ESTj Description by I/O

[Rebelondeck]

This is a pretty good description!

• "They're also able to drop everything and just relax."
Not really.
• "They'll often neglect their own needs and health while looking after others."
Yes and no.

SisOfNight,

I know/knew many ESTj (my mother being one). I found when they went to a party, it was all about the party; they left their normal work behind although the did work at the party on party stuff. Now modern technology may have changed that dynamic. You make a good point......

I found that female ESTj were very self-sacrificing, more so than the men but the men had it as well; however, I never studied the phenomena beyond a family/friend environment.

Consentingadult,

Work is often dog-eat-dog and ESTjs do well in this type of environment.....

All,

I wrote this description and the ISTp one a long time ago for one purpose: the apparent inner anger or rage of both types. No one has yet said anything to the contrary about this aspect, which I emphasized. I've yet to figure out the root cause; perhaps it's a combination of lack of intuition and the closed-loop need for immediate closure. I don't know of an ESTj or ISTp that doesn't have this trait; and when these two types interact, the phenomena can become very apparent very quickly. And, all were nice, well-meaning people......

a.k.a. I/O

[Adam Strange]

SisOfNight,

I know/knew many ESTj (my mother being one). I found when they went to a party, it was all about the party; they left their normal work behind although the did work at the party on party stuff. Now modern technology may have changed that dynamic. You make a good point......

I found that female ESTj were very self-sacrificing, more so than the men but the men had it as well; however, I never studied the phenomena beyond a family/friend environment.

Consentingadult,

Work is often dog-eat-dog and ESTjs do well in this type of environment.....

All,

I wrote this description and the ISTp one a long time ago for one purpose: the apparent inner anger or rage of both types. No one has yet said anything to the contrary about this aspect, which I emphasized. I've yet to figure out the root cause; perhaps it's a combination of lack of intuition and the closed-loop need for immediate closure. I don't know of an ESTj or ISTp that doesn't have this trait; and when these two types interact, the phenomena can become very apparent very quickly. And, all were nice, well-meaning people......

a.k.a. I/O

This is a remarkable portrait of ESTj's. Entirely accurate, IMO. My mother is ESTj and my father is ISTp, and the inner rage thing is an interesting way to look at it. My mother openly expressed her rage in every imaginable way, and my father denied his rage, but it was clearly there. My father volunteered for two wars and survived hand-to-hand knife fights when they ran out of ammunition and their position was overrun, and I always wondered how a guy who worked in finance and never left his desk could do that. Inner rage, obviously. Plus, his childhood was extremely difficult.
This common world view must be what keeps them together. My ESTj mother and ISTp father don't speak to each other much, don't go out, and don't have friends. They are like two strangers, who don't like each other much, living together in a house in a foreign country where neither of them speaks the language, and neither wishes to learn or change.
My ISTp ex-wife also denies her rage, but it is clearly there.

Regarding ESTj's, yes, they can make good managers of people in low-level jobs that are very well-defined, because they think they know best and have no trouble telling others what to do. But they are terrible for creative jobs (other than when they themselves are perfecting something, which they are actually very good at). They often have emotional blind spots, and working for one, if you have any spark of independence or initiative or creativity, can be hell. They want everyone to conform to their rules and to fit perfectly into their world, including you and all of your thoughts. And if you don't, well, there is that inner rage.... I've had a couple of ESTj bosses in my life. Never again.

[Olimpia]

I wrote this description and the ISTp one a long time ago for one purpose: the apparent inner anger or rage of both types.

A lot of the Delta STs are Type 1 (in the Enneagram), which is exactly about inner rage and the suppression of such, through the ideal and pursuit of perfection.
Seems like most Delta STs you've known were Type 1.

I can say that most SLIs I met were most likely Type 1.
The healthier ones are much more balanced and flexible. The less healthy ones are very strict, tight-up, and difficult to deal with (esp. as an IEI).

Then there are also Type 9 SLIs. Type 9 being a fellow Gut Type, they also have Anger issues which are even more repressed than is the case with Type 1.
(That is why Type 9s are usually rather easy to get along with, whatever their Socionics type – their anger is so repressed, it hardly ever comes out.
But boy, if it does... It can resemble a Type 8's anger, esp. when they are a 9w8... It can be scary.)

At last, the third most common Enneagram type for SLIs is Type 6. Those are the more cerebral SLIs...

All in all, I attribute those anger issues (besides Enneagram type) to weak . Because IME, all types with weakened had anger issues, and general issues with expressing their emotions in a sensible manner.
Interestingly, unhealthy leading types will act very similarly to types with weak .

[Rebelondeck]

.........All in all, I attribute those anger issues (besides Enneagram type) to weak . Because IME, all types with weakened had anger issues, and general issues with expressing their emotions in a sensible manner........

SisOfNight,

There are other types that lack Fe, me being one, that don't have that undercurrent of judgemental or indignant rage. All types get angry or blow up for various reasons but it doesn't seem to pervade their existence to the point where it continually has to be kept in check (some ESTjs/ISTps are better at it than others). I don't imply that ESTj or ISTp are bad in any way but it's seems as if rage (or something that looks very much like rage) is their motivating force as Adam Strange had said above. Even the cerebral of these types seem to think the world needs to be taught a lesson; from this assumption, the only difference among them is intensity of the resulting display......

a.k.a. I/O

[Muddy]

All,

I wrote this description and the ISTp one a long time ago for one purpose: the apparent inner anger or rage of both types. No one has yet said anything to the contrary about this aspect, which I emphasized. I've yet to figure out the root cause; perhaps it's a combination of lack of intuition and the closed-loop need for immediate closure. I don't know of an ESTj or ISTp that doesn't have this trait; and when these two types interact, the phenomena can become very apparent very quickly. And, all were nice, well-meaning people......

a.k.a. I/O

I was thinking about this in my other thread and I think the inner rage of Delta STs have is a result of having Se in the Id, which is also made worse with the addition of weak ethics. There is a huge misconception floating around in socionics that the Id functions are used for nothing more then "protecting the dual", which is a is very misleading way of interpreting the Id functions IMO. Rather, I think the Id functions represent a much more vital role in our personalities. So Delta STs, having Se in the Id, are naturally aggressive, competitive and confrontational. Comfort and harmony (Si) is something they need to put conscious effort into achieving, as where they would automatically be in state of comfort and harmony if Si was in the Id rather then the ego.

[wacey]

I was thinking about this in my other thread and I think the inner rage of Delta STs have is a result of having Se in the Id, which is also made worse with the addition of weak ethics. There is a huge misconception floating around in socionics that the Id functions are used for nothing more then "protecting the dual", which is a is very misleading way of interpreting the Id functions IMO. Rather, I think the Id functions represent a much more vital role in our personalities. So Delta STs, having Se in the Id, are naturally aggressive, competitive and confrontational. Comfort and harmony (Si) is something they need to put conscious effort into achieving, as where they would automatically be in state of comfort and harmony if Si was in the Id rather then the ego.

Um..no.

[Muddy]

Um..no.

Always give an explanation before criticizing please. It greatly annoys me when people shoot down someone else's statement without providing reasoning or backing as to why they are wrong.

[wacey]

Always give an explanation before criticizing please. It greatly annoys me when people shoot down someone else's statement without providing reasoning or backing as to why they are wrong.

The last two sentences of that post are totally wrong for delta STs. There is no latent aggression, competitiveness, and confrontational nature to them. Especially not in ISTps, and certainly the same could be said of LSEs. I don't know where you are basing that off of? I hope its not the red head character from The Walking Dead?

And to speak about Si being consciouslly and therefore implicitly strained function for someone like say an SLI, shows your as yet lack of understanding into that sociotype.

[Muddy]

The last two sentences of that post are totally wrong for delta STs. There is no latent aggression, competitiveness, and confrontational nature to them. Especially not in ISTps, and certainly the same could be said of LSEs. I don't know where you are basing that off of? I hope its not the red head character from The Walking Dead?

And to speak about Si being consciouslly and therefore implicitly strained function for someone like say an SLI, shows your as yet lack of understanding into that sociotype.

Then we will simply have to disagree, same goes for @thehotelambush. The redhead character from the Walking Dead IS a shining example of a typical LSE. Yes, he is an acted character, but I've seen others in real life who very closely mimicked his personality and I'm only using him as an example. What would you type him? He is not SLE, I can tell you that much. I don't have as much experience with SLI so I can't speak for them, but I believe it is a similar case with them just not as extreme as LSE. I do not believe the IEs simply "go away" when they are placed in the Id, but rather then manifest in a more primitive, instinctual form. Model A sucks IMO.

Beta ST aggression is manifested in more of a "Lets go to Nam and smoke some chincs" kind of way, while Delta ST aggression manifest more as going into a rage and engaging in domestic abuse. Look at the Delta VI thread and tell me you don't get a vibe of domestic abuse from them. I'm am not attempting to bash deltas by the way but the idea that they are angels because of having Si in the ego is very wrong.

[Exodus]

Beta ST aggression is manifested in more a "Lets go to Nam and smoke some chincs" kind of way, while Delta ST aggression manifest more as going into a rage and engaging in domestic abuse. Look at the Delta VI thread and tell me you don't get a vibe of domestic abuse from them. I'm am not attempting to bash deltas by the way but the idea that they are angels because of having Si in the ego is very wrong.

Model A is really deep and beautiful if you take the time to understand it. The descriptions you've given are offensive and crude by comparison.

The Id functions are something we use mostly for ourselves, as a tool. However, we don't let them get in the way of our Ego functions (as, say, engaging in violence on a regular basis would do with ), and they yield easily when others signal that they're not wanted.

