Entrepreneurial life is often described as an emotional rollercoaster marked by intense well-being fluctuations. Despite its essential role in entrepreneurial success and resilience, research has largely overlooked eudaimonic dimensions and the complexity of everyday entrepreneurial experience. Drawing on focus-group interviews with 30 entrepreneurs, this study applies qualitative content analysis to explore how well-being manifests across levels of self-experience, how entrepreneurs navigate challenges, and what fosters higher well-being in diverse contexts. Between-person analyses support recent findings showing that eudaimonic well-being functions as a mediating layer—an interpretive space in which emotional and cognitive experiences gain deeper meaning. Central well-being dimensions appear double-edged: they provide fulfillment yet expose entrepreneurs to vulnerability shaped by contextual and sector-specific conditions. Integrating stressor research with eudaimonic meaning-making, the analysis shows that strain arises not only from workload or external pressures but also from moral dilemmas, relational breakdowns, and misalignment with personal values. At the within-person level, a temporal pattern emerged: challenges trigger short-term strain but can foster long-term growth through awareness, reflection, and support. Responsible leadership, sustainability, and social impact simultaneously act as motivational resources and stressors. Based on coherent intraindividual patterns, the study develops an entrepreneurial well-being typology capturing distinct strengths and vulnerabilities. This typology offers a foundation for tailored support systems that enhance entrepreneurs’ well-being while promoting sustainable business practices. Overall, the study advances a holistic understanding of entrepreneurial well-being and provides implications for policies and ecosystems fostering healthy, resilient, and purpose-driven entrepreneurship.
Marisa Mühlböck (Wed,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: