[NT] any nt's here NOT drawn to nf's for friendships and/or romance?

[simulatedworld]

The micro part is definitely way off the mark, my first point was that excessive attention to detail is quite the opposite of what an ENTJ would be interested in/prone to doing.

Yes, your definition of management correlates well to Te. Micromanagement does not. Here is how it is defined (through Wikipedia):



So by definition, micromanagement is not something an NT would be prone to doing, since "personal level" corelates better to Fe users, and "attention to details" correlates better to Si users.

Nobody disputed the idea that ESTJs micromanage more than ENTJs...so the comparison to Si doesn't seem relevant. Simply showing that ESTJs micromanage more than ENTJs doesn't really do much to show that ENTJs don't do it.

Once again your whole argument is based on the flimsy premise that Ni doesn't like details. HINT: ENTJs use functions other than Ni, and the extroverted Te and Se functions are the only ones that are visible to others. Ni might not like details, but Te and Se do, and those are the functions others actually see.

The question wasn't, "Do ENTJs think they're micromanaging?" The question was, "Do ENTJs come off as micromanagers to others?" Te+Se can definitely give that impression, regardless of Ni's quiet lack of interest in detail.

Other than that, you're operating on oversimplified definitions of N/S. The idea that "Ss like detail and Ns don't" is an elementary rule of thumb intended to simplify the concept for people who don't understand functions.

In other words, an ENTJ in the process of interacting with the outer world is going to be in Te and/or Se mode (which can and does focus on details in many situations!); Ni comes later when it's time for self-reflection.

Read up on Te--it insists on accuracy and control to such a degree that, even if you don't think you're focusing on trivial details, it often comes off that way to others. Remember that, as extroverted functions, Te and Se are far more evident to others in their interactions with you--we can't see your Ni at work, so even if you don't mean to, you can frequently appear to be micromanaging.

 

[Fecal McAngry]

Why is Te the function you would assign to micromanagement? I would say its most like an unhealthy manifestation of Fe, but all in all it is probably more of an enneagram thing. ENTJs are much more likely to say "I don't give a shit about how you do it, just get it done".

I guess it depends on what one means by micromanagement. ENTJs certainly don't, in my experience, nor should they theoretically--if what one means by the term is obsessive attention to how another completes a task. That's consistent with Si; ISJs presumably being the worst offenders. Then again, the term is flexible and a lot depends on the recipient; Jimmy Carter is an INFJ and was accused of such, blah blah blah...

Incidentally, I personally find SFJs far more annoying than STJs re: micromanagement; STJs generally respect logic even if your approach is a bit different, SFJs often have a method comprehensible to nobody but themselves; and it changes with the wind...

 

[Orangey]

The micro part is definitely way off the mark, my first point was that excessive attention to detail is quite the opposite of what an ENTJ would be interested in/prone to doing.

Yes, your definition of management correlates well to Te. Micromanagement does not. Here is how it is defined (through Wikipedia):



So by definition, micromanagement is not something an NT would be prone to doing, since "personal level" corelates better to Fe users, and "attention to details" correlates better to Si users.

Isn't management still a part of micromanagement? Adding the stem just serves to express the overly-detailed nature of micromanagement as compared to normal management. Te is still the responsible function in both cases. And as I have said repeatedly, yes, TeSi may indeed make a person more inclined to micromanage than TeNi, but the essential Te nature of the behavior makes it something that an ENTJ might be prone to do. When we say someone is a micromanager, we mean that they are overly-controlling of every little aspect of the project/situation/operation/whatever, leaving little room for others involved to deviate or work at their own pace. I think that's something that could potentially be said of all Te types, and I'm failing to see why it couldn't be said of ENTJs.

Also, I don't think I understand you when you say that the "personal level" of micromanagement makes it sound more like Fe. Are you using Michael Scott's definition of the term from The Office as a real, legitimate definition? 'Cause it's not...it was a joke on the show.

