The Office (US version)

[Krig the Viking]

Having watched a bunch of episodes recently, I have unfortunately concluded that my previous reasoning was wrong. I can't see Toby as SLI (he's more likely LII), while Darryl clearly is SLI. And I have no clue what Michael is anymore.

Wait... maybe Michael is IEE? That would make sense of a few things. Hmm. Actually, that would make sense in a lot of ways. Toby could easily be Michael's Supervisor. I'm going to have to investigate this further.

[717495]

Okay, though it would be better if it were true, and not necessarily fit the perfect intertype relationships, as shows often don't fit perfectly. Though there's obvious merit in looking for intertype relationships, as to make the theory make sense also in TV shows, that allows more insight into things, what if questions, as TV shows are playgrounds for ideas.

[Suz]

Having watched a bunch of episodes recently, I have unfortunately concluded that my previous reasoning was wrong. I can't see Toby as SLI (he's more likely LII), while Darryl clearly is SLI. And I have no clue what Michael is anymore.

Wait... maybe Michael is IEE? That would make sense of a few things. Hmm. Actually, that would make sense in a lot of ways. Toby could easily be Michael's Supervisor. I'm going to have to investigate this further.

I dont really like the show, but i did watch a couple of episodes last night, prompted by this thread and curiosity.

I agree with Toby not being SLI--when i saw that suggestion in the thread, he happened to come on the show and i was like SLIs are like THAT???? My conception of LII does fit a lot better!

I didn't really get to see Darryl at all so can't comment.

Michael is a toughy to type. I've gone back and forth on him too. The problem could be that the actor is an ILE trying to play a different type. He often seems Fi-valuing, especially in the activities he chooses for the staff members to do and his underlying motivations for doing that, the way he tries to smooth Fi problems over (not always successfully though). But then he has that Fe-HA way of acting, which totally throws things completely off. I wouldn't say he's a clear IEE or a clear ILE or a clear anything TBH.

I've always had a strong aversion to Dwight (which is one of the reasons I hate the show--that and Michael's Fe antics). An LSI typing for him would certainly explain that.

[buckland]

Having watched a bunch of episodes recently, I have unfortunately concluded that my previous reasoning was wrong. I can't see Toby as SLI (he's more likely LII), while Darryl clearly is SLI. And I have no clue what Michael is anymore.

Wait... maybe Michael is IEE? That would make sense of a few things. Hmm. Actually, that would make sense in a lot of ways. Toby could easily be Michael's Supervisor. I'm going to have to investigate this further.

Yeah, Michael seems to be IEE and Toby is LII. What BG was saying earlier about not seeing him as worth the effort was my impression as well, but not confronting him then leads to his repeatedly being frustrated by Michael's irrationality.

I disagree with what you said about Kelly though, she is very similar to a lot of ESEs I've met.

[ashlesha]

the reason the show initially snagged me was a sort of sick pleasure at how much michael reminded me of my boss at the time who was EIE. so i'm biased and inclined to think of Michael as EIE even though points for other types could probably hold water.

i adore kelly. is it awful that i sort of relate to her? lol. not that i see our behavior as being similar, but i dont think her flaws would really be so bad if not exaggerated for comic effect. i thought she was some Fi-creative, but i dont have any great reasons for saying so. she reminds me of xEEs i've known more than ESEs ive known. her sort of flippant ditziness is something i see more in Eps than in Ejs, who seem more stable and in-charge, or something. (not that Ep equalz ditzy or anything.)

[Krig the Viking]

I'm quite convinced that Michael is an ethical type of some kind. His only real skill -- the only thing at which he is remotely competent -- is salesmanship. He forges a relationship with the potential client, and gets them on his side. It actually fits very well with Creative Fi.

I think this actually works very well. The reason Toby is so miserable is that he works for his Supervisee, who loathes and disregards all of his Ti rules (Vulnerable Ti). Pam in this scenario would be Michael's Semi-Duality, and she alternately feels sympathy for him/feels frustration with him -- which as I understand it is common for the hot/cold, "moth to the flame" Semi-Duality relationship.

Stanley is LSI, so he and Michael are Conflict types, which makes sense. Stanley has no respect whatsoever for Michael, but he doesn't even try to do anything about it, unlike Toby, who occasionally tries to "fix" Michael. Stanley views Michael as a hopeless lost cause. This seems consistent with Conflict (which, despite the name, I've found in practice tends to produce less actual conflict, because Conflict pairs just tend to avoid one another).

I keep going back and forth between ILI and LIE for Dwight. If he were LIE, he would be Michael's Beneficiary, which makes a certain amount of sense -- their relationship definitely seems unequal. Michael would also Supervise ESI Angela, which I thought was surprising, and I'll have to see if it plays out in the actual show.

Interestingly, SLI Darryl would be Michael's Duality. He does seem to be able to handle Michael fairly well, but I would not have predicted Duality. Likewise, I wouldn't have guessed a Mirror relationship with Phyllis, but I might be able to see it.

I don't know Holly's type, but she doesn't really seem like SLI. On the other hand, much of her and Michael's relationship seems based on Si/Ne silliness, so she seems likely to be Alpha or Delta. Further investigation required.

