

Furthermore, the study by Russell et al. ( 2008 ) on the development of entrepreneurial skills and knowledge by higher education institutions ranks at second place. Russell et al. ( 2008 ) noted that BPCs provide fertile ground for new business start-ups and for encouraging entrepreneurial ideas. Russell et al. ( 2008 ) were among the first to suggest a positive correlation between BPCs and entrepreneurial development, thus becoming a theoretical cornerstone for studies willing to further explore the benefits of BPCs for nascent entrepreneurs (Passaro et al., 2017 ).

The study by Lange et al. ( 2007 ) is the third most cited work. Lange et al. ( 2007 ) supported the hypothesis that new ventures created with a written business plan do not outperform new ventures that did not have a written business plan. Their work is often cited among BPC literature when discussing theoretical assumptions against the effectiveness of business plans and, consequently, BPCs (Watson & McGowan, 2019 ).

Several research methods have been adopted in the sample, both qualitative and quantitative. Figure 5 illustrates the methodological choices found within the sample, distinguished as qualitative, quantitative, mixed, and experimental research designs. The amounts shown in Fig. 5 are in absolute value and equal to n = 33 for qualitative research studies, n = 19 for quantitative research, n = 2 for mixed research, and n = 4 for experimental research. The most common choice in research design is the use of a specific BPC as a single empirical case study (Barbini et al., 2021 ; Efobi & Orkoh, 2018 ; Li et al., 2019 ). For instance, Jiang et al. ( 2018 ) investigated the “Challenge Cup” BPC to subsequently develop a longitudinal analysis on creative interaction networks and team creativity evolution. Similarly, Barbini et al. ( 2021 ) investigated data from a BPC in Rimini through the use of a mixed-method analysis. On the other hand, studies that focus on the educational implications of BPCs tend to use students as respondents, instead of BPC participants (Licha & Brem, 2018 ; Olokundun et al., 2017 ).

The research designs used in the selected studies

In terms of methodological choices, qualitative research on BPCs is dominated by semi-structured interviews and surveys (Burton, 2020 ; Watson & McGowan, 2019 ; Watson et al., 2018 ). The above is due to how in-depth, open-ended interviews fit a case study research design, thus explaining their popularity in BPC literature (Watson et al., 2015 ). Additionally, amid qualitative research, we find focus groups (Lu et al., 2018 ), fuzzy-set (Lewellyn & Muller-Kahle, 2016 ), content analysis, and cross-sectional research (Passaro et al., 2017 ). Moreover, quantitative studies include partial least squares models (Fichter & Tiemann, 2020 ; Overall et al., 2018 ), regression analysis, longitudinal studies (Jiang et al., 2018 ; Watson et al., 2018 ), and descriptive empirical research based on surveys. Partial least squares regression models are the most popular choice in regards to quantitative BPC research (Fichter & Tiemann, 2020 ; Overall et al., 2018 ), as they have allowed authors to, among other research, test the impacts of several variables on the entrepreneurial activity of BPC participants (Fichter & Tiemann, 2020 ) and to measure the effectiveness of universities’ promotion of entrepreneurship through events, BPCs, and incubators (Overall et al., 2018 ).

Figure 6 was made with the VOSviewer tool and shows the interactions between the most prolific countries in BPC literature. It showcases the co-citation network between the authors in the sample, sorted by their country of origin. In other words, countries appearing near within the diagram have closer collaboration. The size of each bubble indicates the relevance of each country within the network in terms of overall citations. Several main collaboration groups were found, each highlighted in a distinct color. Consistently with the geographical scope of the sample illustrated in Fig. 3 , the UK and the USA play a predominant role in the collaboration network.

The cross-country co-citation network

VOSviewer can also analyze the co-occurrence year between keywords. Through the co-occurrence chronology of keywords, the first co-occurrence time between keywords can be clearly displayed, which helps to understand the research in the field of BPC and how it has evolved over time. The co-occurrence chronology view is shown in Fig. 7 . The color of the line between the keywords in the figure indicates the first co-occurrence time of the two. The thicker the line, the greater the intensity of the two co-occurrences and the greater the number of co-occurrences between the two keywords. We notice how the field initially started around the topic of entrepreneurial education, as highlighted by the purple and blue clusters. Progressively, the focus has shifted towards social media, business development, innovation, and marketing, most likely due to the growing relevance of digital transformation throughout the past decade.

The co-occurrence chronology view of keywords

To provide readers with a comprehensive and in-depth overview of the BPC literature, we analyzed and synthesized the sample using qualitative content analysis. This technique allows researchers to identify key emerging themes from a sample and to group the records depending on their similarities (Baregheh et al., 2009 ). Three researchers conducted the content analysis independently to uncover the thematic structure of the sample. Later, we shared our findings and discussed divergent thoughts and interpretations. The discussion was aided by a senior researcher with relevant expertise in entrepreneurship research. After much debate, we agreed to arrange the results according to four themes: (1) BPCs as opportunities for entrepreneurial education, (2) benefits of BPC participation, (3) the ideal BPC blueprint, and (4) methodological choices and research design in BPC publications. This classification allowed for a more structured overview of the sample that also afforded enough space and detail to adequately review each literature stream. The research questions that emerged from each theme are presented in Table 3 , and they could act as the backbone for future studies on the topic.

BPCs and entrepreneurial education

While entrepreneurship education existed prior to the 1960s, it only became more significant in the second half of the 20th century. Entrepreneurship education was also much more popular in the USA than in the rest of the world, due to a much greater variety of courses at both the undergraduate and postgraduate levels (Dana, 1992 ). Greater academic interest in entrepreneurship was sparked at the beginning of the 21st century, however, and it has increased rapidly over the past two decades, in terms of both scientific publications and courses available to nascent entrepreneurs (Liñán et al., 2011 ).

Overall et al. ( 2018 ) emphasize the importance of universities in entrepreneurial education and BPCs. Oftentimes, universities combine traditional lectures with more practical activities, such as BPCs, to provide students with a more practically oriented schedule. Similarly, Licha and Brem ( 2018 ) highlight the tools and services available to nascent entrepreneurs via universities, including incubators, accelerators, and entrepreneurship-specific teaching methods. The findings of Licha and Brem ( 2018 ) also suggest that universities tend to give their own spin to entrepreneurial programs and that different cultures lead to different results for BPC participants and nascent entrepreneurs in general. While differences may emerge across programs based in different countries (Lewellyn & Muller-Kahle, 2016 ; Zhou et al., 2015 ), the core elements of such competitions remain stable (Parente et al., 2015 ).

Entrepreneurial programs have steadily increased in popularity over the past decade, thus prompting a newly found interest in BPCs as core components of said programs (Laud et al., 2015 ). Raveendra et al. ( 2018 ) identified several skills that universities can transfer to BPC participants, such as time management, problem solving, communication skills, and brainstorming. Although the development of these skills is not, strictly speaking, universities’ prerogative, both governments and employers want skilled entrepreneurs in society (Russell et al., 2008 ). Indeed, BPCs are a prime opportunity for novel entrepreneurs to develop entrepreneurial skills thanks to the potential for networking with peers and a practice-focused competitive environment. Such an opportunity appears to be tied to the historical appeal of BPCs, as they have attracted students from a plethora of disciplines and sectors throughout the decades (Russell et al., 2008 ).

When BPCs are approached with positive attitudes and open minds, participants can actively benefit from what they learn during their entrepreneurial journeys (McGowan & Cooper, 2008 ). The results of their learning experiences tend to emerge during their entrepreneurial careers, as entrepreneurial skills are held in high regard by various stakeholders and shareholders alike, including investors and business angels (Olokundun et al., 2017 ). Several empirical case studies strengthen these findings, illustrating the importance of BPCs as learning opportunities and their importance in terms of future entrepreneurial life (Cervilla, 2008 ; Li et al., 2019 ; Mancuso et al., 2010 ). It is worth mentioning that some studies in the sample had contradictory results, as universities are not always able to promote entrepreneurship with satisfactory results (Wegner et al., 2019 ).

However, the conversation around entrepreneurial education is still developing. For example, not much has been said about interdisciplinary personalized training and self-learning activities (Li et al., 2019 ). Cervilla ( 2008 ) echoes the same necessity in terms of creating and nurturing an interconnected environment around universities and spin-offs. A first set of exploratory findings suggests that the intervention of external professionals could benefit the entrepreneurial education of students; however, much remains to be said about which skills are valued the most by nascent entrepreneurs (Raveendra et al., 2018 ), incentives and returns for universities that host BPCs (Parente et al., 2015 ), and BPCs as a means to instill proactive entrepreneurial intentions in students (Olokundun et al., 2017 ).

Additionally, the debate surrounding the role of higher education institutions in entrepreneurial education remains very active. While universities’ support for BPCs has been proven to benefit participants in the past (Saeed et al., 2014 ), the findings of Wegner et al. ( 2019 ) suggest that the actions of universities have little to no impact on students’ entrepreneurial intentions. Contradicting results can also be found in other studies (e.g., Coduras et al., 2016 ; Shahid et al., 2017 ), which suggests that additional research is needed to expand this literature stream further. Authors have stressed the importance of intangible benefits gained from BPCs, as participants view them as valuable learning experiences and hold the competencies gained from them in high regard, albeit not entirely useful in day-to-day routines (Watson et al., 2018 ). Still, on the topic of competence development, studies have highlighted that stressing the importance of specific skills during BPCs can seriously impact future entrepreneurial ventures (Overall et al., 2018 ).

Finally, several points of contention emerge when discussing the educational outcomes of BPCs. The literature suggests that nascent entrepreneurs rely on BPCs to refine their business ideas and get feedback (Grichnik et al., 2014 ; Tata & Niedworok, 2018 ); however, empirical and theoretical contributions to BPCs as learning experiences are limited and unclear (Schwartz et al., 2013 ). To address this issue, Watson et al. ( 2018 ) claim that researchers need to understand how participation in university-based BPCs affects entrepreneurial learning outcomes among nascent entrepreneurs. So far, the results have been contradictory. Fafchamps et al. ( 2014 ) found little to no impact on the growth of such entrepreneurial ventures.

Non-educational benefits of BPC participation

It goes without saying that winning a BPC implies a significant increase in visibility, which could lead to finding new stakeholders who could prove useful to the project (Parente et al., 2015 ). However, gray areas still exist. As Parente et al. ( 2015 ) suggest, the role of media coverage could be further improved by involving experts specialized in business and entrepreneurship, instead of generalist media alone. Competition promoters should also invest considerably more time and resources into social media promotion, as social media platforms have become more and more prominent over the years for both entrepreneurs and their potential market (Cant, 2016b ; Palacios-Marqués et al., 2015 ). This is especially relevant for tech-savvy entrepreneurs who are active on social media platforms and could benefit from social media exposure, but they need institutions to act accordingly in this regard (Botha & Robertson, 2014 ). Cant ( 2016b ) found that participants in BPCs were satisfied with the exposure they received from the event, noting that it was worth the effort. However, the author also stressed the importance of event promoters being savvy with social media promotion, which was not always the case.

More broadly speaking, BPC winners have been shown to possess a greater survival rate in entrepreneurial life due to a number of factors, including financial aid, attractiveness in the eyes of stakeholders, and a positive impact on investors (McKenzie, 2017 ). Additionally, McKenzie ( 2017 ) analyzed the YouWiN! competition and noted its impact on the survival rates of established firms and start-ups. The main effect of the competition was to enable firms to buy more capital, innovate more, and hire more workers, hence making the BPC an effective tool for long-term growth. The above results add to a pre-existing debate that has characterized entrepreneurship research in the past, as authors do not seem to reach a universal consensus on the perceived usefulness of business plans (Gumpert, 2003 ; Leadbeater & Oakley, 2001 ). Still, on the topic of firm survival, the results of the study conducted by Simón-Moya and Revuelto-Taboada ( 2016 ) are especially interesting for policymakers responsible for aid programs aiming to foster entrepreneurship, as they show how the quality of a business plan alone can be a necessary condition but not a sufficient condition to explain firm survival. Hence, there is a need for policymakers and institutions to foster entrepreneurship via institutional aid and programs, BPCs included.

Moreover, Fichter and Tiemann ( 2020 ) found that the promotion of sustainability in competitions leads to the integration of sustainability practices into future entrepreneurial activities. However, they warn that policymakers need to effectively plan the integration of sustainability with the entrepreneurial mindset of BPC participants, as generic sustainability orientations do not automatically lead to the integration of sustainability goals into future business activities (Cornelissen & Werner, 2014 ). This sentiment has been echoed in more recent research (Daub et al., 2020 ). The debate on the importance of BPC participation still features a few areas that have yet to be fully explored and discussed. For example, Tata and Niedworok ( 2018 ) claim that the evaluation of business plans changes throughout the phases the idea undergoes, which leads to a more prominent role of subjective feedback in the very early stages of their development. Much like business plan evaluators, nascent entrepreneurs change the way they value their competencies over time (Watson et al., 2018 ): what appeared most useful during their time spent educating themselves might not coincide with what is deemed most relevant during their actual entrepreneurial life; however, more evidence is required to get a proper understanding of this phenomenon.

The ideal BPC blueprint

Several studies have been conducted to explore the contexts in which BPCs thrive and the traits they need to possess to successfully shape future entrepreneurs. Cant ( 2018 ) was one of the first authors to provide a tentative blueprint for future competitions, which included a call for a more structured approach and better planning via a set of universal traits that a BPC should possess regardless of the country or culture in which it is set. Drawing on Bell ( 2010 ), Cant ( 2018 ) also stresses the importance of a go-to model as a means for inexperienced institutions to organize and manage a BPC properly without the need for previous experience.

Additionally, several common trends have emerged that could help determine a generalized BPC blueprint as accurately as possible. First, it is important to ensure that the BPC is embedded in an entrepreneur-friendly ecosystem in which both nascent entrepreneurs and professionals, such as venture capitalists, business angels, and generic investors, can interact and network with each other in a seamless way (Passaro et al., 2017 ). The formulation and development of a business plan is an extremely important yet delicate step for new entrepreneurs, and being able to effectively assess their opportunities and make use of feedback from established professionals is crucial (Botha & Robertson, 2014 ). This two-way feedback mechanism can be implemented both in the early stages of competitions via workshops and lectures and after the winner is picked so that everyone has the chance to understand their results and improve (Cant, 2018 ).

Cant’s ( 2018 ) blueprint stresses the importance of industry specialists aiding participants with their submissions. This finding is supported by a case study by Moultry ( 2011 ), in which industry professionals effectively participated in lectures, provided panel discussions, and helped conduct a BPC for pharmacy students. The vast majority of students who took part in the experiment claimed that the help of industry professionals significantly increased their understanding of business plans and consequently increased their chances of future entrepreneurial success. Moreover, establishing a collaboration network that ties BPC participants to industry professionals greatly increases the chances of survival for university spin-offs (Cervilla, 2008 ).

Finally, an effective BPC should provide winners and, when possible, participants in general with enough resources to fund the early stages of their entrepreneurial journeys (Feldman & Oden, 2007 ; Kolb, 2006 ). Funding nascent entrepreneurs through BPCs could provide several benefits that significantly increase their chances of survival, while also providing them with new opportunities, such as access to debt and equity capital (Burton, 2020 ). However, nascent entrepreneurs themselves need to be able to convince investors that their business ideas are worthy of their funding and resources, and in that regard, opportunity templates vary among people who occupy different professional roles (Tata & Niedworok, 2018 ). While expressing their concerns about founders speculating on financial rewards in the business-idea phase and proposing their own BPC evaluation framework, Tata and Niedworok ( 2018 ) call for a balanced number of jurors from each professional domain to mitigate unfair rating biases. However, much about BPC blueprints remains to be determined. Cant ( 2018 ) explains that there are no set rules applicable to all competitions and that, given the increase in popularity of BPCs all over the world, evaluating similar competitions in Europe and Asia would be a natural progression for this specific literature stream.

Methodological choices and research design in BPC publications

The BPC literature features several research design choices, with both qualitative and quantitative approaches to data collection. Generally speaking, there is a noticeable predominance of empirical research based on case studies and descriptive analysis of BPC scenarios (Efobi & Orkoh, 2018 ; Li et al., 2019 ), with little emphasis on theoretical underpinnings or theory development. Multiple longitudinal studies were identified in the sample (Mosey et al., 2012 ; Watson et al., 2018 ; Jiang et al., 2018 ). We were not able to find SLRs on the topic of BPCs, other than the one performed by Tipu ( 2018 ).

From a qualitative perspective, there were several case studies from both developed (Licha & Brem, 2018 ) and developing countries (Efobi & Orkoh, 2018 ; McKenzie & Sansone, 2019 ). A few qualitative studies have also taken an experimental approach (Fafchamps & Quinn, 2017 ; Fafchamps & Woodruff, 2017 ), which was made possible by the availability of students and higher education institution facilities at the authors’ disposal. Semi-structured interviews were conducted in a few studies, mostly with exploratory intentions (Burton, 2020 ; Watson & McGowan, 2019 ).

Only one study can be labeled as mixed methods research (Barbini et al., 2021 ), whereas the remaining studies were quantitative. Methodological approaches using partial least squares regression are prevalent in BPC research (Overall et al., 2018 ; Wegner et al., 2019 ; Fichter & Tiemann, 2020 ) in which authors attempted to test the impacts of several variables on the entrepreneurial future of BPC participants. For example, Fichter and Tiemann ( 2020 ) used structural equation modeling to test whether the integration of sustainability goals into BPC programs affects the future business outcomes of nascent entrepreneurs, especially in terms of the inclusion of sustainability topics. Moreover, Wegner et al. ( 2019 ) applied a similar research design to determine whether universities’ role in promoting entrepreneurship contests such as BPCs positively affects students’ entrepreneurial intentions. Finally, Overall et al. ( 2018 ) used the theory of planned behavior (TPB) as a theoretical framework to measure the effectiveness of universities’ promotion of entrepreneurship through events, BPCs, and incubators.

Additionally, the topic of BPCs is multi-theoretical in nature, allowing scholars to use various theoretical underpinnings to investigate their nature. The sample features several theoretical frameworks used by authors, including screening and signaling theory for the analysis of early-stage venture-investor communication (Wales, et al., 2019 ); the Fishbein–Ajzen framework to predict planned behavior based on four components of reasoned action (Overall et al., 2018 ); institutional theory as a means to explain variation in entrepreneurial intention (Lewellyn & Muller-Kahle, 2016 ); and variations of the psychological model of “planned behavior” (Liñán et al., 2011 ). It is worth noting that while theoretical perspectives are plenty, records featured in the sample do not use multiple theoretical lenses in the same study. Finally, we find a few studies synthesize and develop their unique theoretical frameworks based on extant theory and empirical observations (Wen & Chen, 2007 ; McGowan & Cooper, 2008 ), even though a considerable portion of the sample features purely empirical results (McKenzie, 2017 ; Moultry, 2011 ).

Research gaps

Several research gaps were identified in the sample. To give a more thought-out structure to the presentation of these results, we classified the gaps into two categories: gaps related to the data and gaps related to the analysis.

Data-related gaps

A few studies had generalizability problems. The exploratory nature of some case studies presented intrinsic limitations to generalizability, as the findings were sometimes not applicable to different contexts (Cervilla, 2008 ; Li et al., 2019 ). For example, Licha and Brem’s ( 2018 ) study features two universities located in Germany and Denmark. Future research could expand upon their findings by investigating several other universities in different countries to strengthen and confirm their results.

Several studies have employed qualitative research methods using exploratory (Parente et al., 2015 ) or experimental approaches (Efobi & Orkoh, 2018 ; McKenzie, 2017 ). There are inherent weaknesses in such research, as self-reported surveys cannot guarantee unbiased responses (Efobi & Orkoh, 2018 ). Similarly, semi-structured interviews feature the same bias; however, their results can be verified with follow-up quantitative research on a larger scale (Licha & Brem, 2018 ; Watson et al., 2015 , 2018 ).

Some studies were also limited due to their sample sizes. Small-scale studies are valuable for exploratory research, as they allow for an initial step into a novel investigation, but they lack in terms of representativeness (Tornikoski & Puhakka, 2009 ; Watson et al., 2018 ; Barbini et al., 2021 ). For example, Wegner et al. ( 2019 ) warn readers of the intrinsic limitations of small sample sizes and ask for larger-scale surveys that could potentially test and expand the results of their initial exploratory research. Moreover, Watson et al. ( 2018 ) claim that it is important to investigate other types of competitions and not limit the scope of BPC research to university-based competitions. In doing so, future research could yield new insights and even adopt comparative perspectives to determine the differences between the two worlds (Watson et al., 2018 ).

Gaps related to analysis

Several main gaps were identified related to analysis, including a narrow focus of prior research, limited geographic scope, and a lack of theoretical underpinnings. A few studies were conducted with very narrow foci, effectively leaving the door open for future studies to bridge the gaps they highlighted. For example, Barbini et al. ( 2021 ) focused on the educational backgrounds of nascent entrepreneurs without considering the implications of their work experience. This gap could be addressed in some capacity by future research. Furthermore, Wegner et al. ( 2019 ) point out that their research shared the same limitation, as they focused on comparing individual students’ entrepreneurial intentions rather than comparing the same individual’s intentions over time. They suggest that future research could explore the influence of universities and BPCs on students’ entrepreneurial intentions (Liñán et al., 2011 ).

Another issue related to the analysis was the limited geographic scope of the sample. While the BPC literature includes contributions from both developed and developing countries (Olafsen & Cook, 2016 ), contextual empirical evidence from both sides of the spectrum is limited. Cross-cultural analysis from different countries could lead to new findings and a more comprehensive look at the BPC phenomenon, especially in developing countries, as thus far only one study exists.

Finally, another gap identified in the sample was the lack of theoretical underpinnings in many of the studies. Most of the selected manuscripts featured qualitative case studies or empirical survey-based data (Cervilla, 2008 ; Li et al., 2019 ). Although their findings were insightful, the authors themselves note that the exploratory nature of most of the studies reflects the need for more theory-building studies on BPCs or the implementation of behavioral theories to strengthen the hypotheses developed by researchers.