 

[SolitaryWalker]

The truth is that anyone can do 'personal micromanagement' and 'impersonal'. Just engaging in these behaviors does not make one either a Te or an Fe type. However, having the natural tendency to do one is highly correlated with having a Te type and the natural tendency to do the other with an Fe type.

As for this debate, I'd side with Orangey that it is natural for an ENTJ to micromanage, however, since this type is Intuitive, it prompts a person to apply an abstract and somewhat innovative thinking to micromanagement. It does detract from the tendency to focus on the details and the concrete that is associated with micromanagement, however, not enough to undermine the tendency of micromanaging altogether as the Te influence remains substantial.

The ESTJ has a similar, yet a slightly different natural disposition; there is a much weaker tendency to incorporate abstract notions into the micromanaging plan.

 

[Fecal McAngry]

TeSi may indeed make a person more inclined to micromanage than TeNi, but the essential Te nature of the behavior makes it something that an ENTJ might be prone to do. When we say someone is a micromanager, we mean that they are overly-controlling of every little aspect of the project/situation/operation/whatever, leaving little room for others involved to deviate or work at their own pace. I think that's something that could potentially be said of all Te types, and I'm failing to see why it couldn't be said of ENTJs.

FJs can be as tyrannical as TJs, if not more so.

NTJs really do tend to give you a LOT of latitude in how you get things done, provided you get them done.

 

[JustHer]

Isn't management still a part of micromanagement? Adding the stem just serves to express the overly-detailed nature of micromanagement as compared to normal management. Te is still the responsible function in both cases.

I don't understand what you are saying. Yes ENTJs are supposed to have a natural talent for management, how does this translate into exerting some sort of excessive control over somebody else's work?

Si is actually an ENTJ's vulnerable function and according to socionics, they are prone to easily missing the details and being too vague. How does it then follow that an ENTJ would be LIKELY to tunnel in on small details? Excessive unhealthy Te for myself (and most likely other ENTJs from what I've seen) would more likely come in the form of demanding people get things done without helping them out in the least or bothering to tell them how to do it.

 

[Fecal McAngry]

Remember that, as extroverted functions, Te and Se are far more evident to others in their interactions with you--we can't see your Ni at work, so even if you don't mean to, you can frequently appear to be micromanaging.

Yeah, but Si and Se have completely different attitudes re: details. An Si user will viscerally be suspicious (if he or she cares) of a process which is unlike his or her own process, an Se user will generally not give a shit; will notice but not judge. Extroverted perceptive functions per se are very open and accepting...

 

[Orangey]

FJs can be as tyrannical as TJs, if not more so.

NTJs really do tend to give you a LOT of latitude in how you get things done, provided you get them done.

Yes, Fe and Te can be similarly dictatorial. Why is that relevant?

And I'm pretty sure that individual NTJs vary in their propensities for micromanagement, so ANYONE could bring anecdotal evidence to bear on their arguments here. If we're talking strictly about functions and their definitions, then I would say that micromanagement is mostly a Te phenomenon (or Fe, though in a different way/in different spheres.) We'll just say, as simulatedworld pointed out, that it's an extraverted judgment thing.

I don't understand what you are saying. Yes ENTJs are supposed to have a natural talent for management, how does this translate into exerting some sort of excessive control over somebody else's work?

Si is actually an ENTJ's vulnerable function and according to socionics, they are prone to easily missing the details and being too vague. How does it then follow that an ENTJ would be LIKELY to tunnel in on small details? Excessive unhealthy Te for myself (and most likely other ENTJs from what I've seen) would more likely come in the form of demanding people get things done without helping them out in the least or bothering to tell them how to do it.

I don't know how to make this more clear. Micromanagement is a type of management. Te users (and Fe users I guess...but that's a needless irrelevancy that's been introduced into the conversation and would require its own argument/require us to suss out the distinctions between Te and Fe in the WAY that they each manifest management behavior) tend to exhibit management type behavior. Therefore if anyone is prone to micromanaging, it is going to be Te users, and ENTJs are Te users. That's not to say that they ALL do it, or that we can expect them to do it very frequently, or that they will do it more often than ESTJs/ISTJs (who have the detail-oriented Si), but just that their dominant Te makes them more likely than many other types to fall into micromanaging behavior.

I won't address your Socionics bit because I don't think ENTJ and ENTj are the same thing.

 

[JustHer]

I don't know how to make this more clear. Micromanagement is a type of management.

The type that is OPPOSITE from the type that an ENTJ would naturally use based on their functional order

That is the whole point.

It is a type of management that BY DEFINITION, relies on the use of Si. Overuse, rather.

I won't address your Socionics bit because I don't think ENTJ and ENTj are the same thing.

If you think the 4th function in socionics is irrelevant, how about 7th function then, as it appears in MBTI?

Are you saying that even though the definition of micromanagement calls for the use of Si, it is okay to dismiss the fact that an ENTJ does not use this function, just because they use the Te bit?

What about NFPs then, who have both the Te and Si combo?

 

[simulatedworld]

The type that is OPPOSITE from the type that an ENTJ would naturally use based on their functional order

That is the whole point.

It is a type of management that BY DEFINITION, relies on the use of Si. Overuse, rather.

No, it doesn't rely on Si by definition. That's ridiculous and you made that distinction arbitrarily by yourself. You have not established that micromanagement involves Si "by definition"; don't kid yourself.

If you think the 4th function in socionics is irrelevant, how about 7th function then, as it appears in MBTI?

Are you saying that even though the definition of micromanagement calls for the use of Si, it is okay to dismiss the fact that an ENTJ does not use this function, just because they use the Te bit?

What about NFPs then, who have both the Te and Si combo?

NFPs will occasionally act like STJs when in the grip of weaker functions, yes.

But your whole premise that Si is always necessary for micromanaging is just blatantly wrong. Go read some basic definitions of Te, please.

Any type can micromanage when in the grip of extroverted judgment--types that place extroverted judgment as a higher priority do it proportionally more often. End of story.

Incidentally, I personally find SFJs far more annoying than STJs re: micromanagement; STJs generally respect logic even if your approach is a bit different, SFJs often have a method comprehensible to nobody but themselves; and it changes with the wind...

This is an Fi/Te vs. Ti/Fe communication issue. I find SFJs far easier to understand, communicate with and work effectively with than STJs. This isn't surprising, given that I'm Ti/Fe user. I also find STJs to be much more annoying and incomprehensible than SFJs in most situations...again, just a question of sharing the same judgment preferences.

 

[Orangey]

The type that is OPPOSITE from the type that an ENTJ would naturally use based on their functional order

That is the whole point.

It is a type of management that BY DEFINITION, relies on the use of Si. Overuse, rather.

The act of managing something is a manifestation of Te (or Fe.) Si does not manage anything; it just makes the Si user more prone to paying attention to details. Combined with Te's (or Fe's) management capabilities, Si's detail-orientation MIGHT make types with those functions more likely to micromanage. I don't think anyone is saying that ENTJs micromanage MORE than STJs or ESFJs, so everyone is in agreement here. What I'm saying is that the recognition that STJs are bigger micromanagers than ENTJs DOES NOT mean that ENTJs don't typically micromanage. It just means, at most, that they are inclined to the behavior to a lesser degree than STJs.

And I don't buy the argument that the presence of Ni in ENTJs completely disconnects them from micromanagement; unless you think that Te (or Fe) has absolutely nothing to do with the behavior, which is not a plausible position, then you are kind of forced to say that types with dom/aux Te/Fe have (to varying degrees within their own set, of course) a greater propensity for it than the majority that comprises the remaining, non dom/aux Te/Fe types. So even if you think that Te/Fe plays a miniscule part in micromanagement as compared to Si, you still have to admit that Te/Fe dom/aux types are more likely than, say, TiNe or FiNe types (with no extraverted judgment OR Si in the dom/aux position) to exhibit micromanaging behavior.

But I don't think that micromanaging, which is to inappropriately exert control over little details of a project/other people/etc., necessarily comes from Si. Sure, Si users naturally pay more attention to detail than others. But that in itself does not translate over to the desire to control the little details of something/someone. There are plenty of STJs that have never micromanaged (meaning that it is not inevitable that SiTe or SiFe causes micromanaging behavior.)

I think an extraverted judging function in a high position AND neurosis can make someone a micromanager, with or without Si. So yeah, a neurotic STJ will probably be a "worse" micromanager than a comparably neurotic ENTJ, but the ENTJs judging function (being Te) still makes it likely that they will manifest their neuroses in the form of micromanagement.

In less words, this:

your whole premise that Si is always necessary for micromanaging is just blatantly wrong. Go read some basic definitions of Te, please.

Any type can micromanage when in the grip of extroverted judgment--types that place extroverted judgment as a higher priority do it proportionally more often. End of story.

If you think the 4th function in socionics is irrelevant, how about 7th function then, as it appears in MBTI?

Heh? I was just saying that the socionics types are not entirely equivalent to MBTI types with the same letter codes. I made the j on ENTj small to indicate that I was talking about socionics, because that's how their naming convention goes. I wasn't pointing out specific function positions by doing that.

Are you saying that even though the definition of micromanagement calls for the use of Si, it is okay to dismiss the fact that an ENTJ does not use this function, just because they use the Te bit?

Yes, basically. Except I don't think that the definition of micromanagement necessarily "calls for the use of Si." One does not NEED Si to be a micromanager. I think a greater portion of the behavior is due to Te (or Fe.) And the difference between a more hands-off manager and a micromanager is not the presence of Si so much as it is, I think, the presence of neurosis.

This:

No, it doesn't rely on Si by definition. That's ridiculous and you made that distinction arbitrarily by yourself. You have not established that micromanagement involves Si "by definition"; don't kid yourself.

What about NFPs then, who have both the Te and Si combo?

What about them?

 

[yenom]

I prefer Capricorns and Pisces.

 

[Fecal McAngry]

No, it doesn't rely on Si by definition. That's ridiculous and you made that distinction arbitrarily by yourself. You have not established that micromanagement involves Si "by definition"; don't kid yourself.

It really depends on what the Villain in our story is nitpicking over. Sensory details as pertaining to methodology is certainly Si. Sensory details as pertaining to outcome could be...an ISTP, for example. Or an ISTJ. Values and ideological "purity" could be me. And so on. WHAT exactly is being "micromanaged?" WTF does that MEAN?

 

[Fecal McAngry]

The act of managing something is a manifestation of Te (or Fe.) Si does not manage anything; it just makes the Si user more prone to paying attention to details.

No.

Se also pays attention to details, but it has an extroverted (read: open, nonjudgmental) attitude. Si has an introverted attitude and in people with a strong preference for Si in conjunction with an extroverted judging function it "looks" much like Ti or Fi despite being a perceptive function--where I might square data with my values and accept or reject on that basis, or you might square with truth/logic and reject or accept or critique on that basis, Si squares sensory material with standards of familiarity/acceptance/known context/etc. As a consequence, "anal" is the IS_J's middle name when other functions are less developed.

An ISTJ playing an ISTJ: YouTube - Dragnet Jack Webb "Alcohol VS. Marijuana & LSD" Great Speech

 

[simulatedworld]

It really depends on what the Villain in our story is nitpicking over. Sensory details as pertaining to methodology is certainly Si. Sensory details as pertaining to outcome could be...an ISTP, for example. Or an ISTJ. Values and ideological "purity" could be me. And so on. WHAT exactly is being "micromanaged?" WTF does that MEAN?

Fair point--every type gets highly particular and uptight about certain things. Those types dominant in extroverted judgment tend to get most particular about the way the external environment is organized--which leads to the form of "micromanaging" others that we're discussing here.

Si squares sensory material with standards of familiarity/acceptance/known context/etc. As a consequence, "anal" is the IS_J's middle name when other functions are less developed.

Right, but as a Perceiving process, Si only encourages the user to interpret things according to their relation to the familiar and to seek out perception of familiar kinds of information. When it comes to applying measured structure to our surroundings, the drive to do that comes from a judgment process.

Si on its own can't micromanage anything except one's own personal perceptions about how to interpret our sense impressions.

 

[Fecal McAngry]

Fair point--every type gets highly particular and uptight about certain things. Those types dominant in extroverted judgment tend to get most particular about the way the external environment is organized--which leads to the form of "micromanaging" others that we're discussing here.

In my own experience, having worked for both ESTJs and ISTJs, ISTJs care a lot more about HOW you get to "X."

 

[simulatedworld]

In my own experience, having worked for both ESTJs and ISTJs, ISTJs care a lot more about HOW you get to "X."

That's interesting. Why do you think that is?

 

[Fecal McAngry]

That's interesting. Why do you think that is?

The primacy of the Si. An analogy would be you vs. your hypothetical INTP twin Olaf. Olaf will pay considerably more attention to the logical purity of statements in conversation. You will let more of the illogical statements slide provided you get the gist or the essence of the intended meaning...

I'm sorry about Olaf's mole, btw. Quite unsightly

 

[simulatedworld]

The primacy of the Si. An analogy would be you vs. your hypothetical INTP twin Olaf. Olaf will pay considerably more attention to the logical purity of statements in conversation. You will let more of the illogical statements slide provided you get the gist or the essence of the intended meaning...

I'm sorry about Olaf's mole, btw. Quite unsightly

Right, but why is focusing on how you get to the desired goal more a function of Si than of Te? That doesn't really jive with this book you sent me. Te is described as focusing intently on making sure things are done according to the society-wide standards that govern the way things are supposed to be done, measured and evaluated. Te needs to be able to depend on the fact that when you do x, it always results in y.

Si is described as more just encouraging us to map out our sensory experiences by relating them to something we already know, and leading us to continue seeking out the same type of information/facts on things that interest us.

The desire for having a standard, precise and predictable methodology (and insisting that others follow it) seems more related to Te than Si.

After all, Perception functions only experience reality as it comes. Judging functions are the ones that attempt to organize it rationally according to predictable standards...after reading Lenore, I think some of the risk-averse tendencies commonly associated with Si are actually more related to Te than many people think.

 

[Orangey]

No.

Se also pays attention to details, but it has an extroverted (read: open, nonjudgmental) attitude. Si has an introverted attitude and in people with a strong preference for Si in conjunction with an extroverted judging function it "looks" much like Ti or Fi despite being a perceptive function--where I might square data with my values and accept or reject on that basis, or you might square with truth/logic and reject or accept or critique on that basis, Si squares sensory material with standards of familiarity/acceptance/known context/etc. As a consequence, "anal" is the IS_J's middle name when other functions are less developed.

How does this contradict what I said? I never said that ONLY Si makes people pay attention to details. Additionally, I never attempted to describe the mechanism by which Si makes people detail-oriented (or "anal," as you put it.) Nothing you've said here, therefore, contradicts what I said in the statement that you quoted. All I intended to express in that statement was that Te and Fe are extraverted judging functions, and as such are primarily responsible for observed behaviors such as micromanagement. By contrast, Si is a perceiving function, and on its own does not do anything. Like you said, to appear to be doing anything, or to be operationalized in some sort of deliberate action, Si needs to be paired with an extraverted judgment function.

All I've been trying to say to JustHer this whole time is that Te/Fe is the essential function behind micromanagement, as opposed to Si (I'm not sure at this point, but I think JustHer's argument is that Si alone is responsible for the behavior, not Te or Fe.) The implications of recognizing this are that ENTJs are (though perhaps to a lesser degree than STJs or even ESFJs due to their [ENTJ's] lack of Si) predisposed, by virtue of their Te, to micromanagement behavior. Now unless someone has some (convincing) way of arguing that no type is predisposed at all to micromanagement behavior unless they have Te/Fe + Si in their top-four function stack, or that Ni is some sort of absolute micromanagement preventative (neither of which do I think can be made), then there is nothing more to be said.