How do you get motivation?

[proteanmix]

Is it possible motivation is less of an issue for Js? Just curious.

Yes.

Or the illusion of motivation. Either way... Yes.

This is going to sound contradictory but my lack of motivation isn't from a lack of motivation. I have very clear goals about what I want to do with my life, I just feel overwhelmed with options. It's like looking at a mess and wondering where to start first. I know my end point, it's just picking out the right path.

I can't speak for all Ps, but if a task is mundane or routine then INFPs are going to procrastinate on it. INFPs prefer to be motivated by a sense of inspiration, love for the mission, or urgency.

INFPs need a task to have some kind of emotional content if they're going to stay on top of it. For example, INFPs will let their own routine work languish undone; but they will work tirelessly to help a friend with the friend's work, because work to aid another person is a feel-good exercise for the INFP. When it comes to the INFP's own work, an approaching deadline can actually be a boon because it inspires a sense of crisis and a crisis atmosphere may finally get the INFP to focus on the task.

INFPs pretty much need to impose organizational systems consciously and deliberately in their lives, or routine tasks won't get done and their house will be a shambles. One of the famous stereotypes of INFPs is that they hate to invite people to their homes because their homes are so messy. An INTJ acquaintance of mine once said that she could identify INFPs in the college dorms by their bedrooms: There was always a "rat's nest" of stuff piled by the bed on the bedstand or on the floor.

The other alternative for INFPs is to strip themselves of most earthly belongings to simplify life and keep clutter from overrunning their lives. And a lot of INFPs go that way (including me when I was younger). But without the accessories needed for normal socializing, that can leave them drifting outside of the mainstream and unattached to society at large.

In my case, seven years in the military accustomed me to keeping things relatively organized and clean; years of doing admin stuff taught me to organize and file paperwork and keep good records; and learning to "putter" has made it possible to keep on top of all the chores of handling a house, a yard, a couple cars, a full-time job, keeping up a social life, spending time with my wife, going out dancing a couple times a week, etc. I always felt overwhelmed by even very light routine tasks when I was younger; but nowadays I would say that I get a lot of enjoyment out of keeping on top of all the routine stuff and don't find it a burden at all.

But I would say that--in my case anyway--it's less a question of motivation and more about learning and imposing some J-oriented organizational tools (along with developing an S-oriented appreciation of the activity of "puttering"). Even nowadays, I'm not "motivated" to do routine tasks; I'm just very well-organized and have developed some good habits so that they're easy to do.

FL

This actually describes my way of doing things very accurately.

 

[ptgatsby]

This is going to sound contradictory but my lack of motivation isn't from a lack of motivation. I have very clear goals about what I want to do with my life, I just feel overwhelmed with options. It's like looking at a mess and wondering where to start first. I know my end point, it's just picking out the right path.

It is, of course, a generalisation... and not all Js are the same. However, a solid J's option paralysis is nothing like a solid P's paralysis... It's night and day - the whole trait revolves around "the deciding" nature of the J.

J's sometimes have problems finding what to do, I agree. There are times when my GF, a rather strong J, does crash and gets cranky because there is nothing for her to do. However, compared to the windstorm of activity that she generates when she has something to do... which is most of the time... It is really different than my own laid back approach. I may go into a frenzy for a few hours... maybe even a few days... but the interest fades away before I've finished what I'm doing.

Where a J will hate painting, but will do an entire house... inside and out... with trim... just because it "needs" to be done, a P will struggle every minute of every day, finding excuse after excuse not to finish it... and eventually just redefine "need" to "it's fine the way it is" or "it won't cost too much for someone else to do it".

 

[RDF]

It is, of course, a generalisation... and not all Js are the same. However, a solid J's option paralysis is nothing like a solid P's paralysis... It's night and day - the whole trait revolves around "the deciding" nature of the J.

My wife and I are both INFPs, and it's funny to contrast the two of us on this issue. For example, the issue of "closure": I have a healthy respect for closing up one task before moving onto the next. My wife is the opposite. She keeps every task open and finds a lot of difficulty bringing even the simplest tasks to closure.

As for me:

I spent seven years in the Marines (an ISTJ environment), and I learned the importance of getting closure on a task. In an ISTJ environment, there comes a time when a task is considered "done," even if it's not perfect or even particularly complete. You pronounce it "good enough for government work" and you pack it up and put it away. There's a strong ethic of closing old business up and putting it away before (or so that) you can move on to new business.

As an INFP that was a new concept for me, and I must say I was rather grateful to learn that lesson. Previously, for example in high school, any project dragged on into eternity because I couldn't get closure or figure out when it was "done." So every new assignment, no matter how simple, was just one more nightmare potentially stretching into infinity, piled onto all the other current nightmares ongoing from other classes.

Nowadays, based on my experience in the Marines, I have a good sense of how long a project should take and when a project is done and a healthy respect for the principle of closing up an old project before starting on a new one.

As for my wife:

My wife is still more or less where I was at in high school. She didn't have a formative experience like the military to teach her how to recognize and respect closure. If anything, her roles as wife and homemaker in her previous marriages pulled her in the opposite direction. As wife and homemaker, her job was to preserve things and keep them open for nest-building and family history purposes. If her daughter scribbled a third-grade art project, it couldn't be thrown out; it has to be preserved in a time capsule in case the daughter might want her childhood scribblings one day as an adult.

So here's how my wife handles a typical task. She has a pile of art magazines on the floor and wants to put them in order them by date, put them in a magazine box, and put the box in place our bookshelves. But while stacking them by date, she notices that two monthly issues are missing. So she pages through a couple issues to see if she can determine if there were in fact magazines issued for those two months. As she is doing that, she notices a couple art patterns of interest that she would like to copy, and she tags them with sticky tags, and makes a mental note to bring them to the copy place.

At this point the task is beginning to stretch into eternity. Now she no longer wants to put the magazines in the magazine box, because once they are filed she might forget to look for the other issues or bring the patterns to the copy place. So the magazine are returned to the pile on the floor. She also doesn't want to go to the copy place, because two issues are still potentially missing and they might have interesting patterns too. And she can't find the two missing issues (or even determine whether they are potentially missing) because everything is in a mess on the floor.

At that point the task becomes overwhelming, so she wanders off to work on some artwork in progress. The next time she wanders into the room and notices the pile, she can't even look at the pile. She has no need for closure on the project of filing the magazines, so there's no impetus to do anything about it; and she can't progress on the project of filing the magazines because it just generates new projects and obligations. Eventually the project becomes repugnant to her and she refuses to see the pile anymore. It becomes invisible to her.

It's really simple math. Her need for closure (the desire to simple finish up the project) is zero. So any other stray consideration that might require the project to stay open will take precedence. Even if the desire to copy patterns and find missing issues is minimal at, let's say, only 2 out of 100, in her head the need for keeping the project open (2) is still infinitely larger than the need to complete the project (0).

In the end, there are ways to get around that. When the clutter around the house gets to be too much, I may put my foot down and she'll accept that my need for closure outweighs her desire to keep things open (at least temporarily).

Also, there are places in life where my wife is more organized than me. (She is probably better at time and deadlines than me.) So I don't mean to point the finger at my wife.

But the above example is one way (out of many) that an absence of natural desire for closure can overwhelm INFPs and make it impossible to do even the simplest tasks around the house. It gets to the point where it takes outside influences (looming deadlines, a complaining spouse) to provide the stimulus for closure. But then the INFP gets stuck in the trap of permanent crisis management: always scrambling to meet deadlines, always behind on everything, seemingly never able to get clear of old business and try something new in life because he or she is so far behind on previous commitments and projects. Lots of stress, lots of bother, lots of feeling out of control and unfulfilled.

FL

 

[ptgatsby]

is so far behind on previous commitments and projects. Lots of stress, lots of bother, lots of feeling out of control and unfulfilled.

You just quoted what I said to my GF a while back. I'm a rather extreme P who has never had to really apply himself to make do. Until now - I've hit the barrier of my natural ability... and I was whining to my GF endlessly for a couple of months... and over the last few weeks have hit quite the low with stress and depressive lows. Even knowing what causes it makes it difficult to change...

