Why do these two ILIs-INTps disagree?

[tcaudilllg]

Two ILIs work for the same company. Both are business strategists. One is known for bold, flying-by-the-seat-of-your-pants strategy; the other for boring, carefully precalculated and time tested stratagems. Times are good at the company, but there are signs of increased product competition on the horizon. The board offers a new strategy using innovative products and experimental marketing. However there are problems with both funding and supply for this new strategy. Everyone is agreed that the company is unprepared for this venture, however there is also a certain concern that delay could be costly.

The ILIs are at odds over how to proceed. The bold ILI recommends a full blown advertising campaign even though product supply is low. Great first impressions, the bold ILI argues, will create an influx of cash that will permit the purchase of supply enough to meet every demand. The cautious ILI is skeptical and suggests waiting until enough cash reserves are in place to create a large amount of supply right off, without risking any advertising dollars until right before the "big launch". The cautious ILI also suggests committing to investigation of competing product strategies, and goes on to argue that the company should be willing to shelve the product outright if the market seems too crowded and/or the product's prospects seem uncertain.

Why do these ILIs disagree?

[Sumer1an]

From a completely functional standpoint, its probably due to different experiences in the past. Confidence may have something to do with it also. There could be a lot of factors but those are the most likely, IMO.

[Theta]

From my perspective there are some points that need to be focused on.

First off ILI is irrational by nature, although it's canalized energy toward production is objectively focused, the basis of the prognition is necessarily irrational.

With the information available I can imagine that the main problem in this case is the allocation of resources. I believe ILI looks for opportunities which it's perspective it can relate to the expectancy of abundance.

The ILI which is highly accepting the risk, might have envisioned the process in which the marketing campaign could easily create this abundance; which from my perspective seems to be related to this ILI's unconscious attitude towards it's understanding of the super id capacity of suggestion, in this case implicit in the marketing campaign.

So the bold ILI perceives abundance in the risky choice, believing the novel process involved in utilizing this new inventory has a tendency towards self evident success. Probably this involves it's experience with previous campaigns or other successful histories he is familiar with.

It could be argued that the receptive pattern towards the "rapid and forceful attraction of attention" reflects a maturing of ILI seeking for duality. So in this case I would have to go for his choice, again only with this infos available.

Of course it could be argued that the careful ILI did a much realistic/pessimistic prognosis characteristic of ILI which displays a "mature" attitude. Waiting for the right moment to act is very ILI like as well. I believe this careful ILI is skeptical about the capacity of the competency, and believes that a market should be easier to attack, so it's allocation of resources displays a non assertive attitude. It could be a useful choice to look for another place to market for but also this is riskier, than involving products that are already designed at least. Waiting for that moment to investigate would not be a wise choice from my perspective, although this investigation should be made anyways those results might be useful later.

[Ozz]

Not answering your question, but I am going to have to side with the cautious ILI.

[Birdie]

I am having a hard time understanding the prejudice here that people of the same type get along smashingly.


Perhaps competition.

[Jonathan]

Are these two actual people, whom you've met and typed as being ILI?
Or is this a hypothetical situation, a kind of clever riddle for us to solve?

[Jonathan]

By the way, as to my answer, the difference of opinion doesn't sound type-related. It's a matter of understanding what the best strategy for that company really is...Should it focus on sales-first, or limit sales based on inventories? I think most small businesses need to focus on sales because it's more likely that they won't sell enough than that they'll get too many orders. But there are cases where companies grew too quickly and hurt themselves because of failure to provide good service (e.g., People's Airlines comes to mind).

If the two people really are the same type, then I think they should at least be able to communicate effectively about their differences of opinion and reasoning, UNLESS some non-Socionic factor prevents such communication.

There are a lot of times when you have two people of one type and one is Democrat and the other is Republican. They won't necessarily change the other person's mind, but they can still carry on a good conversation about their difference of opinion.

[tcaudilllg]

There are a lot of times when you have two people of one type and one is Democrat and the other is Republican. They won't necessarily change the other person's mind, but they can still carry on a good conversation about their difference of opinion.

That's one reason, the reason I had in mind. One trusting in positives (the cautious Republican) and the other trusting in the potential to turn negatives into positives (the bold Democrat).

Now how do these two approach one another's disagreements?