What it's like, at work, sometimes

[UDP]

Granted, you might understand it better if you saw the whole movie.
Perhaps a little more "violent" - but the feeling is very much there - "WTF are you doing?" But I was talking to someone about how there is incompetence at work in an area, and, this movie popped into my head.

"Ronin"

Particularly the questions about the brief case, the confrontation about the position of the guns, and such things. The questions about the brief case are related to information, information dispensation. And also "amateur night" comments.

The anger isn't about being a badass or showing off, it's because the functionality of the situation is at hand, and this is a major problem - especially when lives are at play, and precious things (money). Etc.

[munenori2]

So are you saying something about the specific type of his character or just that it's rrific? Fwiw, I think the facility manager at my job is probably Te-leading or creative and is very huge on these sorts of details. He doesn't care or is incredibly unaware how it comes across at all.

For example, he routinely walks the docks and watches everybody doing their job. Randomly he'll come up and talk to you. There's never any small talk at all. No 'how are you doing', etc. He just asks questions about what you're doing in a sharp, curt, yet emotionally muted, way that carries with it the implication that you're doing said thing wrong, either because you're doing it on purpose or you're simply an idiot. I mean, he's never happy or encouraging about anything. If he bothers to spend time interacting with you he's trying to get you to do them better, hence you feel like a failure.

Once he hopped in my trailer followed by my supervisor (SLE) and the head manager of the day shift (SEE?) and, without a word or any recognition of me, began pushing on my beautiful wall to find places where the packages gave way. I was furious and embarrassed at the same time, since most of the top row moved. He turned to me, as I still clutched the package I was in the process of loading when he decided to be an asshole, and the first words that came out of his mouth were, "Now tell me how you build a wall." I was simply stunned, trying to recall all the 'load methods' we're supposed to follow and regurgitate them. I was halfway stammering through the first one when he interrupted me and asked me what I was supposed to do when the packages were chest high and higher. I gave the obvious 'push them back' answer in a quiet voice and looked down, simmering and demoralized. "When you're loading above your chest, push the packages back," he repeated, then he just walked out of the trailer, leaving me with the day shift manager and my supervisor. I'm sure it was obvious how flustered I was, because the manager tried to change the subject with small talk but figured out quickly that I just wanted to be left alone. On his way out, my supervisor turned and told me I was doing a good job, which took some of the edge off, but I was still soaking in those feelings of anger and failing at something that really wasn't a big deal at all.

It just didn't make any sense to me that you would get on someone's case like that about fitting maybe six or seven more packages into a wall and completely sapping any desire the other person had to do the damn thing at all. Fwiw, I don't think he intends it to be as demeaning as it is, but he just doesn't get how people work. It's frustrating, it's stupid, and you would think he would see that it's counterproductive, because I know for a fact that I didn't work that hard the rest of the day.

Anyway, this video vaguely reminds me of that (my facility manager isn't threatening at all).

[unefille]

Mune, your experience with your facilities manager sounds a lot like the experiences I used to have my LSE boss. He used to walk around and ask people questions about how things were and you'd give a brief, generalised answer and then he'd start drilling you on specifics, looking for 'information' I suppose.

I always found it vaguely insulting, like he was fact-checking me to make sure I wasn't lying, with the implication that I was just slacking off and skating by, taking his money and not doing an 'honest job'. It felt especially offensive because of the 'factual' nature of the questions meant that I figure since the answers were so blatantly obvious, he was just doing this not for real information but to harass/embarrass/demean me.

On the whole though, I do believe that by the end of my time there, he believed that I was a pathological liar, a bad person, a cheater and 'thoroughly rotten'. I always had the 'perfect answer' but it was somehow...wrong for him. He would catch me doing something he deemed incorrect, yet my reasoning was always difficult to counter. Because of this, our relations were highly unsatisfactory since he was convinced I was wrong and yet not able to 'catch me out'. Due to my ability to somehow 'dodge' him, he, over time, formed a very negative opinion of my character. He insinuated as such several times. I think he thought the insinuation, rather than an outright accusation, constituted diplomacy. It doesn't.

[FDG]

Yeah, ESTj are the biggest assholes as managers, especially with me as employee. They hate the fact that I can be more efficient than them, prove them wrong with their usually short-sighted reasoning, finding better ways of doing things, yet still treating others as humans. It's even more hilarious to think that, if we both (me and the ESTj) were to keep doing our job without interfering in each other, we would double the output of whatever place we are in. Yet, this seems completely impossible to accomplish.

In a situation like the one munenori described, I almost end up fist-fighting with a man 25 years older than me. It was not a good advertisement for him as a person, I'm afraid.

[Smilingeyes]

I both like and dislike the example. The scene is evocative. But in this case the storyline actually says that the character IS showing off, because the character does not have the motivations that he pretends to have in that scene. But yeah, I like it.

[UDP]

I both like and dislike the example. The scene is evocative. But in this case the storyline actually says that the character IS showing off, because the character does not have the motivations that he pretends to have in that scene. But yeah, I like it.

Yes


His response to the question about the boathouse (and his end conclusion of "how the fuck should I know...") and other things are not particularly how I'd go about things - that's more "being an asshole", or in his case, dealing with other motives. So, my meaning or 'feeling of what it's like at work, sometimes' does not exactly line up with what the movie, and the character, is portraying.

[UDP]

Yeah, ESTj are the biggest assholes as managers, especially with me as employee. They hate the fact that I can be more efficient than them, prove them wrong with their usually short-sighted reasoning, finding better ways of doing things, yet still treating others as humans. It's even more hilarious to think that, if we both (me and the ESTj) were to keep doing our job without interfering in each other, we would double the output of whatever place we are in. Yet, this seems completely impossible to accomplish.

I'm in a situation myself like that, but, to me, the ENTj is actually jeopardizing what we're trying to do by having no awareness (or regard) for the details (the feasible, practical, day to day things), and trying to make everything bigger and better. I feel like I'm the one who's actually concerned with making things 'go well', where as he seems more concerned with chasing the horizon and doing various other things.

It's lead to some disconnect between us. And I feel the same way you do, actually, in terms of working with that same person without interfering - or even being on the same page would be nice - we initially complemented each other very well. But now it's difficult and cumbersome dealing with each other.

In a situation like the one munenori described, I almost end up fist-fighting with a man 25 years older than me. It was not a good advertisement for him as a person, I'm afraid.

Yeah, I think I know that feeling...

[07490]

I have the same and similar experiences to what mune, unefille and Fdg had with that type at work.

[UDP]

It just didn't make any sense to me that you would get on someone's case like that about fitting maybe six or seven more packages into a wall and completely sapping any desire the other person had to do the damn thing at all. Fwiw, I don't think he intends it to be as demeaning as it is, but he just doesn't get how people work. It's frustrating, it's stupid, and you would think he would see that it's counterproductive, because I know for a fact that I didn't work that hard the rest of the day.

Anyway, this video vaguely reminds me of that (my facility manager isn't threatening at all).

Mmm.
It's really tough, because, what you "see" - or what I see - is this constant flow of faults. And particularly because not many people see it or address it or like to address it, it feels like the onus is on 'me' to do something about it.

When I'm tired or stressed, it's particularly easy to just focus on the negatives - and this saps everything out of people, so I try to avoid it. But even that takes a certain amount of understanding - and most people, esp LSEs, probably don't have toooo much of it. But it depends on maturity.


I can easily, EASILY see an LSE being a total jerk in terms of being damaging to people - and yes, it is exactly counter productive. Addressing the issue in terms of productivity might be a good way to bring it up with the LSE - that is, actually, what happened to me when I was in an extremely bad way. An EII, (go figure) came up to me because I was treating people so badly and pointed out how if I'm so concerned with being productive or certain goals, then what I was doing was actually not very effective at all - it was a (at the time) brand new way looking at what I was doing.

Also, I could see Joe LSE, when having a bad day or more so just being a bitch or loser about things, as simply bashing other people in an effort to build himself up. I think I have seen this, actually. You can tell by the soudn of their voice, it sounds a little whiny or bitchy in how they are going about things - particularly by E6s maybe. E1 LSEs will have a "well I told you so" sound in their voice, or be overtly focused on you being wrong and him being correct.

[Park]

This reminds me of situations where I had to apologize for my behavior and go easy on other's mistakes and incorrectness just so I get the job done. It's one of the things I really hate doing but sometimes have no choice. It's also one of the reasons I often end up alone doing things that were supposed to be group efforts all by myself.

[Park]

It's really tough, because, what you "see" - or what I see - is this constant flow of faults. And particularly because not many people see it or address it or like to address it, it feels like the onus is on 'me' to do something about it.

When I'm tired or stressed, it's particularly easy to just focus on the negatives - and this saps everything out of people, so I try to avoid it. But even that takes a certain amount of understanding - and most people, esp LSEs, probably don't have toooo much of it.

Yes, that's exactly how I am, too.

[Smilingeyes]

I agree with just about everything said in this thread.

Now here's a funny thing.

I commonly treat my patients this way. I'm still the surgeon most patients request. And it's not based on experience or clinical skills either since I'm the new guy in the unit.

It... puzzles me.

I suspect this behaviour gives the patients the feeling that I'm taking them seriously and really doing everything possible to help them. *shrug* Maybe. And the issue is probably mitigated by all the jokes I mix in with the tough questions.

Also, I still don't get how people here don't get that House MD is doing this exact same thing, but that's another story.

I'm rambling. Please ignore all of this.

[munenori2]

I always found it vaguely insulting, like he was fact-checking me to make sure I wasn't lying, with the implication that I was just slacking off and skating by, taking his money and not doing an 'honest job'. It felt especially offensive because of the 'factual' nature of the questions meant that I figure since the answers were so blatantly obvious, he was just doing this not for real information but to harass/embarrass/demean me.

Yeah, that is the way it comes across to me too. Every time I see him walking up, I smile but inside I'm like FML. He, like the ninja, is everywhere and nowhere at the same time. I seriously never notice him until he's within about five feet of me. It's like something out of a movie.

On the whole though, I do believe that by the end of my time there, he believed that I was a pathological liar, a bad person, a cheater and 'thoroughly rotten'. I always had the 'perfect answer' but it was somehow...wrong for him. He would catch me doing something he deemed incorrect, yet my reasoning was always difficult to counter. Because of this, our relations were highly unsatisfactory since he was convinced I was wrong and yet not able to 'catch me out'. Due to my ability to somehow 'dodge' him, he, over time, formed a very negative opinion of my character. He insinuated as such several times. I think he thought the insinuation, rather than an outright accusation, constituted diplomacy. It doesn't.

The first sentence pretty much hits it on the head how I think he feels about me. I'm pretty sure he openly dislikes me, which is weird because every other guy in management I've worked with have always been more than pleased with how easy going and enthusiastic I am (especially the SLE and ESE). I definitely don't think I give very good answers to the kind of questions this guy is famous for asking though. It's almost like the way they're phrased always leave me trying to figure out his intent in asking that I get confused as to what he's exactly looking for. I honestly do feel like I come off looking pretty foolish most of the time, when if he actually had a drawn out conversation with me he'd see I knew a lot more than whatever canned answer he's looking for at the moment.

[Park]

I agree with just about everything said in this thread.

Now here's a funny thing.

I commonly treat my patients this way. I'm still the surgeon most patients request. And it's not based on experience or clinical skills either since I'm the new guy in the unit.

It... puzzles me.

I suspect this behaviour gives the patients the feeling that I'm taking them seriously and really doing everything possible to help them. *shrug* Maybe. And the issue is probably mitigated by all the jokes I mix in with the tough questions.

Also, I still don't get how people here don't get that House MD is doing this exact same thing, but that's another story.

I'm rambling. Please ignore all of this.

I've superficially typed House Te-INTp. What do you think?

[Smilingeyes]

I've superficially typed House Te-INTp. What do you think?

I sense risk of derailing a thread. I'm going to write an answer here but I suggest if you want to continue we might want to private or you might want to post in a pre-existing House thread.

....
I call him ESTj. Following reasons

1. The character of House is an attempt to rewrite S Holmes (who has been archetypally established as ESTj) into a hospital setting. The writer of House is trying to write an ESTj character.
2. House is primarily known for his analytical skills and his ability to slack off while doing usually physical tasks. T+ Si. (Yo-yos, piano, practical jokes, studying hindi, skateboarding. Whatever. He's intensely physical.)
3. House sucks at two things first and foremost at social skills, but he also sucks at ideas. The function of his team is a) to give him ideas b) to be playthings and targets of jokes c) company who have to stand him.
4. House hates Ni. Warren Buffett INTp is known for saying "It's better to be close to correct than absolutely wrong." This is a very Ni way to go. House would much rather go one step further every time in every situation. Very EJ temperamentish.
5. In series 1. where the character of House is established, his lines about his philosophy of doing things are generally from a rational point of view. Later on this angle has been ignored because the viewers don't really care about his philosophy as much as his wacky hijinks. The actor (who is irrational) has taken on more and more charge of the role. Basically early House = House, later seasons = this British comedy actor doing wacky stuff.
6. Reinin criteria: Monologues that sound like he's discussing with himself 'taciturn' yes, 'negative' yes, difficulty detaching himself from a situation once committed 'process' yes, ignoring major objectives for the sake of small circumstantial victories 'tactical' yes, completely ignoring the hospital power structure 'judicious' yes, hating shows of pathos and great emotions 'grave'. And so on. Each and every Reinin criteria checks out.
7. His relationships: Cameron = Ij-Fi (instant love interest who he still ignores). Wilson ENFp (his enabler). Chase = ESTj (tries to act like House (except he's a more healthy individual), likes him, takes his girl Cameron), Foreman = INTp (the guy who thinks he's above house, his supervisor). Cuddy = ESFp (his benefactor, the person who prefers Foreman to House in every way, also works much better with Wilson). All long-term relationships work perfectly.

.
I don't think it would be difficult for me to write more reasons. I don't know how many are required though, or if any amount will make people see it. *shrug* But I think if anything can ever suffice, that should suffice.

[Park]

Thanks Smilex. Thats interesting and it makes a lot of sense. I haven't seen that much of the show, but from what I have, I got the impression that House was kind of mentally detached and good at predicting the outcomes out of situations, and I interpreted the "working ahead" and "being one step further" thing as strong and valued Ni. I considered Te EJ, but perhaps it was the type of the actor that made me go for IP > EJ temperament. And Te > Fe was rather obvious I think.

edit: I apologize to Ryu for this derailment. It doesn't have to go further.

[FDG]

Also, I still don't get how people here don't get that House MD is doing this exact same thing, but that's another story.

I totally agree (also with your analysis above).

[marooned]

Strange. I don't understand why the guy was being such an asshole in the clip. I agreed with him at first. It is unreasonable to withhold information especially in a dangerous job, and had I been in his place (totally not knowing the context of the film) I would have demanded all information or I don't do it. I will not proceed without complete information, especially if it's this sort of life and death thing (which, well, I wouldn't be doing anyway, but nevermind that). And how can I evaluate if I'm doing the right thing or not if I don't even know what my actions are contributing to? I thought his demand for more money though was not a solution, so it seemed like he was just capitalizing on the situation. He must be confident that he'll be able to proceed without all the information (where as I wouldn't be nearly as confident in my ability to just "wing it").

As for the example with the diagram, that didn't make any sense to me at all. If you want everyone to have all the details and all the information, than give it to them, and say 'you all need to know this off the top of your head. Not only do you need to know it, you need to understand it. You may need information to be correct in your mind so when you have to make a fast decision in the moment you have the resources you need.' I would then grill them over and over and over to make sure that they had the correct knowledge and could act on it in a moment, making the correct decisions (assuming I could um do this, I'm pretending I'm him for the most part)... also by "correct" I just mean being able to utilize/integrate the knowledge quickly into the decision making process. I wouldn't try to be an ass because I want them to learn, but I wouldn't be nice, encouraging or understanding either, because in sudden split second situations, no one is going to be nice and encouraging, no one is going to wait while you try to think. When I was satisfied that they had what they needed I would proceed. Of course I would want to start on this early and cover what was going to happen (i.e. I would want ALL information pertaining to "what we would be up against" and why we are doing what we are doing and what is in the case... because I need to be able to see the whole thing clearly). If anyone had confidence issues they would be out, because there's not enough time to fix that. But what I wouldn't do is ask them to provide facts and information when I didn't let them know what I expected them to know. And I certainly wouldn't do it if I didn't even know these important details (it would be more like, we all need to know these details, it's a pain, so let's get started). It seems he was just being an ass because the other guy was trying to introduce "a little trick he learned" as though he was "above" the others with more expertise that he was now going to share with them (assuming the role of teacher). I think it was that which De Niro's character didn't like, so he acted to put the guy "in his place" and at some point had decided he didn't like the guy at all and wanted him gone.

I almost am wondering if the first bit was more about and the second part more about ... ?

I'm actually really confused about some portrayals of LSEs. I only know one LSE irl and I do know he had problems at work in his managerial position and had to take workshops about how to be a more "human" manager. But I doubt he was being as asshole. It was probably that he just called up efficiency matters, pointing out the negative all the time and not giving any positive feedback, which then led others to think he didn't like them or thought they were doing a bad job. And after enough complaints he decided to do something to fix the problem and be a better manager. Because he didn't care about human relations in the work context as much as getting things done in the most efficient way possible, he overlooked the human side at first. He did feel bad that his actions were causing a difficult situation for others and that was his motivation to fix it. Though I guess the point is he is a nice person, so deliberately being an asshole is probably not something he frequently does. Sometimes he seems to have a sort of testosterone-fueled competitive streak expressed in a subtle way that makes it kind of annoying (it's like competitions arising between middle aged preppy white guys on a golf course or something). But that's all.

I remember a manager I worked under once whose type I still can't pin down in memories. I think if there was a clip to show of his standard operating procedure, most people here would say LSE for his type. I just don't know though. On the one hand he was always surveying everything around him, and would stand in one spot staring right into you (from the side so that he would only be in your peripheral vision making you, I mean me, anxious). It was almost impossible not to notice him, like his personality was so strong it seemed to pull things to it. He seemed to be critical and never pleased with anything I did, but this was primarily in my interactions with customers () which I think didn't meet his criteria of super fake smiling friendliness (like what he did and it was really obnoxious). I wanted to avoid him as much as possible. And he seemed to want to guilt trip me, and imply I was doing things (morally) wrong when I wasn't and inquire about my "conscience." I think he didn't understand me at all. The only thing I think he did understand was when I was feeling nervous or anxious because this seemed to amuse him in a terribly degrading patronizing way. But his presence was so strong, and the way his eyes seemed to survey and pierce through everything, sort of makes me wonder if he was actually LSI or something. And despite the fake friendliness (that was so obviously not genuine) he adopted, he had terrible people skills. (I'm not asking that people say what type he was or anything, as that is hardly enough information to get much from... I was mainly expressing my LSE/LSI confusion.)

[UDP]

edit: I apologize to Ryu for this derailment. It doesn't have to go further.

don't worry about it.

[Minde]

For example, he routinely walks the docks and watches everybody doing their job. Randomly he'll come up and talk to you. There's never any small talk at all. No 'how are you doing', etc. He just asks questions about what you're doing in a sharp, curt, yet emotionally muted, way that carries with it the implication that you're doing said thing wrong, either because you're doing it on purpose or you're simply an idiot. I mean, he's never happy or encouraging about anything. If he bothers to spend time interacting with you he's trying to get you to do them better, hence you feel like a failure.

Once he hopped in my trailer followed by my supervisor (SLE) and the head manager of the day shift (SEE?) and, without a word or any recognition of me, began pushing on my beautiful wall to find places where the packages gave way. I was furious and embarrassed at the same time, since most of the top row moved. He turned to me, as I still clutched the package I was in the process of loading when he decided to be an asshole, and the first words that came out of his mouth were, "Now tell me how you build a wall." I was simply stunned, trying to recall all the 'load methods' we're supposed to follow and regurgitate them. I was halfway stammering through the first one when he interrupted me and asked me what I was supposed to do when the packages were chest high and higher. I gave the obvious 'push them back' answer in a quiet voice and looked down, simmering and demoralized. "When you're loading above your chest, push the packages back," he repeated, then he just walked out of the trailer, leaving me with the day shift manager and my supervisor. I'm sure it was obvious how flustered I was, because the manager tried to change the subject with small talk but figured out quickly that I just wanted to be left alone. On his way out, my supervisor turned and told me I was doing a good job, which took some of the edge off, but I was still soaking in those feelings of anger and failing at something that really wasn't a big deal at all.

It just didn't make any sense to me that you would get on someone's case like that about fitting maybe six or seven more packages into a wall and completely sapping any desire the other person had to do the damn thing at all. Fwiw, I don't think he intends it to be as demeaning as it is, but he just doesn't get how people work. It's frustrating, it's stupid, and you would think he would see that it's counterproductive, because I know for a fact that I didn't work that hard the rest of the day.

Yeah, that is the way it comes across to me too. Every time I see him walking up, I smile but inside I'm like FML. He, like the ninja, is everywhere and nowhere at the same time. I seriously never notice him until he's within about five feet of me. It's like something out of a movie.



The first sentence pretty much hits it on the head how I think he feels about me. I'm pretty sure he openly dislikes me, which is weird because every other guy in management I've worked with have always been more than pleased with how easy going and enthusiastic I am (especially the SLE and ESE). I definitely don't think I give very good answers to the kind of questions this guy is famous for asking though. It's almost like the way they're phrased always leave me trying to figure out his intent in asking that I get confused as to what he's exactly looking for. I honestly do feel like I come off looking pretty foolish most of the time, when if he actually had a drawn out conversation with me he'd see I knew a lot more than whatever canned answer he's looking for at the moment.

I wonder if I would respond any differently than you. I'm trying to think about if someone, a boss, came up to me and started quizzing me like that. I think, especially if I wanted to please people, including the boss, I'd probably react similarly - abashed and a little hurt. If I couldn't get the impression that I was doing at least something right sometimes, I'd get demoralized after awhile and probably just quit. Well, maybe I wouldn't actually quit, and if so not for a very long time, unless there was an easy alternative. (There's almost always this little part in me that say, "But maybe this time..." and "I'm committed".) But if all I got was criticism and little to no encouragement and affirmation, I'd be miserable.

[Smilingeyes]

Well...

I feel the need to point out a few things.

1. The ESTj in Munenori's example was walking around with an ESFp and an ESTp. So he was probably stressed, strained and pissy. Not saying that that particular individual might not be like that consistently.

2. The less Si there is, the less there is of that controlling micromanaging instinct. Te subtypes just want to see things move on and only start acting like buggers if there's a real problem. Occasional bits of Ni shining through give people like me the habit of actually giving out quite a bit of encouragement. That's actually ENTj behaviour but it shines through with the Te subtypes. Si gives the instinct that you would do everything better than person x and that really doesn't go well with being a manager. It gives one the instinct to try to take over someone else's task. It's good if the other person is Ne and doesn't want to do anything in the first place, but otherwise, not so good. Anyway, everyone in this thread is correct, the social message of that behaviour is "stop doing that, let me do this." The person may rationalize that he is only trying to show "how" something is done, but that's not the social message.

3. I really like Munenori's "ninja" reference.

[meatburger]

I can see how LSE's can be a bit intimidating to some, i suppose as an ENFp though they treat me very well. There is a younger ESTj at my uni and he knocked on the window last night with some people and asked if i wanted some pizza. I was cooking dinner and i said maybe i could buy a couple of slices. He just laughed at me and said "you cant fucken buy two peices of pizza". Anyway i saw him today and i asked if everyone ate all their pizza and he said nah Lia didn't. I said "well i could have had her extra peices douchebag". He seemed quite taken aback by this lol. Ive had LSE's screw with me in the past and i often bite back hehe.

This thread actually reminds me of my LSI dad though. His blunt way of telling me at least im doing something wrong is pretty unmatched.

[UDP]

LSI or LSE or anybody else, there is a very important difference between:

(A) informing someone that something is wrong (which might lead to actual improvement), or,
(B) berating someone for no real gain: telling someone they are wrong and even getting off on it

I don't like the latter, and the more I see someone doing the latter, the more angry I get at them. Actually, I get angry at them in the First way that I described. People who unnecessarily criticize others because of their own esteem or ego problems - those people I tend to confront about what they are doing.


Just to be clear, it is still a difference in (B) and what winterpark and I agree upon (we'll call it (C) ), in terms of "the constant flow of negatives" - they are two different kinds of stresses that can make us "cranky" or otherwise unpleasant.

What I said in this post:

It's really tough, because, what you "see" - or what I see - is this constant flow of faults. And particularly because not many people see it or address it or like to address it, it feels like the onus is on 'me' to do something about it.

When I'm tired or stressed, it's particularly easy to just focus on the negatives - and this saps everything out of people, so I try to avoid it. But even that takes a certain amount of understanding - and most people, esp LSEs, probably don't have toooo much of it. But it depends on maturity

We'll call that (C)

The difference between B and C is that B is simply a negative state - when people get into B modes, it has to do with outlook and MORE than just being tired or stressed. C is more about being worn down, and has to do with that tiredness or stress creating a lack of balance.

