There is considerable evidence of the benefits of entrepreneurship for economic growth and development (Audretsch et al., 2006). However, in recent decades, Silicon Valley style technology entrepreneurship – also referred to as tech entrepreneurship or techno-entrepreneurship in this paper – has become one of the most influential models of entrepreneurship (Suzuki et al., 2002). Countries, cities and governments around the world have sought to emulate or replicate it (OECD, 2010), such that hitherto successful entrepreneurial regions are disregarded because they are not involved in the “endless creation of highly innovative, technology-oriented, venture capital-backed gazelles and unicorns” (Pahnke and Welter, 2019). Moreover, this type of entrepreneurship has also become dominant in academic research where high growth and innovative enterprises are exulted (Audretsch, 2021). Other types of entrepreneurship such as necessity based, sole proprietor and self-employed entrepreneurs are often disparaged (Welter et al., 2017). In fact, some studies have gone further to argue that other types of small businesses and startups are less entrepreneurial if their founders do not achieve billionaire status (Henrekson and Sanandaji, 2014). Nevertheless, some scholars have begun to push back on this model of entrepreneurship, arguing for a more inclusive approach that appreciates the contributions of other types of entrepreneurship (Welter et al., 2017), and the rising social challenges which the Silicon Valley model has been unable to solve (Audretsch, 2021).

While there is little doubt in the financial and innovative benefits of tech entrepreneurship, there is an increasing body of evidence that this approach, which places persistent growth above anything else, is not just incapable of solving the socio-economic problems facing the world, but it actively creates them. For example, Facebook played a direct role in the devastating genocide of the Rohingya people (Yue, 2019), and there is mounting evidence of the negative psychological impact of social media usage on children and adolescents (Marino et al., 2018; Keles et al., 2020). In addition, the products created by these entrepreneurs are posing enormous danger to nature and the future of humanity (Mora et al., 2018; Creutzig et al., 2022), and threaten the very foundations of democracy (Tucker et al., 2017; Fukuyama et al., 2021). This paper does not seek to downplay the extraordinary achievements of Silicon Valley or tech entrepreneurs. It however argues that these types of entrepreneurs wield immense power and influence in present society, and would normally face ethical quandaries with a consequential impact on the rest of society. Therefore, as technology companies begin an arms race toward superiority in Artificial Intelligence (AI), understanding the motivations and character of the sort of people who become tech entrepreneurs is crucial. Some evidence show that the nature of the Silicon Valley model can encourage what a recent investigative analysis described as the “Machiavellian narcissists” (Griffith, 2023). High profile scandals have plagued some of the most celebrated tech entrepreneurs including the founders of WeWork, Uber, FTX, and numerous other lesser known companies (Griffith, 2023).

One of the earliest investigations of this phenomenon was the analysis of Maccoby (2000), who observed that leaders of the dot com boom were far more willing to court media attention that those of previous generations. This type of obsessive need for self-admiration and the limelight meets the Freudian assessment of a narcissistic personality (Freud, 1925; Maccoby, 2000; Rosenthal and Pittinsky, 2006). Narcissism, Machiavellianism and psychopathy have become known as the dark triad traits (Paulhus and Williams, 2002). Power/control – manipulation – and callousness are at the heart of all three traits (Furnham et al., 2013; Jones and Figueredo, 2013), and entrepreneurs can be motivated by a need to acquire power and domination over others (Brownell et al., 2021). This behavior is not exclusive to tech entrepreneurship. However, as technology continues to play an outsized role in the modern economy, and as the financial and power incentives of pursuing tech entrepreneurship continues to increase, tech entrepreneurship might be more appealing to these types of characters.

Effective Altruism (EA) has become one of the most influential belief systems of the twenty first century (Ackermann, 2022). Seeking to revolutionize charitable contributions and the debate around improving the world, EA has faced both praise and criticism in academic literature (Berkey, 2018; Broi, 2019; Dietz, 2019). EA is particularly influential in tech entrepreneurship with some of the most influential tech entrepreneurs in the world, including the founders of companies like Facebook, Instagram, Skype, PayPal, and Tesla among others, expressing some degree of devotion to the movement (Bennett et al., 2016; Ackermann, 2022). Moreover, EA consistently encourages its followers to pursue tech entrepreneurship and ranks it as its most important career choice.¹ Since late 2022, EA has faced intense backlash due to the criminal investigation and subsequent criminal indictment of arguably its most prominent follower, Sam Bankman-Fried. Consequently, the goal of this research is to investigate the discursive threads in EA literature on Entrepreneurship, and specifically analyse it for dark triad behavior. This paper employs a discursive psychological approach grounded in the theoretical foundations of Potter and Wetherell (1987), Fairclough (1993), and Wiggins (2009), all of whom believed in the potent power of words to directly influence action and shape reality. The paper differs from prior studies by attempting to connect philosophical belief systems/practice to dark triad behavior in entrepreneurship, and therefore provides an important contribution to the contemporary debate on entrepreneurial behavior. The next section includes a theoretical background followed by the methodology, results, discussion, and conclusion/limitation.

We clustered our findings by mapping the discourse timeline before dividing them into the three main phases presented below.

This research contributes to the existing studies on the dark triad behavior in entrepreneurship (Wales et al., 2013; Do and Dadvari, 2017; Brownell et al., 2021). Using a discursive psychology approach (Potter and Wetherell, 1987; Fairclough, 1993), we examined the main entrepreneurship discourses in EA literature to explore if it encouraged traits associated with the dark triad. To the best of our knowledge, our research represents the first attempt to investigate the dark triad behavior, not within the firm, but in a social/philosophical movement. EA has become one of the world’s most influential philosophical movements of the last decade, especially prominent among tech entrepreneurs. Our findings indicate that it was a mutual relationship as EA discourse intensely promoted tech entrepreneurship, ranking it as the best career choice for making the most difference in the world. Following the works of Fairclough who argued that discourse can be “simultaneously a piece of text, an instance of discursive practice, and an instance of social practice,” we thoroughly scrutinized the discourse on tech entrepreneurship and made a number of important discoveries.

Our analysis portrayed a temporal change in the discourse on entrepreneurship, beginning with discourses encouraging risk taking and entrepreneurship between 2012 and 2013, before moving on to discourse on the benefits of having a smart and illicit character, and ending with a focus on aggressive risk taking. Our results reveal that EA discourse contained the sort of aggressiveness which studies suggests are might be typical to all three personalities of the dark triad, but more particular to Machiavellianism and Narcissism (Paulhus and Williams, 2002). According to Brownell et al. (2021), people who possess Machiavellian personalities take an end justifies the means approach to business and tend to show strong adaptability, competitiveness and aggressive risk taking. They are also motivated by power and control, and are willing to use any necessary means to achieve their goals (Al Aïn et al., 2013; Zettler and Solga, 2013). This was most evident in the interview: Sam Bankman-Fried on taking a high-risk approach to crypto and doing good, where donating money to good causes was used to justify an aggressive form of risk taking which would eventually lead to the fraudulent indictment and criminal prosecution of the interviewee. In addition, having a direct impact on the world was among the factors used to dismiss legitimate concerns on the impact of the interviewee’s business on issues like climate change. Furthermore, other discourses included texts on how achieving domination (Brownell et al., 2021) – being motivated by power and control – was the primary motivator for starting a business, a trait typical of dark triad personalities (Jones and Figueredo, 2013; Hoang et al., 2022). In fact, studies have consistently shown domination to be among the few overlapping traits of people high on narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy (Raskin et al., 1991; Paulhus and Williams, 2002; Brownell et al., 2021).

Additionally, our findings show that one of the most dominant and encouraged character in EA discourse is the smart and illicit type of entrepreneur. References to this type of personality was made across several discourses, particularly in discourses between 2014 and 2016. According to Levine and Rubinstein (2013) (referenced in EA discourse): “It is the high-ability (as measured by learning aptitude and success as a salaried worker) person who tends to “break the rules” (as measured by the degree to which the person engaged in illicit activities before the age of 22) who is especially likely to become a successful entrepreneur.” This type of behavior is consistent with prior literature on the dark triad behavior in entrepreneurship. For example, while the emotional difficulty of psychopaths has received a lot of attention (Wu et al., 2019), studies have also shown them to be very smart and willing to break rules and norms to achieve success (Mathieu et al., 2013, 2014; Boddy, 2015). Moreover, research has shown that people with personalities like these tend to pursue entrepreneurship (Hmieleski and Lerner, 2016; Do and Dadvari, 2017; McLarty et al., 2021).

Although dark triad traits have been considered socially malevolent (Paulhus and Williams, 2002; Jones and Figueredo, 2013), there is some evidence linking them to entrepreneurial success (Wales et al., 2013; Gubik and Vörös, 2023), a fact which can explain why it was desirable in EA entrepreneurship discourse. However, there are significant challenges with encouraging dark triad behavior. First, as Boddy (2015) argued, dark triad behavior can potentially be linked to corporate fraud and the sort of behavior which led to the 2007 global financial crisis. Furthermore, while people with dark triad personalities can be found in successful ventures, they can also be found in prison settings (Mullins-Sweatt et al., 2010). The recent criminal indictment of arguably the most prominent proponent of EA is a prime example of this.

Our research investigates the ways in which entrepreneurship discourse in EA could have promoted traits characteristic to dark triad behavior. Using a discursive analytic approach, our findings reveal that domination, aggressiveness, and a tendency to break rules/norms were especially frequently highlighted in EA discourse as a prerequisite for entrepreneurial success. All three traits have been established as characteristic of dark triad personalities. Our study contributes to the growing debate on dark triad behavior in entrepreneurship. However, it differs from prior studies by exploring the topic not within a for-profit venture, but in a popular non-profit social/philosophical movement.

As the race toward artificial intelligence accelerates, tech entrepreneurs are bound to play an outsized role in shaping the future of humanity. Nevertheless, questions remain on the precise approaches to mitigate the dark triad behavior for the benefit of society. There is a clear need for introducing or strengthening existing ethical training for entrepreneurs. For example, universities can include stronger ethical curriculums to their entrepreneurship education programs, and incubators and accelerators can prioritize ethical training. Furthermore, while knowledge of narcissistic business leaders has existed for some time, research on the pervasiveness of dark triad traits in entrepreneurship is relatively nascent. Therefore, there needs to be an increase in awareness of the challenge and a provision of psychological support as part of the entrepreneurial process. This can be achieved with the support of investors and Venture Capital (VC) funds, who can emphasize psychological support as part of the fund-raising requirements for entrepreneurs. In addition, the level of ethical regulation, oversight and criminal prosecution has failed to keep up with the unethical behavior of entrepreneurs (Griffith, 2023). Policy-makers can consider strengthening this process, and improving the reporting standards for entrepreneurs.

Our research is limited in a number of ways. First, because the research topic was specific to entrepreneurship, we only included EA content exclusively focussed on entrepreneurship or the idea of starting a business venture. Second, the 80,000 h website was used as the primary source of data collection. Finally, the analysis and findings of this paper should not be taken as a clinical confirmation of the presence of dark triad behavior in the EA community.

All data used in this study can be found in the online repository of 80,000 hours: https://80000hours.org/topics/.

MO was responsible for the conceptualization, data collection, data analysis, and writing the original draft of the manuscript. MM and ZS were responsible for revising the original draft. All authors read and approved the final version of the manuscript.