Potential research areas

We identified several research areas that could be explored in the future by entrepreneurship researchers. Our selection was based on a combination of our manual review of the content included in the sample and the need for further research expressed by the authors themselves. The suggestions refer primarily to the replication of exploratory research, the need for further longitudinal research, and the testing of hypotheses and measures developed by the authors, each of which is discussed below.

Replication of exploratory studies

The lack of representativeness in the studies was the most evident and recurrent gap highlighted in the sample. Scholars could start from the preliminary research findings provided by current BPC research and replicate studies in different geographical contexts. Although BPCs share several similarities in the way they function and are managed, differences in their efficacy and the survival rate of winners and participants in general can arise. However, replicability is useful for demystifying not only the entrepreneurial lives of winners, but also BPC designs themselves. For example, the blueprint developed by Cant ( 2018 ) can be replicated and tested in several contexts to validate its effectiveness and to provide novel insights into it. Future research is required to explore this ongoing debate and to find as much information as possible on how to plan the support of professionals from outside of universities accordingly (Burton, 2020 ) and how they affect BPC participants’ attitudes and entrepreneurship intentions (He et al., 2020 ).

Longitudinal studies on BPC participants’ entrepreneurial survival

Multiple authors have called for longitudinal studies designed to follow the lives of BPC participants both prior to and after the contests take place. A few longitudinal studies already exist; however, they have also called for more studies with similar research designs. For example, Watson et al. ( 2018 ) call for longitudinal research to test the notion of competition competency they introduced in their study. Similarly, Jiang et al. ( 2018 ) claim that their longitudinal approach was severely limited by being narrowly focused on a single competition. Therefore, they call for further longitudinal studies to strengthen the validity of their findings.

Collecting longitudinal data seems to be a fitting way to contribute to BPC research, specifically, and to entrepreneurial research, more broadly, as metrics could help researchers understand the development of nascent entrepreneurial ventures over time while highlighting the effects of factors such as entrepreneurial education or institutional support for BPC participants at the beginning of their journeys (Wegner et al., 2019 ). Currently, little research has been conducted on a longitudinal basis; thus, there is still a severe lack of understanding of BPCs’ impacts on the entrepreneurial teams and businesses that emerge from them (McGowan & Cooper, 2008 ).

Utilization of diverse research methods

Scholars could make use of a more diverse set of research methods in future BPC studies to overcome the paucity of theoretical contributions and quantitative research in general. While several exploratory studies serve as a strong starting point for BPC research (Burton, 2020 ; Parente et al., 2015 ), it is important to approach the topic in a more multidisciplinary manner, for instance, by including more mixed-method studies in the future (Barbini et al., 2021 ). This could lead to more comprehensive results and a more holistic understanding of the BPC literature among academics and practitioners (Efobi & Orkoh, 2018 ).

Diverse theoretical perspectives

Little theory is currently available on BPCs (Cant, 2018 ). Although multi-theoretical in nature, BPC literature draws on a limited number of existing theories, such as the quadruple-helix model (Parente et al., 2015 ) and the TPB (Overall et al., 2018 ). While the results from exploratory research are interesting and valuable, most of these studies are not underpinned by theory or theoretical frameworks of any kind. Furthermore, the paucity of theoretical underpinnings in our sample can be used as a prompt for future research. To date, only a few studies have grounded their research in established theories (Lv et al., 2021 ; Overall et al., 2018 ). Future research could try to bridge this gap, especially with behavior-centered theories and frameworks, which could be used to address several research questions in terms of BPCs’ impacts on future entrepreneurial lives and the way nascent entrepreneurs incorporate what they learn during competitions into their everyday professional practice (Watson & McGowan, 2019 ).

Theoretical framework

After reviewing the theoretical underpinnings found within the sample, we find a predominance of the conceptual framework developed by Fishbein and Ajzen ( 1975 ), namely the theory of reasoned action (TRA), which allows for a systematic theoretical orientation on beliefs and attitudes to perform a certain behavior. By using the TRA as a base reference, we synthesized extant theoretical research found in the BPC literature. We listed several independent and dependent variables depicted in previous work, reviewed the connections found between them, and illustrated the role played by moderating variables. The framework also serves as a reference to determine the impact each factor has on BPC participants in their entrepreneurial futures. The framework is illustrated in Fig. 8 .

BPC theoretical framework

In the context of BPC, several antecedents can be identified as determinants of future entrepreneurial behavior. Our framework draws on previously published theoretical underpinnings to define both the antecedents of entrepreneurial activity and the multiple intrinsic factors that contribute to its multifaceted nature. We start by identifying entrepreneurial intention and entrepreneurial competence, which have been investigated in the literature through the theoretical lens of the TPB (Ajzen, 1991 ). Then, drawing on the theoretical model Lv et al. ( 2021 ) developed, we expect entrepreneurial teaching and practice support to positively impact future entrepreneurial intention and the development of entrepreneurial competencies. This theoretical assumption is backed by a few studies (Liñán et al., 2011 ) and deemed worthy of further attention. For example, future research could adopt a hierarchical multiple regression to determine the impact of entrepreneurial teaching on future entrepreneurial intention (Olokundun et al., 2017 ). Alternatively, the impact could be investigated through multiple regression models by developing a set of factors tailored to the entrepreneurial education programs and extracted via questionnaires (Liñán et al., 2011 ).

Drawing on entrepreneurial research, we find the perceived desirability of entrepreneurship and the perceived feasibility of entrepreneurship (Schlaegel & Koenig, 2014 ) as the two main attitudes toward entrepreneurial intentions (Ajzen, 1991 ; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975 ). In other words, per the theoretical model proposed by Overall et al. ( 2018 ), entrepreneurial orientation leads students and nascent entrepreneurs to the desirability of an entrepreneurial career and the perceived feasibility of said career, which subsequently influence their entrepreneurial intentions. Then, drawing on the TRA and TPB frameworks, we propose that when individuals possess strong desirability toward an entrepreneurial career and perceive said career as feasible, they will most likely form entrepreneurial intentions (Overall et al., 2018 ).

We define entrepreneurial teaching as the essential aspect of entrepreneurship education. Research suggests that educational support affects nascent entrepreneurs by providing them with adequate skills to tackle better entrepreneurial life (Grichnik et al., 2014 ; Tata & Niedworok, 2018 ). In other words, entrepreneurial education programs actively contribute to entrepreneurial development (Škare et al., 2022 ). The positive effects of educational support on entrepreneurial success and intention can be found in empirical studies (Thomas et al., 2014 ; Passaro et al., 2020 ). More specifically, we note entrepreneurial education as a key factor in influencing innovation and development. The entrepreneur’s competencies are seen as an individual and organizational resource that needs to be properly developed through educational programs in order to bring out its potential for the entrepreneurial future (Salmony & Kanbach, 2022 ). Overall, drawing on the theoretical framework of Lv et al. ( 2021 ), we find both entrepreneurial teaching and entrepreneurial practice, intended as BPC participation, to affect their entrepreneurial intention significantly.

A set of moderating control variables can be used to provide a more comprehensive overview of the influence played by the stakeholders mentioned above. Wegner et al. ( 2019 ) suggest that future research could specify how age moderates the relationship between entrepreneurial support variables and the outcomes of BPC participants. Other studies have also supported the use of age as a moderator of the effectiveness of BPC support on entrepreneurial intention (Cant, 2018 ; Passaro et al., 2020 ). Furthermore, McGowan and Cooper ( 2008 ) claim that entrepreneurs’ levels of knowledge could be tested as moderating variables of entrepreneurial intention and behavior, as BPC participants might have different backgrounds and levels of expertise, which could influence the outcomes of their entrepreneurship activities. Additionally, Lewellyn and Muller-Kahle ( 2016 ) propose using gender as a moderator of entrepreneurial activity. Finally, Terán-Yépez et al. ( 2022 ) discuss the use of affective dispositions as variables influencing entrepreneurial activity. Future research could expand upon their findings and use hope, courage, fear and regret as moderating variables of entrepreneurial intentions.

Entrepreneurial intention as a variable that affects entrepreneurial behavior is backed by a theoretical study conducted by Overall et al. ( 2018 ), underpinned by the TPB (Ajzen, 1991 ). A positive correlation between the two was deemed consistent and statistically significant. In conclusion, the above framework could help explore the connection between BPC participation and the development of entrepreneurial activity, which thus far has received little empirical attention in research. Future research could delve further into the impact of BPC participation and institutional support on entrepreneurial activity to give proper closure to a long-lasting debate on the usefulness of BPC as a stimulant for entrepreneurial practice (Fayolle & Klandt, 2006 ; Russell et al., 2008 ). In addition, many methodological approaches could effectively encapsulate the impact described above, as seen in entrepreneurship research. For instance, future studies could employ a longitudinal case study approach (Overall et al., 2018 ) to follow nascent entrepreneurs in their journey and determine the impact of BPC participation. Longitudinal studies have proven effective in capturing the factors and variables influencing entrepreneurial life over the years (Petty & Gruber, 2011 ).

Conclusions

The purpose of this SLR was to critically analyze the literature related to BPCs and set the future research agenda for the area of entrepreneurship. To the best of our knowledge, ours is the first SLR to review research focused on recent BPC literature (Tipu, 2018 ), thus making our contribution original in its approach. The originality of the study lies in it being the first attempt at conducting an SLR on the topic of BPCs and contributing to science in several ways, as depicted below. Our study on BPC research has several implications for both academics and practitioners. From a theoretical perspective, our study makes several contributions to BPC and entrepreneurship literature. It does so by not only synthesizing extant research, but also by providing a structured research agenda built upon the several gaps found amid BPC literature. A further contribution to science is the development of a theoretical framework that will enable future researchers to have a bird’s-eye view of the domain and structure their future contributions accordingly. From a practical perspective, the study is of interest to practitioners and nascent entrepreneurs, as it provides policymakers and practitioners with a BPC blueprint featuring state-of-the-art characteristics and several key implications on how and why participating in BPCs is beneficial to nascent entrepreneurs. We propose a more detailed look at both theoretical and practical implications below.

Implications for research

Our main research contribution is a detailed review of the recent literature on BPCs, which can be deemed original, as no authors have attempted to systematically synthesize the existing BPC research. Our approach to the design of the SLR was twofold. We first provided a descriptive overview of the sample in terms of annual scientific production and geographical relevance. We then applied qualitative content analysis to highlight key emerging themes that were used to identify foci for future research directions. Based on our classification, we contend that the theoretical advancement of this research area requires greater attention to both antecedents and consequences of BPC attendance.

Our second contribution was the development of a research framework to synthesize existing knowledge on BPCs and to provide new and original insights into the BPC literature stream. Our framework explicates the role played by BPCs in the professional lives of nascent entrepreneurs (McKenzie, 2018 ; Overall et al., 2018 ) in terms of how it affects their entrepreneurial behavior (Burton, 2020 ; Passaro et al., 2017 ) and identifies the specific characteristics BPCs should feature to be as effective as possible. The same framework also helps define the scope for future research, as it identifies several avenues that future entrepreneurship scholars should explore (Fichter & Tiemann, 2020 ; Li et al., 2019 ). The framework provides future researchers a bird’s-eye view of the existing knowledge base in the area, indicating, at the same time, what remains underexplored or ignored. Additionally, by profiling extant research on BPCs, we offer scholars a comprehensive overview of potentially appropriate outlets for their studies, along with the most widely used methods and theories that could help them design their future research.

Finally, we contribute by systematically uncovering crucial research gaps in the reviewed literature on BPCs from both a methodological and a content perspective. From a methodological perspective, our analysis has revealed the need for future research to broaden the methodological scope of BPC research (Efobi & Orkoh, 2018 ). Thus far, the BPC literature stream has been dominated by empirical research featuring case studies and experimental designs (Cervilla, 2008 ; Li et al., 2019 ; Mancuso et al., 2010 ). Quantitative and mixed-method research is needed to further expand upon the findings of exploratory BPC research and to test their validity on a larger scale. From a content perspective, our study has defined a structured research agenda synthesized from extant gaps. We have identified and listed several research questions that could drive future work on the topic. Additionally, our study has highlighted the uneven distribution of BPC research from a geographical standpoint. While their significance is equally pertinent for developed and emerging economies (Tipu, 2018 ) and BPC programs are becoming increasingly popular in developing countries (House-Soremenkun & Falola, 2011 ; Wong, 2011 ), our findings suggest that country-specific production is still lagging behind pioneering nations, namely the USA and the UK. Hence, there is a need for additional evidence from developing countries, along with cross-cultural analyses to highlight the cultural differences in BPC and entrepreneurial education.

Practical implications

Our study has multiple implications for BPC practices. First, it provides policymakers and practitioners with a BPC blueprint featuring state-of-the-art characteristics. Drawing on Cant’s ( 2018 ) BPC blueprint, which was an attempt to identify an ideal set of characteristics for BPCs, we reviewed and expanded upon their findings by adding new points of view taken from empirical studies found in our sample to add new insights and incorporate more contributions from the literature. Overall, the ideal BPC should feature active participation from industry professionals, as they can provide participants with valuable insights into the professional world (Botha & Robertson, 2014 ), which BPC research has shown to be important (Moultry, 2011 ). Furthermore, a serious effort should be made to guarantee BPC participants funds and financial resources for the early stages of their entrepreneurial lives, as material support and knowledge sharing are both crucial to increasing their chances of survival (Burton, 2020 ; Passaro et al., 2017 ).

Second, our study informs practitioners of the importance of longitudinally monitoring BPC participants throughout their entrepreneurial lives (Watson et al., 2018 ). Longitudinal data allow a better understanding of the factors and variables influencing entrepreneurial life (Petty & Gruber, 2011 ). This could help BPC organizers better weigh the design choices in their educational courses by monitoring the returns they get from the seeds planted during the developmental phase of nascent business ideas (Jiang et al., 2018 ). Longitudinal monitoring of BPC participants is valuable in several ways. As suggested by McKenzie ( 2017 ), BPC winners tend to possess a greater survival rate in entrepreneurial life, which contributes to the debate on whether the quality of business plans affects the future survival rate (Simón-Moya & Revuelto-Taboada, 2016 ). Practitioners and policymakers should be asked to monitor and support BPC participants after the competition. As noted by Cant ( 2018 ), building a long-lasting collaboration with BPC participants increases their chances of survival, regardless of whether they have won the actual competition. The role played by BPC organizers in building a post-competition collaborative network is vital and has a significant impact on the survival rate, employment, profits, and sales of ventures participating in BPCs (McKenzie, 2017 ).

Our study could also be beneficial to managers, entrepreneurs, and professionals alike, as it can provide them with several key implications on how and why participating in BPCs is beneficial to nascent entrepreneurs, in terms of visibility, knowledge development, and networking opportunities (Thomas et al., 2014 ; Passaro et al., 2020 ). This is true both for novel entrepreneurs who have yet to emerge and for industry professionals who are willing to get in touch with future generations of entrepreneurs and stimulate the discussion around the topic of BPCs (Barbini et al., 2021 ). While participants generally obtain more tangible benefits from winning BPCs, their very participation in the competition can provide several intangible benefits as well, primarily in terms of networking opportunities and skill development. In this regard, our study is of practical significance for nascent entrepreneurs willing to partake in BPCs, as it features a clear depiction of what to expect to gain from the competition.

Limitations and future research

We adopted an SLR methodology to analyze the available research on BPCs. Our systematic review of the BPC literature provided descriptive and original contributions to the field. Four research questions were addressed in this article. RQ1 was addressed by providing an overview of the current state of the art of BPC research in what we refer to as research profiling. Fifty-eight unique records were extracted from the Scopus and WoS databases and analyzed in terms of annual scientific production, publication sources, geographical contexts, and influence in terms of citations. We addressed RQ2 by adopting qualitative content analysis and identifying several emerging themes across the sample, which led to a structured overview of the existing knowledge on BPCs. In regards to RQ3, we were able to identify several research gaps in the empirical literature and suggest avenues for further research. Finally, we addressed RQ4 by developing a theoretical framework that uses the above sample as its foundation. The framework aims to investigate the multidimensional nature of BPCs and provide future researchers with a theoretical underpinning for their studies.

In regards to future research directions, our systematic review has highlighted several thematic areas of prior research and investigated extant gaps both in terms of topics and in terms of methodological choices. We have, thus, identified various possible avenues for future research and presented them in a theoretical framework, that acs as a synthesized view of the existing research, serves as the basis for identifying visible gaps in prior research and suggesting various theme-based research questions and avenues of future research. In other words, the framework aims to investigate the multidimensional nature of BPCs and provide future researchers with a theoretical underpinning for their studies.

There are a few caveats worth mentioning regarding this study, some of which are intrinsic to the SLR methodology. First, the sample may not have included a few records that did not appear in the online repository due to missing or different keywords. Although chain referencing reduces the chances of this happening, the risk is still there and needs to be addressed. Second, our research protocol included only peer-reviewed journal articles written in English, as conference proceedings, book chapters, and review articles were excluded from the sample. Future research could include gray literature and other sources to compare their results with those published in peer-reviewed journals. Third, the scope of the SLR was limited to BPCs. Therefore, it did not explore nascent entrepreneurs or the role of entrepreneurial education in universities in general, despite both topics being strongly related to BPCs. Future SLRs could take a broader approach and discuss the topic of entrepreneurial education, to which the BPC stream contributes.

Data availability

The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

* Articles included in the sample of the Systematic Literature Review

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50 (2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-t

Article   Google Scholar  

* Arranz, N., Ubierbna, F., Arroyabe, M. F., Perez, C., & De Arroyabe, J. C. (2017). The Effect of Curricular and Extracurricular Activities on University Students’ Entrepreneurial Intention and Competences. Studies in Higher Education, 42 (11), 1979–2008.

Audretsch, D. B., Belitski, M., Caiazza, R., & Desai, S. (2022). The role of institutions in latent and emergent entrepreneurship. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 174 , 121263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121263

* Barbini, F. M., Corsino, M., & Giuri, P. (2021). How do universities shape founding teams? Social proximity and informal mechanisms of knowledge transfer in student entrepreneurship. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 46 (4), 1046–1082. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-020-09799-1

Baregheh, A., Rowley, J., & Sambrook, S. (2009). Towards a multidisciplinary definition of innovation. Management Decision, 47 (8), 1323–1339. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251740910984578

* Bell, J. (2010). Student business plan competitions: Who really does have access? Moyak.com. Retrieved October 19, 2022, from http://www.moyak.com/papers/student-business-plan.pdf

* Botha, M., & Robertson, C. L. (2014). Potential entrepreneurs’ assessment of opportunities through the rendering of a business plan. South African Journal of Economic and Management Sciences, 17 (3), 249–265. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajems.v17i3.524

* Brentnall, C., Rodríguez, I. D., & Culkin, N. (2018). Enterprise Education Competitions: A Theoretically Flawed Intervention. In D. Higgins, P. Jones, & P. Mcgowan (Eds.), Contemporary Issues in Entrepreneurship Research (pp. 25–48). Emerald Publishing Limited.

Google Scholar  

Buono, A. F. (2000). A review of Stuart crainer and Des dearlove’s gravy training: Inside the business of business schools. Business and Society Review, 105 (2), 299–304. https://doi.org/10.1111/0045-3609.00083

* Burton, J. (2020). Supporting entrepreneurs when it matters: Optimising capital allocation for impact. Journal of Entrepreneurship and Public Policy, 9 (3), 277–302. https://doi.org/10.1108/jepp-06-2019-0054

* Cant, M. C. (2016a). Entrants and winners of a business plan competition: Does marketing media play a role in success? Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, 19 (2), 98–119.

* Cant, M. C. (2016b). Using social media to market a promotional event to SMEs: Opportunity or wasted effort? Problems and Perspectives in Management, 14 , 76–82. https://doi.org/10.21511/ppm.14(4).2016.09

* Cant, M. C. (2018). Blueprint for a business plan competition: Can it work? Management Journal of Contemporary Management Issues, 23 (2), 141–154. https://doi.org/10.30924/mjcmi/2018.23.2.141

* Cervilla, M. A. (2008). Celulab case: A “spin-off” de technoclinical solutions .

* Clingingsmith, D., Drover, W., & Shane, S. (2022). Examining the outcomes of entrepreneur pitch training: An exploratory field study. Small Business Economics . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-022-00619-4

Coduras, A., Saiz-Alvarez, J. M., & Ruiz, J. (2016). Measuring readiness for entrepreneurship: Aninformation tool proposal. Journal of Innovation and Knowledge, 1 (2), 99–109.

Connell, R. (2013). The Neoliberal Cascade and Education: An Essay on the Market Agenda and its Consequences. Critical Studies in Education, 54 , 99–112.

Cornelissen, J. P., & Werner, M. D. (2014). Putting framing in perspective: A review of framing and frame analysis across the management and organizational literature. Academy of Management Annals, 8 (1), 181–235. https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520.2014.875669

Dana, L. P. (1992). Entrepreneurial Education in Europe. Journal of Education for Business, 68 (2), 74–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/08832323.1992.10117590

* Daub, C. -H., Hasler, M., Verkuil, A. H., & Milow, U. (2020). Universities talk, students walk: Promoting innovative sustainability projects. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 21 (1), 97–111. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijshe-04-2019-0149

Dee, N., Gill, D., Weinberg, C., & Mctavish, S. (2015). Start-up Support Programmes: What’s the Difference? NESTA.

