User Tag List

First 123412 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 127

  1. #11
    Fe this! Z Buck McFate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,441

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YUI View Post
    As I see it, your own dominant Fe simply doesn't want to recognize Te methods as representing a type of "people skills." But that's exactly the point of this thread. Te-Doms are in fact very good at handling people. But they do it in a very different context and style from Fe. In short: Fe=a focus on one-on-one interpersonal skills, whereas Te=a focus on group leadership (including using the slavedriver style of leadership, if necessary).
    Okay yeah, we are definitely coming from different angles of understanding "reading the room". If the definition of "good leadership" you're working with includes slave-driving (basically knowing how to effectively force one's own will onto others through coercion).

    A big part of my own perception on this is pragmatic. If you treat people like shit, then they don't especially care about doing a good job. They'll do the absolute modicum of what they need to do in order to keep the job, they need to be micromanaged just to do that much (which bleeds resources) - and they'll resent the micromanaging, which fuels the urge to 'get away' with as much as they can (it's a vicious circle that only gets bigger the longer it's left unattended) - and they'll only put up with that crap for as long as they need the job.

    In my mind, "good leadership" knows the value of making everyone feel invested in being part of the team. There's less micromanaging and less turnover, which actually leads to much better results. (Studies have proven this, though I'm too lazy and my google-fu sucks too bad to find them).

    eta: There's actually a germane side tangent to bring in here about how I think there's a kind of "bad leadership" that can apply to any type - that Js are probably worse about than Ps - that shouldn't be confused with Te strengths/weaknesses in particular. Any type can be a (shitty) leader by imposing their will on others in a coercive way - with Js it's more directly forceful. This is the thing I'm personally disagreeing would meet the criteria of "good leadership". There's kind of a whole other tangent - according to how I personally define "good leadership" - about why I find Te frustrating in this regard (and this other tangent was in my first post).
    Reality is a collective hunch. -Lily Tomlin

    INFJ 5w4 sx/sp Johari / Nohari -or- disagree with my type?
    Likes Consilience, SearchingforPeace liked this post

  2. #12
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    24,085

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Z Buck McFate View Post
    This is really interesting to me. I don't see this at all, really. With the caveat that it's "not true of all", my experience of Te doms is that they're tone deaf steamrollers (and I say "steamrollers" because of the tone-deafness). So we must have pretty different ideas of "reading the room", because I feel like they're generally terrible at it. This is something that actually systematically frustrates me about Te.

    This is also true, ime, of ITJs.
    As one of the aforementioned ITJs, I agree with this. That sort of reading the room and getting groups to work together as always seemed the purvey of Fe primarily, though perhaps other F-based functional combinations as well. Te at its best will understand that it is necessary to address and include the human element in order for a group to reach a goal, and we can certainly work at learning the required skills, but it is not our natural preference or forte. I for one prefer to work with someone who has these gifts and can take on that part of the project/work, so each of us plays to our strengths.

    Quote Originally Posted by Z Buck McFate View Post
    TPs on the other hand, I do not feel like they are tone-deaf to the people aspect (since they're willing to actually work through that stuff aloud and allow for outside input to weigh in on the conversation - and/or they provide a satisfactory explanation for why input is being dismissed). I rather envy how they seem to be able to spout this stuff off the cuff, almost instantly, because I really struggle with being able to work through this stuff aloud.
    I see this with my INTP. He comes across as much more friendly and approachable than I do, and can socialize with much greater ease and enjoyment.
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  3. #13
    Senior Member Zhaylin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    952 sp/so
    Socionics
    SLI Si
    Posts
    797

    Default

    I’m still confused about the whole thing. Where does Ni and Ne come in? ESPECIALLY where Fe (?) is concerned.
    If you’re properly reading a room and see things (people/emotions/objects) in various states which need addressed, what is the driving function?

    A person is crying but you notice the overhead light flickering. You’re in a position to tend to either. I’d say, the person who fixes the light would be using T lol
    But, what if they intuit that the flickering is causing the crying person a debilitating migraine which is what makes fixing the light their priority?
    What if the crying person causes you extreme discomfort, you intuit the flickering and fix the light?
    If you’re compelled to simply go over and comfort the person because you see they’re upset, I’d say that’s Fe.
    What about all the others though lol

  4. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    2,430

    Default

    This is an example of effective EXFJ style leadership.... Satya Nadella, Current CEO of Microsoft.
    https://www.wsj.com/video/microsoft-...BFD3DDE84.html

  5. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    316

    Default

    Good input! My thanks to everyone who contributed so far!

    To some extent, it sounds like some posters are arguing over semantics, that is, the definition of "leadership." That is, some posters seem to be saying that they don't think of Te as leadership or as people-handing skills because it's not a touchy-feely or people-friendly style in the same sense as Fe.

    But I would just counter that Te obviously *is* about dealing with people, because otherwise it would be Ti.

    To put it another way, the traditional "core sphere" of Te-Dom career choices is leadership and management. And leadership and management are about people-handling. It may be top-down and heavy-handed, but it's still about people-handling. It's just a different sort of people-handling from Fe.

    Also, let me put all this in a different perspective: I kind of see the F vs T split as reflecting two separate personal development stages.

    F stage: In the Jungian universe, there's a stage where the child kind of masters the concept of personal emotional bonds. Jungians call it the stage where men get in touch with their anima and women get in touch with their animus. I won't go into all that Jungian stuff. But it's basically the stage where the individual begins to derive a whole series of personal concepts encompassing such things as:

    --What is love? Loyalty? Betrayal? What kind of partner would I want? What kind of friend? Do I want a friend who competes with me, or a friend who supports me? Do I want a partner who challenges me, or a partner who mirrors me? What is sexy to me, versus what is not sexy to me? What causes me to trust people, and what causes me to mistrust people? What constitutes friendship? What do I do if I get angry at a friend? And so on...

    This is the whole touchy-feely realm that traditionally falls under F. And all personality types have F somewhere in their makeup, so every adult has at least been through this stage and made up their own decisions as to how they want to answer these questions. The difference with F-Doms is that they kind of "live" in this stage. That is, they tend to want to see the world through this particular prism more than most.

    T stage: In the Jungian universe, there's also a stage where the growing child asserts himself in the larger outside world. To compare: The F stage was more about family and close friends and was more of an early-childhood stage, when the child was still mostly operating within the family group. Meanwhile, the T stage is more about later childhood and adolescence, and it's about moving out into the larger world. It's basically about "social" concepts such as:

    --Where am I on the pecking order? What's my role in my social group? How much do I lead and how much do I follow? How do I deal with group conflict? What if I try to assert my wishes or demands and other members of the group frustrate me in that attempt? What if I fail? What if I succeed? Should I automatically do what others tell me, or can I do things differently from others? How do I handle the anger of others? How do I handle my own anger in the group setting? What if I get ostracized from the group? What if I get elected leader of the group? And so on...

    The tools that you develop at this stage are very different from the tools that you developed at the "F stage." Here, at the "T stage," you develop tools such as: The concepts of equity, equality, balance, social structure, social hierarchy, conflict management, anger management, leadership, followership, rank, pecking order, etc.

    Again, these tend to be top-heavy, leadership-style tools. They aren't touchy-feely like F skills, and they have lots of applications beyond people-handling: For example, the concepts of structure and hierarchy can be used in science to create models of organization like the table of elements or tables of species or whatever. (That's the direction that Ti tends to go in, by interiorizing and intellectualizing what started out as social interaction tools.)

    But in the Jungian universe, this all initially and originally develops in a *social* setting, and the core concept driving the T stage is the desire for asserting oneself in social settings: Where do I fit in, and how do I self-actualize myself while still respecting the needs of the group as well? Well, the answer is through things like pecking order and leaderships skills. And Te-Doms in particular tend to remain fairly true to this starting point, with their traditional focus on fields that involve leadership and management.

    To sum up:

    I described all that developmental background (above) so that I can show better why I would put T skills in the realm of "social" or "group leadership" skills, as opposed to F being in the realm of "personal relationship" or "one-on-one interaction" skills.