[wacey]

Then we will simply have to disagree, same goes for @thehotelambush. The redhead character from the Walking Dead IS a shining example of a typical LSE. Yes, he is an acted character, but I've seen others in real life who very closely mimicked his personality and I'm only using him as an example. What would you type him? He is not SLE, I can tell you that much. I don't have as much experience with SLI so I can't speak for them, but I believe it is a similar case with them just not as extreme as LSE. I do not believe the IEs simply "go away" when they are placed in the Id, but rather then manifest in a more primitive, instinctual form. Model A sucks IMO.

Beta ST aggression is manifested in more of a "Lets go to Nam and smoke some chincs" kind of way, while Delta ST aggression manifest more as going into a rage and engaging in domestic abuse. Look at the Delta VI thread and tell me you don't get a vibe of domestic abuse from them. I'm am not attempting to bash deltas by the way but the idea that they are angels because of having Si in the ego is very wrong.

Alright man, think whatever you want to think its a free world.

Regarding Red head, I think he has Ne polr, not agenda. So Se-LSI.

[Beautiful sky]

I was thinking about this in my other thread and I think the inner rage of Delta STs have is a result of having Se in the Id, which is also made worse with the addition of weak ethics. There is a huge misconception floating around in socionics that the Id functions are used for nothing more then "protecting the dual", which is a is very misleading way of interpreting the Id functions IMO. Rather, I think the Id functions represent a much more vital role in our personalities. So Delta STs, having Se in the Id, are naturally aggressive, competitive and confrontational. Comfort and harmony (Si) is something they need to put conscious effort into achieving, as where they would automatically be in state of comfort and harmony if Si was in the Id rather then the ego.

Rage?

I'll answer this question

My bf will get cranky in the early mornings because he never gets enough sleep. The slightest disruption of the very few hours he can rune his sleep. This has to do with disruption of Si probably. I say this because I've never gotten cranky when my sleep gets interrupted. If interrupted, they'll jump out of bed and bitch about the noise "the damn dog!" etc. But it's just bitching with no harm behind it. Other bitching is "I'm always the one doing things around here!" If an LSE does a lot and gets no appreciation it's not going to be good. They may continue to provide and do but it's just emotionally wrong to continue asking so much of someone who doesn't want to leave the relationship yet expected to continue doing without appreciation. Genuine appreciation.

Other rage comes from having asked you to do something and you not doing it that way or they will not explain to you how they want it done and will suddenly seize the moment and grab the thing out of your hand and do it the way they saw it RIGHT @Sol.
In this case you have to be quiet, patient, and not mind them. Just joke and if they are not in a joking mood do it anyway until they flare up and build over by expressing all their discontent and say "I'm so glad I remained calm"

They feel bad about having done stupid shit like this and gone on a bitchy rant and may even say "It's not you babe. I just didn't want it done THAT way." In which case don't think anything of it and move on. No point in holding on to anger.


They will also get fairy angry when a driver breaks the rules or does something that could potentially hurt someone or is behavior that's perceived as rude "that effing B cut me off"



When LSE run out of time and stress about getting everything ready in time like when my cousin tries to prepare all meals for dinner time at 6pm she will get enraged if people don't focus on work and aren't as driven and focused to get things done briskly lol

I strongly disagree with this. Delta STs do not have "inner anger or rage" as a rule. This is much more characteristic of Se ego types, especially Beta STs who struggle with expressing their emotions in a healthy manner. It suggests you have confused them, as do these quotes:



"ESTjs have a strong sense of ownership and territory - they would not allow anyone to exert control over or do things differently on their turf."
Why would a type that values Ne and not Se display this behavior?



LSEs do naturally take a leadership role, but I would hardly say that it's a compulsion or that power (again, an Se theme) is something they seek out for itself. LSEs do not care much at all about how they are perceived. I'm not sure that they "love interaction with others" either; I would say that they focus their energy on activities that are both productive and enjoyable, and often this means working together with other people. But they are good-natured in general, and tend to be very emotionally balanced. I also disagree that they are "corrosive", this is much more typical of Resolute logical types.

The earlier part of the description is better but you have not correlated anything with the information elements, and you probably could go deeper into the motivations behind the behavior.



This is just plain wrong. Hating "chaos, disarray, lack of discipline, transgressions of their norms, rules, agreements" - these are all Beta ST characteristics, this is all TiSe. LSEs do not have a concept of "transgression of their norms", or if they do they don't care about it. They are extremely flexible with their expectations of others and themselves, and definitely do not exhaustively prepare themselves, in fact they tend to act in the moment and be generally unaware of the need for preparation (Ni PoLR). I also hardly think that they are "anxious, irritable, or angry" - certainly not anxious because they are focused on enjoying the present moment (i.e. Si). If anything, it's the opposite: they tend to ignore problems (as do most Si valuers) and take an overly optimistic outlook that they can deal with things as they come. SLIs can be described as irritable because of a general lack of Fe, but LSEs have role Fe which means they generally try to present a positive attitude.

You are completely wrong. Jesus

[Exodus]

I wrote this description and the ISTp one a long time ago for one purpose: the apparent inner anger or rage of both types.

I strongly disagree with this. Delta STs do not have "inner anger or rage" as a rule. This is much more characteristic of Se ego types, especially Beta STs who struggle with expressing their emotions in a healthy manner. It suggests you have confused them, as do these quotes:

ESTjs have a strong sense of ownership and territory - they would not allow anyone to exert control over or do things differently on their turf. They're strongly focused on their processes and objectives but often overlook the sensitivities and needs of others. They're critical in evaluating the behaviour and productivity of others while ignoring their own shortcomings, and they can express their displeasure rather corrosively.

"ESTjs have a strong sense of ownership and territory - they would not allow anyone to exert control over or do things differently on their turf."
Why would a type that values Ne and not Se display this behavior?

ESTjs enjoy competition and are venturesome, especially if there is a need to prove something. They like being leader of the pack; if they're not, they'll look for weakness in the leadership; and if they can't find any, they'll likely move on to greener pastures. Being perceived as important, substantial, or the best seems to be a goal of most ESTj. They can be very self-righteous and bold in pursuing success but sometimes these forays can be rather rash or impetuous, and that temper is always a possibility.

Although they usually have little interest in hobbies or diversions, they do love interaction with others so will participate in activities that facilitate this.

LSEs do naturally take a leadership role, but I would hardly say that it's a compulsion or that power (again, an Se theme) is something they seek out for itself. LSEs do not care much at all about how they are perceived. I'm not sure that they "love interaction with others" either; I would say that they focus their energy on activities that are both productive and enjoyable, and often this means working together with other people. But they are good-natured in general, and tend to be very emotionally balanced. I also disagree that they are "corrosive", this is much more typical of Resolute logical types.

The earlier part of the description is better but you have not correlated anything with the information elements, and you probably could go deeper into the motivations behind the behavior.

ESTjs hate chaos, disarray, lack of discipline, or transgressions of their norms, rules and or agreements. They seem to need a guaranteed, predictable future since they know that they poorly anticipate problems. They try to gain full understanding and exhaustively prepare themselves before starting any serious endeavour because they need to be ready for every eventuality. However, their impatience can cause them to overlook important considerations but having to fix their plans later can make them very anxious, irritable and or angry.

This is just plain wrong. Hating "chaos, disarray, lack of discipline, transgressions of their norms, rules, agreements" - these are all Beta ST characteristics, this is all TiSe. LSEs do not have a concept of "transgression of their norms", or if they do they don't care about it. They are extremely flexible with their expectations of others and themselves, and definitely do not exhaustively prepare themselves, in fact they tend to act in the moment and be generally unaware of the need for preparation (Ni PoLR). I also hardly think that they are "anxious, irritable, or angry" - certainly not anxious because they are focused on enjoying the present moment (i.e. Si). If anything, it's the opposite: they tend to ignore problems (as do most Si valuers) and take an overly optimistic outlook that they can deal with things as they come. SLIs can be described as irritable because of a general lack of Fe, but LSEs have role Fe which means they generally try to present a positive attitude.

[wacey]

I strongly disagree with this. Delta STs do not have "inner anger or rage" as a rule. This is much more characteristic of Se ego types, especially Beta STs who struggle with expressing their emotions in a healthy manner. It suggests you have confused them, as do these quotes:



"ESTjs have a strong sense of ownership and territory - they would not allow anyone to exert control over or do things differently on their turf."
Why would a type that values Ne and not Se display this behavior?



LSEs do naturally take a leadership role, but I would hardly say that it's a compulsion or that power (again, an Se theme) is something they seek out for itself. LSEs do not care much at all about how they are perceived. I'm not sure that they "love interaction with others" either; I would say that they focus their energy on activities that are both productive and enjoyable, and often this means working together with other people. But they are good-natured in general, and tend to be very emotionally balanced. I also disagree that they are "corrosive", this is much more typical of Resolute logical types.

The earlier part of the description is better but you have not correlated anything with the information elements, and you probably could go deeper into the motivations behind the behavior.



This is just plain wrong. Hating "chaos, disarray, lack of discipline, transgressions of their norms, rules, agreements" - these are all Beta ST characteristics, this is all TiSe. LSEs do not have a concept of "transgression of their norms", or if they do they don't care about it. They are extremely flexible with their expectations of others and themselves, and definitely do not exhaustively prepare themselves, in fact they tend to act in the moment and be generally unaware of the need for preparation (Ni PoLR). I also hardly think that they are "anxious, irritable, or angry" - certainly not anxious because they are focused on enjoying the present moment (i.e. Si). If anything, it's the opposite: they tend to ignore problems (as do most Si valuers) and take an overly optimistic outlook that they can deal with things as they come. SLIs can be described as irritable because of a general lack of Fe, but LSEs have role Fe which means they generally try to present a positive attitude.

For arguments sake it has been my experince that LSE in professional leadership and managment position do have a tendency to over plan and over prepare the daily logistical tasks they and others are responsible for. And further, they have a tendency to verbalize their thinking in an effort to make sure everyone is on the same page.

Personally, I find this habit unnecessary and annoying, especially since plans change so much throughout the day, which usually leads to a palabable stress emanating from the LSE. Perhaps this is the latent aggression muddy textures is talking about?

This immediate switching their minds, or inflexibilty, is not an easy trait for LSE in the work place and it can lead, in the long run, to their insuffurable habit of workplace anxiety, which bleeds over into other employees. Small things become a disaster as they are forced to adapt to hangups that were not a part of the plans. LSE, unlike the SLI, are not the type to withhold expressing their Te frustrations.

Plus, they are Ne orientated, which in the work place looks like a conscious effort by them to find all the variables of what could and can happen in regards, usually exclusively, to the Te matters that are important to their Universe. In other words, they will try to cover all their bases and usually will do so usually verbally, before, during, and after a task. This can and does look like overkill.

Yet even throughout all of this, LSE seem to remain the consummate proffesional, even if they are not always mellow in regards to what needs to be done and how it should be accomplished. They are orientated towards good and stable work place relationships between them and their colleagues and will not use undue pressure not warranted within the confines of what is appropriate in that particular workplace setting.

However, they are in the asking dicotomy so their style of interaction in the workplace is more interrogation seeming then anything. This may seem confrontational about productivity, your actions, methods to do the small and large tasks you are assigned and even the placement of tools and the overall set up of your work place, yet at its heart, it really is not. LSE just can't seem to help themselves interject in this way with this style of communication.

For instance, "Why did you put that wrench over here, it is supposed to go over there?" "Where are you guys going right now, when we discussed going over there?" "How come you used that way of doing it when it is much quicker doing it this way?" [some use of algorithmic cognition in these examples].

[Exodus]

For arguments sake it has been my experince that LSE in professional leadership and managment position do have a tendency to over plan and over prepare the daily logistical tasks they and others are responsible for. And further, they have a tendency to verbalize their thinking in an effort to make sure everyone is on the same page.

Personally, I find this habit unnecessary and annoying, especially since plans change so much throughout the day, which usually leads to a palabable stress emanating from the LSE. Perhaps this is the latent aggression muddy textures is talking about?

This immediate switching their minds, or inflexibilty, is not an easy trait for LSE in the work place and it can lead, in the long run, to their insuffurable habit of workplace anxiety, which bleeds over into other employees. Small things become a disaster as they are forced to adapt to hangups that were not a part of the plans. LSE, unlike the SLI, are not the type to withhold expressing their Te frustrations.

Plus, they are Ne orientated, which in the work place looks like a conscious effort by them to find all the variables of what could and can happen in regards, usually exclusively, to the Te matters that are important to their Universe. In other words, they will try to cover all their bases and usually will do so usually verbally, before, during, and after a task. This can and does look like overkill.

Yet even throughout all of this, LSE seem to remain the consummate proffesional, even if they are not always mellow in regards to what needs to be done and how it should be accomplished. They are orientated towards good and stable work place relationships between them and their collegues.

However, they are in the asking dicotomy so their style of interaction in the workplace is more interrogation seeming then anything. This may seem confrontational about productivity, your actions, methods to do the small and large tasks you are assigned and even the placement of tools and the overall set up of your work place, yet at its heart, it really is not. LSE just can't seem to help themselves interject in this way with this style of communication.

For instance, "Why did you put that wrench over here, it is supposed to go over there?" "Where are you guys going right now, when we discussed going over there?" "How come you used that way of doing it when it is much quicker doing it this way?" [some use of algorithmic cognition in these examples].

I strongly disagree.

This kind of micro-management of wanting to do things in a specific way, with all other ways being wrong, is completely antithetical to how Deltas, who value and not or , operate. If anything, their expectations for people are poorly expressed (even passive-aggressively at times) and this is often frustrating to types that value . Gamma NTs do very often harshly criticize how people do things, but this involves Se and Ni just as much as Te. What Delta STs expect is that when people are working, they are going to focus on work and not do frivolous things like socialize. I have seen LSEs get annoyed because of this before. But beyond that, they are not going to care much about the precise methods that people use to get things done, as long as the result is the same. The opposite of this is to adhere to a principle of the right way to do things, aka . Deltas are mostly going to mind their own business in the workplace if they can, to avoid conflict.