Dhir, A., Talwar, S., Kaur, P., & Malibari, A. (2020). Food waste in hospitality and food services: A systematic literature review and framework development approach. Journal of Cleaner Production, 270 , 122861. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122861

* Efobi, U., & Orkoh, E. (2018). Analysis of the impacts of entrepreneurship training on growth performance of firms: Quasi-experimental evidence from Nigeria. Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, 10 (3), 524–542. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEEE-02-2018-0024

Fafchamps, M., McKenzie, D., Quinn, S., & Woodruff, C. (2014). Microenterprise growth and the flypaper effect: Evidence from a randomized experiment in Ghana. Journal of Development Economics, 106 , 211–226. Elsevier BV.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2013.09.010

* Fafchamps, M., & Quinn, S. (2017). Aspire. The Journal of Development Studies, 53 (10), 1615–1633. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2016.1251584

* Fafchamps, M., & Woodruff, C. (2017). Identifying gazelles: Expert panels vs. Surveys as a means to identify firms with rapid growth potential. The World Bank Economic Review, 31 (3), 670–686. https://doi.org/10.1093/wber/lhw026

Farashahi, M., & Hafsi, T. (2009). Strategy of firms in unstable institutional environments. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 26 (4), 643–666. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-008-9129-9

Fayolle, A. (2013). Personal Views on the Future of Entrepreneurship Education. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 25 (7), 692–701.

Fayolle, A., & Klandt, H. (2006). International Entrepreneurship Education . Edward Elgar Publishing.

Book   Google Scholar  

* Feldman, J., & Oden, L. D. (2007). Apples and oranges mean a new fruit crop: New business plan competition model integrates economic and community development. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 31 (6), 505–506. https://doi.org/10.1080/10668920701359656

* Fichter, K., & Tiemann, I. (2020). Impacts of promoting sustainable entrepreneurship in generic business plan competitions. Journal of Cleaner Production, 267 , 122076. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122076

Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behaviour: An introduction to theory and research . Addison-Wesley.

* Florin, J., Karri, R., & Rossiter, N. (2007). Fostering Entrepreneurial Drive in Business Education: An Attitudinal Approach. Journal of Management Education, 31 (1), 17–42.

Grichnik, D., Brinckmann, J., Singh, L., & Manigart, S. (2014). Beyond environmental scarcity: Human and social capital as driving forces of bootstrapping activities. Journal of Business Venturing, 29 (2), 310–326. Elsevier BV.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2013.02.006

Gumpert, D. E. (2003). Burn your business plan!: what investors really want from entrepreneur . Lauson Publishing.

* He, W., Hao, P., Huang, X., Long, L. -R., Hiller, N. J., & Li, S. -L. (2020). Different roles of shared and vertical leadership in promoting team creativity: Cultivating and synthesizing team members’ individual creativity. Personnel Psychology, 73 (1), 199–225. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12321

Hiebl, M. R. W. (2021). Sample selection in systematic literature reviews of management research. Organizational Research Methods, 109442812098685. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428120986851

House-Soremenkun, B., & Falola, T. (2011). Globalization and Sustainable Development in Africa . University Rochester Press.

Hu, Q., & Hughes, M. (2020). Radical innovation in family firms: A systematic analysis and research agenda. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 26 (6), 1199–1234. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijebr-11-2019-0658

Hyder, S., & Lussier, R. N. (2016). Why businesses succeed or fail: A study on small businesses in Pakistan. Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, 8 (1), 82–100. https://doi.org/10.1108/jeee-03-2015-0020

* Jiang, H., Zhang, Q. -P., & Zhou, Y. (2018). Dynamic creative interaction networks and team creativity evolution: A longitudinal study. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 52 (2), 168–196. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.141

* Jones, A., & Jones, P. (2011). “Making an impact”: A Profile of a Business Planning Competition in a University. Education + Training, 53 (8), 704–721.

* Kolb, C. (2006). Runway ruhr: Business plan competition medical economics. Medizintechnik, 126 (6), 228–229.

Kraus, S., Breier, M., & Dasí-Rodríguez, S. (2020). The art of crafting a systematic literature review in entrepreneurship research. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 16 (3), 1023–1042. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-020-00635-4

Kraus, S., & Schwarz, E. (2007). The role of pre-start planning in new small business. International Journal of Management and Enterprise Development, 4 (1), 1–17.

* Kwong, C. C. Y., Thompson, P., & Cheung, C. W. M. (2012). The effectiveness of social business plan competitions in developing social and civic awareness and participation. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 11 (3), 324–348. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2011.0007a

* Lange, J. E., Mollov, A., Pearlmutter, M., Singh, S., & Bygrave, W. D. (2007). Pre-start-up formal business plans and post-start-up performance: A study of 116 new ventures. Venture Capital, 9 (4), 237–256. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691060701414840

* Laud, R., Betts, S., & Basu, S. (2015). The ‘business concept’ competition as a ‘business plan’ alternative for new and growing entrepreneurship programs: What’s the big idea? Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, 18 (2), 53–58.

Leadbeater, C., & Oakley, K. (2001). Surfing the Long Wave: Knowledge. Entrepreneurship in Britain. Demos.

* Lewellyn, K. B., & Muller-Kahle, M. I. (2016). A configurational approach to understanding gender differences in entrepreneurial activity: A fuzzy set analysis of 40 countries. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 12 (3), 765–790. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-015-0366-3

* Li, R., Qian, Z. C., Chen, Y. V., & Zhang, L. (2019). Design thinking driven interdisciplinary entrepreneurship. A case study of college students business plan competition. The Design Journal, 22 (sup1), 99–110. https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2019.1602993

* Licha, J., & Brem, A. (2018). Entrepreneurship education in Europe - insights from Germany and Denmark. International Journal of Entrepreneurship & Small Business, 33 (1), 1. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijesb.2018.088641

* Liñán, F., Rodríguez-Cohard, J. C., & Rueda-Cantuche, J. M. (2011). Factors affecting entrepreneurial intention levels: A role for education. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 7 (2), 195–218. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-010-0154-z

* Lu, V. N., Scholz, B., & Nguyen, L. T. V. (2018). Work integrated learning in International Marketing: Student insights. Australasian Marketing Journal (AMJ), 26 (2), 132–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ausmj.2018.05.002

* Lv, Y., Chen, Y., Sha, Y., Wang, J., An, L., Chen, T., Huang, X., Huang, Y., & Huang, L. (2021). How entrepreneurship education at universities influences entrepreneurial intention: Mediating effect based on entrepreneurial competence. Frontiers in Psychology, 12 , 655868. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.655868

* Mancuso, L. C., Alijani, G. S., Kwun, O., & Smith, L. D. (2010). Successful outcomes of teaching minority undergraduate students entrepreneurial business planning concepts using andragogy and service learning. Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, 13 , 37–44.

Mariani, M., Baggio, R., Fuchs, M., & Höepken, W. (2018). Business intelligence and big data in hospitality and tourism: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 30 (12), 3514–3554. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijchm-07-2017-0461

Mary George, N., Parida, V., Lahti, T., & Wincent, J. (2016). A systematic literature review of entrepreneurial opportunity recognition: Insights on influencing factors. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 12 (2), 309–350. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-014-0347-y

* Mboha, S. (2018). An assessment of the impact of business plan competitions on enterprise development in Kenya: A case study of Chora bizna enablish LaunchPad. European Scientific Journal, 14 (10), 390. https://doi.org/10.19044/esj.2018.v14n10p390

* McGowan, P., & Cooper, S. (2008). Promoting technology-based enterprise in higher education: The role of business plan competitions. Industry and Higher Education, 22 , 29–36. https://doi.org/10.5367/000000008783876968

* McKenzie, D. (2017). Identifying and spurring high-growth entrepreneurship: Experimental evidence from a business plan competition. American Economic Review, 107 (8), 2278–2307. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20151404

* McKenzie, D. (2018). Can business owners form accurate counterfactuals? Eliciting treatment and control beliefs about their outcomes in the alternative treatment status. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics: A Publication of the American Statistical Association, 36 (4), 714–722. https://doi.org/10.1080/07350015.2017.1305276

* McKenzie, D., & Sansone, D. (2019). Predicting entrepreneurial success is hard: Evidence from a business plan competition in Nigeria. Journal of Development Economics, 141 , 102369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2019.07.002

* Mosey, S., Noke, H., & Binks, M. (2012). The influence of human and social capital upon the entrepreneurial intentions and destinations of academics. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 24 (9), 893–910. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2012.718664

* Moultry, A. M. (2011). A mass merchandiser’s role in enhancing pharmacy students’ business plan development skills for medication therapy management services. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 75 (7), 133. https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe757133

Olafsen, E., & Cook, P. A. (2016). Growth entrepreneurship in developing countries: a preliminary literature review. 

* Olokundun, M. A., Ibidunni, A. S., Peter, F., Amaihian, A. B., & Ogbari, M. (2017). Entrepreneurship educator’s competence on university students’ commitment to learning and business plan writing. Academy of Strategic Management Journal, 16 (2)

Olssen, M., & Peters, M. A. (2005). Neoliberalism, Higher Education and the Knowledge Economy: From the Free Market to Knowledge Capitalism. Journal of Education Policy, 20 (3), 313–345.

* Overall, J., Gedeon, S. A., & Valliere, D. (2018). What can universities do to promote entrepreneurial intent? An empirical investigation. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Venturing, 10 (3), 312. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijev.2018.093227

Paek, B., & Lee, H. (2018). Strategic entrepreneurship and competitive advantage of established firms: Evidence from the digital TV industry. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 14 (4), 883–925. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-017-0476-1

Palacios-Marqués, D., Soto-Acosta, P., & Merigó, J. M. (2015). Analyzing the effects of technological, organizational and competition factors on Web knowledge exchange in SMEs. Telematics and Informatics, 32 (1), 23–32. Elsevier BV.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2014.08.003

* Parente, R., Feola, R., Cucino, V., & Catolino, G. (2015). Visibility and reputation of new entrepreneurial projects from academia: The role of start-up competitions. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 6 (3), 551–567. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-015-0255-6

* Passaro, R., Quinto, I., & Thomas, A. (2017). Start-up competitions as learning environment to foster the entrepreneurial process. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 23 (3), 426–445. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijebr-01-2016-0007

* Passaro, R., Quinto, I., & Thomas, A. (2020). Supporting entrepreneurship policy: An overview of Italian start-up competitions. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 24 (1), 1. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijeim.2020.105274

Petty, J. S., & Gruber, M. (2011). In pursuit of the real deal. Journal of Business Venturing, 26 (2), 172–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2009.07.002

Poggesi, S., Mari, M., De Vita, L., & Foss, L. (2020). Women entrepreneurship in STEM fields: Literature review and future research avenues. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 16 (1), 17–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-019-00599-0

* Raveendra, P. V., Rizwana, M., Singh, P., Satish, Y. M., & Kumar, S. S. (2018). Entrepreneurship development through industry institute collaboration: An observation. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 9 (6), 980–984.

Riviezzo, A., De, A., & Rosaria, M. (2012). Attractiveness of European higher education in entrepreneurship: A strategic marketing framework. Entrepreneurship - Creativity and Innovative Business Models. InTech.

Ross, L. W., & Byrd, K. A. (2011). Business plan competitions: Start-up ‘idols’ and their twenty-first century launch pads. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, 11 (4), 53–64.

* Russell, R., Atchison, M., & Brooks, R. (2008). Business plan competitions in tertiary institutions: Encouraging entrepreneurship education. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 30 (2), 123–138. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600800801938739

Saeed, S., Muffatto, M., & Yousafzai, S. (2014). A multi-level study of entrepreneurship education among Pakistani university students. Entrepreneurship Research Journal, 4 (3).Walter de Gruyter GmbH. https://doi.org/10.1515/erj-2013-0041

Salmony, F. U., & Kanbach, D. K. (2022). Personality trait differences across types of entrepreneurs: A systematic literature review. Review of Managerial Science, 16 (3), 713–749. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-021-00466-9

Schlaegel, C., & Koenig, M. (2014). Determinants of entrepreneurial intent: A meta–analytic test and integration of competing models. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 38 (2), 291–332. https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.1208

* Schwartz, M., Goethner, M., Michelsen, C., & Waldmann, N. (2013). Start-up competitions as an instrument of entrepreneurship policy: The German experience. European Planning Studies, 21 (10), 1578–1597. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2012.722960

Shahid, M. S., Shehryar, H., & Inram, Y. (2017). Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship, 30 (2), 139–156.

Simón-Moya, V., & Revuelto-Taboada, L. (2016). Revising the predictive capability of business plan quality for new firm survival using qualitative comparative analysis. Journal of Business Research, 69 (4), 1351–1356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.10.106

Škare, M., Blanco-Gonzalez-Tejero, C., Crecente, F., & del Val, M. T. (2022). Scientometric analysis on entrepreneurial skills - creativity, communication, leadership: How strong is the association? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 182 , 121851. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121851

Tabares, A., Chandra, Y., Alvarez, C., & Escobar-Sierra, M. (2021). Opportunity-related behaviors in international entrepreneurship research: A multilevel analysis of antecedents, processes, and outcomes. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 17 (1), 321–368. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-020-00636-3

* Tata, A., & Niedworok, A. (2018). Is beauty in the eye of the beholder? An empirical study of how entrepreneurs, managers, and investors evaluate business opportunities at the earliest stages. Venture Capital, 22 (1), 71–104. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691066.2018.1526449

Terán-Yépez, E., Jiménez-Castillo, D., & Sánchez-Pérez, M. (2022). The role of affect in international opportunity recognition and the formation of international opportunity beliefs. Review of Managerial Science, 1–43.

Thomas, D. F., Gudmundson, D., Turner, K., & Suhr, D. (2014). Business plan competitions and their impact on new ventures' business models. Journal of Strategic Innovation & Sustainability, 10(1).

Tipu, S. A. A. (2018). Business plan competitions in developed and emerging economies: What do we still need to know? Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, 11 (1), 81–97. https://doi.org/10.1108/jeee-12-2017-0102

* Tornikoski, E. T., & Puhakka, V. (2009). Exploring firm emergence: Initially conditioned or actively created? International Journal of Entrepreneurship & Small Business, 7 (1), 123. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijesb.2009.021613

* Waldmann, N., Schwartz, M., & Michelsen, C. (2010). From the intention to the foundation - start-up competitions in germany. List Forum Fur Wirtschafts- Und Finanzpolitik, 36 (4), 301–317. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03373978

* Wales, W., Cox, K. C., Lortie, J., & Sproul, C. R. (2019). Blowing smoke? How early-stage investors interpret hopeful discourse within entrepreneurially oriented business plans. Entrepreneurship Research Journal, 9 (3), 20180114. https://doi.org/10.1515/erj-2018-0114

* Watson, K., & McGowan, P. (2019). Emergent perspectives toward the business plan among nascent entrepreneur start-up competition participants. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 26 (3), 421–440. https://doi.org/10.1108/jsbed-02-2018-0038

* Watson, K., McGowan, P., & Cunningham, J. A. (2018). An exploration of the Business Plan Competition as a methodology for effective nascent entrepreneurial learning. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 24 (1), 121–146. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijebr-05-2017-0158

* Watson, K., McGowan, P., & Smith, P. (2015). Leveraging effectual means through business plan competition participation. Industry and Higher Education, 29 (6), 481–492. https://doi.org/10.5367/ihe.2015.0285

* Wegner, D., Thomas, E., Teixeira, E. K., & Maehler, A. E. (2019). University entrepreneurial push strategy and students’ entrepreneurial intention. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 26 (2), 307–325. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijebr-10-2018-0648

* Weisz, N., Vassolo, R. S., Mesquita, L., & Cooper, A. C. (2010). Diversity and social capital of nascent entrepreneurial teams in business plan competitions. Management Research the Journal of the Iberoamerican Academy of Management, 8 (1), 39–63. https://doi.org/10.1108/1536-541011047903

* Wen, C. T., & Chen, Y. W. (2007). The innovation process of entrepreneurial teams in dynamic business plan competition: From sense-making perspective. Journal International De La Gestion Technologique [international Journal of Technology Management], 39 (3/4), 346. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijtm.2007.013505

Wong, P. K. (2011). Academic Entrepreneurship in Asia: The Role and Impact of Universities in National Innovation Systems . Edward Elgar Publishing.

Zhou, W., Vredenburgh, D., & Rogoff, E. G. (2015). Informational diversity and entrepreneurial team performance: Moderating effect of shared leadership. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 11 (1), 39–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-013-0274-3

* Zhu, X., Yang, S., & Kromidha, E. (2022). The emergence of team entrepreneurial passion from team helping: An affective events theory perspective. International Small Business Journal, 026624262210894. https://doi.org/10.1177/02662426221089499

Download references

Open access funding provided by Università degli Studi di Torino within the CRUI-CARE Agreement.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Ecole de commerce Paris - ICD Business School, 12 Rue Alexandre Parodi, France, Paris, 75010, France

Léo-Paul Dana

Lappeenranta-Lahti University of Technology LUT, Yliopistonkatu 34, Lappeenranta, 53850, Finland

Department of Management, University of Turin, Corso Unione Sovietica, 218 bis, Turin, TO, 10134, Italy

Edoardo Crocco, Francesca Culasso & Elisa Giacosa

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Edoardo Crocco .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Dana, LP., Crocco, E., Culasso, F. et al. Business plan competitions and nascent entrepreneurs: a systematic literature review and research agenda. Int Entrep Manag J 19 , 863–895 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-023-00838-5

Download citation

Accepted : 19 January 2023

Published : 28 February 2023

Issue Date : June 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-023-00838-5

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Business plan competition
• Systematic literature review
• Higher education
• Small businesses
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

How to Write a Competitive Analysis for Your Business Plan

11 min. read

Updated January 3, 2024

Do you know who your competitors are? If you do, have you taken the time to conduct a thorough competitor analysis?

Knowing your competitors, how they operate, and the necessary benchmarks you need to hit are crucial to positioning your business for success. Investors will also want to see an analysis of the competition in your business plan.

In this guide, we’ll explore the significance of competitive analysis and guide you through the essential steps to conduct and write your own. 

You’ll learn how to identify and evaluate competitors to better understand the opportunities and threats to your business. And you’ll be given a four-step process to describe and visualize how your business fits within the competitive landscape.

• What is a competitive analysis?

A competitive analysis is the process of gathering information about your competitors and using it to identify their strengths and weaknesses. This information can then be used to develop strategies to improve your own business and gain a competitive advantage.

• How to conduct a competitive analysis

Before you start writing about the competition, you need to conduct your analysis. Here are the steps you need to take:

1. Identify your competitors

The first step in conducting a comprehensive competitive analysis is to identify your competitors. 

Start by creating a list of both direct and indirect competitors within your industry or market segment. Direct competitors offer similar products or services, while indirect competitors solve the same problems your company does, but with different products or services.

Keep in mind that this list may change over time. It’s crucial to revisit it regularly to keep track of any new entrants or changes to your current competitors. For instance, a new competitor may enter the market, or an existing competitor may change their product offerings.

2. Analyze the market

Once you’ve identified your competitors, you need to study the overall market. 

This includes the market size , growth rate, trends, and customer preferences. Be sure that you understand the key drivers of demand, demographic and psychographic profiles of your target audience , and any potential market gaps or opportunities.

Conducting a market analysis can require a significant amount of research and data collection. Luckily, if you’re writing a business plan you’ll follow this process to complete the market analysis section . So, doing this research has value for multiple parts of your plan.

Brought to you by

Create a professional business plan

Using ai and step-by-step instructions.

Secure funding

Validate ideas

Build a strategy

3. Create a competitive framework

You’ll need to establish criteria for comparing your business with competitors. You want the metrics and information you choose to provide answers to specific questions. (“Do we have the same customers?” “What features are offered?” “How many customers are being served?”)

Here are some common factors to consider including: 

• Market share
• Product/service offerings or features
• Distribution channels
• Target markets
• Marketing strategies
• Customer service

4. Research your competitors

You can now begin gathering information about your competitors. Because you spent the time to explore the market and set up a comparison framework—your research will be far more focused and easier to complete.

There’s no perfect research process, so start by exploring sources such as competitor websites, social media, customer reviews, industry reports, press releases, and public financial statements. You may also want to conduct primary research by interviewing customers, suppliers, or industry experts.

You can check out our full guide on conducting market research for more specific steps.

5. Assess their strengths and weaknesses

Evaluate each competitor based on the criteria you’ve established in the competitive framework. Identify their key strengths (competitive advantages) and weaknesses (areas where they underperform).

6. Identify opportunities and threats

Based on the strengths and weaknesses of your competitors, identify opportunities (areas where you can outperform them) and threats (areas where they may outperform you) for your business. 

You can check out our full guide to conducting a SWOT analysis for more specific questions that you should ask as part of each step. 

• How to write your competitive analysis

Once you’ve done your research, it’s time to present your findings in your business plan. Here are the steps you need to take:

1. Determine who your audience is

Who you are writing a business plan for (investors, partners, employees, etc.) may require you to format your competitive analysis differently. 

For an internal business plan you’ll use with your team, the competition section should help them better understand the competition. You and your team will use it to look at comparative strengths and weaknesses to help you develop strategies to gain a competitive advantage.

For fundraising, your plan will be shared with potential investors or as part of a bank loan. In this case, you’re describing the competition to reassure your target reader. You are showing awareness and a firm understanding of the competition, and are positioned to take advantage of opportunities while avoiding the pitfalls.

2. Describe your competitive position

You need to know how your business stacks up, based on the values it offers to your chosen target market. To run this comparison, you’ll be using the same criteria from the competitive framework you completed earlier. You need to identify your competitive advantages and weaknesses, and any areas where you can improve.

The goal is positioning (setting your business up against the background of other offerings), and making that position clear to the target market. Here are a few questions to ask yourself in order to define your competitive position:

• How are you going to take advantage of your distinctive differences, in your customers’ eyes? 
• What are you doing better? 
• How do you work toward strengths and away from weaknesses?
• What do you want the world to think and say about you and how you compare to others?

3. Visualize your competitive position

There are a few different ways to present your competitive framework in your business plan. The first is a “positioning map” and the second is a “competitive matrix”. Depending on your needs, you can use one or both of these to communicate the information that you gathered during your competitive analysis:

Positioning map

The positioning map plots two product or business benefits across a horizontal and vertical axis. The furthest points of each represent opposite extremes (Hot and cold for example) that intersect in the middle. With this simple chart, you can drop your own business and the competition into the zone that best represents the combination of both factors.

