ESTJ: You will follow my rule because we've always done it that way.
ENTJ: No. My rule is more efficient. You will follow my rule.
Me: No. Both rules suck. I'm not going to listen to either of you.
My least favorite is the ENTJ, and for much the same reason you dislike the ESTJ: I don't want to follow your rules and you try to make me follow them. Your rules may be slightly more justifiable and efficient than those of the ESTJ, but they don't work for me and I resent the attempts at control. I work best when doing things my own way.
But the ENTJ is worse than the ESTJ because they actually enjoy telling you what to do, while the ESTJ sees it as their duty. ENTJs come off as extremely narcissistic and controlling. They are too much into methodologies instead of results. Who cares how I do it as long as I get the results you want?
Second worst is the ESFJ, with their anal-retentive BS.
Any EJ is bad. They all know how it should be done and they all want to tell you.
ESTPs can be cocky assholes.
Lots of good points here. Only thing I would say is that ENTJs are certainly more results-oriented than ESTJs; both can be annoying at times but I prefer the ENTJ supervisor because, since he's more into the future end result, he's at least conceptually open enough to let me get things done my own way if I can prove to him objectively that my method works to get the job done on schedule.
ESTJs are more sheeplike--they become extremely petulant over the tiniest variations in procedure (THAT'S NOT WHAT THE BOOK SAYS TO DO!!!), and not only that, they take it as a personal insult if anyone tries to challenge THEIR AUTHORITY IN DOING THE JOB RIGHT. Even polite suggestions to improve efficiency are seen as blatant insults to the traditional authority structure--if your suggestion doesn't stick exactly to every letter of the standard procedure, then you can fuck right off and take your bad attitude toward authority with you! I'M THE BOSS AND I KNOW HOW IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE DONE RIGHT.
Remember that their inner voices are "should" and "ought"; the ENTJ's inner voices are "what if?" and "make a plan to find out how we can do this more efficiently!" Consequently, the ENTJ is much more open to suggestions about conceptual methodology (though not as open to changing plans as an ENTP) because for her, procedure is merely a means to an end--the end being whatever overall goal she is trying to lead everyone toward. If the means can be altered in a new way such that the end can be achieved more efficiently, all the better! Just show me how you're going to do it and let me make sure the concept makes sense (says the ENTJ.)
Results are important to ESTJs, too, but they ONLY want to get there via the standard procedure--procedure acts as a stabilizing force for them and is an end unto itself. If the ESTJ carried out all orders literally and precisely as they were given, s/he doesn't feel responsible if the results don't come out as intended. After all, he did everything he was supposed to!
The ENTJ, on the other hand, will be more upset about these failures to achieve the desired results because s/he will feel he could have/should have done more to modify and improve the efficiency of the system that ultimately ended up failing. In my experience, neither ESTJ nor ENTJ is very easy to convince of anything most of the time, but if I take the time to prepare a new, rational, helpful plan for the way we conceptualize our goals, the ENTJ will
eventually listen if I keep politely hammering the point home.
I can deal with this and their broader, more conceptual/abstract focus a lot more easily than I can with the exceedingly singular,
even less flexible focus of an ESTJ, a lot of the time.
The ESTJ will never, ever, ever, ever listen to anything that suggests a fundamental change of perspective on the task or a restructuring of the traditional procedure or authority structure. The world of "what if?"s and abstractions about possibilities is both uncomfortable and threatening to them.