Making things work in Supervision
Anyways, I'll keep the short story short. I've become good friends with an IEE lately. (through mutual friends) She's a pretty amazing person and fun to be around. Feels like discovering another side of myself that never really got to flourish.
Getting to the point, how would a Socionics dynamic figure into this?
Post-script: As always, open for a retyping on the person involved if necessary.
Nothing against liking your supervisee, and the creative function is generally undeveloped compared with the base function (hence "another side of yourself that never really got to flourish"). More to the point, what does she think of you?Originally Posted by MatthewZ
LII-Ne
"Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys on a million typewriters, and the Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare!"
- Blair Houghton
Johari
I agree. I tend to enjoy the presence of my supervisees. For some reason, they seem to be annoyed at me.
Jason
Relation M-Supervisor F-supervisee can do wonders IMO, provided that Supervisor picks up "take it easy" attitude regarding his base function i.e. refrains himself from criticizing his Supervisee too much(is that possible?).
It is because you are always in a more favourable position in respect to your supervisees.
Relations of Supervision can give the impression that Jason is constantly watching every step of his supervisees. They usually feel this control even if Jason does not say or do anything. The explanation for this is that their weak point is defenceless against Jason's strong point. This makes them nervous and expect the worse.
Although Jason can seem self-satisfied, petty, faultfinding and narrative, his supervisees pay attention to his actions and consider him as consequential. They normally want to gain recognition and commendation from Jason. However, it may seem like Jason always undervalues the abilities of supervisees surrounding him. This stimulates them into proving their own worthiness with various actions, yet there is little chance that they will succeed.
Jason sees the surrounding supervisee as quite interesting and capable, but incomplete and therefore in need of some help and advice. They do not respond to this aid as expected and this will often increase Jason's attempts to change them. Because they naturally do not understand what it is that Jason wants from them, this may irritate Jason, who thinks that they simply don't want to understand.
In these relations it may also appear as if Jason patronises his supervisees, which can be quite obtrusive for them. When there are more than two people present, supervisees often attempt to release themselves from the control of Jason by starting arguments for the sake of it or by attempting to manoeuvre themselves into the commanding position. Unfortunately, these attempts lead nowhere. Jason may think instead that his supervisees simply require more attention.
Jason and his supervisees often look like good friends. The reason for this is that in these relations every party can sense their social value: Jason as a "guardian angel", without whom surrounding supervisees will get into trouble, and supervisees as the object of attention.
Relations of Supervision can give the impression that Jason is constantly watching every step of his supervisees. They usually feel this control even if Jason does not say or do anything. The explanation for this is that their weak point is defenceless against Jason's strong point. This makes them nervous and expect the worse.
Although Jason can seem self-satisfied, petty, faultfinding and narrative, his supervisees pay attention to his actions and consider him as consequential. They normally want to gain recognition and commendation from Jason. However, it may seem like Jason always undervalues the abilities of supervisees surrounding him. This stimulates them into proving their own worthiness with various actions, yet there is little chance that they will succeed.
Jason sees the surrounding supervisee as quite interesting and capable, but incomplete and therefore in need of some help and advice. They do not respond to this aid as expected and this will often increase Jason's attempts to change them. Because they naturally do not understand what it is that Jason wants from them, this may irritate Jason, who thinks that they simply don't want to understand.
In these relations it may also appear as if Jason patronises his supervisees, which can be quite obtrusive for them. When there are more than two people present, supervisees often attempt to release themselves from the control of Jason by starting arguments for the sake of it or by attempting to manoeuvre themselves into the commanding position. Unfortunately, these attempts lead nowhere. Jason may think instead that his supervisees simply require more attention.
Jason and his supervisees often look like good friends. The reason for this is that in these relations every party can sense their social value: Jason as a "guardian angel", without whom surrounding supervisees will get into trouble, and supervisees as the object of attention.
What does she think of me? I can't know that for certain. As I've observed and she's confessed to, one of her worse habits is saying "no" and/or disappointing people. As a natural result, I can't fully know of the negative perception she has of me, or how embellished the positive things she says may be. If there's an obvious "supervisor trying to change the supervisee" characteristic at this point, it would be changing that habit of hers. She can put the weight of the world on her shoulders sometimes, feeling that all problems around her are her fault and that she should feel bad for all of it.
That kept in mind, I believe she thinks I'm an honest friend, a fairly understanding person with an unbreakable sense of calmness. She also speaks of me having some sort of "know everything" ability. (Not in the derogatory sense of me putting my own thoughts above input for others; rather, in the sense that I have some ability to analyze anything rather succinctly.)