I often refer to marketing expert Philip Kohler’s simple strategic positioning map of breakfast, shown here. You can easily draw your own map with any two factors of competition to see how a market stacks up.

It’s quite common to see the price on one axis and some important qualitative factor on the other, with the assumption that there should be a rough relationship between price and quality.

Competitive matrix

It’s pretty common for most business plans to also include a competitive matrix. It shows how different competitors stack up according to the factors identified in your competitive framework. 

How do you stack up against the others? Here’s what a typical competitive matrix looks like:

For the record, I’ve seen dozens of competitive matrices in plans and pitches. I’ve never seen a single one that didn’t show that this company does more of what the market wants than all others. So maybe that tells you something about credibility and how to increase it. Still, the ones I see are all in the context of seeking investment, so maybe that’s the nature of the game.

4. Explain your strategies for gaining a competitive edge

Your business plan should also explain the strategies your business will use to capitalize on the opportunities you’ve identified while mitigating any threats from competition. This may involve improving your product/service offerings, targeting underserved market segments, offering more attractive price points, focusing on better customer service, or developing innovative marketing strategies.

While you should cover these strategies in the competition section, this information should be expanded on further in other areas of your business plan. 

For example, based on your competitive analysis you show that most competitors have the same feature set. As part of your strategy, you see a few obvious ways to better serve your target market with additional product features. This information should be referenced within your products and services section to back up your problem and solution statement. 

• Why competition is a good thing

Business owners often wish that they had no competition. They think that with no competition, the entire market for their product or service will be theirs. That is simply not the case—especially for new startups that have truly innovative products and services. Here’s why:

Competition validates your idea

You know you have a good idea when other people are coming up with similar products or services. Competition validates the market and the fact that there are most likely customers for your new product. This also means that the costs of marketing and educating your market go down (see my next point).

Competition helps educate your target market

Being first-to-market can be a huge advantage. It also means that you will have to spend way more than the next player to educate customers about your new widget, your new solution to a problem, and your new approach to services. 

This is especially true for businesses that are extremely innovative. These first-to-market businesses will be facing customers that didn’t know that there was a solution to their problem . These potential customers might not even know that they have a problem that can be solved in a better way. 

If you’re a first-to-market company, you will have an uphill battle to educate consumers—an often expensive and time-consuming process. The 2nd-to-market will enjoy all the benefits of an educated marketplace without the large marketing expense.

Competition pushes you

Businesses that have little or no competition become stagnant. Customers have few alternatives to choose from, so there is no incentive to innovate. Constant competition ensures that your marketplace continues to evolve and that your product offering continues to evolve with it.

Competition forces focus & differentiation

Without competition, it’s easy to lose focus on your core business and your core customers and start expanding into areas that don’t serve your best customers. Competition forces you and your business to figure out how to be different than your competition while focusing on your customers. In the long term, competition will help you build a better business.

• What if there is no competition?

One mistake many new businesses make is thinking that just because nobody else is doing exactly what they’re doing, their business is a sure thing. If you’re struggling to find competitors, ask yourself these questions.

Is there a good reason why no one else is doing it?

The smart thing to do is ask yourself,  “Why isn’t anyone else doing it?”

It’s possible that nobody’s selling cod-liver frozen yogurt in your area because there’s simply no market for it. Ask around, talk to people, and do your market research. If you determine that you’ve got customers out there, you’re in good shape.

But that still doesn’t mean there’s no competition.

How are customers getting their needs met?

There may not be another cod-liver frozen yogurt shop within 500 miles. But maybe an online distributor sells cod-liver oil to do-it-yourselfers who make their own fro-yo at home. Or maybe your potential customers are eating frozen salmon pops right now. 

Are there any businesses that are indirect competitors?

Don’t think of competition as only other businesses that do exactly what you do. Think about what currently exists on the market that your product would displace.

It’s the difference between direct competition and indirect competition. When Henry Ford started successfully mass-producing automobiles in the U.S., he didn’t have other automakers to compete with. His competition was horse-and-buggy makers, bicycles, and railroads.

Do a competitive analysis, but don’t let it derail your planning

While it’s important that you know the competition, don’t get too caught up in the research. 

If all you do is track your competition and do endless competitive analyses, you won’t be able to come up with original ideas. You will end up looking and acting just like your competition. Instead, make a habit of NOT visiting your competition’s website, NOT going into their store, and NOT calling their sales office. 

Focus instead on how you can provide the best service possible and spend your time talking to your customers. Figure out how you can better serve the next person that walks in the door so that they become a lifetime customer, a reference, or a referral source.

If you focus too much on the competition, you will become a copycat. When that happens, it won’t matter to a customer if they walk into your store or the competition’s because you will both be the same.

See why 1.2 million entrepreneurs have written their business plans with LivePlan

Tim Berry is the founder and chairman of Palo Alto Software , a co-founder of Borland International, and a recognized expert in business planning. He has an MBA from Stanford and degrees with honors from the University of Oregon and the University of Notre Dame. Today, Tim dedicates most of his time to blogging, teaching and evangelizing for business planning.

Table of Contents

• Don't let competition derail planning

Related Articles

3 Min. Read

What to Include in Your Business Plan Appendix

10 Min. Read

How to Write the Company Overview for a Business Plan

How to Set and Use Milestones in Your Business Plan

6 Min. Read

How to Write Your Business Plan Cover Page + Template

The Bplans Newsletter

The Bplans Weekly

Subscribe now for weekly advice and free downloadable resources to help start and grow your business.

We care about your privacy. See our privacy policy .

The quickest way to turn a business idea into a business plan

Fill-in-the-blanks and automatic financials make it easy.

No thanks, I prefer writing 40-page documents.

Discover the world’s #1 plan building software

A business journal from the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania

The Wharton Business Plan Competition: Can You Pick the Winner?

May 26, 2016 • 23 min read.

At this year’s Wharton Business Plan Competition, one team took home more prizes than any predecessor. Check out the field of finalists – and make your guess for the winner.

Each year, the Venture Finals of the Wharton Business Plan Competition pits eight tried-and-tested teams of students from throughout the University of Pennsylvania against each other. Winnowed from a much larger field of applicants, the “Great Eight” vie for the votes of a panel of judges for $125,000 in combined cash prizes and services.

Finalists this year presented products and services including, among others plans, “smart-ranch” analytics provided by automated drones; the “Uber of personal training”; a company offering genetically modified bacteria that can break down plastic waste either completely or to a point where the byproduct can be sold to textiles manufacturers; and a curated platform for investment in Africa’s growing middle-class real estate market.

This was the competition’s 18 th year, and it won’t soon be forgotten — one team took home more prizes than any predecessor. The finals also were streamed live online, as were the two-minute elevator pitches for the Michelson People’s Choice Award, for which the digital audience was allowed to vote.

The six-month competition featured 150 venture concepts, with more than 350 individual participants from six schools at Penn. Judges cut the field to 25 semifinalists, each of which chose one of three industry tracks: health care, technology and other.

Each finalist had 10 minutes to pitch to the judges — who represented Karlin Asset Management, Golden Seeds, Jet.com, ExamWorks Group, the University City Science Center, and Gilt and Hudson’s Bay Company — followed by 10 minutes of follow-up questions.

Here, in alphabetical order, are descriptions of the eight finalists’ business plans. Which would you choose? At the end of the article, learn how your pick compares with the BPC panel’s choices.

Barn Owl Systems: More than 40% of the United States is rangeland used for livestock, and the top concern of the ranchers who tend to them is ensuring an adequate supply of water. So says Josh Phifer, a Wharton MBA student who was raised on a Wyoming ranch and knows first-hand of the profession’s most time- and capital-consuming tasks.

The average ranch spans 30 square miles and has about 1,500 livestock. Every day, the rancher checks the water levels of his or her 20 to 30 water tanks.

“They drive around or get on their horse and check it,” said Vincent Kuchar, also a Wharton MBA student. “Every day.”

Such infrastructure monitoring is costly and inefficient, which is where Barn Owl Systems comes in.

Phifer also is an experienced Air Force instructor and test pilot with a background in leading aerospace test programs. Kuchar has operated dozens of small drones and has experience integrating sensors and drones into wireless networks.

Along with their Penn-educated engineering team, they provide the software that drives the system’s value. The drones are autonomous, collecting imagery of livestock and natural resources. Persistent sensor monitoring tracks water levels. GPS-enabled ear tags provide real-time locations of livestock. Altogether, Barn Owl offers custom analytics for management of rangeland and livestock.

The United States’ roughly 77,000 ranches account for a $92.5 billion livestock industry, and it’s growing annually by 8.7%. Barn Owl’s addressable market, Kuchar said, is $3.7 billion, comprising water monitoring ($117 million), ranch monitoring ($600 million) and agriculture analytics ($3 billion). Barn Owl’s revenue model includes hardware sales, an annual fee for hardware maintenance and an annual subscription for software and data.

They intend to establish a foothold by distributing water tank sensors and a corresponding smartphone application to all ranches at no cost to ranchers. With that, Barn Owl will have a network of clients who can tap one another, for example, during droughts, shifting livestock to regional ranches with abundant resources.

BioCellection: It began as a high-school science fair project for Miranda Wang and Jeanny Yao, best friends from Vancouver. They entered a biotechnology competition with a proposal about the biodegradation of plastics, won a national prize and were invited in 2013 to speak at a TED conference.

With two provisional patents for genetically engineered bacteria that eat waste plastics, the co-founders of BioCellection say they’ve found a $42 billion opportunity.

Wang, a Penn undergraduate student, framed plastics pollution as a global crisis — exposure to chemicals such as Bisphenol A (BPA), she noted, is highly correlated with diseases such as prostate and breast cancer. And despite efforts to keep plastics from spending an eternity in landfills, more than 90% of post-consumer plastics are not being recycled.

BioCellection’s bacteria consume polystyrene waste 80 times faster than naturally occurring bacteria. “Using this technology,” Wang said, “we can either break down plastic pollution completely, or we can actually turn plastic pollution into a higher value material.”

That, she said, is the core of what can make BioCellection a $100 million business in four years. The proprietary bacterium can convert, say, a Styrofoam cup into non-toxic carbon dioxide and water. By altering the process by which the bacteria are grown, they can produce a high-value compound called rhamnolipid.

“That means the same bacterium, this one technology, yields two revenue streams: one for a highly valued product, and another for a bioremediation service,” Wang said.

BioCellection’s rhamnolipid byproducts are cheaper and of lower purity than what the textiles industry currently uses to process fabrics. Conventional rhamnolipids are priced at $5,000 per kilogram; BioCellection’s version is $300 per kilogram. That’s a potential boon for the textiles industry, which doesn’t require the high-purity versions used in the saturated markets of pharmaceuticals, cosmetics and foods.

For the complete breakdown of plastics, BioCellection will park an onsite mobile processor on beaches, in malls, in recycling centers and waste stations.

“This technology right now is non-existent,” Wang said. “We are inventing this, and this is the first one in the world. The opportunity for breaking down plastic pollution around the world is worth hundreds of billions of dollars and is completely untapped.”

“This technology right now is non-existent. We are inventing this, and this is the first one in the world.” –Miranda Wang

The company is focusing at first on China — once BioCellection has demonstrated prototype feasibility, it can qualify for funding by the Chinese government to the tune of $20 million toward the completion of product trials. Competitors for the funding tend to produce “green plastics,” which doesn’t solve the existing pollution problem.

At pilot scale, Wang said, BioCellection can generate $240,000 a week in rhamnolipid production alone. That’s possible, in part, because sourcing ocean plastics for use in clothing, Yao said, is increasingly popular.

“The implication of this technology succeeding,” Wang said, “is tremendous.” (To read an additional interview with Wang, see our Knowledge at Wharton High School article, “ Biotech Innovation That Breaks Down Plastic and Feeds the Fish .”)

brEDcrumb: Scott Elfenbein went to a large public high school in Miami where more than 50% of his class was Hispanic and more than 30% was black. Most of the students qualified for free lunches. And despite the fact that he and his best friend, Juan Gomez, shared similar academic attributes — they ranked 16 th and 15 th , respectively, in their class; carried GPAs of 3.97 and 3.98; and scored 2250 and 2220 on the SAT — Elfenbein, whose family’s annual income was about $100,000, went to Harvard, whereas Gomez, whose family’s annual income was about $25,000, went to a community college.

His friend, a first-generation college student who worked after school to support his family, had no home computer and didn’t apply to top schools due to cost. Both of Elfenbein’s parents had master’s degrees, and he was able to take an SAT preparatory class. The schools to which they applied saw none of those facts.

Every year, Elfenbein said, 1.5 million of the 3.3 million college-ready high school students will undermatch — they either won’t go to the college best suited for them, or they won’t attend any college.

“When you are underrepresented and underserved,” said Elfenbein, a Wharton graduate student, “you don’t actually have steps to follow; you have obstacles. Finding a fee waiver is incredibly hard. If you’re in a community where no one has ever gone to college, it’s incredibly stressful to find a way to actually go through the application process.”

Academic institutions, meanwhile, have related problems — they’re spending $6 billion a year inefficiently recruiting high schoolers at $2,300 per enrollee, and still they miss 40% of the market. Despite intentions to find underserved students, Elfenbein said, universities aren’t meeting their goals for diversity.

He and his Penn-educated team created a platform called brEDcrumb to connect college hopefuls with volunteer undergraduates, young professionals or graduate students who have shared backgrounds. The technology provides deadline reminders, cloud storage for application materials, simplified financial aid forms, access to prep resources and automated fee waiver claims. The volunteer, which the company calls a role model, provides the applicant guidance in essay-writing, scholarships and navigating college.

More than 400 people already have joined brEDcrumb’s ranks of volunteers, which Elfenbein said is a result of “tapping into their identity” — if a potential mentor feels geographically, ethnically or socio-economically underrepresented, that person might feel inclined to lend a hand to a hopeful student who shares a similar background.

The platform streamlines the work of admissions officers, who he said typically get only an email address and a mailing address for a prospective student who has met certain criteria. To ensure that brEDcrumb is building a viable product, the company has consulted with admissions officers in Philadelphia and Boston.

“We’ve built a product for admissions officers by admissions officers,” Elfenbein said. Funding has followed, from Penn, the University of Chicago, Yale University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

This summer, brEDcrumb through its pilot program intends to send 100 students to college. Next year, the goal is 400 to 500. At scale, the company expects that total to reach 250,000 students per year. Universities are willing to spend $2,300 to land each student, and brEDcrumb’s costs will be $800 for each. That’s a 65% gross margin, and at scale it would yield a $375-million-per-year gross profit.

After his friend finished community college, Elfenbein helped him daily in applying to four-year schools. Gomez earned a full ride to Georgetown University and, last fall, he was admitted to Wharton.

Daylight OB, LLC: Every year, there are 300,000 emergency second-stage Cesarean section deliveries in the United States alone. The procedure is necessary when the baby is in distress, when the mother is so tired she no longer can push, or when the baby becomes impacted in the birth canal. An arrest of descent often renders the surgeon unable to deliver the baby through the uterine incision because the baby already has progressed far down the birth canal.

Christina Wray, a Wharton graduate student also in line for an M.D., encountered such a predicament during a labor-and-delivery rotation.

“At this point,” she said, “I had to actually get down on my hands and knees, crawl under the sterile drapes, and then use my hands to push the baby back up through the birth canal into the uterus so that it could be delivered.”

Such is the standard of care, Wray said, despite associations with serious outcomes for all parties. The baby faces an increased risk of skull fracture, intracranial hemorrhage, asphyxia and death. The mother is six times more likely to sustain trauma of the lower uterine segment and has a 50% increased risk of extension of the uterine incision. She’s also nine times more likely to experience a procedure that lasts longer than 90 minutes. All of these factors, due to increased blood loss and infection rates, can extend the patient’s length of stay.

Wray and four colleagues launched the medical-device company Daylight OB, LLC, to improve conditions in labor and delivery units. Its first product is a disposable obstetrics device, called Daylight, used to reposition a baby for an urgent cesarean delivery. It’s a simple, injection-molded device that has a curved handle on one end and a disk-shaped silicone cushion on the other. To use it, an assistant gently applies pressure to the baby’s head and steadily pushes the baby back into the uterus, where it can be delivered through the incision.

As they interviewed more than 50 physicians about their first product to validate the market need and to gather ideas about design improvements, the Penn-educated team, led by Wharton graduate student Neil Bansal, often was asked if it would consider developing other obstetrics devices. The team realized it could leverage what it had learned about the regulatory, intellectual property, manufacturing and commercialization processes for additional devices.

At $150 each, the Daylight would enjoy a shortened hospital approval process, would remain under the reimbursement umbrella of a cesarean procedure and would face no negotiations with payers. The company’s first targets are obstetricians at the nation’s 10 highest-volume hospitals.

Our Frontier Crowd: Wharton graduate student Greg Hagin is bullish on African real estate. He and four colleagues — three of whom, like Hagin, are candidates for an Executive MBA — are building an investment platform that taps into the flow of capital.

“As we know,” Hagin said, “Africa represents the growth story of our time. It’s where investment is moving in terms of infrastructure, development, roads, power, water — it is the economic buildout of our generation.”

Our Frontier Crowd is focusing on the middle-class housing markets of select countries, particularly Nigeria, South Africa and Cameroon, where middle-class incomes have been growing significantly during the past five years.

Major American investors are interested in such opportunities, Hagin said, but “there’s an overhang of unused capital in the system, over $4 billion alone in private equity monies that have been raised have not been invested on the continent at this time.”

The issue, he said, comes down to trust and confidence with local operating partners.

Our Frontier Crowd has consulted with the United Nations; the Canadian government; the Overseas Private Investment Corporation; Brian Trelstad, the former chief investment officer of the Acumen Fund; and Dick Henriques, the former CFO of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

“There’s a striking common theme related to a lack of trust, confidence and the need for local operating partnerships,” Hagin said.

That’s where the purveyors of Our Frontier Crowd see its opportunity — they want to provide a residential real estate platform dedicated to investment opportunities in Africa. They want to connect African real-estate developers and potential home-buyers with foreign investors.

Part of that equation is team member Aristide Toundzi, originally from Cameroon. He has an extensive local network and a family of builders and developers. He is a bridge to local trust.

Part of the equation is mobile technology — desktop computers aren’t necessary when 4G wireless is available. Local users of Our Frontier Crowd can validate, reject or co-invest in the carefully vetted projects on the platform.

“It’s an added layer of due diligence for our properties,” Hagin said, and it sends a strong signal to potential foreign investors regarding quality and risk.

He cited a scalable market opportunity of $181 billion and anticipated revenue of more than $75 million by 2020, with earnings approaching $30 million.

“Africa represents the growth story of our time. It’s where investment is moving in terms of infrastructure, development, roads, power, water — it is the economic buildout of our generation.” –Greg Hagin

“A lot of people are salivating about the opportunity in Africa,” Toundzi, a Wharton executive MBA student, said. “A lot of people will lose a lot of money. We will leverage our networks. It’s really through those connections that we can understand who, between Developer A and B, is a good person to work with.”

Qorum: While working in technology and nightlife with his last venture, Andrew Pietra, a Wharton graduate student raised in Southern California, grew frustrated with liquor companies’ “Drink Responsibly” ad campaigns. He found them to be poorly targeted, squandering hundreds of millions of dollars as they glamorized partying and placed the burden of responsibility on the consumer.

On-demand ride services, meanwhile, had taken the nation by storm. Pietra, who said he lost several friends to drinking and driving, thought there might be a way to have alcohol brands sponsor rides home from bars. With Qorum, he believes he has a solution.

Alcohol brands want to target millennials. They also spend mandated “Drink Responsibly” dollars. Qorum helps alcohol brands sponsor up to 10,000 free Uber rides home from bars per month. In exchange for guaranteed product placement and distribution throughout a network of bars, participating brands will pick up the fare. Qorum gets 10% of the value of each ride.

A suite of mobile apps, along with point-of-sale integration, also can be a boon to bars. When a participating bar wants to increase traffic, it can increase a discount to, say, 20%. Qorum’s platform automatically starts delivering thousands of customized social media ads to non-Qorum users nearby. As new customers arrive, the bar can view relevant information — how often they visit, how long they stay, how much they spend and how they rate competing bars.

“The data that they have now is so terrible,” Pietra said. “When I was in college, I used to go to [a market research company], and they’d pay me $25, and there’d be six other kids. We’re 21 — the liquor companies want to know what we’re doing. They’d ask us survey questions — what’s your favorite spirit, what brand — and everyone’s lying. Everyone says, ‘Oh, I like Grey Goose.’ No you don’t. That’s not what you drink. And so this actually gives them real data that can tell them, what does this 26-year-old male drink when he’s in Los Angeles versus when he’s on vacation in Miami?”

The data help Qorum identify a bar’s customers with the highest lifetime value and “retarget them daily on social media to keep them coming back.” Aggregated user data and customer feedback are displayed on a dashboard within the app. A bar’s owner can explore his or her best customers based on factors such as age, gender and location. The software learns which customers are most likely to become loyal patrons, and it delivers the appropriate ads. Qorum has 26 bar partners, Pietra said, in its launch market of Southern California.

QTEK: Have you ever wondered, Wharton graduate student Mengya Li asked, if the toilet seat you just sat on was clean? How about that sticky handle on the subway car? Or the visibly worn baby-changing station?

Bacteria and fungi can grow anywhere, and where they thrive, infections can spread from person to person. Plastics companies use three types of antimicrobial additives — organic compounds, ionic silver or other metals — to counter this. Those options, Li said, are inadequate.

Organic compounds, which account for 67% of market share, contain toxic chemicals that consumers have been avoiding for many years. Over the past couple of years, she said, the Food and Drug Administration and other agencies have banned the use of most organic compounds in human-interaction applications.

