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.
Society-wide? That has nada to do with Te, at least in this context. You, perhaps unintentionally, are equating Te usage with STJ
behavior...When you want to differentiate a function--i.e. figure out what it is, in and of itself, it's fun to look at the commonalities/noncommonalities found in the disparate types who use a particular function. Extroverted Thinking is characterized, above all, by bottom line effectiveness in the real-world
results. Te is about utility; predictable, efficient and desired results.
Process is completely subservient to
results. Process is useful only to the extent that it predictably achieves a desired end.
Here's LT:
Extraverted Thinking
As one would expect, NTJs, particularly INTJs, are often very specific about the process they themselves use to accomplish something, and even dogmatic about the "best method," but in positions of leadership, they often could not care less how you complete task x, provided you do it well.
Here's David Mamet, whom I believe to be an NTJ, in an excellent results-and-only-results book on acting:
Amazon.com: True and False: Heresy and Common Sense for the Actor (9780679772644): David Mamet: Books
One of the most hilarious things Mamet says is that X, Y, and Z actors who came through X, Y and Z schools did not succeed because of their training, but either in spite of it, or because their training included something peripheral to the method taught in X, Y and Z schools--namely, getting up on stage and performing many times. In other words, in Mamet's view, the essential things are talent and practice, and nuances of acting "methods" are meaningless blather...
I'm reminded btw, of Roger Corman, an INTJ filmmaker who was so precise in his empirical orientation that he used to do things like only paint the side of a piece of furniture that would be seen on film...