Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 41 to 80 of 81

Thread: INTjs as natural leaders

  1. #41
    Creepy-ENTp Male

    Default INTJ Leadership

    I think INTJs can be leaders in various industries and I've seen them be quite successful when the most valued trait is to be the smartest person in the room. Highly technical fields seem like a natural fit, but only if they lead people as clever as they are or at least have enough intellect not to be looked down upon. A leader inspires others to follow their vision or a vision they're tasked to implement. A manager is responsible for a result, but a achieves it through the efforts of others. Given those two brief descriptions, I'd say INTJ leadership depends on the group they would lead. The broader your workgroup the more apt you have to be at leading with both intellect and passion. If you're a leader you lead with whatever approach works for the individuals you need to mobilize. Is this slightly manipulative? Yes. Is this the way leadership works? Much of the time. Is it wrong? No, it's getting the result you are tasked with getting.

  2. #42
    Creepy-

    Default

    ENTp Male you are right on ur comment


    what i think is, an intj can be a leader like Jean Luc Pickar, and then have the middle like william riker to be a middle man, Jean luc pickar can use william riker's natual leader talent to make people to follow jean luc's order.

    like in Movie U5-51, the captain of the sub always gives over to the chief, and the chieft will give order to to crews.

  3. #43
    Creepy-ENTp Male

    Default Interesting, but who's who in the relationship?

    Does the leader actually pick the leader's vision/idea they want to implement? Usually, in my experience. A good example, marginal leader that works this way is probably "W".

  4. #44

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    437
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    in terms of naturalness, probably ENTJs take to it more readily.

    however, INTJs can also make good leaders, BUT we don't tend to want to be. in fact, we'd rather there was someone else around who can do the job. but if there isn't, we would do it.

    i never led anything in school, and only in my senior years in university did i find myself in the position of having to take leadership of groups. now i notice i always end up being some sort of leader in something, despite assiduously trying to avoid it. in all cases it is the group who makes me the leader either formally or informally.

    my personal opinion is that when an INTJ leads, he/she does not lead with charm. he/she leads with trust. this is why INTJs don't tend to be first choice - it takes a while to build trust. it helps, of course, if you have both... but then again INTJs don't WANT the leadership position in the first place, so....

    i agree that it can be difficult for an INTJ in top management positions to penetrate the layers of middle management. but, one way to do it is to find a competent person of a suitable type who can do this.

  5. #45
    Creepy-ENTp M

    Default Now here's a strange observation.

    A couple of INTJ's speak of using other types to be able to implement their vision. (Leadership) Other types (like ENTJ's and P's) talk about picking the best of INTJ ideas/thing that fit into the ENTx vision, and going iwth that. We each see the other as a "means to an end". Maybe there's a 5 element called manipulation? Are you a INTJM or and ENTPM? Pretty amusing.

  6. #46

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    England, UK
    Posts
    258
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    INTj'S ARE "SHADOW LEADERS"

    WE DON'T REQUIRE THE "LIME LIGHT", WE WORK BEHIND THE SCENES TO MAKE THE WORLD A BETTER PLACE!!!

    ARE YOU READY TO BE A MEMBER OF OUR ELITE MASTERMIND GROUP?

    YOUR masterMIND FRIEND,

    SNOWY COMMANDO :wink:
    Remember to keep things simple and not any simpler like Einstein once said.

  7. #47
    Creepy-Markus

    Default

    INTjs would make for awesome leaders of a company, if all of the employees of that company were robots.

  8. #48
    Creepy-

    Default

    INTjs would make for awesome leaders of a company, if all of the employees of that company were robots.
    I know your response is merely jocularity but I like the proposal presented.

  9. #49
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,858
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Markus
    INTjs would make for awesome leaders of a company, if all of the employees of that company were robots.
    Why else do you think we're interested in robots?

    I don't see how Bill Gates can't be an INTJ. An evil INTJ, perhaps, but there are evil ones out there.... Now Steve Ballmer, HE'S the ENTJ of the pair.

    Bill Gates even dresses like an INTJ. He has the pose, he has the detatchment from reality, and he has the desire to remake the world. He is also apt to spend long periods of time in seculsion... very long periods.

    He also seems more independent of his environment than an ENTJ. Where the ENTJ is focused more on relaying information between his environment and himself, the INTJ prefers to restrict the flow of that information. Besides, who better to fit the archetype of the "mastermind" than Bill Gates?

  10. #50
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    D-LSI-Ti 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    11,529
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Are INTjs <insert positive adjective and noun>?

    NO.

  11. #51

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,246
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by discojoe
    Are INTjs <insert positive adjective and noun>?

    NO.
    Heh. Why not?

  12. #52
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    D-LSI-Ti 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    11,529
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blaze
    Quote Originally Posted by discojoe
    Are INTjs <insert positive adjective and noun>?

    NO.
    Heh. Why not?
    INTjs are the emos of Socionics/MBTI. Shun.

  13. #53
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,685
    Mentioned
    95 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I dunno, ISFPs could be emo kids, too. INTJs aren't socially conscious enough to conform to any sort of social norm.
    But, for a certainty, back then,
    We loved so many, yet hated so much,
    We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...

    Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
    Whilst our laughter echoed,
    Under cerulean skies...

  14. #54

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Wilmington NC USA
    Posts
    666
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by discojoe
    Quote Originally Posted by Blaze
    Quote Originally Posted by discojoe
    Are INTjs <insert positive adjective and noun>?

    NO.
    Heh. Why not?
    INTjs are the emos of Socionics/MBTI. Shun.
    *cries*

  15. #55

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    USA.
    TIM
    INTj
    Posts
    4,497
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by metaiwan
    Quote Originally Posted by discojoe
    Quote Originally Posted by Blaze
    Quote Originally Posted by discojoe
    Are INTjs <insert positive adjective and noun>?

    NO.
    Heh. Why not?
    INTjs are the emos of Socionics/MBTI. Shun.
    *cries*
    now make out

  16. #56
    Creepy-

    Default Re: are intj real leaders?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fry
    Just curious, some intj description says intj is the natural leaders. but i never leader before, i know i have some amazing idea to improve the group. but i dont think i have the charm to be a leader. plus i dont have the natural burning desire to take the lead (i am passive).

    does that mean the description of intj is wrong?

    Fry
    intj
    Yes I was called bossy as a child, got into fights over it, quick to learn, I changed my ways to only input my natural talent for leadership when absolutely necessary. (even though i won the fights)

  17. #57
    Creepy-

    Default Re: are intj real leaders?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fry
    Just curious, some intj description says intj is the natural leaders. but i never leader before, i know i have some amazing idea to improve the group. but i dont think i have the charm to be a leader. plus i dont have the natural burning desire to take the lead (i am passive).

    does that mean the description of intj is wrong?

    Fry
    intj

    Perhaps you haven't seen enough people fail in leadership roles, so as to encourage some form of assertiveness.

    That's what happened to me, and now I don't mind being a leader so much. But the INTJ tendancy to sit back and observe the situation first.... I still follow that. But I believe the more competent you feel you are, confidence, and general know how of a sitaution........ that all affects how much it takes one to take charge.

    It's not about leading in the past. For myself, at least, leading has been a long term development, and a growing process.


    Note: I didn't read much except for the first few posts here in this thread

  18. #58

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    110
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: are intj real leaders?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fry
    Just curious, some intj description says intj is the natural leaders. but i never leader before, i know i have some amazing idea to improve the group. but i dont think i have the charm to be a leader. plus i dont have the natural burning desire to take the lead (i am passive). does that mean the description of intj is wrong?
    Which descriptions are you reading and are you INTj or INTJ? An excerpt from typelogic.com says
    INTJs can rise to management positions when they are willing to invest time in marketing their abilities as well as enhancing them, and (whether for the sake of ambition or the desire for privacy) many also find it useful to learn to simulate some degree of surface conformism in order to mask their inherent unconventionality.
    I can't recall the description, but I also read where INTJs can make great leaders when necessary. Usually they will take on the role of leader when the ruling leadership clearly shows to be inept. Once the crises is over, the INTJ will return to a subordinate position. However, these are all based on MBTI descriptions wherein the functions are Ni-Te......

  19. #59

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    281
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus
    INTjs would make for awesome leaders of a company, if all of the employees of that company were robots.
    Why else do you think we're interested in robots?

    I don't see how Bill Gates can't be an INTJ. An evil INTJ, perhaps, but there are evil ones out there.... Now Steve Ballmer, HE'S the ENTJ of the pair.

    Bill Gates even dresses like an INTJ. He has the pose, he has the detatchment from reality, and he has the desire to remake the world. He is also apt to spend long periods of time in seculsion... very long periods.

    He also seems more independent of his environment than an ENTJ. Where the ENTJ is focused more on relaying information between his environment and himself, the INTJ prefers to restrict the flow of that information. Besides, who better to fit the archetype of the "mastermind" than Bill Gates?
    From what I hear, I think most Socionicists would disagree with you that Bill Gates is an INTj. But anyway, let's assume that he is for the sake of this discussion. What is so "evil" about Bill Gates?

  20. #60

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    110
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    This reminds me of an inquiry I made at the INTPCentral forum months, maybe even a year ago. Over the years, I have constantly been asked to join ad hoc committees, organizations, and community initiatives, in leadership roles. I have been approached to lead something since I was a teenager. Usually, I would decline because the ad hoc committee led to other committees, having a hard time stepping down once in a position, etc. Does anyone have similar problems? I guess if I found a group that I would like to maintain a consistent and ongoing relationship, I would join. Otherwise, I like the "meat and potatoe" committees, which are set up to resolve a particular problem and disban.

  21. #61
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    "Come with me if you want to live"
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,907
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cone
    Here is a general outline of the INTj representative of the type, Maximilien Robespierre:

    [Robespierre,] known to his contemporaries also as "the Incorruptible", is one of the best known of the leaders of the French Revolution. He earned the nickname of "the Incorruptible" through his selfless devotion the the Revolution. He was an influential member of the Committee of Public Safety, which oversaw the period of the French Revolution in which the revolutionaries consolidated their power; a period which is commonly known as the Reign of Terror. The myth that Robespierre himself became a virtual dictator in his final years is often repeated. While the Committee of Public Safety was certainly a dictatorial committee, Robespierre was not in his own right a dictator. In the Thermidor of Revolutionary calendar's Year Two, he was executed by spiteful colleagues.

    Politically he was a disciple of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, among other Enlightenment philosophes, and a capable articulator of the beliefs of the bourgeois left. He harnessed this talent as a means of rabble-rousing. He is often described as a rather impractical man, who coupled deistic beliefs in the Supreme Being with marked fanaticism.

    He was described as physically unimposing. He dressed immaculately - so much so that some described him as a dandy.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robespierre

    SUCK ON THAT, BITCHES
    Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
    If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.

    ~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
    ~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.

  22. #62
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,858
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wym123
    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus
    INTjs would make for awesome leaders of a company, if all of the employees of that company were robots.
    Why else do you think we're interested in robots?

    I don't see how Bill Gates can't be an INTJ. An evil INTJ, perhaps, but there are evil ones out there.... Now Steve Ballmer, HE'S the ENTJ of the pair.

    Bill Gates even dresses like an INTJ. He has the pose, he has the detatchment from reality, and he has the desire to remake the world. He is also apt to spend long periods of time in seculsion... very long periods.

    He also seems more independent of his environment than an ENTJ. Where the ENTJ is focused more on relaying information between his environment and himself, the INTJ prefers to restrict the flow of that information. Besides, who better to fit the archetype of the "mastermind" than Bill Gates?
    From what I hear, I think most Socionicists would disagree with you that Bill Gates is an INTj. But anyway, let's assume that he is for the sake of this discussion. What is so "evil" about Bill Gates?
    I said he was evil, that's my subjective appraisal. For one thing, he's on Bush's side (that means he's in opposition to me), and he has done his very best to sideline developments on the internet that I would have liked to have seen taken place. Even apart from my own disagreements, however, he was a part of the strategy to deliberately create differences (FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt)) between his IE product's implementation of the HTML standard and Netscape's. This created a very significant waste of energy for some two years as developers ended up having to research ways to get around the descripencies. This was more than a simple divergence of product evolution: it was a coherent, explicit strategy designed to psychology bend the market against the idea of having two dominant browsers at once. When you try to manipulate vast amounts of people psychologically without their realizing it, then what you are doing is plainly evil. And yes, that which is unethical, is evil.

    Let me just make clear what he did: HE USED HIS COMPANY'S POSITION ON AN INTERNATION STANDARDS COMMUNITY TO DELIBERATELY DILLUTE THE STANDARDS IT PROPOSED. He acted in his own interests against the good of the many. That qualifies any man for the label of evil.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halloween_Documents

    And yes, standing by while others commit wrongs when you can stop them is just as evil as doing the wrongs yourself.

  23. #63

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    281
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg
    I said he was evil, that's my subjective appraisal. For one thing, he's on Bush's side (that means he's in opposition to me), and he has done his very best to sideline developments on the internet that I would have liked to have seen taken place. Even apart from my own disagreements, however, he was a part of the strategy to deliberately create differences (FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt)) between his IE product's implementation of the HTML standard and Netscape's. This created a very significant waste of energy for some two years as developers ended up having to research ways to get around the descripencies.
    If you are trying to claim that Netscape (4.7 and before) followed W3C recommendations strictly, you are wrong. If you are trying to claim that IE significantly diverges from Netscape's implementation of the web standards, you are also wrong. In fact, part of the reason why IE rose to the top is because they actually supported all the bugs and quirks of Netscape including their broken standards.

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg
    This was more than a simple divergence of product evolution: it was a coherent, explicit strategy designed to psychology bend the market against the idea of having two dominant browsers at once. When you try to manipulate vast amounts of people psychologically without their realizing it, then what you are doing is plainly evil. And yes, that which is unethical, is evil.
    How did Bill Gates psychologically manipulate people? You are not being clear. I mean, seriously. Microsoft releases a product and consequently people are manipulated? Logic doesn't seem to hold.

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg
    Let me just make clear what he did: HE USED HIS COMPANY'S POSITION ON AN INTERNATION STANDARDS COMMUNITY TO DELIBERATELY DILLUTE THE STANDARDS IT PROPOSED. He acted in his own interests against the good of the many. That qualifies any man for the label of evil.
    Are you claiming that following W3C's web standards is in everyone's best interests? Perhaps you would like to justify the statement. I would love to hear your arguments so I can precisely point out where your assumptions are wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg
    Are you saying that because MS did this, Bill Gates is evil? Please explain your reasoning.

  24. #64
    Froody Blue Gem's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Location
    A Place within a Place in the Universe Where they will never suspect. *Cackles like a witch.*
    TIM
    EII H-Ne
    Posts
    363
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'm not really a leader or a follower. I have my own interests, and I am my own person. But I am not really one to lead and take charge at all. I am clueless what to do when I am given a leadership position that is set-in-stone. I usually dislike being the one to take charge and give orders. If no one else is doing anything and things are going nowhere, I will make suggestions to the rest of the people in the group, or give my own two cents.

    In group settings, I have been told I have potential leadership qualities, and even that I am the social glue that holds the group together. I kind of observe what's going on, and think of multiple solutions to a problem. And take in the interests of the people around me, and that kind of stuff sticks in my memory. It's more when I'm familiar enough with the people, that this side of me comes out. I focus a lot on the dynamics, and try to get to know everybody.
    xII se PoLR, 9w1-5w4-2w3 sp/so

    Phlegmatic-Melancholic |RCoAI| Fascinator| Newtype-secondary| LEFVl|

    #JusticeforJeb_, Water Sheep did nothing wrong, High Inquisitor Of Council of Water Sheep and Water Sheep's protector


    Make things right? Who are we to decide when things are right and when they need to be fixed?



  25. #65
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    15,766
    Mentioned
    1404 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Froody Blue Gem View Post
    I'm not really a leader or a follower.
    Leadership is about an influence. You give it to others and get it from others. You never exist without others to be "your own person". You depend from a state and actions of other people and the same other people depend from you.
    You are a part of collectives, groups as you interact with people and get have bidirectional influences. The better state of people near and better they perceive you - the more good you may get from them. In your instincts this also has compation emotions as you need to control the state of other people and care about them to support their abbility to care about you and your interests, wishes in return.
    The normal way to understand all this are families when you are a child and when later you get a pair and own children. This is what helps to make sociums where people are stronger to protect own interests than when are more separated. And this is what is tried to be destroyed by the other groups who want to dominate and to make you weaker. They also make propaganda of senseless individualism, a part of aims of what is similar - to make other people weaker to harm their interests.
    Individualism is what opposite to love. If you want a use from types - you need to love. Types just show with who this is easier. If you reject love - you'll get lesser good from other people.

    People want to make the most influence on the world, including other people, by ego functions - it's where they want a leadership. And prefer to be followers in own weak valued regions. The similar in lesser degree is for nonvalued strong and weak functions. All types are leaders and followers in similar degree. Just in different regions.

  26. #66
    FreelancePoliceman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    TIM
    LII-Ne
    Posts
    5,701
    Mentioned
    524 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by one View Post
    Wouldn't it be difficult for INTj to lead because of weak and unvalued Se
    You can make sure other people are doing what needs to be done without Se.

    As for myself, I don't know about being a "natural leader." I'd rather not. But often I've found myself in positions where A) no one in a group is doing anything, and no one seems to have any ideas about how to change that. I tend to get annoyed in those situations and take charge, explaining what needs to be done, asking questions, and delegating tasks (ideally with input, but more often than not there is none, so I've learned to just tell people what to do first and manage complaints later). As far as Se goes, I'm the first to admit I don't have the strength of will or charisma to coerce people into doing what I want. But most people don't seem very independently minded or want to think of their own ideas, so I've found that if you do the bare minimum to explain your reasoning and to explain how your ideas are in their best interest, people will generally acquiesce.

    I would consider myself OK at directing small-medium sized groups, but it's a role I fill only when no one else will, or they don't seem suited to the task. Ideally, I'd prefer to work in groups where leaders aren't necessary, and everyone works together because of their own initiative. Barring that, I'd genuinely much rather let someone else take the lead.

  27. #67
    Rebelondeck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    1,929
    Mentioned
    175 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Good leadership isn't natural; it's learned. Ejs tend to want to be in control and most easily interact with people but these qualities don't make them good leaders. LIIs usually have an objective perspective and they tend to make very good strategists but the detached natures of Ijs often prevent them from gaining peoples full trust and or commitment. Some of the better leaders that I've met were SLIs because they seemed to lead by example; and Ips don't seem to present as much of an elitist air as do Ejs - although many can be too defensive or lack the confidence to be a leader.

    a.k.a. I/O

  28. #68
    ouronis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    TIM
    ref to ptr to self
    Posts
    2,999
    Mentioned
    130 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    There are too many crazy LIIs for me to be able to generalize this- I am good at making balanced and well though out decisions and taking feedback, but I'm not good at the charismatic side of leadership. If I was in a situation where I was asked to lead an already gathered and motivated team, I could do it. I tend to have issues with being too controlling and exacting with other people, though. It is a hard pill for me to swallow that I cannot extend the expectations I have for myself onto other people.

  29. #69
    Adam Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Midwest, USA
    TIM
    ENTJ-1Te 8w7 sx/so
    Posts
    16,229
    Mentioned
    1553 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ouronis View Post
    There are too many crazy LIIs for me to be able to generalize this- I am good at making balanced and well though out decisions and taking feedback, but I'm not good at the charismatic side of leadership. If I was in a situation where I was asked to lead an already gathered and motivated team, I could do it. I tend to have issues with being too controlling and exacting with other people, though. It is a hard pill for me to swallow that I cannot extend the expectations I have for myself onto other people.
    I know at least thirteen LII's IRL, and the description above fits every one of them. LII's, in my experience, really are extremely good at making balanced and well thought out decisions, but they seem to struggle when it comes to personally influencing people charismatically.

    What I've seen is that, when things are going well, that is, when they step into a position of leadership of a group which already has a well-established hierarchy and a clear mission, they can do well. But then things tend to fall apart. They try to control people and keep them focused and on schedule through spreadsheets or texted schedules rather than by leading them in person. They often seem prematurely defensive, as if they are already feeling that people don't like them and won't do what they are asked, even before this starts to happen.

    When things do start to go wrong, LII's can at first become snarky, and then they allow too much anger, and what seems to be basic disrespect for the other person's intelligence, to come into their voices. Eventually, when the project finally appears to them to be reduced to a smoking crater, they will retreat into isolation. At this point, they may return to analysis and explanation, which are really their strong points.

    In the military, there are line officers and there are staff officers. LII's are staff officers.

    Expecting an LII to charismatically lead a group is a lot like putting Leonard Cohen in charge of Pattons' United States Central Army in France and Germany and expecting him to conquer Germany. (I type Cohen as an IEI, and Patton as an SLE.)

  30. #70
    Seed my wickedness The Reality Denialist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Spontaneous Human Combustion
    TIM
    EIE-C-Ni ™
    Posts
    8,235
    Mentioned
    335 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yep it seems like some of LII's can not push. I don't know why.

    For me it is like I have made it happen in front of a group after being hesitant but it left a very bad taste in my mouth in the end. When I looked at them I just can not stop thinking that there are lots of people against their will doing this meaningless stuff.
    MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
    Winning is for losers

     

    Sincerely yours,
    idiosyncratic type
    Life is a joke but do you have a life?

    Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org

  31. #71
    ouronis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    TIM
    ref to ptr to self
    Posts
    2,999
    Mentioned
    130 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Strange View Post
    I know at least thirteen LII's IRL, and the description above fits every one of them. LII's, in my experience, really are extremely good at making balanced and well thought out decisions, but they seem to struggle when it comes to personally influencing people charismatically.

    What I've seen is that, when things are going well, that is, when they step into a position of leadership of a group which already has a well-established hierarchy and a clear mission, they can do well. But then things tend to fall apart. They try to control people and keep them focused and on schedule through spreadsheets or texted schedules rather than by leading them in person. They often seem prematurely defensive, as if they are already feeling that people don't like them and won't do what they are asked, even before this starts to happen.

    When things do start to go wrong, LII's can at first become snarky, and then they allow too much anger, and what seems to be basic disrespect for the other person's intelligence, to come into their voices. Eventually, when the project finally appears to them to be reduced to a smoking crater, they will retreat into isolation. At this point, they may return to analysis and explanation, which are really their strong points.

    In the military, there are line officers and there are staff officers. LII's are staff officers.

    Expecting an LII to charismatically lead a group is a lot like putting Leonard Cohen in charge of Pattons' United States Central Army in France and Germany and expecting him to conquer Germany. (I type Cohen as an IEI, and Patton as an SLE.)
    If you ask me, people shouldn't need to be led in person. They should just do their jobs and stop needing babysitting when they are perfectly competent on their own. Failing this, most people don't need to be led past a quick conversation about what they need to do and when they need to do it, so it's not that hard. It's the same information, but it helps people narrow down their understanding of what you want with verbal cues and body language. Plus they can ask questions.

    I definitely have an issue with hiding my emotions once I lose respect for someone who is especially difficult to deal with. I tend to seek out outside guidance if it comes to that.

    I have had people straight up give me the silent treatment because I was pushing them without regard to how they might be feeling in that moment (because for me, it's never an issue - I just do the job and if I dont like it, I say so).

    An SEI coworker once told me that I can't recognize assholes lol.
    Last edited by ouronis; 01-07-2021 at 09:41 PM.

  32. #72
    Rebelondeck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    1,929
    Mentioned
    175 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    @Adam Strange Yes, there are different types of leadership. Normally, LIIs wouldn't even think of trying to influence (unlike say LIEs), which makes LIIs poor into-the-breach leaders - a style that suited to Ejs especially LIEs. However, LIIs seem to have much better success as project managers than do LIEs because the arena is more strategic than it is tactical. I have not seen LIIs being deliberately snarky (accidentally, yes) or displaying anger but I've seen countless Ejs that way. Many LIIs will retreat to figure out what to do next, which is a poor quality when staff need immediate leadership. LIEs make the best execs but they tend to be charismatic dictators; LIIs can be good managers if the staff already believe that they're competent because LIIs usually have a hard time convincing people that they are, unlike other types. Competent LIIs tend to be respected but have very few allies so they tend to avoid "the breach" scenarios.

    a.k.a. I/O

  33. #73
    Adam Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Midwest, USA
    TIM
    ENTJ-1Te 8w7 sx/so
    Posts
    16,229
    Mentioned
    1553 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rebelondeck View Post
    @Adam Strange Yes, there are different types of leadership. Normally, LIIs wouldn't even think of trying to influence (unlike say LIEs), which makes LIIs poor into-the-breach leaders - a style that suited to Ejs especially LIEs. However, LIIs seem to have much better success as project managers than do LIEs because the arena is more strategic than it is tactical. I have not seen LIIs being deliberately snarky (accidentally, yes) or displaying anger but I've seen countless Ejs that way. Many LIIs will retreat to figure out what to do next, which is a poor quality when staff need immediate leadership. LIEs make the best execs but they tend to be charismatic dictators; LIIs can be good managers if the staff already believe that they're competent because LIIs usually have a hard time convincing people that they are, unlike other types. Competent LIIs tend to be respected but have very few allies so they tend to avoid "the breach" scenarios.

    a.k.a. I/O
    Again, all very true, @Rebelondeck, both in my opinion and my experience.

    Probably the best combination is to have an LIE run an organization as a leader, and an LII writing proposals and managing schedules. Honestly, the very best proposals for future work that I've ever seen were written by LII's. They are models of clarity and succinctness, even when based almost entirely on BS from an LIE.
    I've tried to write proposals myself, and in comparison to an LII's work, they look like they were written in crayon by a third-grader.
    But I've never seen an LII who was able to inspire loyalty in a group. Trust, yes, but personal loyalty, no. I've seen them speak extemporaneously in meetings and be brilliant at it, but they just don't seem to care about moving people in one direction. They seem to be willing to work just hard enough to keep their jobs, especially if those jobs don't involve a lot of work, but they don't seem to be willing to work to ensure that someone else has a job.

    There is a huge difference between being a leader and a manager. A manager is not going to be able to get a group of soldiers to do a head-on attack of a fortified position, where it is almost certain that one-third of the group is going to die. "OK, Bob, you run in from the right. Joe, you run in from the left. Ted will run in from the center, and I'll be back here covering you guys." But a good leader will be the first one in line, and the remainder of the men will follow.

    There is a good example of this kind of leadership in Saving Private Ryan, where the CO actually was, yes, attacking a German machine gun position.

    On the other hand, Patton's army regularly ran ahead of it's supplies and had to stop advancing for lack of fuel. Very effective leadership, but terrible management.

  34. #74
    Marep's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    TIM
    EII Sx/Sp 9w1 (954)
    Posts
    599
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Angela Merkel is supposedly LII.

  35. #75
    What's the purpose of SEI? Tallmo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Finland
    TIM
    SEI
    Posts
    4,161
    Mentioned
    305 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marep View Post
    Angela Merkel is supposedly LII.
    Yes, but probably D subtype

    I think the president of Finland is also LII (Sauli Niinistö). Here is a video when he met Donald Trump. The lack of Se is painful to watch
    The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.

    (Jung on Si)

  36. #76
    Rebelondeck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    1,929
    Mentioned
    175 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marep View Post
    Angela Merkel is supposedly LII.
    Well, a nation of LSIs needs a plan with some context.

    a.k.a. I/O

  37. #77
    Rebelondeck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    1,929
    Mentioned
    175 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Strange View Post
    ........On the other hand, Patton's army regularly ran ahead of it's supplies and had to stop advancing for lack of fuel. Very effective leadership, but terrible management.
    Patton was a genius tactician likely with OCD (a Mozart) but everyone who was close to him thought him a bully and most despised him as a person. Staff knew to present only idealized images of him. Most executives of corporations are similar to Patton (tacticians), but the bulk of leadership resides hidden in support staff. It's rare to find tacticians (or strategists) who are also good leaders. Bradley likely provided more actual leadership than did Patton.

    a.k.a. I/O

  38. #78
    Humanist Beautiful sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    EII land
    TIM
    EII INFj
    Posts
    26,935
    Mentioned
    699 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)

    Default

    No

    Double wammy
    Bad at Fe makes the team unhappy and stressed
    Bad at prioritizing and Se not communicating with ease
    -
    Dual type (as per tcaudilllg)
    Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?


    I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE

    Best description of functions:
    http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html

  39. #79
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Beyond the Pale
    TIM
    Heretic
    Posts
    7,017
    Mentioned
    151 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fry View Post
    Just curious, some intj description says intj is the natural leaders. but i never leader before, i know i have some amazing idea to improve the group. but i dont think i have the charm to be a leader. plus i dont have the natural burning desire to take the lead (i am passive).

    does that mean the description of intj is wrong?

    Fry
    intj
    Are those MBTI descriptions? Ejs are the natural leaders not Ijs. Extraversion isn't just about sociability, though sociability also helps when leading. There are also seemingly quite a few logical Ep leaders, but probably still more EIE and ESE leaders than ILE and SLE. LIIs are not usually doormats despite some of the stereotypes of how Se PoLR is supposed to look, but they're not usually all that pushy themselves despite not usually being pushovers either.

  40. #80
    Renna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2022
    Posts
    469
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    What's Abraham Lincoln type? He seem weak at Se relate decisions...

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •