According the empiricists, science is based on experience and observation, the only means humans have to access real knowledge. Companies often find themselves operating in uncertain, fast-moving and unpredictable environments, where experimental and discovery-driven approaches may result beneficial for both established companies and startups. Experimentation and hypotheses falsification can play a key role in validating and legitimizing business model choices and shifts by aiding executives and entrepreneurs in selecting the most suitable strategic alternatives to pursue and reducing uncertainty related to decision-making. The learning school of strategy and the adaptive approach have extended and built on the argument supporting the adoption of an approach based on learning, testing and the use of empirical data to reduce uncertainty in decision-making. An increasing number of scholars have since been igniting the discourse on the role of scientific methods in entrepreneurship and strategy-making although often lacking comprehensiveness in analyzing and including approaches and methods that are actually employed in entrepreneurial and corporate practices. This study aims at addressing the similarities and differences between different experimental approaches undertaken by startups and established companies in dealing with uncertainty, often connected to renewal processes or the launch of new products and services. By means of a critical discussion, we provide conceptual considerations about the different experimental approaches and their relationship with the scientific method