Ionic silver and other metals, she said, are expensive, ineffective and bad for the environment.

Li and her company, QTEK, have a solution. Their first product is Surfion, an ionic copper-based antimicrobial powder additive that is mixed into the plastic — one application, with no required maintenance. The material and process are patented. And they’re working on new applications.

“In fresh produce packaging,” Li said, “it can keep delicious strawberries and mushrooms fresh for much longer. It can prevent mold growth in your own bathroom. Used on school desks or toys, it can prevent infections spreading from one child to the next.”

QTEK will supply the raw material to chemical and plastics companies, which in turn serve consumer, industrial and medical needs.

Surfion, Li said, protects against bacteria and fungi; organic compounds and ionic silver cover only bacteria. Surfion’s patented technology allows its active ingredient to be released over 13 years; organic compounds and ionic silver aren’t durable for even a year. Surfion’s price, $50 per kilogram, is less than half the $120 of ionic silver.

“This is an existing market valued at $4 billion today and growing at a rate of 10% every year,” she said.

QTEK, Li said, has received more than 60 requests for samples of Surfion and is in production trials with several Fortune 500 companies. Stricter regulations, she said, make North American plastics companies QTEK’s first target.

WeTrain: Jonathan Sockol and Zach Hertzel bounded into the auditorium of Huntsman Hall, trailed by a dozen people who clapped in syncopation and flanked the aisles. All were fit, and all wore the t-shirt of the pair’s venture, a company that bills itself as the “Uber of personal training.”

“In fresh produce packaging, [Surfion] can keep delicious strawberries and mushrooms fresh for much longer. It can prevent mold growth in your own bathroom. Used on school desks or toys, it can prevent infections spreading from one child to the next.” –Mengya Li

Sockol, a Wharton graduate student, spoke of losing 60 pounds and feeling energized, then lamented the cost of hiring a personal trainer — nationally, gyms charge an average of $60 per session. Hertzel, a master trainer and a veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan, where he was a medic in the U.S. Army, spoke of frustrations from the trainer’s perspective — of that $60 average session, the trainer typically sees no more than $15. That, he said, contributes to a high burnout rate among trainers.

Personal training is a $40 billion market, with 700,000 daily sessions in the United States, and the founders of WeTrain say they’ve created an opportunity that will benefit both trainers and their clients.

The service, which charges $49.95 monthly for access to reduced rates and $99.95 for even more perks, offers its members training sessions for as low as $15 per half-hour. The company keeps the membership fees; the trainers keep the member client’s entire session fee. WeTrain also offers single-serving sessions ($29.95 for 30 minutes, $49.95 for 60), of which trainers keep $15 and $25, respectively.

WeTrain says its personal trainers and yoga, pilates and cycling instructors can train clients anywhere, anytime, with or without gym equipment. They can visit in-person or virtually, via live video chat in which they offer guidance as the client practices.

To request an immediate session or to schedule one (80%-85% of sessions thus far, Sockol said, have been scheduled in advance), a user of the mobile app chooses a start time, selects either a 30- or 60-minute session and focal area (i.e. core, cardio, strength, flexibility), and confirms his or her location.

All instructors are certified, insured, have background checks and interview with the training team. A ratings system adds a layer of popular vetting.

“We are really redistributing the power from the gym to the trainers,” Sockol said.

Within three months of WeTrain’s first push of mainstream marketing, its more than 100 trainers had led more than 1,000 sessions within the Center City launch’s three-mile radius. It recently signed a $30,000 contract with a residential community.

And the Winner is …

BioCellection won the Perlman Grand Prize, which includes $30,000 and opportunities to represent The Wharton School/University of Pennsylvania at other business plan competitions. It was the first undergraduate team to win the Grand Prize.

It also was the first team in BPC history to win five total awards. BioCellection took the Wharton Social Impact Prize ($10,000), the Gloeckner Undergraduate Award ($10,000), the Michelson People’s Choice Award ($3,000) and the Committee Award for Most “Wow Factor” ($1,000).

Wang and her team, which officially launched BioCellection last May, secured another $60,000 in investments during the two weeks immediately following the competition. She said the company is “well on our way to closing our $400,000 Series 1 Bridge Round because of the exposure we’ve received” through the competition. Plastics manufacturers in China and the United States have contacted BioCellection for opportunities to collaborate.

Luke Chow, for example, owns a Maryland-based plastic-injection company, Prime Manufacturing Technologies. He attended the finals with BioCellection in mind; this summer, Wang said, Chow will produce, on a small scale, different types of plastics for laboratory use. He also will connect the BioCellection team with U.S.-based experts in plastic polymer science.

Michael Chea, meanwhile, expressed interest from a fashion perspective — he spoke with the team about building a textiles manufacturing center in Philadelphia, and those discussions will continue.

For now, BioCellection is moving to its own lab at the San Jose BioCube. There, Wang and her team will work with two companies to develop BioCellection’s tech and business. Wang will visit China to form early partnerships with outsource manufacturers, to make early contacts with government agencies, to gather scientific data from contaminated beaches and to find a market entry point for bioremediation. Within six months, she said, they will hire a full-time genetic engineer and file their first non-provisional patent.

Second prize ($15,000) went to brEDcrumb. Third prize ($10,000) went to WeTrain, which at 2015’s Venture Finals won the Committee Choice award.

Each of the top three prize winners also will receive up to $10,000 of in-kind legal services and $5,000 of in-kind accounting services.

Qorum won the Committee Award for Best Pitch ($1,000), and Barn Owl won the Committee Award for Best Use of Technology ($1,000).

More From Knowledge at Wharton

How Financial Frictions Hinder Innovation

How Early Adopters of Gen AI Are Gaining Efficiencies

How Is AI Affecting Innovation Management?

Looking for more insights.

Sign up to stay informed about our latest article releases.

• 400+ Sample Business Plans
• WHY UPMETRICS?

Customer Success Stories

Business Plan Course

Strategic Planning Templates

E-books, Guides & More

Entrepreneurs & Small Business

Accelerators & Incubators

Business Consultants & Advisors

Educators & Business Schools

Students & Scholars

AI Business Plan Generator

Financial Forecasting

AI Assistance

Ai Pitch Deck Generator

Strategic Planning

See How Upmetrics Works  →

• Sample Plans

Small Business Tools

Write the Competition Section: Business Plan Writing

Aayushi Mistry

• December 21, 2023

11 Min Read

What is the Competition Section?

Your business plan includes a lot of operational sections. Every section holds a different importance. In that case, competition is one of the most fundamental aspects of your business. And so, it needs to be added to your business plan. The section that explains your competition is your competition section.

While deciding where to add the competition section, pay attention to the flow of your business plan. Moreover, it also depends on the priority. So, it must come next to your objective, problem statement , product/services, and target audience.

Why Do You Need a Competition Section in Your Business Plan?

The why of your business plan depends on your purpose-

If your purpose is to direct your business growth:

Your competition status can play as your reference point. Here, the competition section serves as a medium for understanding your competition. So, you can develop strategic positioning.

This can help you and your team to look at comparative strengths and weaknesses exclusively. So, you can easily come to the strategies that work in your favor, and give you a competitive advantage .

If your purpose is to create a business plan to seek investment:

You must add it to inform your investors about your competition, market position, and brand promise.

You need to describe the competition to reassure probable investors that you know and understand your competition. And that you are ready to take advantage of opportunities and avoid the pitfalls.

Apart from this, your purpose also makes a difference in how to write your competition section in your business plan. However, the difference is minor, and the effect of it is profound.

How to write a competition section in your business plan?

Regardless of your purpose mentioned above, you have to include all the steps mentioned below. Wherever there is the need for that ‘minor’ change, we will include it under the same step.

While following this step, we suggest you take action side by side. So, it becomes easier to implement. Moreover, before putting up your competition section, be ready with your competition data.

Also, make sure that you have conducted a competitive analysis and processed data of at least 5 competition companies. Once you have everything you need, you can go through the following steps-

1. Determining and Documenting Your Business Position

Regardless of your purpose, you will have to follow this step. And there isn’t any major difference here. You need to know your business position in the market and document it properly. However, we will first talk about the determining part. And then, document it for the competition part of your business plan.

How to determine your market position?

Gather crucial details for your company and your competitors’ companies. When you have all the data, you compare them. And put it up on the competition graph.

The details you will need include:

• Sales Figures
• Profit margins
• Distributors

You can also add the marketing column if you find the need. Here, your goal is to make clear positions with respect to your target markets.

However, there are two most reliable ways to determine your position:

1. Position Mapping Graph

You can do this for 5 main aspects of your business-

• For product characters
• The quality of products/services
• The number of products/services
• For user/customer friendliness

You can either put all the points in the same graph or use a separate graph for each.

How to do this?

• Get graph paper and divide it into 4 quadrants
• Add your parameter(s)
• Start plotting your and your competition’s point

2. Competitive Matrix

A competitive matrix is a method that helps you determine your competitive advantages. Usually, you put together this tool to note your market credibility. It is an industry analysis tool that compares the characteristics of you and your competition.

How to do it?

• You draw out a matrix
• Position your company and competitors, at the top, the horizontal blocks
• Put all the aspects you want to compete with, in the vertical blocks
• Put the tick marks to draw the competition

How to document in the competition section for your business plan?

Once you complete the determination, the documentation is quite easy. In fact, you can put the final graphs in your draft. It will not only give color and variety but also make it easy to understand.

While you put all the graphs together, you have to explain your competition and the parameters that you have selected. Moreover, you can go ahead and explain why the companies are your competition. Also, explain why you picked particular parameters.

Mention the date and time frame in your graphs. It makes it easier to have a deeper knowledge of your competition.

Basically, the documentation is journaling the process of drawing the graphs. You may not want to add every detail. As that could make the entire section a little longer than expected. But at the same time, don’t leave out the important details.

As for the difference, you can follow the same process for both purposes. Only make sure that your draft for your investors has been relatively concise. As for your company draft, you can add as many details as you want.

Why is this step important?

When you follow this step, the process of putting the competition section for your business plan is literally half done. It brings you the clarity that you, your team, and your investors need to make your business successful.

2. Determine and Draft Your Competitive Advantages

Determining the competitive advantage.

This process may look hard. But it is not. In fact, it just includes one step to the above one. It can be done side by side while you are drawing the comparison and putting them together in different graphs.

You have to note and add the points where you are doing better (or can do) better than your competition. And then, note how that bonus point can bring you an advantage(s).

Drafting your competitive advantage

You have to note down your bonus points and explain them in detail. You can use those graphs too for more clarity and variety. It is better that you make this up to the point. If you are writing for the investors, they might just want the rounded points after seeing the graphs.

And if you are using it for directive purposes, even then, it is good to have a well-rounded point. However, you might need the back details along the way ahead. So, you can note it down too.

With this step, you became assertive about your success and future in the market.

If brought in front of your investors, they quickly get a clear idea of whether to invest in your business or not. In a way, it helps you store their faith in your business.

And if you are only planning to put the direction of your company’s success, it gives you a clear picture of your strengths and opportunities. In a way, it restores your faith in your product/services.

3. Put in the customers’ review

This step is just like putting that final nail in the coffin! Plus, regardless of the purpose of your business plan, this step and section remain the same. Even more interesting, it takes less time than the two above-mentioned steps.

Here’s how you do it-

• Find out the reviews and ratings of all the competitors, you had begun the process with.
• Be discreet. Don’t only add the good points or the bad points. Add the good, the bad, and the average rating and reviews.
• You can go ahead and make three sections named- The Good, The Bad, and The Average.
• Add 10-12 reviews in total and put them in the respective sections (3 or 4 in each).
• You can find reviews from search engines, social media, websites, forums, and magazines.
• If you want authentic reviews and have enough time and resources, you can even run surveys. Or contact agencies that run unbiased surveys.

How to draft it-

• Put them just the way they are, even if they have typos. Try not to tamper with them.
• Add them at the end of the competition section for your business plan.

Why is this step important

• To add more clarity and favor to your business.
• Gives a chunk of customer points of view.
• Restores your, your team’s, and your investor’s faith in your company.

Basic Template

And that’s all about the competition section in the business plan. We hope we have given you all the information that you needed. However, regardless of how you find notes, we have listed the FAQs for the competition section for a business plan. You can refer to it for questions that look similar to yours.

FAQs for your competition section

What if we think that our business does not have competition?

Ideally, every business has competition. If not directly, then indirectly. Basically, there are three types of competition- Primary, Secondary, and Tertiary.

• Primary: The business that has similar products/services as you and, serves the same target audience.
• Secondary: The high-end or low-end services/products as you. There may be a slight change in the target audience, depending on the spending capacity location and more.
• Tertiary: They have completely different products/services but satisfy the same needs of your target audience.

So, if you think that you don’t have primary competition. Look closely, you may have a secondary or tertiary competition.

What if that time my competition changes?

You have to run the test from the start and draft the section from scratch. It may be the same even when you want to add and remove the parameter.

Do we need a separate team to draw a competition analysis and draft it in the business plan?

Not importantly. However, it is important for everyone involved in your team to be qualified and have adequate experience. If you think that your team doesn’t have that, you can form or hire a separate team.

How long should the competition section be in the business plan?

It should be detailed. But it must not take up most part of your business plan. Moreover, it also depends on the number of other sections you are adding. And it also depends on what these other sections are. In any case, there is no harm in being concise. No matter who the reader is, we all prefer a quick read.

Where else can we showcase this analysis?

You can use this analysis in marketing and sales strategies. You can even use it to further research and develop your product/services.

Build your Business Plan Faster

with step-by-step Guidance & AI Assistance.

About the Author

Since childhood, I was in awe of the magic that words bring. But while studying computer science in college, my world turned upside down. I found my calling in being a copywriter and I plunged into a world of words. Since then, there is no looking back. Even today, nothing excites me to find out the wonders the words can bring!

Related Articles

What is a Competitive Advantage? Explained with Examples

Everything You Need to Know About Pricing Strategy

What is SWOT Analysis & How to Conduct it

Reach your goals with accurate planning.

No Risk – Cancel at Any Time – 15 Day Money Back Guarantee

Popular Templates

• Arts & Culture
• Civic Engagement
• Economic Development
• Environment
• Human Rights
• Social Services
• Water & Sanitation
• Foundations
• Nonprofits & NGOs
• Social Enterprise
• Collaboration
• Design Thinking
• Impact Investing
• Measurement & Evaluation
• Organizational Development
• Philanthropy & Funding
• Current Issue
• Sponsored Supplements
• Global Editions
• In-Depth Series
• Stanford PACS
• Submission Guidelines

Rethinking Business Plan Competitions

Examining the pitfalls and potential of social business plan competitions, and how educators can redesign them for greater impact.

• order reprints
• related stories

By Michael Gordon & Daniela Papi-Thornton Nov. 30, 2016

On both sides of the pond, we have seen business plan competitions for social ventures send contestants out to sea without a compass.

While many of today’s university students crave lives of meaning and social impact , most will never start a business—social or otherwise. Social business plan competitions typically honor the first trend while overlooking the second. There is an opportunity to rethink these contests and use them to help students identify a range of ways to create social value, beyond just starting a business. Most importantly, these contests need to foster genuine understanding of problems before asking students to design solutions.

Many university social business plan competitions invite students to address a specific, pressing concern, typically in a short period, and almost always out of context. They typically require that entrants work toward a business model solution without requiring or rewarding a thorough understanding of the problem, including the landscape of current and past attempts at solutions.

What are the results?

• Students try to solve problems they don’t understood by proposing solutions that aren’t grounded in reality.
• Innovation is rewarded, even if neither contestants nor judges know what solutions have already been tried. Competition winners often feel validated even if their ideas are weakly developed or repeat the mistakes many others have already made.
• Winners are rewarded for their business plans—which tend to lock them into flawed solutions and lead to confirmation bias—rather than for thoroughly understanding a problem and receiving incentives for being flexible in seeking paths to solve it.
• A culture develops of “Best PowerPoint Wins,” ,reinforcing the common illusion that launching and running a successful social venture is much easier that it really is.
• Students who enter these contests often think they have produced grand solutions for social problems, leaving humbler, less entrepreneurial—but still quite socially minded—students without any funding and with few learning opportunities to find their own paths to impact.

We have both seen these mistakes play out. At the Center for Social Impact at the University of Michigan, we once asked students to look into improving the skills and professional outlook of young, low-income inner-city adults. One thing we got right was to create a tie-in between our competition and the actual activities of a well-run nonprofit. What we didn’t get right was expecting students to examine and tweak the nonprofit’s programming, financing, culture, and values, and then double its impact—all within a year. The competition was two weeks long, and the nonprofit was out of state. The students were, in effect, asked to pretend to be “experts” in a field they knew little about, had few hands-on resources to learn from, and were expected to do a year’s worth of work in a fortnight.

At Oxford, we’ve made similar mistakes. When students studying for Saïd Business School ’s one-year MBA competed for the Skoll Centre ’s social business funding, their intense schedule of study, in effect, guaranteed that many would apply with very rudimentary ideas and would not be ready for start-up funding even if they received it.

On many campuses, students are asked to form plans for new start-ups that address issues of noble concern about health, education, human rights—you name it. They are asked to address problems in faraway places, or involving communities with whom they have no familiarity. Organizers’ unrealistic expectations about what students can achieve translate into “exotic” societal challenges that students find attractive—but that have worrying traces of colonialist attitudes.

We believe there is another way.

Competitions can produce positive outcomes in different ways, and organizers should take the opportunity to carefully consider their goals in designing them. To help more students understand and take action to solve social and environmental problems, contests need to promote a full understanding of a problem and its context to ensure that students understand what is working, what isn’t, where gaps in impact lie, and how they might plug into existing efforts to solve these problems. This approach would help students acknowledge a range of possible interventions beyond starting a social business, such as expanding impact through government adoption or franchising a current solution. Opening up these contests so that contestants can consider extending or replicating an existing solution to a complex problem would invite students to step into a range of roles, not just the idealized start-up founder or heropreneur .

For a fewer number of students, competitions may be a step toward actually launching a venture. But even so, they must have a deep contextual understanding of the problem they want to solve before they are on solid footing to launch. Hence, contests that incentivize and reward an understanding of a problem will benefit all stakeholders, including both job seekers and future social venture founders.

Both of our institutions are shifting programs away from traditionally run competitions. We believe that our role is first to provide students with opportunities to understand social problems and deeply engage with them, and help them identify a variety of ways that they might add value. If they then decide that the problem requires a new venture to fill a gap in the landscape of current solutions, our next opportunity is to connect them to the tools and resources they need to test out their ideas.

To create this shift in approach, the Skoll Centre launched a competition called The Global Challenge , based on the Impact Gaps Canvas , which rewards students for understanding a problem. Students map the landscape of current solutions and then identify gaps where further social value can be added. The Global Challenge is now in its second year and is open to partner universities around the world, with more than 20 partner universities signed up for the 2017 competition. Over the last four years, Saïd Business School has also incorporated a required core course into the MBA and EMBA curriculum, Global Opportunities and Threats Oxford (GOTO) , designed to help students understand global challenges and bring the idea of “problem understanding” before “solution finding” to all students.

The University of Michigan, meanwhile, has incorporated the Impact Gaps Canvas and additional ecosystem mapping tools into several impact competitions. They have become mandatory first steps in two social impact competitions hosted by the Center for Social Impact at the Ross School of Business and third hosted by the School of Public Health.

Other universities are also making the shift. The University of Melbourne’s Melbourne Accelerator Program (MAP), for example, includes impact gaps mapping as part of its Impact Entrepreneurship Program, Compass , and social entrepreneurship courses at Brigham Young University (BYU) offer opportunities for students to “apprentice with a problem” rather than asking them to jump in and “solve it."

Inspired by the approach at BYU, the Skoll Centre launched its own Apprenticing with a Problem Funding competition, which gives students access to funds to go out into the world for three or more months and learn about a problem they care about, through research or an internship. By learning about and apprenticing with organizations already working to solve challenges, students can identify a range of ways they might add value. This opportunity also attracts a much wider range of students than simple business plan competitions. Laura Taylor, a 2016 competition winner, noted, “I would not have entered the competition if it were about starting a new venture, as that was not my goal. … I wanted to learn how I could best contribute to solutions that might not be obvious at first glance.”

The University of Michigan’s Center for Social Impact has created another way of apprenticing through its Academic Year Impact Corps. A student can take a year-long, for-credit course where she spends 6-8 hours per week with a local social enterprise. That organization views her as part of the team, includes her in strategic discussions, and provides ongoing mentorship from the organization’s executive director. The student also spends the year doing a meaningful project for the organization, getting coaching from the center’s faculty director and participating in a seminar involving all other students in the course in an attempt to provide a grounded perspective on the complexity of social change work.

To better support students who actually do want to launch a business, the Skoll Centre has opened up its social business plan competition to alumni. In this way, students can identify a challenge they want to work on, “apprentice” with that problem either through the Skoll Centre’s apprenticeship funding or by working in the sector, and—perhaps years later—enter the Skoll Centre’s competition to gain financial support for a business start-up.

Other universities considering how to design or reshape their business plan competitions should think about:

• Rewarding and supporting deep learning about, not just solving, social problems
• Providing flexible funding that does not lock students into enacting untested business proposals, but rather allows them to pursue multiple paths to impact
• Identifying credible judges and mentors who have a deep understanding of global challenges themselves
• Providing thoughtful and thorough feedback to students so that they learn from the experience, even if they do not secure funding through the competition.

It’s time we social business plan competition organizers start drinking our own medicine and focus on the theory of change behind our contests. If we want to create appropriate incentives for students to go out and solve global challenges, then we should design offerings that are best designed to do that—and that means rethinking the value of traditional business plan competitions.

Support  SSIR ’s coverage of cross-sector solutions to global challenges.  Help us further the reach of innovative ideas.  Donate today .

Read more stories by Michael Gordon & Daniela Papi-Thornton .

SSIR.org and/or its third-party tools use cookies, which are necessary to its functioning and to our better understanding of user needs. By closing this banner, scrolling this page, clicking a link or continuing to otherwise browse this site, you agree to the use of cookies.

• Search Search Please fill out this field.

What Is a Business Plan?

Understanding business plans, how to write a business plan, common elements of a business plan, how often should a business plan be updated, the bottom line, business plan: what it is, what's included, and how to write one.

Adam Hayes, Ph.D., CFA, is a financial writer with 15+ years Wall Street experience as a derivatives trader. Besides his extensive derivative trading expertise, Adam is an expert in economics and behavioral finance. Adam received his master's in economics from The New School for Social Research and his Ph.D. from the University of Wisconsin-Madison in sociology. He is a CFA charterholder as well as holding FINRA Series 7, 55 & 63 licenses. He currently researches and teaches economic sociology and the social studies of finance at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem.

A business plan is a document that details a company's goals and how it intends to achieve them. Business plans can be of benefit to both startups and well-established companies. For startups, a business plan can be essential for winning over potential lenders and investors. Established businesses can find one useful for staying on track and not losing sight of their goals. This article explains what an effective business plan needs to include and how to write one.

Key Takeaways

• A business plan is a document describing a company's business activities and how it plans to achieve its goals.
• Startup companies use business plans to get off the ground and attract outside investors.
• For established companies, a business plan can help keep the executive team focused on and working toward the company's short- and long-term objectives.
• There is no single format that a business plan must follow, but there are certain key elements that most companies will want to include.

Investopedia / Ryan Oakley

Any new business should have a business plan in place prior to beginning operations. In fact, banks and venture capital firms often want to see a business plan before they'll consider making a loan or providing capital to new businesses.

Even if a business isn't looking to raise additional money, a business plan can help it focus on its goals. A 2017 Harvard Business Review article reported that, "Entrepreneurs who write formal plans are 16% more likely to achieve viability than the otherwise identical nonplanning entrepreneurs."

Ideally, a business plan should be reviewed and updated periodically to reflect any goals that have been achieved or that may have changed. An established business that has decided to move in a new direction might create an entirely new business plan for itself.

There are numerous benefits to creating (and sticking to) a well-conceived business plan. These include being able to think through ideas before investing too much money in them and highlighting any potential obstacles to success. A company might also share its business plan with trusted outsiders to get their objective feedback. In addition, a business plan can help keep a company's executive team on the same page about strategic action items and priorities.

Business plans, even among competitors in the same industry, are rarely identical. However, they often have some of the same basic elements, as we describe below.

While it's a good idea to provide as much detail as necessary, it's also important that a business plan be concise enough to hold a reader's attention to the end.

While there are any number of templates that you can use to write a business plan, it's best to try to avoid producing a generic-looking one. Let your plan reflect the unique personality of your business.

Many business plans use some combination of the sections below, with varying levels of detail, depending on the company.

The length of a business plan can vary greatly from business to business. Regardless, it's best to fit the basic information into a 15- to 25-page document. Other crucial elements that take up a lot of space—such as applications for patents—can be referenced in the main document and attached as appendices.

These are some of the most common elements in many business plans:

• Executive summary: This section introduces the company and includes its mission statement along with relevant information about the company's leadership, employees, operations, and locations.
• Products and services: Here, the company should describe the products and services it offers or plans to introduce. That might include details on pricing, product lifespan, and unique benefits to the consumer. Other factors that could go into this section include production and manufacturing processes, any relevant patents the company may have, as well as proprietary technology . Information about research and development (R&D) can also be included here.
• Market analysis: A company needs to have a good handle on the current state of its industry and the existing competition. This section should explain where the company fits in, what types of customers it plans to target, and how easy or difficult it may be to take market share from incumbents.
• Marketing strategy: This section can describe how the company plans to attract and keep customers, including any anticipated advertising and marketing campaigns. It should also describe the distribution channel or channels it will use to get its products or services to consumers.
• Financial plans and projections: Established businesses can include financial statements, balance sheets, and other relevant financial information. New businesses can provide financial targets and estimates for the first few years. Your plan might also include any funding requests you're making.

The best business plans aren't generic ones created from easily accessed templates. A company should aim to entice readers with a plan that demonstrates its uniqueness and potential for success.

2 Types of Business Plans

Business plans can take many forms, but they are sometimes divided into two basic categories: traditional and lean startup. According to the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) , the traditional business plan is the more common of the two.

• Traditional business plans : These plans tend to be much longer than lean startup plans and contain considerably more detail. As a result they require more work on the part of the business, but they can also be more persuasive (and reassuring) to potential investors.
• Lean startup business plans : These use an abbreviated structure that highlights key elements. These business plans are short—as short as one page—and provide only the most basic detail. If a company wants to use this kind of plan, it should be prepared to provide more detail if an investor or a lender requests it.

Why Do Business Plans Fail?

A business plan is not a surefire recipe for success. The plan may have been unrealistic in its assumptions and projections to begin with. Markets and the overall economy might change in ways that couldn't have been foreseen. A competitor might introduce a revolutionary new product or service. All of this calls for building some flexibility into your plan, so you can pivot to a new course if needed.

How frequently a business plan needs to be revised will depend on the nature of the business. A well-established business might want to review its plan once a year and make changes if necessary. A new or fast-growing business in a fiercely competitive market might want to revise it more often, such as quarterly.

What Does a Lean Startup Business Plan Include?

The lean startup business plan is an option when a company prefers to give a quick explanation of its business. For example, a brand-new company may feel that it doesn't have a lot of information to provide yet.

Sections can include: a value proposition ; the company's major activities and advantages; resources such as staff, intellectual property, and capital; a list of partnerships; customer segments; and revenue sources.

A business plan can be useful to companies of all kinds. But as a company grows and the world around it changes, so too should its business plan. So don't think of your business plan as carved in granite but as a living document designed to evolve with your business.

Harvard Business Review. " Research: Writing a Business Plan Makes Your Startup More Likely to Succeed ."

U.S. Small Business Administration. " Write Your Business Plan ."

• How to Start a Business: A Comprehensive Guide and Essential Steps 1 of 25
• How to Do Market Research, Types, and Example 2 of 25
• Marketing Strategy: What It Is, How It Works, and How to Create One 3 of 25
• Marketing in Business: Strategies and Types Explained 4 of 25
• What Is a Marketing Plan? Types and How to Write One 5 of 25
• Business Development: Definition, Strategies, Steps & Skills 6 of 25
• Business Plan: What It Is, What's Included, and How to Write One 7 of 25
• Small Business Development Center (SBDC): Meaning, Types, Impact 8 of 25
• How to Write a Business Plan for a Loan 9 of 25
• Business Startup Costs: It’s in the Details 10 of 25
• Startup Capital Definition, Types, and Risks 11 of 25
• Bootstrapping Definition, Strategies, and Pros/Cons 12 of 25
• Crowdfunding: What It Is, How It Works, and Popular Websites 13 of 25
• Starting a Business with No Money: How to Begin 14 of 25
• A Comprehensive Guide to Establishing Business Credit 15 of 25
• Equity Financing: What It Is, How It Works, Pros and Cons 16 of 25
• Best Startup Business Loans for May 2024 17 of 25
• Sole Proprietorship: What It Is, Pros and Cons, and Differences From an LLC 18 of 25
• Partnership: Definition, How It Works, Taxation, and Types 19 of 25
• What Is an LLC? Limited Liability Company Structure and Benefits Defined 20 of 25
• Corporation: What It Is and How To Form One 21 of 25
• Starting a Small Business: Your Complete How-to Guide 22 of 25
• Starting an Online Business: A Step-by-Step Guide 23 of 25
• How to Start Your Own Bookkeeping Business: Essential Tips 24 of 25
• How to Start a Successful Dropshipping Business: A Comprehensive Guide 25 of 25

• Terms of Service
• Editorial Policy
• Privacy Policy
• Your Privacy Choices

11.4 The Business Plan

Learning objectives.

By the end of this section, you will be able to:

• Describe the different purposes of a business plan
• Describe and develop the components of a brief business plan
• Describe and develop the components of a full business plan

Unlike the brief or lean formats introduced so far, the business plan is a formal document used for the long-range planning of a company’s operation. It typically includes background information, financial information, and a summary of the business. Investors nearly always request a formal business plan because it is an integral part of their evaluation of whether to invest in a company. Although nothing in business is permanent, a business plan typically has components that are more “set in stone” than a business model canvas , which is more commonly used as a first step in the planning process and throughout the early stages of a nascent business. A business plan is likely to describe the business and industry, market strategies, sales potential, and competitive analysis, as well as the company’s long-term goals and objectives. An in-depth formal business plan would follow at later stages after various iterations to business model canvases. The business plan usually projects financial data over a three-year period and is typically required by banks or other investors to secure funding. The business plan is a roadmap for the company to follow over multiple years.

Some entrepreneurs prefer to use the canvas process instead of the business plan, whereas others use a shorter version of the business plan, submitting it to investors after several iterations. There are also entrepreneurs who use the business plan earlier in the entrepreneurial process, either preceding or concurrently with a canvas. For instance, Chris Guillebeau has a one-page business plan template in his book The $100 Startup . 48 His version is basically an extension of a napkin sketch without the detail of a full business plan. As you progress, you can also consider a brief business plan (about two pages)—if you want to support a rapid business launch—and/or a standard business plan.

As with many aspects of entrepreneurship, there are no clear hard and fast rules to achieving entrepreneurial success. You may encounter different people who want different things (canvas, summary, full business plan), and you also have flexibility in following whatever tool works best for you. Like the canvas, the various versions of the business plan are tools that will aid you in your entrepreneurial endeavor.

Business Plan Overview

Most business plans have several distinct sections ( Figure 11.16 ). The business plan can range from a few pages to twenty-five pages or more, depending on the purpose and the intended audience. For our discussion, we’ll describe a brief business plan and a standard business plan. If you are able to successfully design a business model canvas, then you will have the structure for developing a clear business plan that you can submit for financial consideration.

Both types of business plans aim at providing a picture and roadmap to follow from conception to creation. If you opt for the brief business plan, you will focus primarily on articulating a big-picture overview of your business concept.

The full business plan is aimed at executing the vision concept, dealing with the proverbial devil in the details. Developing a full business plan will assist those of you who need a more detailed and structured roadmap, or those of you with little to no background in business. The business planning process includes the business model, a feasibility analysis, and a full business plan, which we will discuss later in this section. Next, we explore how a business plan can meet several different needs.

Purposes of a Business Plan

A business plan can serve many different purposes—some internal, others external. As we discussed previously, you can use a business plan as an internal early planning device, an extension of a napkin sketch, and as a follow-up to one of the canvas tools. A business plan can be an organizational roadmap , that is, an internal planning tool and working plan that you can apply to your business in order to reach your desired goals over the course of several years. The business plan should be written by the owners of the venture, since it forces a firsthand examination of the business operations and allows them to focus on areas that need improvement.

Refer to the business venture throughout the document. Generally speaking, a business plan should not be written in the first person.

A major external purpose for the business plan is as an investment tool that outlines financial projections, becoming a document designed to attract investors. In many instances, a business plan can complement a formal investor’s pitch. In this context, the business plan is a presentation plan, intended for an outside audience that may or may not be familiar with your industry, your business, and your competitors.

You can also use your business plan as a contingency plan by outlining some “what-if” scenarios and exploring how you might respond if these scenarios unfold. Pretty Young Professional launched in November 2010 as an online resource to guide an emerging generation of female leaders. The site focused on recent female college graduates and current students searching for professional roles and those in their first professional roles. It was founded by four friends who were coworkers at the global consultancy firm McKinsey. But after positions and equity were decided among them, fundamental differences of opinion about the direction of the business emerged between two factions, according to the cofounder and former CEO Kathryn Minshew . “I think, naively, we assumed that if we kicked the can down the road on some of those things, we’d be able to sort them out,” Minshew said. Minshew went on to found a different professional site, The Muse , and took much of the editorial team of Pretty Young Professional with her. 49 Whereas greater planning potentially could have prevented the early demise of Pretty Young Professional, a change in planning led to overnight success for Joshua Esnard and The Cut Buddy team. Esnard invented and patented the plastic hair template that he was selling online out of his Fort Lauderdale garage while working a full-time job at Broward College and running a side business. Esnard had hundreds of boxes of Cut Buddies sitting in his home when he changed his marketing plan to enlist companies specializing in making videos go viral. It worked so well that a promotional video for the product garnered 8 million views in hours. The Cut Buddy sold over 4,000 products in a few hours when Esnard only had hundreds remaining. Demand greatly exceeded his supply, so Esnard had to scramble to increase manufacturing and offered customers two-for-one deals to make up for delays. This led to selling 55,000 units, generating $700,000 in sales in 2017. 50 After appearing on Shark Tank and landing a deal with Daymond John that gave the “shark” a 20-percent equity stake in return for $300,000, The Cut Buddy has added new distribution channels to include retail sales along with online commerce. Changing one aspect of a business plan—the marketing plan—yielded success for The Cut Buddy.

Link to Learning

Watch this video of Cut Buddy’s founder, Joshua Esnard, telling his company’s story to learn more.

If you opt for the brief business plan, you will focus primarily on articulating a big-picture overview of your business concept. This version is used to interest potential investors, employees, and other stakeholders, and will include a financial summary “box,” but it must have a disclaimer, and the founder/entrepreneur may need to have the people who receive it sign a nondisclosure agreement (NDA) . The full business plan is aimed at executing the vision concept, providing supporting details, and would be required by financial institutions and others as they formally become stakeholders in the venture. Both are aimed at providing a picture and roadmap to go from conception to creation.

Types of Business Plans

The brief business plan is similar to an extended executive summary from the full business plan. This concise document provides a broad overview of your entrepreneurial concept, your team members, how and why you will execute on your plans, and why you are the ones to do so. You can think of a brief business plan as a scene setter or—since we began this chapter with a film reference—as a trailer to the full movie. The brief business plan is the commercial equivalent to a trailer for Field of Dreams , whereas the full plan is the full-length movie equivalent.

Brief Business Plan or Executive Summary

As the name implies, the brief business plan or executive summary summarizes key elements of the entire business plan, such as the business concept, financial features, and current business position. The executive summary version of the business plan is your opportunity to broadly articulate the overall concept and vision of the company for yourself, for prospective investors, and for current and future employees.

A typical executive summary is generally no longer than a page, but because the brief business plan is essentially an extended executive summary, the executive summary section is vital. This is the “ask” to an investor. You should begin by clearly stating what you are asking for in the summary.

In the business concept phase, you’ll describe the business, its product, and its markets. Describe the customer segment it serves and why your company will hold a competitive advantage. This section may align roughly with the customer segments and value-proposition segments of a canvas.

Next, highlight the important financial features, including sales, profits, cash flows, and return on investment. Like the financial portion of a feasibility analysis, the financial analysis component of a business plan may typically include items like a twelve-month profit and loss projection, a three- or four-year profit and loss projection, a cash-flow projection, a projected balance sheet, and a breakeven calculation. You can explore a feasibility study and financial projections in more depth in the formal business plan. Here, you want to focus on the big picture of your numbers and what they mean.

The current business position section can furnish relevant information about you and your team members and the company at large. This is your opportunity to tell the story of how you formed the company, to describe its legal status (form of operation), and to list the principal players. In one part of the extended executive summary, you can cover your reasons for starting the business: Here is an opportunity to clearly define the needs you think you can meet and perhaps get into the pains and gains of customers. You also can provide a summary of the overall strategic direction in which you intend to take the company. Describe the company’s mission, vision, goals and objectives, overall business model, and value proposition.

Rice University’s Student Business Plan Competition, one of the largest and overall best-regarded graduate school business-plan competitions (see Telling Your Entrepreneurial Story and Pitching the Idea ), requires an executive summary of up to five pages to apply. 51 , 52 Its suggested sections are shown in Table 11.2 .

Are You Ready?

Create a brief business plan.

Fill out a canvas of your choosing for a well-known startup: Uber, Netflix, Dropbox, Etsy, Airbnb, Bird/Lime, Warby Parker, or any of the companies featured throughout this chapter or one of your choice. Then create a brief business plan for that business. See if you can find a version of the company’s actual executive summary, business plan, or canvas. Compare and contrast your vision with what the company has articulated.

• These companies are well established but is there a component of what you charted that you would advise the company to change to ensure future viability?
• Map out a contingency plan for a “what-if” scenario if one key aspect of the company or the environment it operates in were drastically is altered?

Full Business Plan

Even full business plans can vary in length, scale, and scope. Rice University sets a ten-page cap on business plans submitted for the full competition. The IndUS Entrepreneurs , one of the largest global networks of entrepreneurs, also holds business plan competitions for students through its Tie Young Entrepreneurs program. In contrast, business plans submitted for that competition can usually be up to twenty-five pages. These are just two examples. Some components may differ slightly; common elements are typically found in a formal business plan outline. The next section will provide sample components of a full business plan for a fictional business.

Executive Summary

The executive summary should provide an overview of your business with key points and issues. Because the summary is intended to summarize the entire document, it is most helpful to write this section last, even though it comes first in sequence. The writing in this section should be especially concise. Readers should be able to understand your needs and capabilities at first glance. The section should tell the reader what you want and your “ask” should be explicitly stated in the summary.

Describe your business, its product or service, and the intended customers. Explain what will be sold, who it will be sold to, and what competitive advantages the business has. Table 11.3 shows a sample executive summary for the fictional company La Vida Lola.

Business Description

This section describes the industry, your product, and the business and success factors. It should provide a current outlook as well as future trends and developments. You also should address your company’s mission, vision, goals, and objectives. Summarize your overall strategic direction, your reasons for starting the business, a description of your products and services, your business model, and your company’s value proposition. Consider including the Standard Industrial Classification/North American Industry Classification System (SIC/NAICS) code to specify the industry and insure correct identification. The industry extends beyond where the business is located and operates, and should include national and global dynamics. Table 11.4 shows a sample business description for La Vida Lola.

Industry Analysis and Market Strategies

Here you should define your market in terms of size, structure, growth prospects, trends, and sales potential. You’ll want to include your TAM and forecast the SAM . (Both these terms are discussed in Conducting a Feasibility Analysis .) This is a place to address market segmentation strategies by geography, customer attributes, or product orientation. Describe your positioning relative to your competitors’ in terms of pricing, distribution, promotion plan, and sales potential. Table 11.5 shows an example industry analysis and market strategy for La Vida Lola.

Competitive Analysis

The competitive analysis is a statement of the business strategy as it relates to the competition. You want to be able to identify who are your major competitors and assess what are their market shares, markets served, strategies employed, and expected response to entry? You likely want to conduct a classic SWOT analysis (Strengths Weaknesses Opportunities Threats) and complete a competitive-strength grid or competitive matrix. Outline your company’s competitive strengths relative to those of the competition in regard to product, distribution, pricing, promotion, and advertising. What are your company’s competitive advantages and their likely impacts on its success? The key is to construct it properly for the relevant features/benefits (by weight, according to customers) and how the startup compares to incumbents. The competitive matrix should show clearly how and why the startup has a clear (if not currently measurable) competitive advantage. Some common features in the example include price, benefits, quality, type of features, locations, and distribution/sales. Sample templates are shown in Figure 11.17 and Figure 11.18 . A competitive analysis helps you create a marketing strategy that will identify assets or skills that your competitors are lacking so you can plan to fill those gaps, giving you a distinct competitive advantage. When creating a competitor analysis, it is important to focus on the key features and elements that matter to customers, rather than focusing too heavily on the entrepreneur’s idea and desires.

Operations and Management Plan

In this section, outline how you will manage your company. Describe its organizational structure. Here you can address the form of ownership and, if warranted, include an organizational chart/structure. Highlight the backgrounds, experiences, qualifications, areas of expertise, and roles of members of the management team. This is also the place to mention any other stakeholders, such as a board of directors or advisory board(s), and their relevant relationship to the founder, experience and value to help make the venture successful, and professional service firms providing management support, such as accounting services and legal counsel.

Table 11.6 shows a sample operations and management plan for La Vida Lola.

Marketing Plan

Here you should outline and describe an effective overall marketing strategy for your venture, providing details regarding pricing, promotion, advertising, distribution, media usage, public relations, and a digital presence. Fully describe your sales management plan and the composition of your sales force, along with a comprehensive and detailed budget for the marketing plan. Table 11.7 shows a sample marketing plan for La Vida Lola.

Financial Plan

A financial plan seeks to forecast revenue and expenses; project a financial narrative; and estimate project costs, valuations, and cash flow projections. This section should present an accurate, realistic, and achievable financial plan for your venture (see Entrepreneurial Finance and Accounting for detailed discussions about conducting these projections). Include sales forecasts and income projections, pro forma financial statements ( Building the Entrepreneurial Dream Team , a breakeven analysis, and a capital budget. Identify your possible sources of financing (discussed in Conducting a Feasibility Analysis ). Figure 11.19 shows a template of cash-flow needs for La Vida Lola.

Entrepreneur In Action

Laughing man coffee.

Hugh Jackman ( Figure 11.20 ) may best be known for portraying a comic-book superhero who used his mutant abilities to protect the world from villains. But the Wolverine actor is also working to make the planet a better place for real, not through adamantium claws but through social entrepreneurship.

A love of java jolted Jackman into action in 2009, when he traveled to Ethiopia with a Christian humanitarian group to shoot a documentary about the impact of fair-trade certification on coffee growers there. He decided to launch a business and follow in the footsteps of the late Paul Newman, another famous actor turned philanthropist via food ventures.

Jackman launched Laughing Man Coffee two years later; he sold the line to Keurig in 2015. One Laughing Man Coffee café in New York continues to operate independently, investing its proceeds into charitable programs that support better housing, health, and educational initiatives within fair-trade farming communities. 55 Although the New York location is the only café, the coffee brand is still distributed, with Keurig donating an undisclosed portion of Laughing Man proceeds to those causes (whereas Jackman donates all his profits). The company initially donated its profits to World Vision, the Christian humanitarian group Jackman accompanied in 2009. In 2017, it created the Laughing Man Foundation to be more active with its money management and distribution.

• You be the entrepreneur. If you were Jackman, would you have sold the company to Keurig? Why or why not?
• Would you have started the Laughing Man Foundation?
• What else can Jackman do to aid fair-trade practices for coffee growers?

What Can You Do?

Textbooks for change.

Founded in 2014, Textbooks for Change uses a cross-compensation model, in which one customer segment pays for a product or service, and the profit from that revenue is used to provide the same product or service to another, underserved segment. Textbooks for Change partners with student organizations to collect used college textbooks, some of which are re-sold while others are donated to students in need at underserved universities across the globe. The organization has reused or recycled 250,000 textbooks, providing 220,000 students with access through seven campus partners in East Africa. This B-corp social enterprise tackles a problem and offers a solution that is directly relevant to college students like yourself. Have you observed a problem on your college campus or other campuses that is not being served properly? Could it result in a social enterprise?

Work It Out

Franchisee set out.

A franchisee of East Coast Wings, a chain with dozens of restaurants in the United States, has decided to part ways with the chain. The new store will feature the same basic sports-bar-and-restaurant concept and serve the same basic foods: chicken wings, burgers, sandwiches, and the like. The new restaurant can’t rely on the same distributors and suppliers. A new business plan is needed.

• What steps should the new restaurant take to create a new business plan?
• Should it attempt to serve the same customers? Why or why not?

This New York Times video, “An Unlikely Business Plan,” describes entrepreneurial resurgence in Detroit, Michigan.

• 48 Chris Guillebeau. The $100 Startup: Reinvent the Way You Make a Living, Do What You Love, and Create a New Future . New York: Crown Business/Random House, 2012.
• 49 Jonathan Chan. “What These 4 Startup Case Studies Can Teach You about Failure.” Foundr.com . July 12, 2015. https://foundr.com/4-startup-case-studies-failure/
• 50 Amy Feldman. “Inventor of the Cut Buddy Paid YouTubers to Spark Sales. He Wasn’t Ready for a Video to Go Viral.” Forbes. February 15, 2017. https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestreptalks/2017/02/15/inventor-of-the-cut-buddy-paid-youtubers-to-spark-sales-he-wasnt-ready-for-a-video-to-go-viral/#3eb540ce798a
• 51 Jennifer Post. “National Business Plan Competitions for Entrepreneurs.” Business News Daily . August 30, 2018. https://www.businessnewsdaily.com/6902-business-plan-competitions-entrepreneurs.html
• 52 “Rice Business Plan Competition, Eligibility Criteria and How to Apply.” Rice Business Plan Competition . March 2020. https://rbpc.rice.edu/sites/g/files/bxs806/f/2020%20RBPC%20Eligibility%20Criteria%20and%20How%20to%20Apply_23Oct19.pdf
• 53 “Rice Business Plan Competition, Eligibility Criteria and How to Apply.” Rice Business Plan Competition. March 2020. https://rbpc.rice.edu/sites/g/files/bxs806/f/2020%20RBPC%20Eligibility%20Criteria%20and%20How%20to%20Apply_23Oct19.pdf; Based on 2019 RBPC Competition Rules and Format April 4–6, 2019. https://rbpc.rice.edu/sites/g/files/bxs806/f/2019-RBPC-Competition-Rules%20-Format.pdf
• 54 Foodstart. http://foodstart.com
• 55 “Hugh Jackman Journey to Starting a Social Enterprise Coffee Company.” Giving Compass. April 8, 2018. https://givingcompass.org/article/hugh-jackman-journey-to-starting-a-social-enterprise-coffee-company/

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This book may not be used in the training of large language models or otherwise be ingested into large language models or generative AI offerings without OpenStax's permission.

Want to cite, share, or modify this book? This book uses the Creative Commons Attribution License and you must attribute OpenStax.

Access for free at https://openstax.org/books/entrepreneurship/pages/1-introduction

• Authors: Michael Laverty, Chris Littel
• Publisher/website: OpenStax
• Book title: Entrepreneurship
• Publication date: Jan 16, 2020
• Location: Houston, Texas
• Book URL: https://openstax.org/books/entrepreneurship/pages/1-introduction
• Section URL: https://openstax.org/books/entrepreneurship/pages/11-4-the-business-plan

© Jan 4, 2024 OpenStax. Textbook content produced by OpenStax is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License . The OpenStax name, OpenStax logo, OpenStax book covers, OpenStax CNX name, and OpenStax CNX logo are not subject to the Creative Commons license and may not be reproduced without the prior and express written consent of Rice University.

• Search Search Please fill out this field.
• Building Your Business
• Becoming an Owner
• Business Plans

How to Write the Competitor Analysis Section of the Business Plan

Writing The Business Plan: Section 4

Susan Ward wrote about small businesses for The Balance for 18 years. She has run an IT consulting firm and designed and presented courses on how to promote small businesses.

The competitor analysis section can be the most difficult section to compile when writing a business plan because before you can analyze your competitors, you have to investigate them. Here's how to write the competitor analysis section of the business plan.

First, Find Out Who Your Competitors Are

If you're planning to start a small business that's going to operate locally, chances are you already know which businesses you're going to be competing with. But if not, you can easily find out by doing an internet search for local businesses, looking in the online or printed local phone book, or even driving around the target market area. 

Your local business may also have non-local competitors that you need to be aware of.

If you're selling office supplies, for instance, you may also have to compete with big-box retailers within a driving distance of several hours and companies that offer office supplies online. You want to make sure that you identify all your possible competitors at this stage.

Then Find Out About Them

You need to know:

• what markets or market segments your competitors serve;
• what benefits your competitors offer;
• why customers buy from them;
• as much as possible about their products and/or services, pricing, and promotion.

Gathering Information for Your Competitor Analysis

A visit is still the most obvious starting point - either to the brick and mortar store or to the company's website. Go there, once or several times, and look around. Watch how customers are treated. Check out the prices.

You can also learn a fair bit about your competitors from talking to their customers and/or clients - if you know who they are. Other good "live" sources of information about competitors include a company's vendors or suppliers and a company's employees. They may or may not be willing to talk to you, but it's worth seeking them out and asking.

And watch for trade shows that your competitors may be attending. Businesses are there to disseminate information about and sell their products or services; attending and visiting their booths can be an excellent way to find out about your competition.

You'll also want to search for the publicly available information about your competitors. Online publications, newspapers, and magazines may all have information about the company you're investigating for your competitive analysis. Press releases may be particularly useful. 

Once you've compiled the information about your competitors, you're ready to analyze it. 

Analyzing the Competition

Just listing a bunch of information about your competition in the competitor analysis section of the business plan misses the point. It's the analysis of the information that's important.

Study the information you've gathered about each of your competitors and ask yourself this question: How are you going to compete with that company?

For many small businesses, the key to competing successfully is to identify a market niche where they can capture a  specific target market  whose needs are not being met.

• Is there a particular segment of the market that your competition has overlooked?
• Is there a service that customers or clients want that your competitor does not supply? 

The goal of your competitor analysis is to identify and expand upon your competitive advantage - the benefits that your proposed business can offer the customer or client that your competition can't or won't supply.

Writing the Competitor Analysis Section

When you're writing the business plan, you'll write the competitor analysis section in the form of several paragraphs. 

The first paragraph will outline the competitive environment, telling your readers who your proposed business's competitors are, how much of the market they control and any other relevant details about the competition.

The second and following paragraphs will detail your competitive advantage, explaining why and how your company will be able to compete with these competitors and establish yourself as a successful business.

Remember; you don't have to go into exhaustive detail here, but you do need to persuade the reader of your business plan that you are knowledgeable about the competition and that you have a clear, definitive plan that will enable your new business to successfully compete.

What are your chances of acceptance?

Calculate for all schools, your chance of acceptance.

Your chancing factors

Extracurriculars.

15 Business Competitions for High School Students

What’s covered:, why should you enter an investing competition, how do business competitions affect my admissions chances.

Whether you dream of being a billionaire businessman like Mark Cuban, an investment icon like Warren Buffet, or a founder who’s focused on giving back like Hamdi Ulukaya, the creator and CEO of Chobani, entering a business competition for high schoolers is often a great first step toward a successful enterprise.

Business competitions are a great opportunity to show off your entrepreneurial spirit while gaining a deeper understanding of the challenges of starting and running a business. Business competitions allow you to highlight in-demand skills like idea generation, creative thinking, leadership, and communication. They also give you a chance to learn about building a business and to test your ideas in a relatively risk-free environment—after all, there is no capital or investment to lose. 

Many business competitions will also connect you with real-life professionals and college business school faculty. This creates both the chance for mentorship and the foundation of a business network that can serve you both inside and outside of the classroom—it can help with everything from gaining college admission to getting a business off the ground. 

Business competitions for high schoolers also often provide winners with monetary awards or scholarships which are beneficial for keeping the cost of college down—something every aspiring business person can appreciate. 

1. Conrad Challenge

Date(s): 2023 dates announced in August Type: Global 

This business challenge tasks students between ages 13 and 18 to apply science and technology to solve global issues, create a pitch, and build a business plan. Participants work in teams of two to five students to compete in four traditional categories and one special category that changes annually. The four traditional categories are:

• Aerospace and aviation 
• Cyber technology and security 
• Energy and environment 
• Health and Nutrition 

The 2021/2022 special category was “re-purposed farmlands and alternative uses of tobacco (and its by-products)”. 

2. Blue Ocean High School Entrepreneur Pitch Competition

Date(s): 2/18/22 Type: Global 

The Blue Ocean High School Entrepreneur Pitch Competition is one of the world’s most prestigious business competitions for high school students. Participants can work alone or in teams of up to five to generate an innovative product or service that the world needs and pitch it in a maximum five-minute-long video. 

3. Youth Citizen Entrepreneurship Competition

Date(s): 4/1/22-9/15/22

Type: Global

Individuals between the ages of 13 and 29 are invited to participate in this business competition focused on using entrepreneurship to solve global issues. Participants are challenged to create or implement an idea, project, concept, solution, or initiative with a societal impact that addresses one of the United Nations’ 17 Sustainable Development Goals . 

4. Wharton Global High School Investment Competition

Dates: 9/22-4/23

The Wharton Global High School Investment Competition is a highly regarded business competition for high schoolers and is open to students in grades nine through 12. Participants are required to examine a case study of a potential client and create a portfolio that meets their long-term goals using $100,000 in hypothetical funds. Unlike investment competitions that select winners based on the performance of their portfolio, Wharton Global High School Investment Competition winners are chosen based on the strength and articulation of their investment strategy. 

5. Global Youth Entrepreneurship Challenge (GYEC)

Date(s): 5/28/21

The GYEC is a 12-hour, online, worldwide business competition for high school students ages 14 through 19. Participants work in teams of up to eight students—each ideally possessing broad and complementary skill sets—to solve a significant global problem using an innovative and sustainable enterprise idea. Winning teams will receive a trophy along with an award certificate.

6. GENIUS Olympiad Business 

Date(s): 4/18/22-6/18/22

Participants in the GENIUS Olympiad compete in numerous categories (including business) focused on environmental issues. Students can compete in one of two business tracks: entrepreneurship or social responsibility. Both tracks require the participant to deliver a presentation as if they were making a real pitch for funding—dressing in formal business attire and including an accompanying PowerPoint presentation.

7. Diamond Challenge   

Date(s): 1/7/21-4/23/22

Type: National 

This well-known high school business competition is an initiative of Horn Entrepreneurship

at the University of Delaware. The challenge features two tracks for participants to compete, business innovation and social innovation. Both tracks require participants to work in teams of two to four students, to submit a concept narrative, and provide a pitch deck. Diamond Challenge offers substantial awards to its winners—first place takes home $11,000, second place $7,500, and third place $3,750. 

8. Pirates Pitch Competition for High School Students  

Date(s): 9/22-11/22

This Pirates Pitch Competition for High School Students is provided by Seton Hall University and is aimed at teaching high schoolers the basics of entrepreneurship and idea generation. To enter the competition, participants must submit a business idea in 350 words or less. Finalists will need to pitch their idea to judges in a live virtual event. Competition winners receive both a cash prize and a generous scholarship to Seton Hall.

9. Yale DHSRI High School Investment Competition

Dates: 2/22-4/22

The Yale DHSRI High School Investment Competition is hosted by the Dwight Hall Socially Responsible Investment Fund at Yale University, the nation’s oldest undergraduate-run socially responsible investment fund. Competing in teams of two or four students, high schoolers (students in grades nine through 12 are eligible to participate) build a portfolio using $100,000 in virtual funds and ultimately submit a final investment report that outlines their strategy, learning process, and environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG) themes. 

10. DECA Challenges

Dates: Varies 

For three-quarters of a century, DECA has been helping to prepare future entrepreneurs and leaders in marketing, finance, and hospitality. DECA has more than 3,000 high school chapters and 175,000 members. Throughout the year, DECA issues many challenges to its members, many of which are business focused and require participants to demonstrate specific skills and knowledge.  

11. tecBRIDGE High School Business Plan Competition 

Dates: 3/18/22-4/21/22 

STEAM (science, technology, engineering, art, and math)-based business is at the heart of the tecBridge High School Business Plan Competition. Participants are expected to create sustainable and scalable concepts, answer a series of questions, and deliver a ten-minute-long presentation. Students are also expected to demonstrate creativity, critical thinking, and top-notch presentation skills.

12. The Big Idea Competition 

Date(s): 10/31/22-12/7/22

Young entrepreneurs are challenged to think of ways to make the world a better place to live by using business to implement change in this high school business competition. The competition is open to all high school students and requires them to submit a 1,075-word description of their business idea. Nearly $35,000 in prizes are awarded annually, including a $1,000 first prize. 

13. High School Utah Entrepreneur Challenge (HSUEC)

Date(s): 2/21/21-3/26/22

Type: State

Utah high school students ages 14 to 18 can show off their entrepreneurial spirit and innovative ideas in this business competition. Students are encouraged to form teams of up to five students to compete in the HSUEC and are required to submit a business proposal that details:

• the opportunity or problem the business/product addresses
• the solution or improvement the business/product provides
• the market the business/product competes in, its target customer, and what sets it apart from the competition 

Participants must also submit a prototype in any medium of what their idea, product, or service will look like. 

14. West Virginia High School Business Plan Competition 

Date(s): 11/12/22-4/6/22 

The West Virginia High School Business Plan Competition is open to West Virginia students in grades nine through 12. The competition is aimed at helping high schoolers learn how to move a business idea from conception to action. Participants can compete either as an individual or in teams of up to four people. Submissions to the contest are in the form of a maximum 90-second YouTube video that addresses three key points:

• the business product or service
• the problem or opportunity and why is it a problem or opportunity 
• the customer and how the product/service solves their problem

15. Wisconsin High School Business Model Competition

Date(s): 4/20/22 – 5/21/22 

This awesome business competition—open to high school sophomores, juniors, and seniors—is presented by the University of Wisconsin Oshkosh’s Alta Resources Center for Entrepreneurship and Innovation. Students can compete alone or in teams of up to three and are asked to present an idea or solution to a problem that could lead to a business. Finalists will need to deliver a four-minute-long pitch to a panel of judges. Prizes include cash awards as well as scholarships to UW Oshkosh.  

Business competitions can have varying levels of influence on your odds of getting accepted into college. Everything from the prestige of the competition to where you are placed to the value a college places on extracurricular activities like business competitions can impact the weight they’re given by an admissions office.

The four tiers of extracurricular activities are useful for better understanding how colleges consider your activities outside of the classroom. Top-tier activities (those in tiers one and two) include participation in the most well-thought-of and distinguished competitions. Winning or placing highly in a top-tier competition can significantly improve your admissions odds. Less prominent and lesser-known competitions fall into tiers three and four. Lower-tiered activities don’t hold the same sway over admissions offices and have less effect on admissions chances. 

Interested in learning how your participation in a business competition influences your odds of getting into your dream school? CollegeVine can help! Our free chancing calculator considers factors such as grades, test scores, and extracurriculars to estimate your odds of getting into hundreds of colleges and universities while also providing insight into how to improve your profile.

Related CollegeVine Blog Posts

Hudson Valley Students Make it to the Final Round of the New York State Business Plan Competition

May 8, 2024

A team of Hudson Valley students made it all the way to the second round of the New York Business Plan statewide finals on April 25.

Out of 140 teams competing in regional events throughout the state this spring, only 60 teams moved on to the statewide finals, and Hudson Valley’s team was the only one in the state competition’s final round from a SUNY community college.

The team - Ameera Aftab, Lukas Donaghue, Ryan Connors and Adam Conklin - presented the idea “Semester at Yours,” an online platform to help facilitate short-term furniture leasing for college students living off-campus. According to the team’s pitch, the Semester at Yours marketplace would foster a sustainable and affordable alternative to students just dumping their used furniture on the curb when their lease is up.

“Being the only community college, out of 60 teams, to make it to the state finals really showed me what was possible if the right support and help is given to students,” said Donaghue. “It also showed me how much space there is for community colleges to take in this competition. Out of 120 teams statewide who made it to the video stage of the state final, only three were community college teams.”

Aftab said the experience they were able to take away from the competition was invaluable.

“Being the only community college team in the state to make it to finals, we got to connect with college students from all over the state and Ivy League schools, too,” she said. “We also met with many mentors who have successful businesses all over the state and they shared their experiences with us.”

The team members are all part of Hudson Valley’s Entrepreneurs Club, which meets weekly with the goal of fostering pride and fellowship within the School of Business and throughout the college community, encouraging interest and activity in the fields of business and related areas.

Entrepreneurs Club advisors, Associate Professor Johanna Mather and Professor Danielle Blesi, said events such as the New York State Business Plan competition provide a great lesson in collaboration and gaining real world business experience.

“We live in a community that is a hub for education and innovation,” said Mather. “Students from all colleges have tremendous resources in the Capital Region, and it was a wonderful opportunity to bring all of these together for them. It was very important for students to see the resources and connections available to them in the Capital Region.”

“As educators, we are very fortunate to provide such an invaluable experience to our students and to all of those across the region,” said Blesi. “We are lucky to be supported by a community that encourages these aspiring entrepreneurs to set high standards and work toward their goals. We are also very grateful to all of the judges and members of our college community that supported the students and provided them with mentorship and a solid foundation for the future.”

For students interested in extracurricular experiences and opportunities such as the Business Plan Competition, Connors encourages them to take advantage of it.

“It’s an amazing opportunity,” said Connors. “Even if you don't feel like you know what you're doing, your idea and passion is enough. There are plenty of mentors out there to guide and assist you along the way and it gives real world experience and is an amazing networking opportunity.”

One other Hudson Valley team advanced out of the regional NYBP competition, which was held in Hudson Valley’s Bulmer Telecommunications Center, April 5. That team included students Austin Shulkin, Brooks Marcus and Ray Guiles.

“The Hudson Valley community is extremely proud of all of our students who created such unique and compelling business ideas for this competition” said President Roger Ramsammy. “Educational experiences and opportunities as such are truly difference makers in students’ educational journey.”

Media Contact

• MyUHart MyUHart Blackboard Self-Service Hawkmail Compass UNotes UHartHub
• Healthy Hawks
• Self-Service

Barney Business Plan Competition

The bi-annual business plan competition, run by the Barney School of Business in collaboration with other departments on campus, concluded with a Hartford Art School student earning the number one spot.

25 students between Barney, ENHP, HAS, and CETA presented their business plans on Friday, April 19. The following Friday, April 26, the award ceremony was held and three students left with a cash prize. Justin Stochel , a Visual Communication Design major in HAS, won first place by a landslide, with 53.5 out of 55 total possible points for his hot chocolate company, Hot Spell. Principles of Entrepreneurship (ENT 314), the class from which students participate in the competition, was Stochel’s first ever business class.

The second and third place winners were both Barney students. Ben Avital , a Business Analytics & Managerial Economics major, has already started his business, AirExterm (pest control), in real-life! Avital has graciously donated his winnings to the UHart’s Innovators Group club. Lastly, Hazel Hill , President of the Innovators Group, finished in third place for her business Satin Locks, a car accessory.

Judges for the competition included Barney Board of Visitors members, industry experts, campus partners, and faculty. Thank you to those who participated and congratulations to the winners!

New business plan competition prize highlights disability and environmental issues

As student teams plan, prepare, and perfect their original concepts for the Cornell Hospitality Business Plan Competition this year, they will have an extra incentive to design businesses that tackle specific social issues. The new $5,000 Stein Family Prize for Disability and Environmental Sustainability Solutions will be awarded to the team whose business concept best addresses disability issues and/or environmental sustainability concerns.

The inspiration for the Stein Family Prize came when Spencer Stein ’14 was diagnosed with a cavernous angioma (Cavernoma) that threatened to leave him paralyzed. The anomaly was discovered incidentally when Spencer had an MRI after a paragliding accident left him with minor compression fractures in his spine. Actually, Spencer fell 150 feet from the sky, and he considers the fall a gift as it caused him to find the dangerous Cavernoma that was an unknown serious risk to him since birth. Although his parents gave him tremendous support, they ultimately left the treatment decision up to him, and Spencer interviewed neurosurgeons around the country before deciding who would perform the procedure.

Once Spencer decided to undergo the surgery, he took time off from school to prepare physically, mentally, and spiritually as the surgery was considered to be so risky that some neurosurgeons refused to attempt it. During this time off, he did start to experience the pain and tingling that were telltale signs that the Cavernoma had become active. After a successful surgery in June 2011, Spencer spent several weeks recovering in an acute neuro-unit in Phoenix.

“In the hospital, I saw many other patients who had it worse than me, and that’s when I started to think about ADA [Americans with Disabilities Act] issues,” said Spencer. “While my surgical outcome enabled me to be able to walk, during my rehabilitation period, I learned firsthand the challenges of having a disability. From the hospitality standpoint, I could see so many things that could have been better for the patient, and I wanted to get the entire SHA student body thinking about how to improve things.”

