Honestly, I feel you're making a much larger abstraction than what exists in reality (or maybe what SHOULD exist). Not to say that the abstraction doesn't exis

Honestly, I feel you're making a much larger abstraction than what exists in reality (or maybe what SHOULD exist). Not to say that the abstraction doesn't exist, just that you're a bit too far in the othering-realm for my tastes. There's definitely a middle ground in there where the semantic difference between entrepreneur and architect doesn't exist - where good work and good ideas "are", regardless of how far you swing on that spectrum. I agree that the distinction between the two types of individual is necessary, but an over-use of it is an easy way to lose out in the long run. The question about what you did to stop a failing project is an odd one and probably completely ineffective. If that's the reason they didn't hire you, take it as a good thing. There's too much nuance for it to be considered useful without other considerations. My recent situation was that I pushed too hard to stop a failing project and was socially cast out. By the time the senior staff noticed that my suggestions actually made sense and weren't batshit extreme, the social dynamic was too much and I left. On your last point, I'm not sure that would be a useful question, either. It's so incredibly for a linux lead to say, "Our infrastructure security has no technical debt", for example. It's easy to say, but impossible to prove without being at the company for a while, even for an in-the-mud admin. Hell, that's what happened at the place I just left.