When your boss is your supervisee - LSE/ILI supervision relations

[shadowbox]

I'm an Intp and I've been at my new job for about a month or so. One of the office managers appears, from my typing, to be an LSE. He's a very concrete thinker who's also shown what I would describe as ne HA in the way in which he constantly tries to show that he's discovered profound solutions to life's problems, but is actually kind of just pointing out things that are more or less common wisdom.

The other thing I've noticed is that once he finds a correct/workable solution for a problem, he automatically assumes that this is the only correct way to do things. Finally, he also shows difficulty with any sort of ambiguity (ni polr). The idea, for example, that two people could take the same course of action for two completely different reasons is something he seems to reject almost reflexively.

My fear in interacting with him is that I somehow come across as though I'm blowing him off or condescending to him when he tries to offer me advice. We both share an interest in history and politics, but I'm worried that he may take my Ni-grounded analysis the wrong way when we discuss these things. Any advice as to how to keep relations friendly without stepping on his polr?

[darya]

It's difficult for me to imagine LSE's being anybody's supervisee . LSE's should be renamed an universal supervisor -they try to manage everbody and their mom.

[consentingadult]

You seem to have a good grasp on LSEs PoLR and Mobilizing functions.

The first question so far is: how is the interaction developing so far? Not every working relationship between LSEs and ILIs have to turn into something dramatic. Perhaps the psychological distance stays large enough to avoid problems. I've seen it happen so it's not impossible. Otherwise I'm afraid there is not much you can do about it, other then to get another job.

[shadowbox]

You seem to have a good grasp on LSEs PoLR and Mobilizing functions.

The first question so far is: how is the interaction developing so far? Not every working relationship between LSEs and ILIs have to turn into something dramatic. Perhaps the psychological distance stays large enough to avoid problems. I've seen it happen so it's not impossible. Otherwise I'm afraid there is not much you can do about it, other then to get another job.

It's been ok so far as our interactions have been pretty minimal. I have, however, gotten some hints from both my one-on-one interactions with him as well as overhearing him with my coworkers that he has a very specific idea of how things should go down. He's also sort of taken me "under his wing" a little bit as far as giving me recommendations for lunch, interacting with coworkers, how to use my time most effectively etc.

On a superficial level, this seems like a pretty common interaction between a boss and a new employee, and none of his advice would be worrisome if it were delivered in a typical "here are some helpful ideas/take it or leave it" way. The problem is that he's very sincere when he gives me these tips and he relates them, somewhat poorly, to anecdotes from his own life in a way that makes it clear that his feelings/pride may be vulnerable if he doesn't think I'm making a good faith effort to take his advice into consideration. What constitutes a good faith effort in his book, however, seems to be the million dollar question.

Anecdotally, another one of my coworkers is a female LSE and we seem to be on friendly terms so far, so yes maybe there is hope.

[shadowbox]

It's difficult for me to imagine LSE's being anybody's supervisee . LSE's should be renamed an universal supervisor -they try to manage everbody and their mom.

Agreed, although I will say that they seem to have a genuine desire to help people. Unfortunately they're often helpful in the same way your cat tries to be helpful when it brings you a dead bird as a present.

[consentingadult]

If you believe the relationship might turn problematic because of Socionics-related aspects, than I think there is not much you can do to keep both of you satisfied. What you are saying about this person does not contradict my knowledge on LSEs. They can have unrelenting standards that can not be messed with.

I wrote a blog post about LII-IEE-ESI supervision ring once, and concluded that there are two problems in a supervision relationship: the supervisor hitting the PoLR of the supervisee (which to him is stressful), but also the supervisor not being very open towards the supervisee's creative function. From the perspective of LSEs you will probably stubbornly be ignoring their Si advice (which to him is frustrating).

I wouldn't recommend such a course myself, but if you want to give it a try anyway, you need to give your Ni some slack (to not hit his PoLR) and pay attention to his Si-suggestions. Both of these are unnatural to you.

[shadowbox]

I wouldn't recommend such a course myself, but if you want to give it a try anyway, you need to give your Ni some slack (to not hit his PoLR) and pay attention to his Si-suggestions. Both of these are unnatural to you.

Interesting, yeah this was kind of what I was thinking of at least trying. For example, he's indicated that he anticipates that I will have questions or doubts about certain aspects of upcoming projects and it seems like he expects me to stop by his office from time to time with questions just to confirm to him that I'm actually engaged and care about doing a good job.

I'm willing to make an effort do things like this to a certain extent. However, besides this relationship things are actually going really well with my other coworkers and the three other managers in the office (one of whom is a fairly attractive ESFP), so ultimately I also don't want to suppress my strong functions too much as it would kind of mess up my whole vibe. I guess we'll just have to see where it goes.

[Beautiful sky]

This is not a good relationship

[Beautiful sky]

Keep clear of close interactions. My mom is ILI and my d-cousin and she love that each take care of family and creative side to the other but they can not firmly stick to their own thoughts about their world views without ripping into each other. Namely my mother does not shy away from embarrasing anyone who she feels is expressing an idea or concept that isn't proper or right by her opinion. She's the only one who can bring an LSE dowwn when it comes to virble justing. For example we were at a wedding and the waiter came around and asked my cousin if she might like him to bring a dish from the other side of the table. My cousin sees the wedding as an opportunity to use her Si...to relax and enjoy. She accepted his offer politely but my mom, who doesn't have use for Si and wants to do it herself liking Se type of energy, voiced her opinion loudly saying "what....we don't have arms? We can get things ourselves. He makes us seem like invalids." At that my dual cousin responded with "well this is for us to ccept the opportunity to let someone take care of us so we can relax" my mother doesn't stop she feels like she has to put my d-cousin into her place "we don't need others fetching things for us in the means of showing that" my d-cousin has no choice but to restrain herself and a comforting or reassuring look from me gave her that feeling. I gestured her about my mom's type and their compatibility. She and I sat at the same table next to each other as we often do and enjoyed the wedding thoroughly, even letting the waiter open our wine

[Beautiful sky]

Your conflicts and discomforts will be along the lines of Si and Se, namely that even in how you express the way in which you live and enjoy life will be very different in how she sees it. My advice is that you don't express personal preferences. Just accept the tasks stick to the SEE or benefit relations at work and that should go well for you. I also worry that LSE being observant and harsh and critical maybe not to your face but behind your back may create a situation or an attitude that can psychologicaly mess with your sense of stability as often that occures in superviaory interactions over prolonged period of time, but maybe that you will worry about later..

[Narc]

ILI-LSE supervision is one of the funniest relations to watch unfold. Seriously.

[shadowbox]

Your conflicts and discomforts will be along the lines of Si and Se, namely that even in how you express the way in which you live and enjoy life will be very different in how she sees it. My advice is that you don't express personal preferences. Just accept the tasks stick to the SEE or benefit relations at work and that should go well for you.

Thanks, I think you've summed it up pretty well. The lucky thing his that he's away quite a bit and I'm only going to be working under him on projects part of the time, more often than not I'll be working with the more favorably-typed managers.

I also worry that LSE being observant and harsh and critical maybe not to your face but behind your back may create a situation or an attitude that can psychologicaly mess with your sense of stability as often that occures in superviaory interactions over prolonged period of time, but maybe that you will worry about later..

Agreed, kind of. I worry that if I hit the LSE's Polr enough, the fact that I'm performing well and that I'm getting along with everyone else may create a sort of paranoia/insecuritty that could really set him against me. Before discovering socionics I had a situation like this with my supervisor (EIE), so I know the feeling when people around you like someone but that person seems to just naturally undermine you and make you feel unsure of yourself.

[Capitalist Pig]

Idiots often overestimate their intelligence and exaggerate their abilities. It's not really a conscious thing, they're just too stupid to know any better. Just try to be polite, and keep your relationship formal.

Also, if your boss is prone to praising you in private but seems to undervalue you in front of others, that would be a good sign that yes, he is potentially cockblocking your progress in whatever it is you do for work.

[FDG]

Just don't think about it as a socionics relationship for the moment being.

[consentingadult]

Interesting, yeah this was kind of what I was thinking of at least trying. For example, he's indicated that he anticipates that I will have questions or doubts about certain aspects of upcoming projects and it seems like he expects me to stop by his office from time to time with questions just to confirm to him that I'm actually engaged and care about doing a good job.

That's what he may have said, but what he probably really means is that he himself is having doubts as to you being able to make things happen, and that he needs you to pass by so he can monitor if everything is going according to his wishes indeed. The most likely reason why he is distrusting you, is because of your IP temperament: in his eyes, you do not have an appearance of proactive behavior.

Perhaps at some stage you should stop beating about the bush and just have a candid discussion with him and say it out loud: boss, I get the impression that you have structural doubts about my capacities and contributions?

[ashlesha]

ive never worked for an ile, but for an sle. all my bosses at that place were beta (there was also an eie and an lsi) and i didnt really like any of them but he was my least dreaded to work for. because he was really friendly (over the top with his Fe ha) and most laid back. he yelled a lot and could be a real dick but i didnt take him too seriously because it was obviously just fireworks that would quickly blow over. interns and new employees were often scared of him and impressed by how calm and firm i was with him when he exploded. the key was just to not get defensive and hold your ground. but i only actually yelled back at him once - he chilled out immediately and in my next review said he was happy with how i was gaining confidence, or whatever, which was annoying because i always felt confident, just didnt usually feel the need to yell. he struck me as someone who was easy to emotionally manipulate but i never went out of my way to try. (though i did do that with an lse who worked there, because i respected him even less and he obviously viewed me as stupid because i was a woman so i played up my woman-ness because fuck him)

[shadowbox]

That's what he may have said, but what he probably really means is that he himself is having doubts as to you being able to make things happen, and that he needs you to pass by so he can monitor if everything is going according to his wishes indeed. The most likely reason why he is distrusting you, is because of your IP temperament: in his eyes, you do not have an appearance of proactive behavior.

Perhaps at some stage you should stop beating about the bush and just have a candid discussion with him and say it out loud: boss, I get the impression that you have structural doubts about my capacities and contributions?

I'm not sure about this interpretation. The whole "trust me you're going to have questions and its better to come to me first"- thing was part of the sort of boilerplate speil he gave me on the first day I met him. I don't really think I've gotten too much of a read yet on what he thinks of my IP temperment, especially since I haven't actually done any substantive work for him yet. I'm sort of looking at this in a more preemptive (ni) way as of right now in light of the fact that although I believe I've successfully typed him and that this typing suggests potentially troubled waters ahead, the psychological distance is still pretty large and we haven't really had any substantial clashes in personality as of yet. I'll keep your advice in mind however if, down the road, he seems to be doubting/undermining me.

[FDG]

Is this advice useful only for dealing with bosses??? Hahaha.

Well, I said "for the moment being". That is, until very specific problems actually happen, which may (or not) be interpreted via socionics. Judging from the OP's post, nothing actually happened yet, so I can't even really see why he's thinking so much about potential personal troubles.


As a general socionics rule, I'd say ESTx bosses are usually hellish unless you're really a master at being tactful and diplomatic. I can barely understand why these people are needed in a functioning society - esp. at their peak negativism.