C can turn into B if C lasts too long. But, to me, when people get in B states, it's just very bad. Because at that time it is no longer about being productive at all - there is no real concern, it's just being bitchy. C goes into B when the person in state C has given up and doesn't care, and is just inclined to shit on everyone; it's a very low state.


So to put it into a contiuum, I suppose...
A - good state
C - getting stressed / not so good. In need of rest or recovery.
B - Very bad, negative, producing no good fruit - for self or others.


When I'm feeling myself in C or getting more and more towards the lower part of C and towards B, I know I have to check out, because at that point whatever I'm doing is getting bad. The problem is that if you really get into B state, it's hard to care, because you've just (subconsciously at least) given up, you don't feel responsible, you just blame other things. It's not a healthy state.


Sometimes stressed out managers linger in between B and C states, which is unfortunate. I'm not sure what to say, just that they need to get a better hold on themselves and try to get back towards A, towards being fruitful in their insights and flaw-finding.

[Park]

I, personally, see a very thin line between A and C. I can very easily find myself in a mixture of A and C when in a good/neutral state of mind (w/ low or no stress). I guess what sets them apart is exactly that - the level of stress and tiredness. But my point is that I don't need to get stressed or feel bad in order to drift into C.

B is something I try to avoid at all costs and never let myself be drawn in. However, with high levels of stress and situations where people manage to piss the crap out of me, it can happen.

[krieger]

Si gives the instinct that you would do everything better than person x and that really doesn't go well with being a manager. It gives one the instinct to try to take over someone else's task. It's good if the other person is Ne and doesn't want to do anything in the first place, but otherwise, not so good.

In what way would you say Ni types are less receptive to this kind of behavior? Is it related to some desire to reach a collective consensus on how to act, and to rejection of firm opinions on the part of any single person on this?

[UDP]

mmm

Just to be more clear,

It's really tough, because, what you "see" - or what I see - is this constant flow of faults. And particularly because not many people see it or address it or like to address it, it feels like the onus is on 'me' to do something about it.

When I'm tired or stressed, it's particularly easy to just focus on the negatives - and this saps everything out of people, so I try to avoid it. But even that takes a certain amount of understanding - and most people, esp LSEs, probably don't have toooo much of it. But it depends on maturity

C is referring to the second paragraph.

(Granted, I've presented a very general framework that many probably relate to on a general level, and others not. It's not really that concrete or definite, nor was it intended to be.)

So for now, I'll just speak for myself.
The first paragraph is how I am by nature, I always see those things.
But when I'm at my best, there is not attachment to them being "good" or "bad", it's more just the nature of how something works, and/or how it could work better, and/or how it is not working as well as it should or needs to work. The emphasis is on what it is 'not', perhaps.

C is more when there is more stress or tiredness involved - emotionally or physically. Frustration, anger, disappointment, weariness, whatever. I am able to see it as a clear difference, from A. And I'm more prone to C if, say, I haven't gotten enough sleep or I'm very stressed out - again, still having that kind of "intention" of pointing out things so that such can be improved, but perhaps not being fully aware of the consequences.

Hmm that might be another good way of explaining it, perhaps - where A is actually a state of more awareness in general. Awareness of other people and what's going on. Compared to B, which is lowest awareness, and low concern. C is the in between, slipping phase.

[Park]

Just to be more clear,

C is referring to the second paragraph.

Well yeah, I think it makes a bit more sense that way.

C is more when there is more stress or tiredness involved - emotionally or physically. Frustration, anger, disappointment, weariness, whatever. I am able to see it as a clear difference, from A. And I'm more prone to C if, say, I haven't gotten enough sleep or I'm very stressed out - again, still having that kind of "intention" of pointing out things so that such can be improved, but perhaps not being fully aware of the consequences.

I understand this and I can relate.

Hmm that might be another good way of explaining it, perhaps - where A is actually a state of more awareness in general. Awareness of other people and what's going on. Compared to B, which is lowest awareness, and low concern. C is the in between, slipping phase.

Yeah, that makes sense. I think the words "awareness" and "concern" are spot-on. (at least for me they are)

[cracka]

I agree with just about everything said in this thread.

Now here's a funny thing.

I commonly treat my patients this way. I'm still the surgeon most patients request. And it's not based on experience or clinical skills either since I'm the new guy in the unit.

It... puzzles me.

I suspect this behaviour gives the patients the feeling that I'm taking them seriously and really doing everything possible to help them. *shrug* Maybe. And the issue is probably mitigated by all the jokes I mix in with the tough questions.

Also, I still don't get how people here don't get that House MD is doing this exact same thing, but that's another story.

I'm rambling. Please ignore all of this.

I can see this being so due to being a doctor more than a "boss" of someone. You can do it because, as you said, people are pretty much forced to take you seriously, no matter how you speak to them. Hopefully, because you have their health in mind. If they sense you're being that way just to be a dick, then they probably wouldn't come back... this would be more of how the people spoken of earlier in this thread seem to be being viewed, but again, they're not doctors.

[Minde]

Hm, Cracka, your post reminded me of one doctor I had once (and not for very long), who would say blunt, rather mean things. And who was a bit pushy.


... Anyway, what I logged on to say was:

I wonder if saying to an ESTj, "Be nicer!" is like saying to an INFj, "Watch where you're going!"?

[UDP]

... Anyway, what I logged on to say was:

I wonder if saying to an ESTj, "Be nicer!" is like saying to an INFj, "Watch where you're going!"?

first, i'm not sure that the 'watch where you're going' thing is the best counterpart to telling an ESTj to being nice.

I tend to tell EIIs to try to take better care of themselves. What you said seems to be related to physical clumsiness, which I understand coming from you, but it might be too specific to you. I don't generally feel the urge to tell EIIs to 'stop being so clumsy". But I do frequently get the urge to tell them to take care of themselves - in terms of eating, getting better sleep, stop letting people use them / exploit them, and so on.

I do find input from people on who to relate to others better as useful... though definitely moreso if they seem skilled at relating to people well, and have strong ethics. (big surprise). But I also won't just 'be nice' for the sake of being nice, or just because someone has told me to, there has to be good reason. And I definitely won't just 'be nice' if I feel someone really deserves to or needs to hear that they did something wrong, or if I need to tell them something they must hear. (When some Fe types tell me to be nice, it doesn't work very well.... and oddly enough, perhaps, the people who seem to give me the best advice in this regard - for Fe valuing types, are Ni-INFps. Their Fe is much more subdued. Fe INFps though are terrible - really, the worst. ISFps are also good, and Fe dominants now and then... but of course to all Fe types, I prefer Fi ego people - particularly the delta NFs, to give relational advice)

[Smilingeyes]

In what way would you say Ni types are less receptive to this kind of behavior? Is it related to some desire to reach a collective consensus on how to act, and to rejection of firm opinions on the part of any single person on this?

I'm not sure what you mean with the question. I don't think I talked about the receptiveness of Ni people, rather their own behaviour. I mean, Ni people give very general instructions with the full intention to tease the other party into Se action. They enable people. And particularly ENTj-Ni people have a habit of finding good things in anything the other person does thereby inciting maximal activity from their partner. They can be very motivating and some of the best leaders in the socion, if not THE best. They make people want to do things.

But as managers they're not that good for the same reason. They don't exert control. Anything the other person does is ok and has a use. So the outcome is anything but certain.

Si people just grab the reins and do it ourselves.

---



@Minde:

I think the equivalent of "Watch where you're going!" would be "Watch how you treat people!"

"Be nicer!" would be more like "Be more agile!" IMO Sort of good advice but somehow weirdly impossible. One can try to mold oneself and that is easy, but to actually be different in some fundamental level? That's not easy at all.

@meatburger

One thing that I've noticed when comparing my IJ-Ti dad with myself and a number of IP-Si people...

When my dad notices that someone does something different than he's used to, he berates them because what they're doing is simply "wrong" for some reason. There's never any explanation and even if you show him a working alternate way, it's still wrong. He doesn't even understand the point of discussion.

The IP-Si people I've observed react more like "This is the best way. If you want to do something differently you can, but eventually you will observe that this is the best way so you might as well give up all attempts to do something different." (I've actually heard this at this length only a couple of times but seen it implied quite a few times.)

My reaction is a lot more case by case. Usually I'm "Whatever works! Sure, if you find another way that works, please yourself." But if I notice someone trying something and I've tried it myself, I might intervene and explain what results their action will have. But mostly I still give them free choice to try themselves if they insist. The problem people most often have with my style is that they think I waste time. It takes a bit of time for me to get to the point which is "Don't do that, do this." I talk a lot.

[tiny_dancer]

munenori, I feel for ya'. That's my day, every day, all day. Except my boss is LIE. LIEs can be good bosses, but only when they will sit still for 5 bloody minutes and actually listen to what you're saying. My boss changes focus and cuts me off before I can even finish one sentence and STILL manages to blame ME for not being able to get all my questions answered in one sitting.

[Cheesy]

So are you saying something about the specific type of his character or just that it's rrific? Fwiw, I think the facility manager at my job is probably Te-leading or creative and is very huge on these sorts of details. He doesn't care or is incredibly unaware how it comes across at all.

For example, he routinely walks the docks and watches everybody doing their job. Randomly he'll come up and talk to you. There's never any small talk at all. No 'how are you doing', etc. He just asks questions about what you're doing in a sharp, curt, yet emotionally muted, way that carries with it the implication that you're doing said thing wrong, either because you're doing it on purpose or you're simply an idiot. I mean, he's never happy or encouraging about anything. If he bothers to spend time interacting with you he's trying to get you to do them better, hence you feel like a failure.

Once he hopped in my trailer followed by my supervisor (SLE) and the head manager of the day shift (SEE?) and, without a word or any recognition of me, began pushing on my beautiful wall to find places where the packages gave way. I was furious and embarrassed at the same time, since most of the top row moved. He turned to me, as I still clutched the package I was in the process of loading when he decided to be an asshole, and the first words that came out of his mouth were, "Now tell me how you build a wall." I was simply stunned, trying to recall all the 'load methods' we're supposed to follow and regurgitate them. I was halfway stammering through the first one when he interrupted me and asked me what I was supposed to do when the packages were chest high and higher. I gave the obvious 'push them back' answer in a quiet voice and looked down, simmering and demoralized. "When you're loading above your chest, push the packages back," he repeated, then he just walked out of the trailer, leaving me with the day shift manager and my supervisor. I'm sure it was obvious how flustered I was, because the manager tried to change the subject with small talk but figured out quickly that I just wanted to be left alone. On his way out, my supervisor turned and told me I was doing a good job, which took some of the edge off, but I was still soaking in those feelings of anger and failing at something that really wasn't a big deal at all.

It just didn't make any sense to me that you would get on someone's case like that about fitting maybe six or seven more packages into a wall and completely sapping any desire the other person had to do the damn thing at all. Fwiw, I don't think he intends it to be as demeaning as it is, but he just doesn't get how people work. It's frustrating, it's stupid, and you would think he would see that it's counterproductive, because I know for a fact that I didn't work that hard the rest of the day.

Anyway, this video vaguely reminds me of that (my facility manager isn't threatening at all).

I've noticed that lately at work I've been really Te with a person who I think is Fe creative.. God, maybe I'm Te ego? Naaa guess I've just copied it from other people..
Anyway, I see what you're saying I also think that people who behave that way are unhealthy. Te people can do their Te thing in a constructive, honestly wanting to teach you way and share their knowledge (that's how us Te "lovers" will see it anyway) or like anyone else they can use it badly because of any reason you can think of.. the whole seeking control thing maybe.. Te gone bad...

I've seen ENTj bosses who act in ways that make everyone around them hate them but they're usually somewhat unhealthy and have no restraint whatsoever. They feel as if they can say really demeaning things to people based on being competent or not. It just really gets ugly. Honestly though, as long as it's not directed at me, I take it with a pinch of salt and know exactly how to please them.. Would I want to hang out with an unhealthy person like that? No way and no one would. I also really pity my ENTj boss because he's being so pathetically oblivious to the fact that he does not know how to act and really not in touch with reality, I find it unfortunate and getting in the way of him getting what he really wants which is of course

It's easier for me to say this because Te does not make me cringe but take things really as lightly as you can with unhealthy people. Even if this person is your boss, once you've figured out that what makes him act that intrusively is related to him being unhealthy, you can just say well, whatever, these are just signs of unhealthiness, go on with your things and say to such a person, yes you are right (you awesome piece of ****), and know that you're doing things just as good as you want them and you get things done so everyone else can bugger off.. I think the point is that no matter who it is, no one can make you feel insecure about your capabilities, be proud of what you have and how you do things and that you have capabilities that he'll probably never have (like emotional intelligence perhaps).. ok, it's getting personal.. and somewhat cheesy..and long.. I'm getting sleepy and I think I'm ENFj based on what I just wrote... or maybe = just ignore the chatter I'm not myself today, or maybe i finally am?! if you want to continue to read my wonderful thoughtful and very intriguing new suspicion, search for the next thread in what's my type: "Cheesy - ENFj drama queen or a nice little happy delta?" The thread no one will ever forget

[meatburger]

Cheesy, Sneezy & Lemon Squeezy

[Lobo]

I wonder if I would respond any differently than you. I'm trying to think about if someone, a boss, came up to me and started quizzing me like that. I think, especially if I wanted to please people, including the boss, I'd probably react similarly - abashed and a little hurt. If I couldn't get the impression that I was doing at least something right sometimes, I'd get demoralized after awhile and probably just quit. Well, maybe I wouldn't actually quit, and if so not for a very long time, unless there was an easy alternative. (There's almost always this little part in me that say, "But maybe this time..." and "I'm committed".) But if all I got was criticism and little to no encouragement and affirmation, I'd be miserable.

I would probably answer in a sort of smartass way if someone were constantly checking how I work. What restrains me in talking back is if he/she "deserves respect" like he/she is a lot older than me, has a dignified position, etc. Last time something like that happened I got very red and irritated, yet I kept my mouth shut, but apparently the expression in my face communicated what I was feeling to my prof/supervisor and he changed his tone.

Btw, hey guys.

[UDP]

Btw, hey guys.

hey man (you're a guy .... yes?)


aside: what, to you, is the meaning of that coldplay song in your sig? What's it really about?

[Lobo]

hey man (you're a guy .... yes?)


aside: what, to you, is the meaning of that coldplay song in your sig? What's it really about?

I'm a man, man. Sirena is my twin sister, so I can see the confusion.

Coldplay's Viva la Vida album was inspired by a Spanish painting I believe, and I'm guessing that the song's reference to ruling and the like is based on an actual Spanish king. But outside that context, to me the song is about the irony in life. In one moment you can be the king (arguably the best "position" someone could have), and then suddenly you become the pauper. "One minute I held the key, next the doors were closed on me, and I discovered that my castle stands upon pillars of salt, pillars of sand." What I quoted in the sig is the part that really stands out to me in the song for some reason.

[UDP]

Yeah. I see a lot of biblical references too - roman calvalry, st peter, etc. I'm not sure how much it is about Jesus and him being a 'king'. but there is also reference to missionaries and spanish stuff, too.