A well-known venture capital partner discusses the psychological traits needed by founders. Have you also fallen into the trap of identity labeling?

Recently, YettaS, a partner at the well-known investment firm Primitive Ventures, shared an article titled "Founder Observation Record: The Cost of Identity" on Twitter. The article starts with identity labels and discussion issues, exploring the psychological traits that good founders typically possess. Over the past year, Primitive Ventures has invested in 14 projects.

The issue of identity binding inevitably leads to hostility and division.

He indicated that there are always some self-introduction labels that are most commonly mentioned in the industry, such as: "I am one of the earliest people in this industry", "I come from a pure technical background", "I am a believer in this track", "I graduated from Ivy League", etc. Although this information seems to be just background information, it unknowingly becomes an anchor point for some people's sense of value, and even a part of their identity.

Changing the subject, he mentioned that in today's society, the discussions that are most likely to spiral out of control often revolve around a few themes: gender, politics, and religion. Once a topic is raised, rational dialogue quickly devolves into hostility and division. This is not because these issues cannot be discussed, but because they are highly tied to individual identity. Once a certain stance becomes part of "who I am," the discussion turns into a trigger for self-defense mechanisms. Thus, arguments turn into defenses, logic gives way to emotion, and correction becomes a threat.

In contrast, discussions about whether the model algorithms of DeepSeek are better or whether the pretraining strategies are more advanced, although they can also spark intense debates, usually remain at the level of "technical correctness." This is because everyone assumes that these issues can be verified, updated, or overturned, and it becomes a debate centered around facts and logic. Views can be falsified, and therefore can be corrected; whereas the self cannot be falsified, making it difficult to touch.

This psychological mechanism is particularly crucial in entrepreneurship. Whether an excellent founder can quickly adjust their direction in the face of market feedback and failure, without viewing these adjustments as a denial of their self-worth, is often a decisive factor in whether they can navigate through cycles and break through bottlenecks. He classifies this psychological trait as Low Ego ( low sense of self ).

When you are questioned "Weren't you a staunch supporter of XX back then? How come you have changed now?" do you feel ashamed? Are you brave enough to look back at your own dark historical comments from a few years ago? Can you calmly end a relationship that has become ineffective without denying your initial judgment? Can you accept the version of yourself that was once "not smart enough, not mature enough"?

Four key psychological traits build a strong psychological core

In his long-term observations of entrepreneurs, he found that truly outstanding entrepreneurs often do not stand out due to a specific talent or skill, but rather exhibit an internal psychological structure of integrity and stability when facing uncertainty, conflict, and volatility. This structure is not reflected in explicit labels or resumes, but is a deep order that runs through each of their choices and responses.

Summarize four particularly critical psychological traits that constitute the strong and flexible core of the founder:

Low Ego — Low Sense of Self

High Agency — High Autonomy

Natural Curiosity — Strong Curiosity

Strong Execution — High Execution Capability

A type of founder that Primitive Ventures greatly admires: they have a strong sense of direction and are not constrained by self-labeling; they can maintain their beliefs while being flexible in their adjustments; they possess high self-esteem without having an obsessive arrogance. This sounds like an idealized persona, but behind it lies a very clear psychological structure: Low Ego. They have a very clear yet relaxed understanding of "who they are." They defend their viewpoints rather than defending themselves.

The entrepreneurs they want to support are people who can defend their opinions, not themselves. In the process of communicating with the founder, not only listening to his vision and resume, but also repeatedly digging into a core question, how he defines himself. Technical routes, industry labels, personal backgrounds, these elements are understandable in themselves, but once they are regarded as part of the "identity" by the founders, it is easy to form cognitive path dependence, they no longer judge right or wrong, but only defend the "I am such a person". Once the belief is challenged, it's more about defending "I'm right."

Still emphasizing past achievements? Justifying failures? You may have fallen into an ego-driven decision-making pattern.

Yetta stated that they would deliberately observe the following dimensions to determine whether the founders are prone to making ego-driven decisions:

Is there frequent emphasis on past achievements, especially the repeated mention of early accolades?

Do you frequently name-drop or appeal to labels in conversations, such as: we are friends with XX?

Are you prone to interrupting, eager to maintain your position rather than deeply understanding the essence of the issue?

Are you inclined to rationalize failures after the fact, avoiding the admission of your own judgment errors?

Is there a single authority dominating among the team, without healthy tension to challenge each other?

Once ego takes over, the founder's perception becomes inflexible. In the highly populist and transparent market of blockchain, this rigidity is particularly fatal. I have seen too many founders with beautiful products and smooth financing, yet they are unable to truly unite the community. At the root of this issue is that the founder has already set a position for themselves; they are unable to open up externally and will not relinquish internally.

There are also founders whose backgrounds are not fancy and whose products are not perfect, but the community is willing to give them time, patience and trust because they feel a sense of community from the founders, who is not teaching you how to think, but inviting you to think together. These differences seem to be due to different ways of communicating, but in fact they are different in deeper founder self-identity.

When a founder internalizes labels such as "I come from a technical background", "I am an ideologue", "I have an elite educational background", and "I am contributing to the industry" as part of their identity, it becomes difficult for them to truly listen to feedback and empathize with the community. Because in their subconscious, any questioning of the product direction is seen as a denial of "who they are".

The behavior of emphasizing labels stems from deep-seated fears.

Yetta further points out that he believes these self-labels stem from deep fears. Labels are supposed to be communication tools that allow others to quickly identify your location, profession, background, or value proposition. It is a social symbol system that is easy to categorize and spread. But for many, labels are increasingly alienated as pillars for constructing their inner selves. Behind this lies a deep fear of "self-collapse".

In the past, a person's identity was structured and deterministic. Who you are depended on where you came from, what you believed in, and what profession you engaged in. This information constituted a solid social order and a source of self-identity. However, today, with the decentralization of geography, profession, and values, individuals must actively "construct who they are." Thus, labels have become the most convenient substitute, providing a psychological illusion that appears quite certain.

All you need to say is, "I am a tech geek," "I am a libertarian," or "I graduated from a certain university," and you can quickly gain others' understanding, recognition, and even admiration. This instant feedback of recognition acts like dopamine, reinforcing people's reliance on labels. Over time, labels become not just tools, but substitutes for the self.

Thus, the more a person lacks internal order and stable structure, the more likely they are to treat labels as psychological supports. They may repeatedly emphasize statements that sound like experiential narratives, such as the phrases I mentioned at the beginning; the true function of these words is not to communicate information, but rather to serve as dependencies for constructing their sense of self and as anchor points for their sense of existence.

They constantly emphasize their certain identity positioning, relentlessly defending their existing stances, refusing to revise their perceptions, not because they truly believe in a certain viewpoint, but because once the labels waver, the entire illusion of "self" will collapse. They are not protecting the facts; they are protecting the "self" that is pieced together by external evaluations.

So Dovey (, founder of Primitive Ventures, said: "The hardest people to communicate with in the world are not those without culture. They are those who have been indoctrinated with standard answers and think the world revolves around them."

The best founders often exhibit a very low attachment to status.

Freedom of thought begins with detachment from identity. The most outstanding founders often exhibit a very low attachment to identity. This does not mean they lack a sense of self, but rather they possess a highly integrated and stable sense of internal order. Their self-identity does not rely on external attachments such as "prestigious school background," "celebrity investor endorsement," or "certain industry labels," but is rooted in an internal capability structure: insight into the world, psychological resilience in the face of uncertainty, and the ability to continuously adjust their own models in a dynamic environment. They do not anchor their self-worth to positions, viewpoints, or role labels.

On the contrary, the stronger the sense of identity, the easier it is for thoughts to be confined. When you fear "overthrowing your past self," you begin to build cognitive walls and limitations. You become more concerned with how others evaluate your "consistency" rather than whether your judgment today is correct. Thus, you start to find reasons for your old viewpoints instead of searching for solutions to reality. This is the most dangerous blind spot in strategic judgment.

Next, Yetta stated that true cognitive evolution begins with the acknowledgment that "I am not the words I have spoken in the past." An individual with free thought does not need to say, "I am type X but also understand Y," but rather completely relinquishes the psychological dependency of "I must be type X." They can change without anxiety and update without fear.

Only when you no longer rely on labels to stabilize your self-identity, and truly have an inner sense of control over "who you are," can you loosen your attachments, detach from roles, and enter a space of free thinking. Perhaps this is the starting point of what Buddhism refers to as "non-self": not the dissolution of existence, but allowing cognition and action to no longer be hijacked by the self.

This article discusses the psychological traits that founders need, as shared by a well-known venture capital partner. Have you also fallen into the trap of identity labeling? It first appeared in Chain News ABMedia.