    This idea of seeing F and T as developmental stages naturally raises a number of other questions, such as: Can one in fact associate the different functions with childhood developmental stages? And where do N and S fit in, in such a scheme?

    I haven't found anything definitive on functions versus developmental stages. But that's probably because my reading on the subject is kind of random and hit-and-miss. Maybe an expert could speak definitively here. But traditional MBTI theory on the development of the different functions does say that the different functions develop at different ages. And I did see one Jungian text that said Jung called N&S the "irrational functions" because they developed very early in infancy, whereas F&T are the "rational functions" because they are developed later. So the jury is kind of out on that question: I still need to do more reading on the subject.

    And I'm not even going to go into N and S. That's for another thread at some other time.

    But I figured that I would describe this scenario of how F and T develop here at TypoC, and you all can decide for yourselves. You can determine whether it passes your personal "sniff test." Again, as I said in the OP, it's just something I'm toying with. I don't have anything official to back it up. It's just something that feels good to me, and I was curious if it worked for anyone else as well. Thus, I'm interested in any and all feedback on the subject.

    Meantime, I still owe the thread some ideas on Fe vs Fi (and tangentially Te vs Ti). That's coming up. I'll try to tie that material into the concepts of F and T as people-handling skills (in the developmental sense, anyway).

  6. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    2,430

    Default

    I am still struggling with the group vs. 1 on 1 distinction. BOTH Fe and Te are about the "objects" (people, environments) outside themselves because they are directed outwards (hence extroversion). Fe focuses on the interpersonal dynamics within groups and between people. Te focuses on the impersonal structures and efficiencies within systems.Of course, people are to be part of the system. However, the personal/interpersonal aspects aren't going to factor in as much when it comes to planning for efficiencies.

    Hell, my TJ friend was expressing to me how incompetent he felt when it came to people but I proceeded to point out how his ability to set aside personal issues/struggles to accomplish tasks was one area of emotional intelligence where he excelled.

  7. #17
    Somber and irritated cascadeco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9w1 sp/sx
    Posts
    8,247

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Consilience View Post
    I am still struggling with the group vs. 1 on 1 distinction. BOTH Fe and Te are about the "objects" (people, environments) outside themselves because they are directed outwards (hence extroversion). Fe focuses on the interpersonal dynamics within groups and between people. Te focuses on the impersonal structures and efficiencies within systems.Of course, people are to be part of the system. However, the personal/interpersonal aspects aren't going to factor in as much when it comes to planning for efficiencies.

    Hell, my TJ friend was expressing to mehow incompetent he felt when it came to people but I proceeded to point out how his ability to set aside personal issues/struggles to accomplish tasks was one area of emotional intelligence where he excelled.
    Re the bolded - I'm curious if this is true or not, but I think TJ's would need to chime in.

    For me, I really feel I have a decent grasp of efficiency/operations, but part of what makes things optimally efficient is knowing where to put people / where strengths lie and who works better with whom, who hates doing certain things (so I'll try to accommodate preferences when deploying), but also recognizing when I have no better option so someone ends up needing to do something they don't particularly enjoy. Is what I'm describing simply an F bent on efficiencies? fwiw I'm not a strong F either, going by dichotomies.
    "...On and on and on and on he strode, far out over the sands, singing wildly to the sea, crying to greet the advent of the life that had cried to him." - James Joyce

    My Photography and Watercolor Fine Art Prints!!! Cascade Colors Fine Art Prints

  8. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    2,430

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cascadeco View Post
    Re the bolded - I'm curious if this is true or not, but I think TJ's would need to chime in.

    For me, I really feel I have a decent grasp of efficiency/operations, but part of what makes things optimally efficient is knowing where to put people / where strengths lie and who works better with whom, who hates doing certain things (so I'll try to accommodate preferences when deploying), but also recognizing when I have no better option so someone ends up needing to do something they don't particularly enjoy. Is what I'm describing simply an F bent on efficiencies? fwiw I'm not a strong F either, going by dichotomies.
    It would be awesome to hear more TJ input. I wanted to clarify what I meant by efficiency.😀

    From all my discussions with TJ friends, they seem to rarely do a full on analysis of how person A clashes with person B, why or why or why not? How does it affect the company culture? They seem to view it as speculation and unreliable data (whereas I dig deeper to find the meaning behind the dynamic). It's more like what assets and liabilities are both person A and B bringing to the company and its goals?
    Likes cascadeco liked this post

  9. #19
    Mastermind Fieldmarshal Sacrophagus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    MBTI
    XNTJ
    Enneagram
    854
    Posts
    1,484

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YUI View Post
    To some extent, it sounds like some posters are arguing over semantics, that is, the definition of "leadership." That is, some posters seem to be saying that they don't think of Te as leadership or as people-handing skills because it's not a touchy-feely or people-friendly style in the same sense as Fe.
    I think those definitions are primordial to skim parts of the personality of each one, or at least, have a grasp on their current mindset.

    Ask me what leadership is and I'll say leadership is going your own way with conviction, carving your own path detached from the influence of men, and those aligned with your vision will follow on their own. You lead the way. That's what it's all about.

    It's goal-oriented in its essence, it does not concern itself with people, and only the drive to make things happen is what fuels that relationship in a managerial context.

    "I will highlight your strengths and I will see how I can put them to use."


    Just like Coriolis mentioned, Te is about efficiency and it should make note of the frustration of other people under poor leadership and drive whoever is in charge to either optimize their approach or allocate the task to someone else who knows better since the end result is all that matters.

    If I used Te the same arrogant way I did when I was an adolescent I would probably piss off half the population of the world and still not care. But that defeats the purpose.

    The premise says that Reason is the main tool, and one would expect that everyone should follow it. However, it's not the case.
    Upon searching I realized that in many cases, the content of the message does not matter as much as its recipient for many people. You would feel tempted to call them stupid until you give in to the truth that we humans are biased in nature and that is as fair as it gets.

    Using these conclusions, you can steer many situations in your favor. It's purely instrumental in concept.

    Now, if I had to make a comparison between the way I operate and my ENFJ friend's leadership style, I'd say she's a mother to all of them.

    -If I am to deploy two people to do a task, she will comment that they do not get along, while I don't care about that since they're individuals who give results.
    -I can infuse respect within a group, while she can infuse understanding and love.
    -I will encourage each one of them to preserve their individuality even among the group, while she puts an emphasis on anything that does not scream the word differences.
    -I have a sharp eye to read people's motivation and prognosticate their behavior, while she's more in tune with their feelings much like a sponge.
    -I care more about substance, while she cares more about its delivery.
    -She's also the kind of person who reads something disconcerting and types "...". It's hilarious.
    -In some rare occasions we might do the same thing, but with different intentions in mind.

    Regarding group dynamics, in times of turmoil and adversity, I am one who uses wisdom, knowledge, strength, determination, and leading by example to inspire them forward. In such times she feels useless because a harmonious atmosphere will not solve the problem nor pushes them to break their boundaries. She would still support them through everything even when support seems useless.

    Those are some of the key differences I can come up with in this short lapse of time.

    Some of your findings are on point. I will come back to you later.
    الخَيلُ وَاللَيلُ وَالبَيداءُ تَعرِفُني *** وَالسَيفُ وَالرُمحُ وَالقِرطاسُ وَالقَلَمُ
    Swift steeds, dreary nights, and the desolate wasteland, all know me full well
    As do the sword, the spear, the paper and the pen.
    Likes Zhaylin, Consilience liked this post

  10. #20
    Iron Maiden fidelia's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1w2 so/sx
    Posts
    13,145

    Default

    I'm finding this an interesting discussion and am still collecting my thoughts on it. Thanks for starting it, @YUI.
    Likes Zhaylin liked this post

Similar Threads

  1. Ideas for part time jobs that involve little social interaction?
    By DigitalMethod in forum Academics and Careers
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 04-03-2010, 04:03 PM
  2. Scarcity & Social Interaction
    By Eldanen in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 10-13-2008, 11:03 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