Very interesting, and I mostly agree, with one caveat. You get into tricky areas when you look at ability as relates to r/K. r’s are less openly competitive, but they are survivors, who will do anything, and engage in rule breaking to win. I suspect even the novelty seeking is a part of finding new ways to compete without openly competing. So they do have advantages.
They are also excellent at maneuvering through social hierarchies, so they will often rise, irrespective of success.
There is a great blog here, which I view as describing the epitome of amygdala dysfunction in management, which the author describes as SOB syndrome, based on a phrase common to all of them he knew.
http://mandynamerica.com/blog/memorable-sobs-in-inaction/
The big problem is r’s are conditioned early on in childhood to be pretenders, so you never know what you will get, or what you have.
But interesting analysis, and I agree on most all of it.
I forgot to mention one, focused as I was on business in isolation. r's tend to thrive in areas where there's a slew of complex regulations which can be negotiated through like a complex social hierarchy. K's, I suspect, are more at home in an environment of simple laws that say what they mean and mean what they say.
Have you spent some time poking through libertarian theory and Austrian economics? One of their major themes is: economic competition, when viewed in the global sense, is another kind of social co-operation. They're also big on pointing out that a lot of business competition consists of finding niches with new products: in essence, competing for consumer dollars without competing directly.
But on the other hand, the Rothbardian segment insists that the current regulations on banks should be replaced by one simple law that's much tougher than the current set-up: 100% reserves on demand deposits. Anything more lenient, they consider to be encouragement of fraud. The 100%-reserv'ers consider this point to be non-negotiable.
To get back to regulations, the regulatory State provides a big advantage to r's because of how it grew. The legislators discovered a principle that computer programmers didn't discover until 1990 or so: the more user-friendly the application, the more back coding is needed to make it work properly. With respect to legislation, the "back coding" is a combination of implementary regulations and amendments that make the original law much more complex - like, most notoriously, the Internal Revenue Code.