But that is exactly what I said to her when I explain what was happening. It's so incredibly unhealthy... and an awesome example of how it sets in.

 

[RDF]

... and an awesome example of how it sets in.

Thanks!

I agree that it's tremendously unhealthy, and I see a lot of it around these P-oriented MBTI message boards. But I know how hard it is for strong Ps to make the necessary changes in their lives to get some alleviation.

For example, I try to help out my wife and set up some organizational systems for her or just show her how easy it is to cut through the clutter with the right "attitude" and priorities. But we've been living together 7 1/2 years and it's still a struggle for her. (We still have Christmas lights and decorations scattered around the living room. :steam: )

I think strong Ps just need to try to register how much this affect their lives and then try to start chipping away at it. It's very much under their control, but old habits die hard.

It's also worth noting that strong Js have problems of their own. Too strong an orientation in either direction is a problem.

Moderation in all things.

FL

 

[ptgatsby]

I think strong Ps just need to try to register how much this affect their lives and then try to start chipping away at it. It's very much under their control, but old habits die hard.

It's under control to a certain extent... It depends on how strong it really is. Using conscientiousness from FFM rather than the J/P divide, anyone under ~20 is going to be in for a hard time, simply because it cycles down, similar to depression. Ps are like a manic form of motivation - you suddenly kick it into high gear where the mind shuts off and you just fly into activity... but that goes just as suddenly as it starts and you fall into a slump.

Unlike feeling the 'blues' after an event, the chronic stress of doing something when you don't have the motivation to do it decreases the natural energy that Ps can get when they get into something. This suddenly leaves them with no energy to do anything... and that means that less and less gets done, more and more stress builds...

It's a bit more than a habit. The breaking point is to make sure that you don't start the cycle... which is often triggered by a flurry of activity and going into a slump. At this point it is natural, but if things continue to build... yah. It's over.

It's also worth noting that strong Js have problems of their own. Too strong an orientation in either direction is a problem.

It's true that Js have a few... issues... But the reality is that they dominate in nearly every 'good' walk of life, from jobs to relationships, from money to happiness, from school work to hobbies. P's got screwed over on this trait. About the only pure advantages is in creativity... and of course, if you are a moderate, this allows you to be creative and not fall under a deluge of deadlines For the most part, being moderate is way better. Way way better.

It may be better to be a P with J skills than a J with P skills (Ps are far more innate - one doesn't learn "P" skills with ease, if at all... You temper J's drive, heh)... But Ps require a certain amount of drive and conditioning to learn Js. Military training works, so long as it doesn't break you... but that's heavy conditioning - it's not common... and Ps can snap under the conditioning, causing a certain amount of... behavioral issues.

 

[Natrushka]

Where a J will hate painting, but will do an entire house... inside and out... with trim... just because it "needs" to be done, a P will struggle every minute of every day, finding excuse after excuse not to finish it... and eventually just redefine "need" to "it's fine the way it is" or "it won't cost too much for someone else to do it".

... and then there's the colour of paint decision.

 

[RDF]

It's under control to a certain extent... It depends on how strong it really is. Using conscientiousness from FFM rather than the J/P divide, anyone under ~20 is going to be in for a hard time, simply because it cycles down, similar to depression. Ps are like a manic form of motivation - you suddenly kick it into high gear where the mind shuts off and you just fly into activity... but that goes just as suddenly as it starts and you fall into a slump.

Unlike feeling the 'blues' after an event, the chronic stress of doing something when you don't have the motivation to do it decreases the natural energy that Ps can get when they get into something. This suddenly leaves them with no energy to do anything... and that means that less and less gets done, more and more stress builds...

It's a bit more than a habit. The breaking point is to make sure that you don't start the cycle... which is often triggered by a flurry of activity and going into a slump. At this point it is natural, but if things continue to build... yah. It's over.

True, and a very good point. There's the physiological side of these ups and downs, which may provide physical and chemical reinforcement for up/down cycling. I agree it's not just a simple mental decision creating or resolving these problems.

It's true that Js have a few... issues... But the reality is that they dominate in nearly every 'good' walk of life, from jobs to relationships, from money to happiness, from school work to hobbies. P's got screwed over on this trait. About the only pure advantages is in creativity... and of course, if you are a moderate, this allows you to be creative and not fall under a deluge of deadlines For the most part, being moderate is way better. Way way better.

It may be better to be a P with J skills than a J with P skills (Ps are far more innate - one doesn't learn "P" skills with ease, if at all... You temper J's drive, heh)... But Ps require a certain amount of drive and conditioning to learn Js. Military training works, so long as it doesn't break you... but that's heavy conditioning - it's not common... and Ps can snap under the conditioning, causing a certain amount of... behavioral issues.

The statistics give Js the overall edge, and I agree with that when looking at the meta level measured by the statistics.

I would add, however, that in real life these influences operate very much at the margins. IOW, in practice Ps and Js both do well in the workplace and the world. It's just that Js might do a little better when measured according to raw indices of income or whatever. But it's not to say that Ps can't succeed and be happy. (Not disagreeing with you or the statstics, just playing with the emphasis.)

Also, statistical results depend on what you measure. For example, Ps may actually find greater contentment in the workplace (where they have to learn J skills) than in the home where things are more amorphous. The workplace provides a structure that Ps can learn and eventually excel at. Home, by comparison, may continue to seem structureless and baffling. I see this a lot with Ps. Some Ps that I know are the ultimate workaholics by virtue of paying no attention to the clock (working long hours) and getting positive reinforcement at work for their productivity while their home environment simply baffles them and seems unmanageable.

Those same Ps may fall apart when the company structure changes. When a company changes leadership a lot of the older staff may choose that time to retire because they don't want to deal with the change in corporate philosophy. And I've seen Ps affected by this as much as Js. Having learned to excel in one corporate structure, older Ps may react negatively to the imposition of a new corporate structure that they'll have to figure out anew.

I've also seen this in the military. The rigid structure of the military may drive some kids batty (I saw a few kids driven over the edge when I was in). But it can also provide structure and skills and a haven for kids who couldn't find a niche or security at home or elsewhere. When I was in the military I saw troubled ESFP and ESTP gang members remake themselves and get a new lease on life in the military. That was also my own story to some extent.

I'm not suggesting that all Ps to go into the military; I agree that that that would be a radical way to resolve a minor problem.

But that's kind of why I was pushing the concept of "puttering" in my first post in the thread. It seems tough for Ps to just implement J solutions out of thin air. So maybe if Ps address the issue of nonproductivity in part by accessing their S, that will help a bit to get them moving. Obviously, though, puttering has to serve the end of productivity. Otherwise it's just more aimless activity contributing to clutter in one's life.

FL

 

[RDF]

... and then there's the colour of paint decision.

Lol! My wife makes those decisions. I want nothing to do with them.

FL

 

[ptgatsby]

I would add, however, that in real life these influences operate very much at the margins. IOW, in practice Ps and Js both do well in the workplace and the world. It's just that Js might do a little better when measured according to raw indices of income or whatever. But it's not to say that Ps can't succeed and be happy. (Not disagreeing with you or the statstics, just playing with the emphasis.)

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

Also, statistical results depend on what you measure. For example, Ps may actually find greater contentment in the workplace (where they have to learn J skills) than in the home where things are more amorphous. The workplace provides a structure that Ps can learn and eventually excel at. Home, by comparison, may continue to seem structureless and baffling. I see this a lot with Ps. Some Ps that I know are the ultimate workaholics by virtue of paying no attention to the clock (working long hours) and getting positive reinforcement at work for their productivity while their home environment simply baffles them and seems unmanageable.

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.

I'm not suggesting that all Ps to go into the military; I agree that that that would be a radical way to resolve a minor problem.

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.

 

[Totenkindly]

... 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...

 

[RDF]

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

 

[KMCE]

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.

 

[Natrushka]

... 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>

 

[Lookin4theBestNU]

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!

 

[ptgatsby]

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.

 

[RDF]

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)

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

 

[ptgatsby]

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

 

[RDF]

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.

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

I sympathize. Good luck!



FL

 

[Mycroft]

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.