[NT] NTPs: Leaders?

[INTPness]

But honestly... I'm great in a crisis: when everybody is wigging out I'm normally pretty cool and effective.

That's the only time it's challenging. Other times, it's easy, boring, and mundane. If there's a time crunch, on the other hand, then it's time to get creative (Ne) and to be super efficient, cutting out all unnecesary and useless steps (Ti). In a crisis, there's no time for jumping through hoops and all that nonsense. Just get it done. INTP dream.

 

[jimrckhnd]

That's the only time it's challenging. Other times, it's easy, boring, and mundane. If there's a time crunch, on the other hand, then it's time to get creative (Ne) and to be super efficient, cutting out all unnecesary and useless steps (Ti). In a crisis, there's no time for jumping through hoops and all that nonsense. Just get it done. INTP dream.

Yep. When it comes to down to just getting it done its amazing how much less than usefull or simply useless stuff falls away. INTP dream indeed!

 

[violet_crown]

The modern culture of military warfare favors J. If that's a coincidence or not is up for you to decide.

It's not a coincidence. It is, however, unfortunate given that the nature of modern conflict better favors the strengths of perceiving-types.

Hahaha. *realizes he's been exposed*. No, I just mean a lot of J's wouldn't confess that a P could outperform them or be more productive for even 1 second.

I have no problem admitting that there are areas where a P could outperform me. I just have doubts that the average P is better suited to leadership than the average J. Having said that, there are notable exceptions. Steve Jobs (ENTP) is one, JFK (ENFP) is another, and I've heard Bill Gates is actually a closet *gasp* INTP contrary to his reputation as the ENTJs ENTJ (the irony of that alone makes it worth believing ). These men are examples of capable visionaries with the aptitude, flexibility, and persistence to harness the best in those around them to make big ideas come true. There might be a better way to define great leadership, but I sure haven't heard it.

 

[redcheerio]

[MENTION=7254]Wind-up Rex[/MENTION]

Leadership or management? Why not leadership?

Management, I agree. Leadership, I disagree, except that one would usually have to succeed as a manager first before proceeding to leadership, but that isn't always the case.

Leadership with the ability to delegate mundane admin stuff would be where I think NTPs would shine.

 

[violet_crown]

[MENTION=7254]Wind-up Rex[/MENTION]

Leadership or management? Why not leadership?

Management, I agree. Leadership, I disagree, except that one would usually have to succeed as a manager first before proceeding to leadership, but that isn't always the case.

Sorry. I'm not quite sure who you're referring to here.

 

[ReflecTcelfeR]

Leading.... I can do it. I've done it. Pretty relaxed style, brainstorm sift and enact after consensus pretty straight to process. Pressure from responsibility doesn't really scare me, but I don't usually go out of my way to become a leader, though it happens of its own accord at times.

 

[onemoretime]

It's possible to be skillful as a leader without having leadership as one's calling in life. However, when pursuit of that calling demands leadership, xNTPs can be extremely adept at it.

Take William Tecumseh Sherman, a quintessential ENTP, for example. If I were to take a stab at his life's purpose, I would guess that it involved the continuation of his family's work in creating and building the United States. It most certainly was not leadership, as most clearly demonstrated by his eloquent refusal to run for president. However, when the Civil War and his responsibilities as a general demanded he take a leadership role lest the health of the nation come to calamity, he became a beloved leader whose insight burned the way to an expedited conclusion of the war, and turned the world upside down.

The xNTP leader sets the leadership model which the xNTJ later refines and perfects. Keeping to the example of American generals, I can state with reasonable certainty that Patton (ENTJ) would more often than not defeat Sherman in a protracted campaign if both were given equal starting resources (e.g. 1880s tech). However, Patton only could do this because of his education in the very strategies that Sherman developed in the first place. Patton's genius came in taking the strategic insights that Sherman and others developed and executing them with tactical verve and perfection. However, this genius derived from his purpose, which he clearly stated was to be a soldier and leader of men.

 

[redcheerio]

It's not a coincidence. It is, however, unfortunate given that the nature of modern conflict better favors the strengths of perceiving-types.

I have no problem admitting that there are areas where a P could outperform me. I just have doubts that the average P is better suited to leadership than the average J. Having said that, there are notable exceptions. Steve Jobs (ENTP) is one, JFK (ENFP) is another, and I've heard Bill Gates is actually a closet *gasp* INTP contrary to his reputation as the ENTJs ENTJ (the irony of that alone makes it worth believing ). These men are examples of capable visionaries with the aptitude, flexibility, and persistence to harness the best in those around them to make big ideas come true. There might be a better way to define great leadership, but I sure haven't heard it.

[MENTION=7254]Wind-up Rex[/MENTION]

Leadership or management? Why not leadership?

Management, I agree. Leadership, I disagree, except that one would usually have to succeed as a manager first before proceeding to leadership, but that isn't always the case.

Leadership with the ability to delegate mundane admin stuff would be where I think NTPs would shine.

Sorry. I'm not quite sure who you're referring to here.

Sorry, I should have bolded the portion of your quote above the first time.

I'm asking if your doubts about Ps in leadership might be more about management instead of leadership, due to the NTP's weaknesses in dealing with organization and follow-up of many details, which management usually involves a lot of, but which leadership usually doesn't.

The distinction can be confusing, though, because most leadership roles also involve management and vice versa. To me, the distinction is that leadership involves leading people, mentoring, and making strategic decisions, while management is more about scheduling, tracking, coordinating people and making sure they're doing their jobs, and follow-up.

Leading.... I can do it. I've done it. Pretty relaxed style, brainstorm sift and enact after consensus pretty straight to process. Pressure from responsibility doesn't really scare me, but I don't usually go out of my way to become a leader, though it happens of its own accord at times.

That pretty much describes me, too. I don't care about power, but will step up as appropriate, as I have in the past.

It's possible to be skillful as a leader without having leadership as one's calling in life. However, when pursuit of that calling demands leadership, xNTPs can be extremely adept at it.

Take William Tecumseh Sherman, a quintessential ENTP, for example. If I were to take a stab at his life's purpose, I would guess that it involved the continuation of his family's work in creating and building the United States. It most certainly was not leadership, as most clearly demonstrated by his eloquent refusal to run for president. However, when the Civil War and his responsibilities as a general demanded he take a leadership role lest the health of the nation come to calamity, he became a beloved leader whose insight burned the way to an expedited conclusion of the war, and turned the world upside down.

The xNTP leader sets the leadership model which the xNTJ later refines and perfects. Keeping to the example of American generals, I can state with reasonable certainty that Patton (ENTJ) would more often than not defeat Sherman in a protracted campaign if both were given equal starting resources (e.g. 1880s tech). However, Patton only could do this because of his education in the very strategies that Sherman developed in the first place. Patton's genius came in taking the strategic insights that Sherman and others developed and executing them with tactical verve and perfection. However, this genius derived from his purpose, which he clearly stated was to be a soldier and leader of men.

That's a great story, and inspiring, thanks!

 

[Beargryllz]

Who wants to follow me?

 

[redcheerio]

Personally, I find some of the methods used by NTPs to be very odd...
But I definitely understand the way some works.
I know quite a few. None work in a steady pace, they all kind of sit around recuperating and then spring into action and get things done very fast.
It works really well, and they can handle all sorts of weird crisis scenarios awfully good.
I value that highly, and I don't nag about stuff like that. It's even quite a pleasant way of working, one which I mimic when around NTPs.

I don't believe in NTP upper management at all, though.

1. Not following the procedures of society, thus breaking laws and earning bad reputation.
2. Being too democratic is bad in a company. Listen to people, but don't let them decide for you. Too many cooks makes a toxic effing soup.
3. Organizations don't work well if they're not organized. The leader roll is a lot about organizing and a P in the mix is peeing in the mix.
4. NTPs are just that. Individualists. They are awesome on their own or holding up a tiny group of highly autonomous workers, where leadership is only symbolical.

NTPs fill a huge role already, they don't fit into the leader role though.
Besides, who the hell wants to be a figurehead?

That's the only time it's challenging. Other times, it's easy, boring, and mundane. If there's a time crunch, on the other hand, then it's time to get creative (Ne) and to be super efficient, cutting out all unnecesary and useless steps (Ti). In a crisis, there's no time for jumping through hoops and all that nonsense. Just get it done. INTP dream.

I'm like this, too. I work best under pressure, but I can't keep up the supersonic pace on a consistent basis.

YLJ, I think NTPs can make good leaders if they delegate most of the mundane stuff that they hate and suck at. However, I agree that they at least have to be organized. I think they also have to have fairly well-developed Fe. It is easier for an NTP to be organized if they are not weighed down with a lot of stuff they (we) find uninteresting.

When I'm weighed down with mundane tasks for too long, I feel like I wanna die.

 

[redcheerio]

Who wants to follow me?

<*crickets*>

 

[Beargryllz]

<*crickets*>

*eats the delicious crickets and quips about the high quantity of protein to be found in edible arthropods*

 

[violet_crown]

I'm asking if your doubts about Ps in leadership might be more about management instead of leadership, due to the NTP's weaknesses in dealing with organization and follow-up of many details, which management usually involves a lot of, but which leadership usually doesn't.

Disclaimer--my response to this is a little difficult for me to articulate, and partially contradicts what I said earlier. Ok, let's go!

First, my intuitive distinction between leadership vs management defines them in terms of their objectives.
Leadership concerns the execution of a specific vision.
Management concerns the execution of specific policy or set of policies.

Second, there are recurring leadership styles that work together to propel an organization towards a particular goal. A simple model of this identifies three primary modes of leadership: Innovators, Entrepreneurs, and Managers.

Innovators are dreamers. They imagine what could be, often in creative and brilliant ways. They can be very charismatic. But they get bored easily, and dive into new ideas and new visions easily and often, which can drive those around them stir crazy. They are not very good at building things (other than prototypes), and are not all that interested in financial viability. For innovators, the idea is everything.

Entrepreneurs are implementers. They boldly convert ideas into reality, overcoming any obstacle that gets in their way. They build ideas and prototypes into successful businesses. Even in bad times, they are not interested in maintaining the status quo. They want change, they want growth, they want risk-taking. They may be a bit vague about how they define success, but they won’t stop until they get it. Then they get bored. For entrepreneurs, success is everything.

Managers are trustees. They protect and maintain things, making sure the company’s sales, assets, and employees are not at risk. They create systems, policies and infrastructure to keep everything functioning smoothly and efficiently. They are not risk takers. Entrepreneurs leave when the managers take over. For managers, sustainability is everything.

Third, in the course of an organization's life cycle leadership will engage in some aspect of each of these three modes while emphasizing one. There's a natural continuum between the purely visionary role of the Innovator, and the purely conservational role of the Managers.

Ok, so I say all this to make the point that what usually comes to mind when you ask someone about leadership are "Entrepreneur" types, because they are the most common type of leaders. In this kind of role a Judging-type--especially an NTJ--will have an advantage as it plays to their natural strengths. The "Innovator" plays the crucial role of defining the vision executed by the Entrepreneur. This role plays more to the strengths of a Perceiving-type, specifically an NTP. Theoretically, these two types work together in order to satisfy the definition of leadership I provided in my first point.

In practice, however, organizations led by Innovators are rare. The usual set-up is an Entrepreneur with one Big Idea that they manage to implement. Unless they've started their own company, the leadership positions available to an NTP are entrepreneurial roles that don't really play to their natural strengths. An outside observer may look at this situation, and assume it is true because NTPs are shitty leaders. But that's not precisely the case. What is more accurate is to say that opportunities for the style leadership most natural to the NTP are scarce to the point of non-existence in an established organization. Certain instances render this argument utter horseshit, a few examples are: an organization with an internal culture (like Apple) where creativity and vision are highly valued; or, NTPs who are able to work with what they got in order to be effective in traditional leadership roles.

TL; DR: I think NTPs are better as idea people. Bow before the might of my original conclusion!

 

[redcheerio]

[MENTION=7254]Wind-up Rex[/MENTION]

^Those are great, and very informative, thanks!

I would argue that NTPs can make great Innovators *and* Entrepreneurs, while NTJs can make great Entrepreneurs and Managers. Most other types probably are best as Managers. Which is good, because most companies need more Managers than the other two kinds of Leaders.

Also, I think that traditional companies, once established, might only have Managers. However, leading edge companies will need to continually keep some Innovators and Entrepreneurs on board, rather than just to get the company started.

Or maybe they just need to hire the Innovators and Entrepreneurs as management consultants regularly to keep ahead.

What do you think?

 

[violet_crown]

[MENTION=7254]Wind-up Rex[/MENTION]

^Those are great, and very informative, thanks!

I would argue that NTPs can make great Innovators *and* Entrepreneurs, while NTJs can make great Entrepreneurs and Managers. Most other types probably are best as Managers. Which is good, because most companies need more Managers than the other two kinds of Leaders.

Thanks

Like I said, there's definitely a spectrum in terms of leadership styles with very few people getting to be purely one of any. I also agree with you that NTPs fall somewhere between Innovator---Entrepreneur, while NTJs usually fall more Entrepreneur---Manager. Having said that, I'll point out that there are few things on this planet more miserable than an NTJ in a purely managerial position. I despise red tape, and the idea of making a living as Lord of the Dispenser makes me sad.

Also, I think that traditional companies, once established, might only have Managers. However, leading edge companies will need to continually keep some Innovators and Entrepreneurs on board, rather than just to get the company started.

I agree with this as well. I think the type of organization, its maturity, and its internal culture will naturally play a role in the composition of its leadership. Nonetheless, on the balance there will always be more Entrepreneurs and Managers than there are Innovators. I think the scarcity of Innovators as leaders derives from the fact that 1) a lot of things have to line up in just the right way for them to be influential, and b) the vast majority of people just aren't suited to it. It leads to a kind of clustering effect, which is further emphasized by the fact that a driven visionary leader can simply make-up an environment that works for them if they can't find one, and fill it with people like themselves (think Silicone Valley).

These things being the case, I'm inclined to say that if you're going to generalize, my initial point about J's being better suited to leadership positions that P's still stands in practice. This doesn't mean a NTP couldn't be a good leader, though.

 

[redcheerio]

Thanks

Like I said, there's definitely a spectrum in terms of leadership styles with very few people getting to be purely one of any. I also agree with you that NTPs fall somewhere between Innovator---Entrepreneur, while NTJs usually fall more Entrepreneur---Manager. Having said that, I'll point out that there are few things on this planet more miserable than an NTJ in a purely managerial position. I despise red tape, and the idea of making a living as Lord of the Dispenser makes me sad.

I agree with this as well. I think the type of organization, its maturity, and its internal culture will naturally play a role in the composition of its leadership. Nonetheless, on the balance there will always be more Entrepreneurs and Managers than there are Innovators. I think the scarcity of Innovators as leaders derives from the fact that 1) a lot of things have to line up in just the right way for them to be influential, and b) the vast majority of people just aren't suited to it. It leads to a kind of clustering effect, which is further emphasized by the fact that a driven visionary leader can simply make-up an environment that works for them if they can't find one, and fill it with people like themselves (think Silicone Valley).

These things being the case, I'm inclined to say that if you're going to generalize, my initial point about J's being better suited to leadership positions that P's still stands in practice. This doesn't mean a NTP couldn't be a good leader, though.

Buuuuuuuuut, I thought we just agreed NTPs make good Innovator and Entrepreneurial leaders!





Just kidding, I think there is room for more Managers than Entrepreneurs or Innovators, which means room for more NTJs than NTPs. And yeah, NTPs can go off and start our own thing anyway.

 

[violet_crown]

Buuuuuuuuut, I thought we just agreed NTPs make good Innovator and Entrepreneurial leaders!

I agreed to the idea that an NTPs natural leadership style would fall somewhere between those two modes. I probably should have clarified I still feel they'll fall more on the Innovator side than the Entrepreneur side.

Just kidding, I think there is room for more Managers than Entrepreneurs or Innovators, which means room for more NTJs than NTPs. And yeah, NTPs can go off and start our own thing anyway.

Ya'll are the ones that brought us the IPod. I have to admit when you guys do it, you do it big.

 

[redcheerio]

I agreed to the idea that an NTPs natural leadership style would fall somewhere between those two modes. I probably should have clarified I still feel they'll fall more on the Innovator side than the Entrepreneur side.

Ya'll are the ones that brought us the IPod. I have to admit when you guys do it, you do it big.

OK OK, I guess I mostly agree with that.

 

[violet_crown]

It's a very persuasive banana.

 

[redcheerio]

It's true, you can't argue with the banana.

This is the banana's response to that: