According to the latest Global Entrepreneurship Monitor, Luxembourg’s early-stage entrepreneurial activity stands above the EU average. We are strong at starting. Yet established business ownership remains lower. Less strong at sustaining. That gap may not only be financial. It may be cognitive.
We invest in capital, accelerators and AI infrastructure. We measure funding rounds and exits. But we rarely ask: what kind of minds does an innovation economy run on? 2018 data cited by KPMG shows that US entrepreneurs were six times more likely to report ADHD than comparison groups. Other studies point to higher rates of dyslexia and other neurodivergent profiles among founders. That pattern is unlikely to be incidental.
Innovation demands non-linear thinking, risk affinity, speed and tolerance for ambiguity. Neurodivergent profiles express these capacities in different ways: intensity, pattern recognition, systems thinking, unconventional problem framing. The common thread is their divergence. This is why neurodiversity is no longer confined to HR. It has become a matter of institutional signalling and board-level strategy.
When Palantir launched a Neurodivergent Fellowship in 2025, CEO Alex Karp framed it as a recruitment pathway for exceptional talent, not a diversity initiative. His message was direct: neurally divergent individuals will shape the future. In startups and large corporations alike, cognitive difference is being treated as strategic capacity. Yet systems shape behaviour long before someone becomes a founder.
In prosperous economies like Luxembourg, many future entrepreneurs spend formative years inside corporate or institutional roles. Luxembourg also reports relatively low fear of failure, likely supported by economic security and strong re-employment prospects. A credible ‘plan B’ can reduce the psychological cost of trying. Security can enable experimentation.
At the same time, formative performance cultures matter. If they primarily reward predictability and risk control, people adapt. They become excellent inside structure. That is a strength. But it does not automatically stretch the capacities required for sustained entrepreneurial endurance.
“Innovation economies produce norms, not just systems”
The issue is not whether cognitive range exists. It does. The question is whether our systems are designed to recognise it, interpret it correctly and channel it towards durable value creation. Innovation economies produce norms, not just systems.
Economic growth is usually framed in terms of capital, labour and technology. Cognition is rarely treated as infrastructure. Yet if certain cognitive profiles are statistically overrepresented among entrepreneurs, then this is not a peripheral inclusion topic. It is a structural economic variable. Ecosystem design cannot remain cognitively neutral.
We may be optimising for stability while assuming innovation will take care of itself. It does not.
This column was published in the 9th edition of Forbes Luxembourg.
Read more articles:
CK Charles Kieffer: Eight Decades, One Vision
