User Tag List

First 2345 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 43

  1. #31
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Natrushka View Post
    ... and then there's the colour of paint decision.
    ... oh god... *groan*

    Which leaves me with my ultimatum:
    If you want me to make a decision, ask me to make one that doesn't depend on arbitrary preferences...
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  2. #32
    RDF
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ptgatsby View Post
    Well, I can't totally agree. However, I do know that MBTI has a weaker correlation to these things, so I can't disagree either



    Far as I know, the three measures that for certain are correlated with being conscientiousness are job satisfaction, job competence and rank. That's pretty damning for P's in the workplace. It also shows a significant improvement in academic performance and similar environments.

    However, you are right about the margin... namely that a good ~50% of the population isn't strong enough either way to really have it affect them significantly. However, once you get into the midrange ~20%, it does become very noticeable. And once you hit the extremes, you begin to see some real issues (on both sides now). So most of the population doesn't suffer for being one way or the other in the first place... and those that are midrange tend to be able adapt most of the time.

    The reverse is true for postions however! For the most part, J's strive in far more situations than Ps do... or rather, they are far more competent in a larger pool of situations and more likely to find satisfaction in what they are doing regardless. Ps can and do find the perfect job for them... but it's far rarer.

    To put it another way, Ps that do well embrace J mentality... most of the time. Js that do well tend to just not be overly J. Embracing their P, or being 'softer' and less headstrong, is not nearly as needed to get ahead or find satisfaction in what they are doing.



    Yup And if it's a major problem, it might not be beneficial either. There is a big difference between being a moderate P and deviant... and being a strong P, cognitively.
    I basically agree with this latest parsing of the statistics. That is, I don't think there's a broad-based dissatisfaction or inability to cope with the working world among Ps. My experience is that most Ps do just fine in the working world; when problems arise, they are going to be skewed more toward certain fields, certain personality types (or strength of P), and perhaps certain age groups.

    It's taken for granted that the working world is going to require Ps to learn some J skills if only to deal with schedules and deadlines. But most Ps just count that as routine socialization (basically a question of maturity) and make the transition just fine. While the organizational structure of the working world may naturally favor Js, I don't really see the process of accepting some structure as being a significant obstacle to most Ps. Problems are going to arise more at the margins or extremes, where certain types or subgroups don't accept socialization well or where the structural demands of a given individual job or profession are so precise as to require a very high degree of J-ness.

    For example, I didn't see the military life as overly burdensome for most Ps. Most Ps of my acquaintance made the adjustment to a more structured lifestyle just fine and understood why that adjustment had to be made. Naturally, a subgroup of military people routinely ran into disciplinary problems and ended up washing out; perhaps Ps tended to predominate within that subgroup. But the problems of a numerical minority shouldn't necessarily be projected onto the majority. At least, I didn't get the impression from my own experience that the majority of Ps found the demands of military life particularly burdensome or punitive.

    I tend to see a lot of flexibility in personality type, especially in the workplace where all personality types are required to stretch beyond their natural strengths at times. The group labeled "P" is a huge one, and there is a lot of variation across the group as a whole and between subgroups (different ages, professions, etc.). My own experience is that most Ps are adaptable enough to learn a few J skills (enough to cope with work demands for 8 hours a day) and still be content and competitive in the workplace. So unless the statistics point at really huge variations (for example, 90 percent of Js succeed at activity X while 90 percent of Ps fail at that same activity), then I think it's important to avoid turning statistics into broad-based assumptions. I think the statistics have to be parsed pretty fine to really get a true picture.

    Your latest set of statistics parses the numbers a bit more than previously and reflects a lot more flexibility of personality type in the broad center (such as "a good ~50% of the population isn't strong enough either way to really have it affect them significantly"). That's closer to what I actually see in the workplace. So I'm more comfortable with this latest set of statistics as opposed to the earlier, broader description of workplace barriers to Ps.

    Hope you don't mind my nitpicking on this issue. But I have a pretty broad experience of the workplace, and I think maybe people make too big a deal about personality type being an obstacle in the workplace. I think it's an issue at the extremes, but not usually for the broad mass in the center. Again, I think it's a question of emphasis.

    FL

  3. #33

    Default

    I see, I want, I get. There are a lot of things I want very badly in life. They are my source of motivation.

    Being greedy is a virtue you know Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
    "Man is not made for defeat. A man can be destroyed but not defeated."
    - Ernest Hemingway

  4. #34
    Pareo cattus Natrushka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    1,213

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    ... oh god... *groan*

    Which leaves me with my ultimatum:
    If you want me to make a decision, ask me to make one that doesn't depend on arbitrary preferences...
    I know an INTJ who agonized over choosing the right colour of white paint for the interior of her house. Yes. White. Paint.

    <and now I'm waiting to see if she notices this post>

    This signature left intentionally blank.

    Really.

  5. #35
    Senior Member Lookin4theBestNU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ENFj
    Enneagram
    2w3
    Posts
    801

    Default

    In regards to the OP:
    I have struggled from time to time with a lack of motivation though I contribute it to a mild depression. Here is what I do:
    I spend time first identifying as specifically as possible the underlying cause(s) of this lack. I tend to believe through my own results that good old fashioned pen and paper will bring about clarity and focus. What am I worried about? Why am I dreading this so much? Am I just being plain lazy? What would make me feel better? (providing not doing it at all in not an option ) What possibly bring me out of this 'stage'?

    After I have felt that I have regained control (lack of motivation at least to me feels like a loss of self-control) I set about creating small goals. What are one or two very small tasks/decisions that could bring me that sense of accomplishment to bring about this motivation? I then will force myself to get up and do them. Chances are I am dreading a large task/decision. I know that if I just start time and again it will prove to not be as bad as I am imagining!
    "At points of clarity, I realize that my life on earth is meaningless, and that I am merely a pawn in a bigger game. A game I cannot possibly understand or have control of. Thankfully, before depression sets in, I drift back into my cloudy, bewildered daily routine." **Joel Patrick Warneke**

  6. #36
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FineLine View Post
    Hope you don't mind my nitpicking on this issue. But I have a pretty broad experience of the workplace, and I think maybe people make too big a deal about personality type being an obstacle in the workplace. I think it's an issue at the extremes, but not usually for the broad mass in the center. Again, I think it's a question of emphasis.
    Not at all! I would agree that any personality can do well in most environments... I mostly study this because I'm rather extreme on three traits and it helped me understand where my strengths and weaknesses are. Most of the population will fit in the "normal" range anyway, where the (dis)advantage is largely hidden by other factors.

    I do disagree about the minimizing of the influence of the factor however;

    Your latest set of statistics parses the numbers a bit more than previously and reflects a lot more flexibility of personality type in the broad center (such as "a good ~50% of the population isn't strong enough either way to really have it affect them significantly"). That's closer to what I actually see in the workplace. So I'm more comfortable with this latest set of statistics as opposed to the earlier, broader description of workplace barriers to Ps.
    Let me put it another way; P's always have a harder time than Js, however, the level of impact differs to the point where other factors cause enough noise to hide it. If you were to take Ps and Js and seperate them into two groups, then assign them job performance, job statisfaction and ranking, what'd you see is two different bell curves - a bimodal distribution. So there are always Ps that are better than Js... and the peaks aren't exactly hugely seperate... but the bias is there. Ps shift downward on those measurements. (If it helps, they tend to slide slightly up on IQ tests ).

    To highlight the significance of this, consider that about 85% of CEO/Executive (and military equivalents) positions are Js. 75% are Upper management... and down the ladder to entry positions;59%.

    It could be said that J's are better suited for management... and I'd agree. Regardless of the interpretation, this isn't very far away from your 90/90 example. I would say that a spread of greater than 15% is significant... and the upper spread is about 60%! (These are taken from "Type Talk at Work", 2002)

    What's important to note is that these aren't single events. If you take a P and a J and set them on a task, they will perform roughly as well... It's that over the long term, the J is consistently able to maintain performance while the P is not. This is the same reason that P's are more likely to have been arrested, etc - we are inherently deviant and do not follow structure... laws included... well. These edges add up to large differences. If a P has learned to control certain behaviours, the edge gets smaller and over time, their P advantages can work on their behalf instead of always against it. Regardless, the difference is still extremely large.

    Ps are a good thing when it is applied to creative ventures... Most great philosophers and theorists, many great artists and revolutionary writers are Ps.

    The only reason I bring this up is because Ps that are motivated to excel in the workplace/etc need to know what their issues are. I'm at the really bad end of the P measurement and have coped just fine - it's not impossible, even at the extremes. The issue is that Ps are negatively biased and will, for the most part, need to learn a skillset that addresses these issues.

    Type is nice about the "fairness" of opposing traits... So I'm reaching outside of type for most of this research. Warnings about correlations and all that should apply.

  7. #37
    RDF
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ptgatsby View Post
    It could be said that J's are better suited for management... and I'd agree. Regardless of the interpretation, this isn't very far away from your 90/90 example. I would say that a spread of greater than 15&#37; is significant... and the upper spread is about 60%! (These are taken from "Type Talk at Work", 2002)

    Yep, I agree. But you're talking about the spread at management levels. That doesn't necessarily pertain to the "broad mass in the center." To me, that's getting out at the margins. Not everyone makes it to the management ranks even with the ideal personality type, or even necessarily wants to break into management ranks.

