Isn't conformity sometimes appropriate? It seems to me that the trick is knowing when to follow the rules (including your own) and when to bend or break them.
Constantly railing against conformity sounds like a teenager attempting to be "edgy".
Constantly railing against conformity sounds like a teenager attempting to be "edgy".
You'll never get that from a conformist, because (in my experience) they are too afraid of failing to start something. They spend too much time analyzing risk and not enough time acting if left to their own devices.
Conversely, someone who is too much of a risk taker spends too little time analyzing the risks of an action.
The sweet spot is right down the middle, and is extremely rare.
This is a pat phrase that means nothing. If you assume there are extremes on either side of a desired trait you can say it's in the middle, but it's not a useful criteria.
PS: What you really want is someone who is more innovative than 95% of people out there, but still capable of functioning within the context of a company.
You do want someone who processes both conformist tendencies and initiative in about equal percentage share. Yes, that is unlike a vast majority of people.
The sweet spot is context dependence, which isn't rare at all. A champion boxer submits to his coach's criticism and his trainer's discipline so he can dominate and control other boxers. A smart entrepreneur with an innovative product doesn't gratuitously innovate in his accounting or his contracts.
And contrary to what you say, successful risk takers are often obsessive about risk.