Informing and Directing

[Orangey]

No, that's still directing!

hmm. I think informing would be something like "Jeez, you are being such a moron"

Ah, right, so that they get the hint that because you think they're being a moron, they should probably be quiet so as not to annoy you. So informing isn't just rephrasing something into a question, it's more like forming a request or demand around surrounding information and hoping that the person will make the connection between that information and what you want them to do. So it should be called "indirecting", lol.

 

[Gabe]

"So informing isn't just rephrasing something into a question, it's more like forming a request or demand around surrounding information and hoping that the person will make the connection between that information and what you want them to do."

Exactly.

 

[Eric B]

Yeah, I rarely if ever encounter the drill Sargent style.

That's just a really angry directive.

Would the informing version be "Here. You can go to this webpage to read this article, it's really interesting."

Yeah. Even moreso, it could even be simply "there is a website with an article that's really interesting'.

 

[Orangey]

That's just a really angry directive.

Yeah. Even moreso, it could even be simply "there is a website with an article that's really interesting'.

Hmmmm...I don't really experience anyone IRL with a true directing style then. Even my mother (who is a TJ to the core) says stuff like "you know, you left your cup in the living room", with the expectation that I will know to get up and get it right then. Of course, if I don't, she reverts to directing style (usually angry directing style). I think she may do this just to piss me off, though, since she knows that I hate those kinds of statements.

I think informing may be perceived as "nicer" or more palatable for others, so when attempting to be polite (as in most casual conversations, which is the majority of the interacting that I tend to do), most people I come across will do the informing style. I tend to do informing when I'm hyper - conscious of others perceptions of me, like when I meet someone new. Otherwise I do a fair mixture of both...and with closer acquaintances, I hold back less with the directing style.

The point: I don't know if identifying a directing/informing style will necessarily yield positive results when trying to type someone (in the P/J department, anyway).

 

[Jack Flak]

It depends on how deeply the amateur is willing to understand, or what framework he is familiar with, if any. Temperaments, and Interaction Styles (which are just temperaments in a different area of interaction) have been mapped to the MBTI, and temperament is based on expressive and responsive behavior scales. Directing and Informing is one of the responsiveness factors, and is very observable in people's behavior. So with this factor, a person familiar with temperament theory will know where it fits in the types, and it's also a big clue for someone trying to type themselves or someone else.

I don't suppose I can say it's useless, because I haven't tried to use it. It just seems extraneous.

 

[wolfy]

I Directing and Informing is one of the responsiveness factors, and is very observable in people's behavior. So with this factor, a person familiar with temperament theory will know where it fits in the types, and it's also a big clue for someone trying to type themselves or someone else.

It helped me a lot in deciding between ISTP and ISFP.

 

[Eric B]

Hmmmm...I don't really experience anyone IRL with a true directing style then. Even my mother (who is a TJ to the core) says stuff like "you know, you left your cup in the living room", with the expectation that I will know to get up and get it right then. Of course, if I don't, she reverts to directing style (usually angry directing style). I think she may do this just to piss me off, though, since she knows that I hate those kinds of statements.

I think informing may be perceived as "nicer" or more palatable for others, so when attempting to be polite (as in most casual conversations, which is the majority of the interacting that I tend to do), most people I come across will do the informing style. I tend to do informing when I'm hyper - conscious of others perceptions of me, like when I meet someone new. Otherwise I do a fair mixture of both...and with closer acquaintances, I hold back less with the directing style.

The point: I don't know if identifying a directing/informing style will necessarily yield positive results when trying to type someone (in the P/J department, anyway).

While "directing" and "informing" have a nice ring to them as names of the factor; they are really not that good as descriptors, because as I said, that is just one behavioral tendency of what is better termed "people/task-orientation". Everybody uses both, at times, of course. It's just a tendency to use one or other other, yet this can be affected by such non-inborn factors as learned behavior, particular situations, stress, etc. So your mother, while starting out with an informing method, was quick to switch to directing when that didn't work. Types other than TJ/ST/NJ would have probably been slower to switch to directing. (showing more patience). Again, it's not that they never use it, but the people/task orientation (or "responsiveness" to people) is the real root of the behavior, whether it actually takes the form of D/Inf language in any given instance or not.

 

[Gabe]

Hmmmm...I don't really experience anyone IRL with a true directing style then. Even my mother (who is a TJ to the core) says stuff like "you know, you left your cup in the living room", with the expectation that I will know to get up and get it right then. Of course, if I don't, she reverts to directing style (usually angry directing style). I think she may do this just to piss me off, though, since she knows that I hate those kinds of statements.

I think informing may be perceived as "nicer" or more palatable for others, so when attempting to be polite (as in most casual conversations, which is the majority of the interacting that I tend to do), most people I come across will do the informing style. I tend to do informing when I'm hyper - conscious of others perceptions of me, like when I meet someone new. Otherwise I do a fair mixture of both...and with closer acquaintances, I hold back less with the directing style.

The point: I don't know if identifying a directing/informing style will necessarily yield positive results when trying to type someone (in the P/J department, anyway).

hmmm, how is your mother TJ to the core? Directing types usually start off with directing, especially if they're your parents, or in some other postion where they're Expected to direct. (whether in the form of asking "could you please..." or plain old "do this").

 

[Orangey]

hmmm, how is your mother TJ to the core? Directing types usually start off with directing, especially if they're your parents, or in some other postion where they're Expected to direct. (whether in the form of asking "could you please..." or plain old "do this").

Well I say that she's TJ to the core because she is a neurotic organizer, is super pragmatic and can't stand not to have closure. I don't think that the directing/informing can really tell you all that much about a person's type. I mean, I'm not going to believe that my mother is a P because she uses informing communication before she uses directing...especially not in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary (regarding more important factors). And she still uses directing...especially when she is irate about something not being done, or blah blah blah. The Ps I know generally never use it.

I've also heard way more indirect informing than the one I quoted from her. For instance, my friend, who recently asked me to help him on a project, will start off asking me "so...do you have any free time today?" or "so, you're off today, right?" as a way of reminding me that I need to work on it. Makes me want to strangle him...but as Eric B stated, it's probably more palatable than if he came up to me and directly directed me to work on it.

 

[Gabe]

Well I say that she's TJ to the core because she is a neurotic organizer, is super pragmatic and can't stand not to have closure. I don't think that the directing/informing can really tell you all that much about a person's type. I mean, I'm not going to believe that my mother is a P because she uses informing communication before she uses directing...especially not in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary (regarding more important factors). And she still uses directing...especially when she is irate about something not being done, or blah blah blah. The Ps I know generally never use it.

I've also heard way more indirect informing than the one I quoted from her. For instance, my friend, who recently asked me to help him on a project, will start off asking me "so...do you have any free time today?" or "so, you're off today, right?" as a way of reminding me that I need to work on it. Makes me want to strangle him...but as Eric B stated, it's probably more palatable than if he came up to me and directly directed me to work on it.

Actually, it's probably more annoying than just asking. The "do you have time" thing is probably something I do, but I've never minded being ASKED to do something. Not everyone has knee-jerk reactions against the communication styles, and the approach to developement in the area of interaction styles would include becoming more flexible with directing and informing.

And per the Berens interaction style's model, directing and informing is not about J and P.

(and I'm still not sure about your mom. How could I be? adjectives aren't enough. An annoyed person will use a combination of annoyed directing and annoyed informing (that almost seems inherently obvious to me) So your mom informed once (yes, the example you gave was one of informing. The question is does she prefer directing or informing? )

 

[Orangey]

Actually, it's probably more annoying than just asking. The "do you have time" thing is probably something I do, but I've never minded being ASKED to do something. Not everyone has knee-jerk reactions against the communication styles, and the approach to developement in the area of interaction styles would include becoming more flexible with directing and informing.

And per the Berens interaction style's model, directing and informing is not about J and P.

(and I'm still not sure about your mom. How could I be? adjectives aren't enough. An annoyed person will use a combination of annoyed directing and annoyed informing (that almost seems inherently obvious to me) So your mom informed once (yes, the example you gave was one of informing. The question is does she prefer directing or informing? )

Well, this isn't exactly a thread about my mom. If I wanted others to speculate about her type, I'd start a new thread. I was starting my part of this discussion with the assumption that my typing of her is accurate...meaning I wasn't opening that up for debate (though you may doubt my accuracy...I don't really care).

And the communication style that is most annoying to you or I or anyone else is obviously a matter of personal taste. I don't mean to imply that any one style is universally more annoying than another.

And as to the bolded part, what can I say...I agree. Yay for Berens.

Edit: Although wait...I'm not specifically familiar with Berens. Is that the TJ = directing, NF = informing, and FJ and TP somewhere in the middle business that's already been brought up in this thread?

 

[Gabe]

Well, this isn't exactly a thread about my mom. If I wanted others to speculate about her type, I'd start a new thread. I was starting my part of this discussion with the assumption that my typing of her is accurate...meaning I wasn't opening that up for debate (though you may doubt my accuracy...I don't really care).

And the communication style that is most annoying to you or I or anyone else is obviously a matter of personal taste. I don't mean to imply that any one style is universally more annoying than another.

And as to the bolded part, what can I say...I agree. Yay for Berens.

Edit: Although wait...I'm not specifically familiar with Berens. Is that the TJ = directing, NF = informing, and FJ and TP somewhere in the middle business that's already been brought up in this thread?

No, that's a model that Eric B. regulary hawks.

Per the Interaction Styles Model, NJs and STs prefer directing, SFs and NPs prefer informing.

 

[Eric B]

And per the Berens interaction style's model, directing and informing is not about J and P.

Well, on the iNtuiting half of the types it is

No, that's a model that Eric B. regulary hawks.

Per the Interaction Styles Model, NJs and STs prefer directing, SFs and NPs prefer informing.

"TJ = directing, NP = informing, and FJ and TP somewhere in the middle" is not dealing in Directing and Informing alone, but also takes into consideration Structure and Motive, which are similar, and basically mirror D/Inf. A TJ will be even less responsive (that's the common factor, again) than an STP or NFJ, and probably even more likely to use directing language (while the other TP and FJ are considered Informing rather than directing. Hence those two groups being "inbetween").

 

[Gabe]

Well, on the iNtuiting half of the types it is
"TJ = directing, NP = informing, and FJ and TP somewhere in the middle" is not dealing in Directing and Informing alone, but also takes into consideration Structure and Motive, which are similar, and basically mirror D/Inf. A TJ will be even less responsive (that's the common factor, again) than an STP or NFJ, and probably even more likely to use directing language (while the other TP and FJ are considered Informing rather than directing. Hence those two groups being "inbetween").

(paraphrased) "The functions...not causal"
-Linda V. Berens



what is "responsiveness" again?

I still suspect that your interest in the idea of "directiveness" arose out of mistaking directing preference with bluntness or something like that. Is that possible?

 

[Eric B]

"Responsiveness" is basically another name for "agreeableness", or "people/task focus", or the original "response time sustain" of the old temperament model. It corresponds to both Directing/Informing (in the Interaction Styles), and Structure/Motive in the Keirseyan temperaments.
My interest in the idea of "directiveness" came from the desire to know how MBTI really corresponded with other versions of temperament theory using responsiveness and expressiveness. I never said that all bluntness was directiveness, or anything like that, but rather what I have been saying here; that someone with a preference for directing might be more inclined to be blunt, and that someone who is both directing and structure focused might be even moreso inclined. It is but one possible by-product of low responsiveness. Of course, any number of factors can alter behavior some other way. It's all just about inclination or proclivity.

I also don't understand the comment about functions being non causal.

 

[Gabe]

"Responsiveness" is basically another name for "agreeableness", or "people/task focus", or the original "response time sustain" of the old temperament model. It corresponds to both Directing/Informing (in the Interaction Styles), and Structure/Motive in the Keirseyan temperaments.
My interest in the idea of "directiveness" came from the desire to know how MBTI really corresponded with other versions of temperament theory using responsiveness and expressiveness. I never said that all bluntness was directiveness, or anything like that, but rather what I have been saying here; that someone with a preference for directing might be more inclined to be blunt, and that someone who is both directing and structure focused might be even moreso inclined. It is but one possible by-product of low responsiveness. Of course, any number of factors can alter behavior some other way. It's all just about inclination or proclivity.

I also don't understand the comment about functions being non causal.

What I take it to mean is that just because, say, NTPs prefer informing while STPs prefer directing, while all FPs prefer informing that therefor Ti does not have some kind of standalone value as a 'more directive' function than Fi.
You can direct or inform through any function. You can focus on motive with Te. You can define your affiliative role with Ti etc...

 

[Eric B]

A T indicates that it is either directive, OR structure focused OR both. And both of those tend to be less responsive than F. We're talking about preference, here (first two functions), not the others. So yes, an FP can use their relief or inferior Te in a motive focused way. But those with dominant or secondary Te will tend to be both structure as well as directive. (That's tend, meaning they will not necessarily always use those communications. Again, you cannot get hung up on literal definitions of "direct or inform" as if those two behaviors comprise all of the characteristics of what is being described).

I have since added a table to the stuff I had written on D/Inf/Str/M, showing how T, F, J and P relate to responsiveness. You can see it here ERICA vs EISeNFelT (scroll right above the table on factor comparisons this link goes to).