You’re manufacturing a false dichotomy here. There’s no contradiction between founders being compassionate and calm (in the sense of level-headed) and also being passionate and innovative. In those small companies where I worked, the work was anything but tedious, and there was no lack of risk. But exponential growth wasn’t the goal, making good products in a sustainable fashion was the goal.
I will back up here a bit as my first claim came off as a bit confrontational. However, I find it a bit unrealistic to expect an environment where you have founders that are very compassionate and calm. The very nature of building a business is a maddening task. Which is something we seem to forget.
Most level-headed people would never do it. The very idea of starting something that has a very minimal chance of success isn’t rational. Therefore I do find the traits you describe at somewhat of a contradiction.
Many of the most known innovators and leaders are often described as intense, driven, and even obsessive. Their willingness to defy convention, take significant risks and challenge the status-quo can be seen as crazy.
I suppose I’ve seen the other side of this coin, in small companies where everything is ”too much of a risk” if it cannot generate a good cash flow within a few months. This is a very level-headed approach. I’ve also seen them miss some great opportunities because of it. Nevertheless, they are still operating and probably will be for a long time. However, I'm uncertain that they have enough energy and will power to "change" the world.
Now, I'm not saying that a small company with calm level-headed leaders are a bad thing. But I don’t believe that there aren’t trade-offs. Both have their pros and cons.