For LII/IEE to get along, the LII has to practice at not accentuating IEE's unstructured thinking style. This isn't easy considering that LII is constantly focusing on it. From the LII's perspective, there won't be any problems. From the IEE's perspective things will be okay as long as the LII doesn't become overly critical.
Friendship between supervisors and supervisees can be good, I think. One of my good friends is an ESI. I'm also still friends with my LII ex. We speak fairly often, considering we broke up years ago and he's in another city. Hanging out with him recently was also really nice. Post-socionics, I can actually see now how we relate mostly through Ne.
I actually think he would describe me exactly as MatthewZ has described his friend. He often told me I was far too hard on myself.. he also told me I do everything backwards.Curiously, I told him during our breakup that he didn't need me. What he wanted was someone else, he just couldn't quite see that. I've also heard another supervisee say that about her husband - he wants her to be someone she's not. I guess the supervisee can perceive the mismatch more than the supervisor?
Unfortunately, with more closeness the relationship degrades. I don't think there's anything you can really do about it, though. People are who they are. They can mute things a bit in the interest of accommodating differences, but that only goes so far.
MatthewZ, I doubt your friend is exaggerating when she compliments you. Personally, I only say things I mean. We are diplomatic, yes, but we try not to embellish. Perhaps we do see things on the rosy side, though. And we don't like it when people fish for compliments, although we may give them spontaneously at other times. Negative perception? Mmm.. I dunno - if she didn't like you, she wouldn't hang out with you.
IEE
supervision relations can last a little while. but they tend to break apart, usually the supervisee rejects the supervisor. i don't really think there's all that much you can do to prevent this. there's things you can try, as stated above, but you won't be able to stick to it. so, over time, these relations fall apart, esp if you get too close.
somebody mentions Male supervision on female. this is the worst. maybe it's different for LII-IEE, but for EII-M ON ILE-F....i have not had good experiences with this. the supervision is magnified by male social position. i've had better luck with female EII's...but again, this is a relation best kept on a larger distance despite the connection between the supervisee's leading the supervisor's creative.
if you think about it...your supervisor is supposed to make you feel the burn. everybody is kept in line by somebody. but who wants to go touching the flame again and again.
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
Yeah, my ex was clueless as to why I believed we didn't go together. He just didn't see it at all.
IEE
I find that highly reassuring.
yeah. we go along tra la la la la....what??? someone doesn't like my leading functionhow DARE they?
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
Sadly, this is true.
IEI-Fe 4w3
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
This is one area of Socionics that is odd to me... Your supervisee would be LSE, so it's victim-caregiver. On the other hand, mine is ILE and we are both infantiles. I think that's interesting. In my case my reaction is the opposite of what you're describing, about wanting to keep a distance. I've always had a thing for ILEs, but unfortunately, there's a certain "aura" that I might be projecting which I have no control over that might make them uncomfortable (for all I know). However, this is not the case for all ILEs I've met.
My Dad (ISFj) supervised my Mom (ESTp...) Based on that, honestly MattewZ, the romantic relationship can be good for awhile--they lasted 20 years!--but Socionics predicts that the Supervisee will ultimately resent the Supervisor, think ill of him/her... And so it happened with my Mom and Dad.
ILIs are my supervisees, and I genuinely like and admire a lot of them... They can rarely stand me (especially in person) for long, unless I tone it down so much that I'm not really myself anymore.
SEIs are my supervisor... And I genuinely cannot stand them for long (especially in person) unless they tone it down...
Last edited by JuJu; 12-14-2009 at 04:01 AM.
Wait... ISFj-ENTp is a conflict pairing, not supervision.
Yeah I corrected it--she's ESTp... I wrote more in the above post too.
lol, no attention to detail tonight... SEIs rather... i'll change it.
What surprised me is how fast you can become close friends when meeting your supervisor or visee. And you also grow attached to eachother.
Though for romantic purposes I cannot imagine that it will ever work out good. Being supervisee means really feeling yourself unworthy all the time.
i never noticed that. you're right. i wonder if it makes a difference.
there is that instantaneous Ne connection....goes a long way initially. since a lot of people don't "get" ILE.I think that's interesting. In my case my reaction is the opposite of what you're describing, about wanting to keep a distance. I've always had a thing for ILEs, but unfortunately, there's a certain "aura" that I might be projecting which I have no control over that might make them uncomfortable (for all I know). However, this is not the case for all ILEs I've met
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
Well, I do give IXEs a lot of slack compared to other types, and I do know that it's rather unfair... It's different when you understand where someone is coming from rather than dealing with enigmatic types, whom you don't know what really is going on up there. I have an ILE professor who was always late for class and is very unreliable when it comes to asking him a question and getting a response. For some reason, it does not bother me in the slightest because I know that he is absent minded and has good intentions. It might potentially frustrate me at some point, but would never have bad feelings. Then there's an IEE friend who stood me up to go to a movie because she completely forgot. I looked kind of foolish walking around trying to find her and waiting outside. When she told me about forgetting, instead of getting mad, I bought some soft dough pretzels nearby and we chilled at her house. However, this really does not happen with other types
interesting. is there a socionics interpretation of this, i wonder? i'm not sure if i give LSI's slack or not.Well, I do give IXEs a lot of slack compared to other types, and I do know that it's rather unfair... It's different when you understand where someone is coming from rather than dealing with enigmatic types, whom you don't know what really is going on up there. I have an ILE professor who was always late for class and is very unreliable when it comes to asking him a question and getting a response. For some reason, it does not bother me in the slightest because I know that he is absent minded and has good intentions. It might potentially frustrate me at some point, but would never have bad feelings. Then there's an IEE friend who stood me up to go to a movie because she completely forgot. I looked kind of foolish walking around trying to find her and waiting outside. When she told me about forgetting, instead of getting mad, I bought some soft dough pretzels nearby and we chilled at her house. However, this really does not happen with other types
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
supervisor/supervisee
These relations can be fine, as long as:
1. Both of you need to be objective. Do not share what you are really feeling. If either party opens up the other kind of feels sheepish and 'awkward.' Leave the subjective stuff for your own quadra.
2. If your supervisee tells you to do something just do it. Pay attention to when you are criticizing the supervisee. The supervisor has the power in this situation but it can be made better by realizing this imbalance and working with it. We subconsciously and very often criticize our supervisee without thinking about it. And this just goes back to basic humanity. Nobody likes being criticized, you know, even when they know they done something wrong, especially when it's not an official test or something. It's just, people communicating. Just be aware of your natural knee-jerk reaction to criticize supervisee and simply don't do it. You can't control what you think or how you feel, but you can control how you behave and conduct yourself.
There is no reason to act like an adolescent just because you're with somebody who you can't be all romantic fag like. Grow out of that shit. You can only be your 'true self' with very few people, and that's just how it is.
3. Don't talk so much, find an activity you both enjoy and that you are good at. This keeps psychological distance focused on the activity and less on the feelings or internal impressions. Whatever you do don't share your romantic life with each other, or anything like that. The supervisor is bound to give you advice that really annoys you, or vice-versa. Be a human doing, don't be a human being.
Of course this advice is unnatural and counter-intuitive. Well that's the point. You can't be your internal self, the self you really want to be, the kind you always virtuously are- around your supervisor/supervisee. But behaving in this way, I bet that you will improve your relations with others. It takes practice, though.
Also, relationships are everything. You want to have good relationships with others as much as possible. It will only make you more powerful and successful right? I mean if you want a 'real life example of socionics' I can't think of anything better. With a little practice and effort, whenever I do these things they do work.
Just remember too that we all need the sort of unconditional love and understanding that only our own quadra provides us. Where you don't have to try at all, you just be yourself. But realistically, to function in the world, you just can't do this. I know you already know that but it's worth repeating!
Alright B&D .... this is all good stuff and seems OK if both people know socionics or at the least the supervisor is the one with the knowledge and the goodwill to use it in the way you describe.
Have you given any thought to what happens when the supervisee has the knowledge (but cannot share it) and is having their space incessantly invaded by a supervisor who cannot always be avoided.
ILE
the way you described needing to be in this relation is how my marriage has gone. My advice to everyone on this board: do not marry your supervisor or supervisee. DO NOT DISREGARD THIS ADVICE JUST BECAUSE HE OR SHE IS A GOOD PERSON OR HOT OR SEXY OR WHATEVER. Because everything B&D has written is exactly right. And if you want your marriage to be that way, then go ahead and do it. At your own risk, ladies and gentlemen.
IEI-Fe 4w3
We should distinguish between j>p and p>j supervision!
The relation of supervision with a rational supervisor is definitely much better than the other one. It's even the relation Keirsey recommends (even though some people are different types in MBTI).
@redbaron: What's your type and what's the type of the person you married?
I think everyone on this board must know except for you! LOL I'm IEI-Ni and my husband is ESE-Fe. Married for 15 years.
IEI-Fe 4w3
I didn't read your signature.
That's the bad one. If your husband was LIE the relation would also be called "supervision" - but probably a very nice one...
yeah I dunno. someone was saying that supervision works better in the positivist ring?
My aunt is EIE and my uncle is SEI and that one is pretty bad too, imo... But they have been married for 35 years. Not particularly happily, however.
Last edited by redbaron; 01-23-2010 at 05:17 PM.
IEI-Fe 4w3
Gulenko says that in his article "Equifinal groups" on wikisocion.
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...tml#post453993
what happened?
why would this particular pairing not work out? I dont get it. it doesnt feel anything like the descriptions. on the other hand, my supposed 'mirage' relationship with ESI's feels like one of supervision. its really aggravating, so much so that I dont think I could ever be with one; the type as a whole. I feel like they keep dwelling on things that are unlikely to happen, stubbornly and mouth off over the PETTIEST shit. Stuff that makes ME angry that they would get so upset about it, and Im usually a calm person. I find myself trying to contain my criticisms constantly w them.
<Crispy> what subt doesnt understand is that a healthy reaction to "FUCK YOU" is
LOL!! you called me out on that one! Um, I dunno. Sometimes I think it's okay but I remember screaming fights they used to have... you wonder I guess. I suppose none of us ever really knows what goes on in a marriage.
My uncle was diagnosed with terminal cancer (he actually appears to be in a sort of remission at the moment) 18 months ago and she STILL screams at him. There's a sort of disgust or condescension in their attitudes towards one another. I guess it's become clearer to me recently. ?
IEI-Fe 4w3
I wasn't aware that there was that much of a difference between j>p and p>j. I got the impression that the problem with supervision is that the supervisor stresses the supervisee without knowing it. I think a j would be as annoyed by a p as a p would be by a j, but that an extrovert would have an easier time bugging an introvert than vice versa.
that's what I've heard before too. It's pretty easy for an introvert to keep a lot to themselves. But of course that's bad too. Doesn't foster intimacy, just leads to the two of them growing apart and developing separate lives.
IEI-Fe 4w3
Do supervisors get irritated over supervisees "missing the obvious"? I've noticed in a few people that when the supervisee says something clueless related to their polr that the supervisor will reply with something snarky. As though they're thinking, "Why do you always ask the dumbest questions?"
That's what it felt like my LII boss was doing to me, and I've noticed it a fair amount with other people I've been observing...
IEE
Yes. The supervisor feels certain things are obvious and that the supervisee is just being difficult. Over time it has the effect of causing the supervisor to lose respect for the supervisee.
IEI-Fe 4w3
It happens. But it's not so bad if there's an understanding of socionics involved. For example, I'm lousy at predicting the weather. I told my ILI friend. I tried to predict the weather the other day, and my friend laughed at me. But it was a good reminder not to trust my own judgement on something I know nothing about.
It's kind of weird being the third party in those situations because it's obvious the person is asking a real question, but the supervisor doesn't see it at all.Yes. The supervisor feels certain things are obvious and that the supervisee is just being difficult. Over time it has the effect of causing the supervisor to lose respect for the supervisee.
IEE
It's possible supervision relationships can survive a marriage ... but of the ones i know
The most extreme:
ENFJ(man)-ISFP(woman) At first he was amazed at her - compliments like her cooking was just fabulous and in the kitchen things just appeared. The relationship ended with him under evaluation in a psychiatric ward about 9 months later, on the edge of being diagnosed as requiring ongoing treatment and life changing medication. I remember it well there was absolutely nothing wrong with him before he met her nor in the last 10 years since that time.
Another ENFJ(man)-ISFP(woman) lasted 10 years and with kids. In the later part of the marriage the guy spent a lot of time perched on the roof trying to escape her ! ... seems funny but i doubt he saw it that way. In the end from frustration she "crossed the line" precipitating divorce (ie cheated on him). Apparently she is still unsure what the problem was between them in the first place. He's obviously learned his lesson and just recently married another ISFP ...
Another was an INFP(man) - ENTJ(woman). This marriage lasted 3 years but serious problems appeared after the first. Again the man ended up on medication (lol) and the problems in the relationship (mood swings, aggression etc) soon began to be attributed to that.... turns out there was not much need for medication after the divorce and he could hold a job.
ILE
Reply With Quote