Plus, they are Ne orientated, which in the work place looks like a conscious effort by them to find all the variables of what could and can happen

I've seen this said often, is it an MBTI concept or something? This is not but . Preparation, planning for the future is an Ni theme. Someone who is focusing on Ne is naturally open to possibilities and does not fear that things could go wrong. A type with PoLR is going to be basically ignorant of the idea that anything could go wrong, and will often be blindsided when they do. What you are talking about is more like Mobilizing as in LSIs.

[wacey]

I strongly disagree.

This kind of micro-management of wanting to do things in a specific way, with all other ways being wrong, is completely antithetical to how Deltas, who value and not or , operate. If anything, their expectations for people are poorly expressed (even passive-aggressively at times) and this is often frustrating to types that value . Gamma NTs do very often harshly criticize how people do things, but this involves Se and Ni just as much as Te. What Delta STs expect is that when people are working, they are going to focus on work and not do frivolous things like socialize. I have seen LSEs get annoyed because of this before. But beyond that, they are not going to care much about the precise methods that people use to get things done, as long as the result is the same. The opposite of this is to adhere to a principle of the right way to do things, aka . Deltas are mostly going to mind their own business in the workplace if they can, to avoid conflict.



I've seen this said often, is it an MBTI concept or something? This is not but . Preparation, planning for the future is an Ni theme. Someone who is focusing on Ne is naturally open to possibilities and does not fear that things could go wrong. A type with PoLR is going to be basically ignorant of the idea that anything could go wrong, and will often be blindsided when they do. What you are talking about is more like Mobilizing as in LSIs.

Have you ever worked for an LSE? Honestly?

[Exodus]

Have you ever worked for an LSE? Honestly?

Yes in fact I have.

[wacey]

Yes in fact I have.

For an Ne characters, you are really missing the gist of what I am saying.

[wacey]

This is business logic, productivity, efficiency, systems of preparing work, getting as much done in a day as possible in the shortest amount of time, managing employees and teams all of which are assigned differing tasks and making sure products and resources are managed to maximize out put. Are you telling me LSE are some kind of cowboys at there? flying off the seat of their pants and just winging it? Preparation and planning for the future is absolutely within the realm of black logic. The logic of actions. the logic of what should be done and how best to do it.

Maybe SLI wouldnt care how other people are doing tasks, they will just do them the way they think is right themselves. LSE are a totally different story. Why else would they rub the Betas the wrong way if it was not for being pedantic about Te?

[Exodus]

Preparation and planning for the future is absolutely within the realm of black logic.

Before you said this was , now it's ?

The logic of actions. the logic of what should be done and how best to do it.

Sure, but the way you've characterized the manner in which LSEs express this value is not accurate.

Maybe SLI wouldnt care how other people are doing tasks, they will just do them the way they think is right themselves. LSE are a totally different story. Why else would they rub the Betas the wrong way if it was not for being pedantic about Te?

They would rub them the wrong way for not thinking about the future consequences or the deeper significance of what they are doing. They would also rub them the wrong way for not expressing their expectations clearly or adhering to firm principles, rather adopting an opportunistic attitude of deriving benefit in whatever way is available ( > ).

[wacey]

Before you said this was , now it's ?


Sure, but the way you've characterized the manner in which LSEs express this value is not accurate.


They would rub them the wrong way for not thinking about the future consequences or the deeper significance of what they are doing. They would also rub them the wrong way for not expressing their expectations clearly or adhering to firm principles, rather adopting an opportunistic attitude of deriving benefit in whatever way is available ( > ).

In my experience working closely with LSE in a mid sized company that my assessment is actually extremely accurate. Of course you don't have to believe me and thats fine.

They would rub them the wrong way by going for the actions of how to do something instead of the underlying process involved in order that others may find and discover their own ways of preforming an act Ti vs Te.. Ti will explain and maybe reexplain, but they will not expect that it should be done exclusively the way they might do it. LSE will have this expectation that things are done their way, period. And if you are doing it differently then there is definitely something wrong with you.

And to say LSE are not aware about future implications of their's and other's actions in the realm of Te is false. They want to do something right the first time, which leads to a extended preparation period. The devil is in the details when it comes to black logic. You must be thinking about SLIs or something here.

[consentingadult]

... getting as much done in a day as possible in the shortest amount of time...

This is not quite the case, if I understand you correctly. The efficiency of LSEs is about getting more done in the same amount of time (i.e. making the most of the time available). This as opposed to the efficiency-attitude of SLIs, which is about getting specific things (a preset amount) done in the shortest amount of time. To put it differently: LSEs want to make the most of a 9 to 5 workday, whereas SLIs strive to get the job done and go home early.

It is this difference in attitude that is an important reason why IEEs can endure SLIs much longer than LSEs. IEEs interacting with LSEs feel physically worn out after a while, and this is the reason why in activity relations between IEEs and LSEs the IEEs need a temporary break from the relationship every now and then. This is not entirely to blame on the LSEs: the recognition-seeking mobilizing-Te can-do-attitude of IEEs gives LSEs a false impression, the (refreshing) impression that the IEE is willing and capable of doing more. Meanwhile, the IEEs have an unconscious expectation that the LSEs will protect them from overexerting themselves, which is what an SLI would take care of in a relationship with an IEE. (I'm reminded of an LSE woman at work yesterday, who, each time she brings me my latte, offers to already put the sugar in it for me. Such obvious caretaking behavior is a sweet thing to see, in a sense more charming than the more subtle, covert caretaking behavior of SLIs).

Likewise, LSEs probably need a break from IEEs because of an overdose of Ne, which is encouraged by LSEs because of their recognition seeking mobilizing-Ne, giving the IEE the false impression the LSE wants more of it.

[wacey]

This is not quite the case, if I understand you correctly. The efficiency of LSEs is about getting more done in the same amount of time (i.e. making the most of the time available). This as opposed to the efficiency-attitude of SLIs, which is about getting specific things (a preset amount) done in the shortest amount of time. To put it differently: LSEs want to make the most of a 9 to 5 workday, whereas SLIs strive to get the job done and go home early.

It is this difference in attitude that is an important reason why IEEs can endure SLIs much longer than LSEs. IEEs interacting with LSEs feel physically worn out after a while, and this is the reason why in activity relations between IEEs and LSEs the IEEs need a temporary break from the relationship every now and then. This is not entirely to blame on the LSEs: the recognition-seeking mobilizing-Te can-do-attitude of IEEs gives LSEs a false impression, the (refreshing) impression that the IEE is willing and capable of doing more. Meanwhile, the IEEs have an unconscious expectation that the LSEs will protect them from overexerting themselves, which is what an SLI would take care of in a relationship with an IEE. (I'm reminded of an LSE woman at work yesterday, who, each time she brings me my latte, offers to already put the sugar in it for me. Such obvious caretaking behavior is a sweet thing to see, in a sense more charming than the more subtle, covert caretaking behavior of SLIs).

Likewise, LSEs probably need a break from IEEs because of an overdose of Ne, which is encouraged by LSEs because of their recognition seeking mobilizing-Ne, giving the IEE the false impression the LSE wants more of it.

You kind of ran with what I was saying and elaborated on it. I pretty much agree with everything you just said here, you fleshed it out nicely.

And see its funny because for myself, the very "help-full" and well meaning small acts by an LSE in my work place, although kind in that Te sort of way, can be irritating and cause me to avoid them. I find myself internally rolling my eyes when I hear "one more little tip". I would assume this falls into their, as you put it "recognition seeking mobilizing Ne"? Voicing the facts of the external world Te in order to supply Ne with information which it in turn can use later on?

Because gammas are not nearly as paternalistic in their administration of Te. The phrase "don't ask, don't tell" comes to mind when describing gamma Te and funny enough SLI. If you don't ask them, then usually they won't tell you. With LSE unsolicited advice, even actual physical help, is the normal.

Your post also is helping me confirm that delta is not the quadra for me.

[applejacks]

This is not quite the case, if I understand you correctly. The efficiency of LSEs is about getting more done in the same amount of time (i.e. making the most of the time available). This as opposed to the efficiency-attitude of SLIs, which is about getting specific things (a preset amount) done in the shortest amount of time. To put it differently: LSEs want to make the most of a 9 to 5 workday, whereas SLIs strive to get the job done and go home early.

It is this difference in attitude that is an important reason why IEEs can endure SLIs much longer than LSEs. IEEs interacting with LSEs feel physically worn out after a while, and this is the reason why in activity relations between IEEs and LSEs the IEEs need a temporary break from the relationship every now and then. This is not entirely to blame on the LSEs: the recognition-seeking mobilizing-Te can-do-attitude of IEEs gives LSEs a false impression, the (refreshing) impression that the IEE is willing and capable of doing more. Meanwhile, the IEEs have an unconscious expectation that the LSEs will protect them from overexerting themselves, which is what an SLI would take care of in a relationship with an IEE. (I'm reminded of an LSE woman at work yesterday, who, each time she brings me my latte, offers to already put the sugar in it for me. Such obvious caretaking behavior is a sweet thing to see, in a sense more charming than the more subtle, covert caretaking behavior of SLIs).

Likewise, LSEs probably need a break from IEEs because of an overdose of Ne, which is encouraged by LSEs because of their recognition seeking mobilizing-Ne, giving the IEE the false impression the LSE wants more of it.

Awesome post and insight. This perfectly sums up the relationship between me (IEE) and my Mother in Law (LSE). She will never offer me something without also making it for me herself- be it a meal, a drink. She does this for everyone, and tragically it goes under appreciated, which leads to built up anger. Somehow I can see and understand that, so I'm more inclined to give grace and appreciation to appease any rage.

My SLI husband will kiss my forehead or politely offer to help me as a form of caretaking. It's not as insisted as charming LSE is, but it is still there, if not gentle and overt.

In rather simplistic terms, I used to say my Mother in Law was the extroverted version of my husband. Both have anger. Both can be kind and caring caretakers, but they are made manifest very differently.

[Beautiful sky]

For arguments sake it has been my experince that LSE in professional leadership and managment position do have a tendency to over plan and over prepare the daily logistical tasks they and others are responsible for. And further, they have a tendency to verbalize their thinking in an effort to make sure everyone is on the same page.

Personally, I find this habit unnecessary and annoying, especially since plans change so much throughout the day, which usually leads to a palabable stress emanating from the LSE. Perhaps this is the latent aggression muddy textures is talking about?

This immediate switching their minds, or inflexibilty, is not an easy trait for LSE in the work place and it can lead, in the long run, to their insuffurable habit of workplace anxiety, which bleeds over into other employees. Small things become a disaster as they are forced to adapt to hangups that were not a part of the plans. LSE, unlike the SLI, are not the type to withhold expressing their Te frustrations.

Plus, they are Ne orientated, which in the work place looks like a conscious effort by them to find all the variables of what could and can happen in regards, usually exclusively, to the Te matters that are important to their Universe. In other words, they will try to cover all their bases and usually will do so usually verbally, before, during, and after a task. This can and does look like overkill.

Yet even throughout all of this, LSE seem to remain the consummate proffesional, even if they are not always mellow in regards to what needs to be done and how it should be accomplished. They are orientated towards good and stable work place relationships between them and their colleagues and will not use undue pressure not warranted within the confines of what is appropriate in that particular workplace setting.

However, they are in the asking dicotomy so their style of interaction in the workplace is more interrogation seeming then anything. This may seem confrontational about productivity, your actions, methods to do the small and large tasks you are assigned and even the placement of tools and the overall set up of your work place, yet at its heart, it really is not. LSE just can't seem to help themselves interject in this way with this style of communication.

For instance, "Why did you put that wrench over here, it is supposed to go over there?" "Where are you guys going right now, when we discussed going over there?" "How come you used that way of doing it when it is much quicker doing it this way?" [some use of algorithmic cognition in these examples].

This is a great post wacey. LSE are planners.

[wacey]

This is a great post wacey. LSE are planners.

Thanks maritsa. When it comes to Te, yes they are planners and will do so augmented by an Si creative function, so they look at all the sensory details that go hand in hand with Te. And if they are your manager, they will monitor your actions as well. Being extroverts they will also comment on them, which is why they make their conflictor IEI nervous and defensive, as they feel they are continuously questioned on the appropriateness of their actions. Which causes them to second guess themselves and the built up experiences their introverted intuition tells them.

I have some knowledge and time watching a few closely.

[Beautiful sky]

Thanks maritsa. When it comes to Te, yes they are planners and will do so augmented by an Si creative function, so they look at all the sensory details that go hand in hand with Te.

I have some knowledge and time watching a few closely.

I appreciate your observations. It's finally adding to everything about LSE that I've been saying thus far that other people were associating with Ni traits instead. I was getting very frustrated

[wacey]

I appreciate your observations. It's finally adding to everything about LSE that I've been saying thus far that other people were associating with Ni traits instead. I was getting very frustrated

Cool.

[consentingadult]

This is a great post wacey. LSE are planners.

No, they are micromanagers...

[Beautiful sky]

No, they are micromanagers...

LSI are

[wacey]

No, they are micromanagers...

Same difference really. The best laid plans go out the window as soon as activity starts happening and then LSE needs to maintain control of the process .

That's how I view it anyway. Seems like delta NFs dont mind that type of management because it covers both Te logics as well as sensate details for them.

[wacey]

No, they are micromanagers...

Oddly, or maybe not oddly, I've noticed the same micromanagement tendancies in EII when they are in position of logistical authority for the daily tasks.

This has been major cause for conflict between myself and them that borders on extinguishment as they sort through, linearly, the process they believe to be the most effective. In fact the biggest interpersonal work place arguments I've ever had has been with EII. This does end up looking like micro managment and poor judgement often at several points throughout the day as they change thier mind about what is "best" to do. The weak yet expected Te produced by them is very apparent. On top of this they become flustered and perfectionistic about inconsequential logics of actions details. This is similar to the LSE.

Also because they are linear rationals, any task completion done spontaneously by others will cause discomfort for the EII unless it in accompanied by strong Te validation for them in their eyes. This could come from a more chilled out source such as a SLI or LIE. However if it comes from a source they do not deem to be immediately graspable through black logic, such as a task done with high energy by an Se valuer, then they will cause an upset. For example moving a company vehicle to a different location without telling will produce unnecessary fear and irritability within them. The same goes for LSE.