    I can agree with your point about longevity in the workplace working against Ps, in the sense that P traits aren't favored as you get promoted upward into management and/or might get tired of toeing the line and have a mid-life crisis. I have no problem with a clarification like that.

    But I think those clarifications need to be made and highlighted. Rather than hearing the statement "Ps have more difficulty functioning in the workplace," I would prefer to hear "Ps fit in well in the workplace, at least initially, but they tend to increasingly hit glass ceilings when it comes to longevity and/or the rise to management. So in later years they probably need to make some careful decisions about career direction and progression."

    Again, perhaps that is nitpicking. But I see some people bailing out of the mainstream without ever having given it a try, simply because they perceive a cultural bias against their "nature." (The INFP ranks are kind of notorious for this.) I hate to see MBTI potentially interpreted by them as fodder for their paranoia. With proper qualifications, MBTI might, on the contrary, reassure them that they can at least give the mainstream a try and find some measure of initial acceptance. And then, in later years, awareness of MBTI can be used to avoid common pitfalls of their type or steer their career path to an appropriate channel.

    It's nitpicking. But I fuss about broad generalizations that might be interpreted as saying that personality type X simply isn't compatible with environment Y or with partners of personality type Z. The truth is more complex than that. I want to hear about the qualifications, especially if I've seen the contrary in my own experience.

    FL

  8. #38
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FineLine View Post
    It's nitpicking. But I fuss about broad generalizations that might be interpreted as saying that personality type X simply isn't compatible with environment Y or with partners of personality type Z. The truth is more complex than that. I want to hear about the qualifications, especially if I've seen the contrary in my own experience.
    Fair enough - the individual has a choice on how he or she acts, and everyone has different talents regardless of personality. It can be looked at in all sorts of different ways... I certainly don't want to get across is that we are non-functional. My last word on it is simply that the correlations are surprisingly high across the board, and highly predictive. I believe it to be a fairly significant factor, somewhere around IQ and the T/F divide (each factor tends to have slightly different influences, but are all strong).

    The only reason I push it is because while one can be self defeating by over emphasising innate problems, one can also self defeat by not acknowledging or realising their own areas of contention. I would rather have those that are willing to work through their own issues have the knowledge to do so rather than protect those that would use it as an excuse. There are many excuses; it doesn't require type to blame something!

    Back on the original topic, J's don't have more motivation exactly, they have more dedication. I think that's the best way to put it. Ps can be highly motivated but simply lack the discipline to make things happen. You can approach this two different ways: find a way to trick yourself into doing the work... or you can learn how to apply yourself and destress after. These are skills that one learns... if you don't learn them and if you don't use them, Ps will tend to spin their wheels without much movement.

    Having said that, I'm going to go struggle with my deadlines now :P

  9. #39
    RDF
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ptgatsby View Post
    Fair enough - the individual has a choice on how he or she acts, and everyone has different talents regardless of personality. It can be looked at in all sorts of different ways... I certainly don't want to get across is that we are non-functional. My last word on it is simply that the correlations are surprisingly high across the board, and highly predictive. I believe it to be a fairly significant factor, somewhere around IQ and the T/F divide (each factor tends to have slightly different influences, but are all strong).

    The only reason I push it is because while one can be self defeating by over emphasising innate problems, one can also self defeat by not acknowledging or realising their own areas of contention. I would rather have those that are willing to work through their own issues have the knowledge to do so rather than protect those that would use it as an excuse. There are many excuses; it doesn't require type to blame something!

    Back on the original topic, J's don't have more motivation exactly, they have more dedication. I think that's the best way to put it. Ps can be highly motivated but simply lack the discipline to make things happen. You can approach this two different ways: find a way to trick yourself into doing the work... or you can learn how to apply yourself and destress after. These are skills that one learns... if you don't learn them and if you don't use them, Ps will tend to spin their wheels without much movement.
    Sounds good to me.

    Quote Originally Posted by ptgatsby View Post
    Having said that, I'm going to go struggle with my deadlines now :P
    I sympathize. Good luck!



    FL

  10. #40
    The elder Holmes Mycroft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sp
    Posts
    1,080

    Default

    Regardless of P or J preference, I'm of the mind that your N is going to waste if you work at an institution where rising in the ranks is the only motivation or goal.
    Dost thou love Life? Then do not squander Time; for that's the Stuff Life is made of.

    -- Benjamin Franklin, Poor Richard's Almanack, June 1746 --

Similar Threads

  1. [Fi] How do you get in tune with yourself?
    By gretch in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 07-24-2016, 07:13 AM
  2. Organization, how do you get it done? (Ps welcome)
    By raz in forum Academics and Careers
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 02-02-2009, 02:46 AM
  3. [MBTItm] How do you get along with the SJs?
    By nolla in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 06-05-2008, 03:13 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO