I probably suck to work for in that way, but the reality is this is not a job about pushing the envelope, it's a job about executing as cleanly as possible. You work at one of these if you love to implement simple tech to solve non-tech problems, and I make that clear while hiring.
It's a moderately lucrative job, and can be very rewarding for certain types, but I totally understand if, coming from Google, it would be a system shock as it is decidedly not "tech" as most folks mean it.
On the other hand, in my little corner of the world I've seen plenty of damage done by an "invent-nothing" mentality and an approach to software architecture that permits only plugging together popular open source components with fancy websites and corporate backing. For lack of a better term I call it "noun-driven development". You needed a disk reachable through an ssh server and an Apache directory listing, you ended up with Artifactory. You needed a library to replicate data with a Merkle tree, you ended up with someone's Kafka + etcd + memcached + redis + glusterfs Frankenstein monster, etc.
Don't mind me, I'm mostly talking to myself here.
Building the even a basic framework takes hundreds of hours of developer time... for no real competitive advantage.
It's fine to work on innovative things (there was a point were something about Java annotations clicked and the report writing part got rewritten in a week)... but building big things that give small gains aren't viable in small shops.
Doing innovation on "how can we compress this web page even more" makes no sense at a small shop - if it's an issue grab Minify off the shelf and use that. Don't spend half a year writing your own that you'll need to support.
The small company is best served by working on things that give the competitive advantage - not working on those big ideas (unless that big idea is the competitive advantage).
Big tech companies have the advantage that they've got thousands of developers some of whom have some free time or the competitive advantage is removing another 200 bytes from a web page.
That small tech shop had 4000 hours of Java dev time to "spend" a year.. and another 4000 hours of JavaScript, and 2000 hours of python, and 2000 hours of android/iOS. There's a stack of 5000 hours of bugs and features for each of those parts of the app. Spending 500 hours of anyones time on something that can be solved off the shelf for under 10 hours to integrate is far from an optimal use of time.
This isn't saying that they don't do development, but rather that they're not breaking new ground in tech. They aren't working on any cutting edge problems or developing frameworks to enable development at scale.
I worked at a company that did some logistics. There was an app for phones, some servers, and some software that did routing, provided ETAs to customers, and produced some reports.
I would lump it in the broad umbrella of "tech" but it isn't a company that's building the next big thing (or even small thing) that will change the world.