Spencer’s interest in disability issues was furthered this summer during an internship at the San Diego Zoo. As part of the ADA team, he helped build a multisensory zoo experience for visually-impaired guests. Through that assignment, Spencer learned that creating programs that exceed—rather than simply meet—ADA regulations can make good business sense and attract a previously underserved customer base.

“As I developed the program, I had visually-impaired tourists join me for a walk around the zoo. I gave them a prototype of the accessibility tour that I had designed, and they gave comments that helped me improve the script that the zoo guides would be utilizing. The encounters with the visually-impaired guests taught me so many things about the experience from the guest perspective,” said Spencer. These lessons had a great impact on Spencer as he worked during his own recovery period when his activities were still quite limited.

Although it could take a long as two years before Spencer’s recovery is complete, he is already back at Cornell, doing well, and spreading the word about disability issues.

“We think the School of Hotel Administration should be raising awareness in this area, and the prize is a great place to start,” said Spencer. “The hotel company that implements innovative and thoughtful practices first will gain significant market share. The ADA rules should be a baseline, not the standard in a competitive market. The real prize will be gratitude to the prize winners from those with impairment. It is fun to be able to enable the competition so the Cornell student community can advance the hospitality industry,” said Spencer.

“We are excited and grateful for the support of the Stein family in offering this new prize, as we continue our efforts to build the Cornell Hospitality Business Plan Competition into a major event in the field of entrepreneurship,” added Dr. Susan Fleming, the faculty member overseeing the competition.

The Cornell Hospitality Business Plan Competition is organized by the Pillsbury Institute for Hospitality Entrepreneurship and provides an experiential learning opportunity for student entrepreneurs looking to make their mark on the hospitality industry. The year-long competition culminates in early spring with the submission of final business plans and group presentations. The winners are announced during Hotel Ezra Cornell in April.

Blackstone LaunchPad Student Start-Ups Place in the Finals of the 2024 New York Business Plan Competition

Two Syracuse University Libraries’ Blackstone LaunchPad (LaunchPad) student start-up teams placed in the finals of the New York Business Plan Competition (NYBPC) , powered by Upstate Capital, held in Albany on April 25.

Motolani Oladitan ’24 (College of Arts and Sciences), left, founder of Tá Beautie, and Natasha Brao ’22 (College of Visual and Performing Arts) G’23, G’24 (Whitman School of Management), founder of Shooka Sauce.

Natasha Brao ’22, (College of Visual and Performing Arts) G’23, G’24 (Whitman School of Management), founder of Shooka Sauce, won the 3 rd place prize of $1,000 in the food and agriculture track. Shooka Sauce is a Mediterranean-spiced tomato sauce based on the dish Shakshuka, inspired by mixing and melding cultural flavors to promote creative cooking.

Motolani Oladitan ’24 (College of Arts and Sciences), founder of Tá Beautie, was awarded the Concept Stage Award of $500 in the software and services track. Tá Beautie is a virtual marketplace connecting African beauty and wellness brands with the diaspora, making it easier for consumers to discover and purchase high-quality, authentic African products.

Five Launchpad student start-up teams attended the 2024 New York Business Plan Competition. Other student teams to reach the finals include Frank Marin ’24 (Marhold Space Systems), Adya Parida ’25 (Scale Sense), and Dylan Bardsley ’26 and Mark Leaf ’27 (Clarity).

The NYBPC attracts some of New York state’s best student entrepreneurs. The competition promotes entrepreneurial opportunities for college students from across the state to pitch their business plans to seasoned investors. They also receive the opportunity to engage with mentors and judges from the business community. The finals event connects students with business professionals, provides experiential learning opportunities through competitions, connects entrepreneurs with resources at the Entrepreneurship Expo and awards up to $100,000 in cash prizes to help seed new ventures.

Cristina Hatem

• Wasserstrom Prize for Graduate Teaching Presented to Physics Professor Christian Santangelo Monday, May 13, 2024, By Caroline K. Reff
• Sei Whale Death Sparks Conversations About Ecology, Marine Safety Friday, May 10, 2024, By Daryl Lovell
• Graduate Aims to Bring Visibility to Indigenous Community Through Fashion Friday, May 10, 2024, By Kelly Homan Rodoski
• Student Leaders Leondra Tyler ’24 and Omnia Shedid L’24 Make Their Mark on Campus, Plan for the Future (Podcast) Friday, May 10, 2024, By John Boccacino
• 5 Questions for Commencement Speaker Dario Nardella, Mayor of Florence, Italy Thursday, May 9, 2024, By News Staff

More In Campus & Community

2024 commencement in photos.

Congratulations graduates! The accomplishments of the Class of 2024 were celebrated by students, faculty, staff and families as the University held its annual Commencement ceremony in the JMA Wireless Dome on Sunday, May 12. These photos capture some of the…

Student Speaker Yvonne Chen-Yih Kuo ’24: ‘Be the Generation That Pushes Time Forward’ (Video)

As the student speaker for Commencement 2024, University Scholar Yvonne Chen-Yih Kuo ’24 asked her fellow graduates to reflect on their academic and interpersonal growth during their time at Syracuse. “Four years ago, COVID abruptly reshaped how we interacted with…

‘Your Moment Is Now!’ Commencement Speaker Dario Nardella Encourages Class of 2024 to ‘Never Stop Pursuing Knowledge’ (Video)

As Florence Mayor Dario Nardella delivered the keynote speech to Syracuse University’s Class of 2024 Sunday morning, he referenced the selfless actions of the thousands of international students who helped save his city’s cultural heritage when a deadly flood swept…

Chancellor Syverud Addresses Graduates at Commencement Ceremony (Video)

Syracuse University Chancellor and President Kent Syverud had words of praise—and  pride—for the graduates during the University’s Commencement ceremony on May 12. “Each of you graduating today got here because of your own hard work. Each of you got here…

Wasserstrom Prize for Graduate Teaching Presented to Physics Professor Christian Santangelo

Christian Santangelo, professor and director of graduate studies in the physics department in the College of Arts and Sciences (A&S) and member of the BioInspired Institute, is the 2024 recipient of the William Wasserstrom Prize in recognition of his exemplary…

Subscribe to SU Today

If you need help with your subscription, contact [email protected] .

Connect With Us

For the media.

Students’ Business Wins Grand Prize in Statewide Competition

by Meg Keniston

May 7, 2024

Research and Discovery

Since then, Sangree and Wexler have teamed up and combined their respective science and business acumen to revolutionize the future of clean water. Their business, Eutrobac LLC, recently earned the grand prize out of 340 student teams and $27,500 in prize money at the 2024 New York Business Plan Competition.

Neutralizing Nitrogen's Impact on Lakes and Ponds 

According to the Eutrobac co-founders, nitrogen pollutes more than 50% of the water in the U.S. Much of that nitrogen comes from fertilizer use, which is necessary to feed the growing global population.

“The Green Revolution enabled us to feed way more people than we ever could before, and we needed a lot of nitrogen to do that,” Sangree says. “This is just a result of feeding more people and producing more food. Without it, we wouldn’t be able to eat.”

But when nitrogen reaches bodies of water like lakes and ponds, it has dire effects through a process called eutrophication, which involves nutrients accumulating in a body of water, causing increased growth of microorganisms – such as algal blooms – that deplete the water of oxygen.

“[Eutrophication] contaminates drinking water, ruins ecosystems, and spoils recreational water for swimmers,” Wexler explains. According to the National Institutes of Health, too much nitrogen in drinking water can cause cancer, congenital disabilities, or other adverse health effects both in humans and livestock.

Most systems for removing nitrogen from water are costly. Sangree knew there had to be a sustainable and cost-effective way to help curtail this problem. In a story featured in the Spring 2022 issue of Hamilton magazine , Sangree, an environmental studies major, described her initial vision for her contraption — a solar-powered, floating treatment wetland system made from recycled materials that was smaller and cheaper than anything currently available.

“The idea behind the floating bed that I’ve designed and built is that within the bed, I’m creating conditions that encourage the growth of the bacteria associated with turning this fertilizer pollution into a less harmful form,” she said during the 2021 interview.

During the summer of 2022, the device finally worked.

Eutrobac’s Green Dream Team

Sangree originally planned to find an interested investor or company and sell her technology. After reading about Sangree’s work in the Hamilton magazine, Reed Pugh ’86 contacted her and got her thinking that this might be a viable business venture for her to pursue. Wexler, who has had a knack for identifying great business opportunities since he was a kid, saw the same potential.

“I told her that she could try to sell this technology that isn’t developed yet but has incredible potential, or she could spend a few years developing it herself, which would be more exciting. And she agreed,” Wexler says. 

Sangree knew Wexler, an interdisciplinary studies major focused on rhetoric, had plenty of business experience. He spent his gap year as a founding team member of a now multimillion-dollar company, Bond Sports. Together, Sangree and Wexler devised the name of the company – Eutrobac, inspired by the process they are working to eliminate – and the device, NutriFilter™. Since then, they have secured the IP, facilitated hundreds of customer discovery interviews to gain a deeper understanding of the different industries that might be interested in the technology, conducted additional market research, and filed an application for a utility patent, which is pending.

“Jesse and I work really well together,” Sangree says. “I take care of the science side, whereas Jesse is the business powerhouse. At this stage, it’s been figuring out the science and then the business strategy side by side.”

The Helpful Hamilton Network

One of the most critical milestones in getting Eutrobac and the NutriFilter™ ready for prime time came when Sangree least expected it: attending a Common Ground event on campus.

“It was about a week before I would have lost my claim to the technology, as I had publicly disclosed it at a conference a year prior, and I was losing hope that we could patent it in time,” Sangree explains. “Stu Ingis [‘93] just happened to be moderating the event, and after he introduced himself as someone who owned a patent law firm and cared about the environment, I approached him, introduced myself, and gave him a little elevator pitch. He agreed to get one of his patent attorneys to handle our case right there on the spot. It was really a miraculous thing. That was a financial barrier that would’ve been impossible for us.”

Ingis is one of many Hamiltonians — from professors and mentors to alumni and staff — whom Wexler and Sangree credit with helping them get Eutrobac off the ground. When Sangree first mentioned the idea for her research to Assistant Professor of Environmental Studies Aaron Strong , he ensured she could bring her idea to life with help from retired Professor of Geosciences Todd Rayne and Professor of Biology Mike McCormick, who also played integral roles.

Sangree found support for her research from all corners of College Hill. Grounds & Fleet Operations Manager Mike Jasper, a member of the Facilities Management team, helped Sangree move items and get the appropriate permissions needed to set up her experiments and anchor the prototype in a College-owned reservoir about two miles from campus. “We couldn’t have done this without him and his support,” Wexler says. 

Director of Outdoor Leadership Andrew Jillings procured materials for Sangree and gave her a kayak to use. At the same time, Science Technician Tom Freeland, Machinist Technician Walt Zarnoch, and Sciences Instrumentation Technician Bruce Wegter helped her build much of the technology. 

As Sangree and Wexler continued developing their business, another supportive Hamilton graduate they connected with during this venture, entrepreneur Martin Casstevens ’80, encouraged them to enter the annual New York Business Plan Competition, which promotes entrepreneurial opportunities for college students who pitch business plans to seasoned investors. 

A Big Win at the New York Business Plan Competition

The duo faced stiff competition as they made their way through the four rounds of the competition, which included 340 student teams comprised of more than 770 students from 58 colleges and universities across the state. When Eutrobac won the grand prize at the Mohawk Valley region semifinal in early April, it automatically earned Wexler and Sangree a spot in the statewide competition. Following each business’ pitch and presentation, Eutrobac was first announced as the winner and concept stage award recipient in the Safety, Power & Mobility category before being selected as the overall grand prize winner for the competition.  

“Our competition was tough,” Wexler says, noting “really impressive” rival pitches such as technology that can deliver vaccinations without needle intrusion and recruiting software that uses AI to help companies hire new employees. “I believe we won because what Ellie invented is really impressive and incredible and because we were able to articulate our competency on the subject with clarity.” 

“I was very impressed by the other teams,” Sangree adds. “It was cool to see research from other colleges resulting in all of these new technologies and businesses.”

Sangree and Wexler won $27,500 in total prize money between the four rounds, which will help bolster the startup’s growth. The competition will also connect them with mentors and industry leaders throughout the ecosystem of innovators from the Upstate Capital Association of New York, the event’s sponsoring organization. 

What’s Next for Eutrobac?

It will be a busy summer for Eutrobac. “We have a series of paid pilot studies to continue testing the technology in industry this summer, including one at the Brooklyn Botanical Garden,” Wexler says. “We’re also collaborating with Hamilton students, and a few will intern with our company this summer. At the [Garden], the interns will take the water samples and analyze the data.”

In the fall, Sangree will attend the University of California-Santa Cruz as a Ph.D. candidate in their biogeochemistry program and continue working on Eutrobac and the NutriFilter™. Wexler plans to focus full-time on the company to achieve scaled distribution by 2026.

Sangree and Wexler are eager to connect with any Hamilton students or alumni interested in learning more about internships or other opportunities. Get in touch by emailing [email protected] .

More Hamilton Stories

Wexler ’24 Examines Hate Speech Through Emerson Project 

Language gives us the tools to approach and understand the world. It gives meaning to objects and facilitates interactions among people. In fact, as you’re reading this now, it is language that transforms these strange black lines into a story.

Toward a Sustainable Future 

Ellie Sangree ’24 arrived for her first semester at Hamilton equipped with more than the usual college essentials; she came with a concept for an experiment. It involved eutrophication, which is when excessive nutrients, often from agricultural chemicals, taint a body of water. It’s a major cause of pollution in freshwater and marine ecosystems.

Help us provide an accessible education, offer innovative resources and programs, and foster intellectual exploration.

Site Search

• Starting a Business
• Growing a Business
• Small Business Guide
• Business News
• Science & Technology
• Money & Finance
• For Subscribers
• Write for Entrepreneur
• Entrepreneur Store
• United States
• Asia Pacific
• Middle East
• South Africa

Copyright © 2024 Entrepreneur Media, LLC All rights reserved. Entrepreneur® and its related marks are registered trademarks of Entrepreneur Media LLC

5 Ways to Get Ahead of Your Competition by Making a Lasting Impression on Your Clients No matter what kind of entrepreneur you are, no matter what kind of business you have, there are likely lots (and lots) of others who do the same thing you do. That's why it's so important to differentiate yourself from your competition in any and all ways that you can.

By Emily Reynolds Bergh • May 13, 2024

Key Takeaways

• Part of making a meaningful impression on your clients is consciously putting your best face forward every day, in every way.

Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.

I'm in the public relations space, and as of last count, there are more than 48,000 other PR firms in the United States. A large fraction of these compete with my agency in the five hub cities where I operate. Yet mine consistently ranks among the highest in those cities — Nashville, for example.

Is it because I know my industry better than my competitors? Because I land more placements for my clients? Because my team is more talented or my network of connections more expansive? As much as I'd like to think that I'm running with the front of the pack based solely on the quality of my services and the effectiveness of my methodologies, it's far more likely that I earn rave reviews and generate referrals from my clients due to two words: personalized attention.

More specifically, my team and I go well above and beyond to create an exceptional customer experience at my firm because I've learned over the years of running my own business that it's the client's impression of you that matters most — that's what informs all other aspects of customer relations, drives all other client decisions and determines if they'll stay with you or not (even more so than short-term results).

Even in the digital age we all inhabit, with so many automated tasks and productivity tools that populate our workplaces, personalizing the professional is a surefire means to client retention and satisfaction. Here are five practices I regularly follow to make the most positive impression on my clients I possibly can.

1. Get a copy of your client's org chart

When you understand the structure of your client's business, you understand who does what, who reports to whom, and, in turn, you know who to go to for what. Not only is this an immense time-saver — as in not filling people's inboxes unnecessarily with work that doesn't pertain to them — but your clients will also appreciate that you did your homework on their staffing.

It's so much more impressive to send a note that says, "Would your team like to see this before we send it up to Jeremy?" or "I believe Bettina has the final sign-off here" than "Are you the right person to contact about this?" And note the use of actual names here — learning the first names of everyone you'll be working with moves you into first place faster than you'd think!

Related: 4 Ways to Make the Best First Impression With Your Customers

2. Use proper grammar and punctuation

Make sure that all your communications to your client — and, far more importantly, all the communications you prepare on their behalf — are written properly . Yes, it takes some extra work to eliminate errors. Still, it's absolutely worth the effort when you consider how much just one typo can mar an entire project (ever seen "pubic" instead of "public"?) and how poorly faulty grammar can reflect on quality output, education level and attracting the intended audience.

Though it may be true that language standards are slipping in America, that doesn't mean nobody's noticing the shoddy quality of copy. Some people still notice and care. If your client is one of them, you'll earn bonus points by knowing the difference between "compliment" and "complement" by not allowing both "San Antonio Riverwalk" and "San Antonio River Walk" in the same publication. Use your grammar checker. Always do a spell-check. Re-read everything you produce. And if you don't have a language maven on staff to serve as your in-house proofreader, hire an affordable freelancer who can provide quick turnaround times.

3. Choose video over audio

Whenever possible, schedule video calls and videoconference meetings over phone calls and phone meetings. The day and age of in-person meetings is quickly becoming obsolete. Still, there will never be a replacement for face-to-face interaction , eye contact, observing facial expressions and showing your client with every head nod and eyebrow raise that you're following what they're saying and closely attending to your conversation.

During the pandemic, cultivating one-on-one relationships over Zoom and Teams became the new norm, and most people are entirely fine leaving it that way! Interacting over a screen instead of a conference table is just more convenient, time-effective and environmentally friendly. Nevertheless, we can't afford to lose the "one-on-one interaction" part of business relationships. Remember the old Bell advertising slogan? Well, video is the modern-day equivalent of "the next best thing to being there," so leverage your camera as often as possible to "see" your clients, not just talk to them.

4. Mark your calendar!

Notate birthdays, business anniversaries, baby due dates. Keep a record of your client's big meetings and conference attendance . On those days, send a person-to-person text or email. And the more specific, the better, such as "Hope your coffee product presentation in Jersey went well and the traffic wasn't too bad on the Parkway!" Or "Congrats on baby Elliot. That was my grandfather's name, and I hope it serves your brand-new son as well as it did him."

By incorporating the personal into the professional, which is a pillar of my own approach at my company , clients value your role more because you've actively endeavored to become part of their lives, not just an appendage of their business. In other words, when you add personal touches to your communications and conversations, your clients can't help but think of you on a more human level rather than just a professional contact with whom they can easily cut ties.

Related: 6 Strategies for Making a Good First Impression During Business Meetings

5. Observe the line between personal and professional, but use both — often

On a related but separate note: As much as I'm saying to weave personal connections into your daily dealings with your clients, you never, ever want to go too far. You can use humor, but not off-color humor. You can show vulnerability, but you don't want to appear weak or indecisive. You can ask questions and admit what you don't know, but be strategic (not lazy) about trying to resolve issues yourself before coming to your clients with them. And be yourself, absolutely always be genuinely yourself, but don't expose so much that you cross the line into overintimacy or inappropriate divulgence.

By speckling your client interactions with individual touches as you simultaneously maintain proper decorum, you will put a personal face on your business name. And that name will leave more of a mark on your customers precisely because of your adept balancing act between the personal and the professional.

Part of making a meaningful impression on your clients is consciously putting your best face forward every day, in every way. Don't let them see a messy office behind you on Zoom, but let them vent about their kid's tonsillitis for 10 minutes if needed. Don't bad-mouth other clients or finger-point when things go wrong, but get to know them well enough that you'd love to grab a drink next time you're in town.

Take every opportunity you can to show your clients — and then remind them often — that "business as usual" to you means being prepared (as in learning an org chart), producing quality output (that's been proofed), scheduling face-to-face encounters, observing special occasions in their lives and sharing your authentic self, who happens to be a multifaceted, wonderful human being with flaws who's also an utter professional and a real pro at what you do!

Entrepreneur Leadership Network® Contributor

Founder at R Public Relations Firm

Want to be an Entrepreneur Leadership Network contributor? Apply now to join.

Editor's Pick Red Arrow

• This Mother and Daughter Were 'Kind of Fringe Weirdos' When They Started an Uncommon Business in Their Garage. Now They're in Major Retailers — and Victoria Beckham Is a Fan.
• Lock A Leadership Shortage Is Coming. Here's What Needs to Happen to Prevent It.
• Lock The Author of 'Million Dollar Weekend' Says This Is the Only Difference Between You and the Many 'Very, Very Dumb People' Making a Lot of Money
• What the NLRB Appeal of the Expanded Joint Employer Rule Judgment Means for Your Business
• Lock 12 Books That Self-Made Millionaires Swear By
• The Sweet Side Hustle She Started in an Old CVS Made $800,000 in One Year. Now She's Repeating the Success With Her Daughter — and They've Already Exceeded 8 Figures.

Most Popular Red Arrow

This new under-the-radar regulation will impact most businesses. here's what you need to know..

There's a new requirement for many U.S.-based businesses that went into effect starting earlier this year. These are the things you need to know about the Corporate Transparency Act.

Communicate Your Business Data Better with This $20 Deal Through May 22

Microsoft Visio 2021 Professional features a wide range of shapes and tools to help businesses diagram better.

63 Small Business Ideas to Start in 2024

We put together a list of the best, most profitable small business ideas for entrepreneurs to pursue in 2024.

Keep Learning with Rosetta Stone and More During Limited-Time Price Drop

Open up a world of business opportunities with a new language and other growth courses.

7 Tips for Empowering Mothers in the Workplace

Moms make up an important and large segment of the workforce, yet too often have been overlooked in the development of company culture. In this article, we explore seven ways that companies can empower mothers in the workplace, through the lens of my own experience as a mom and CEO.

Protect Your Business Computer From Hackers and Trackers with This $70 VPN Deal

Windscribe VPN supports unlimited devices, a global VPN network, and more.

Successfully copied link