2.4 Key conclusion
This paper key conclusion, the author
clearly to state that the main objective of this research, and the result of
the key findings, but he should state the limitation of the research on his
conclusion. And the author are clearly state what he want to do in the further
This paper is hardly to understand, I think this paper is for the professionals to read because in this paper author use many term of rationality which is hardly for average people to understand. The author always writes in the first person, which make the opinions seems subjective. Also, I think the arguments of the author is not enough to support his conclusion or maybe he can use more literature to support his assumption and conclusion. 4. Research impact and practical implicationsThe research impact of this research is the using the practical wisdom approach as a lens to viewing the interactions, there are raised a number of question between the entrepreneur and the stakeholder. And begin to open the important exploration question is “what does it mean to be a good entrepreneur?” in this important question, practical wisdom approach may be a good lens to viewing or examining the entrepreneurship. And can remind the research that the rationality approach may be not the only one approach that can be used to explain or exam the entrepreneurial behavior, practical wisdom can be the choice. In this paper, I found that the entrepreneur which a using the practical wisdom approach are always pay more attention on the stakeholder wealth than the personal benefit, I think it is the good ways of entrepreneur to not just focused on the finance benefit, because some entrepreneur want to get more finance benefit they will Ignore moral, so if we can educate the entrepreneur to view the entrepreneurial decision making throught the lens of practical wisdom, they may can found out what are their vision of good life to improve their entrepreneurship. 5. Bibliography/structure/logical argumentFrist, talk about the bibliography, in this paper is often use the literature which is written by Opp, all the assumption is basis on his literature, I thought that the author should review more literature to find out is the other literature also support Opp’s review or not. Second, the author can improve his paper’s structure, all the section should be coincide, for example in the page 517, the table of the summary of the rational actor model is above the argue of utility maximization proposition, the summary should present after the argue of those proposition. Also, the author should discuss the part of practical wisdom before doing the summary (P.521).Finally, the logical argument, the author should use more literature to support hit view and his assumption, if not, the argument will lost it reliability.