In complexity and evolution, heterogeneity is an asset. The more the relevant elements of variation present(requisite variety ) in a system, the more resilient and evolvable a system will become.
Despite that, most entrepreneurship models are proposed as solutions for the problems of the existing one. It is often pitched as better that the previous one, Eg. Plan Vs Lean startup, effectuation Vs causation, Theory based view vs Lean.
Using the antecedent as a frame to marginally improve the existing approach is also the standard practice.
While this is the reality, studies have shown that real entrepreneurs don’t behave according to the dictums of any prescriptive models. Fisher (2012) for example investigated behavior underlying the venture founding process using effectuation, bricolage, and causation has found that entrepreneurs often use elements of all the 3 theoretical models, and that there were no cases in which only the behaviors associated with causation were responsible for the development of the venture.
Mansoori and Lackéus(2019) in their analysis stressed the possibility of using multiple methods complimenting each other, which is a standard practice in weather prediction(ensemble models).
Sarasvathy’s(2001) also asserted the point that both causation and effectuation are integral parts of human reasoning that can occur simultaneously, overlapping and intertwining over different contexts of decisions and actions” (p. 245).
I contend that real world decision in a complex adaptive system cannot be understood with linear thinking or binaries. Since it is impossible to know various emergent decision contexts before hand, it is always ideal to design solutions for such variables and contingencies. That means not excluding ideas, models and theories, etc., by prescription or omission.