Abstract
The present paper re-analyzes and extends a study on institutional forces and the written business plan (Honig and Karlsson in J Manag 30(1):29–48, 2004). We attempt to examine to what extent critical decision making is evident in model and variable choice, and whether the implications provided by systematic replication efforts may serve to provide additional and perhaps unrecognized theoretical and/or empirical observations. We find that the key result—formal business planning does not affect performance, does not hold. In fact, we find evidence that formal business planning affects survival but not profitability. The re-analysis also reveals, that institutional antecedents to formal planning appear to be fragile and prone to researcher biases due to different coding and assumptions. Our study underscores the consequences of access to original data and coding material, and to rely upon current methodological explanations for subsequent analyses.