I just had a thought -- could Andy be ESE? That would make sense of a lot of things. He's emotionally expressive, and his singing could be a result of Creative Si (almost all of the ESEs I know in real life sing -- one even conducts a choir). I don't know what type Erin would be, though. She doesn't seem like LII. SEI? Another ESE? Hmm.

Now that I think of it, Andy kind of reminds me of Gene Kelly, who I also think was ESE. The resemblance was especially striking during Andy's recent foray into the world of musical theatre.

I disagree with what you said about Kelly though, she is very similar to a lot of ESEs I've met.

I think there's a lot of confusion on this board about ESEs and SEEs. I'm somewhere in the neighbourhood of 90% sure that Kelly is SEE. She's aggressive, and doesn't care about the emotional atmosphere unless she's trying to manipulate it for her own gain. In fact, I'm so sure she's SEE that I would tend to believe the "ESEs" you know are in fact SEEs, if they're that much similar to her.

Also, the reason it's hilarious that she and Toby have to share that tiny room in the back is that poor Toby is miserable having to listen to her all day. This fits much, much better with Conflict than Duality.

[glam]

i think Kelly is SEE.

i thought Andy might be some sort of role clown (i lean LSE), and that Erin might be IEE or something. somehow i don't see them as Alphas, more like silly Deltas.

[ladyinred]

what is Karen's type??

[thePirate]

I'm quite convinced that Michael is an ethical type of some kind. His only real skill -- the only thing at which he is remotely competent -- is salesmanship. He forges a relationship with the potential client, and gets them on his side. It actually fits very well with Creative Fi.

His expertise in salesmanship has little to do with being an ethical type. It is more plausible for a logical to do better in a sales context but lack otherwise than an ethical, not to mention logicals can be pretty adept when it comes to sales. He is socially oblivious and his style of relating is horrendous, it is hard to picture an ethical type exhibit such traits to his magnitude. I can't claim to have a good grasp of his type, but in my opinion what Michael has is a strong intuitive grasp of business dynamics and the 'flow' of things, when to close a deal, how to go about putting offers no the table, etc. This explains his social incompetence but also reconciles how he has managed to be so 'successful' regardless.

I think he's an unhealthy ILE. Micheal screams infantile, often times the way he talks is highly metaphorical and hard to grasp. Its hard to see him as a sensor or grounded in any way as his conception of happenings is often vastly different than the actual situation. He caters towards his 'vision' of the world, showing hints of brilliance in his reasoning capabilities. Michael is also over the top aggressive which points more to Se role than base, and is constantly coming up with ideas to makes the office(and his life) more interesting. Him being an 'idea' man and valuing Ne and fresh possibilities is a pretty constant trait of his, and goes well with Ni ignoring as he has a dismissive attitudes towards gloomy predictions of his plans. He is Fe HA as he has this conception of himself as this adept entertainer who is popular, fun, and well-liked, while everyone else finds him irritating exhausting, and awkward (characteristic of HA, you feel you are adept at it, everyone else see's how horrible you are at it) and shows a compulsive habit of trying to elicit responses much to his own detriment (which is how I feel HA tends to manifest after awhile, little hits aren't bad, prolonged exposure is detrimental). Also just a note on Toby, I don't know what type he is but what seems to irritate Michael about Toby is his regulatory nature. Toby tries to sway Michael out of his crazy ideas, many times by questioning Michael about the appropriateness of his actions(Fi), or downright making value judgments about his actions. Fi is a system of 'rules' much like Ti is, except it has to do with behavioral 'correctness/appropriateness' in the context of people as opposed to theoretical correctness/appropriateness. This is Toby's job and why he is there, his job is basically to give Michael PoLR hits.

Err, so yeah, that's my mini-analysis. could be wrong but I have yet to see anything else that fits better.

[Krig the Viking]

His expertise in salesmanship has little to do with being an ethical type. It is more plausible for a logical to do better in a sales context but lack otherwise than an ethical, not to mention logicals can be pretty adept when it comes to sales. He is socially oblivious and his style of relating is horrendous, it is hard to picture an ethical type exhibit such traits to his magnitude. I can't claim to have a good grasp of his type, but in my opinion what Michael has is a strong intuitive grasp of business dynamics and the 'flow' of things, when to close a deal, how to go about putting offers no the table, etc. This explains his social incompetence but also reconciles how he has managed to be so 'successful' regardless.

I agree that Michael is socially oblivious and has a horrendous style of relating, which would seem to indicate weak Ethics, but this is counter-balanced by the fact that his Logic is also horrendous. It's important to note that his one skill of salesmanship revolves primarily around building a personal relationship with the potential client (Fi) rather than explaining the logical reasons his company is the best one (Ti). If you watch how Jim approaches sales, he's much more focused on the Logical approach.

I think he's an unhealthy ILE. Micheal screams infantile, often times the way he talks is highly metaphorical and hard to grasp. Its hard to see him as a sensor or grounded in any way as his conception of happenings is often vastly different than the actual situation. He caters towards his 'vision' of the world, showing hints of brilliance in his reasoning capabilities. Michael is also over the top aggressive which points more to Se role than base, and is constantly coming up with ideas to makes the office(and his life) more interesting. Him being an 'idea' man and valuing Ne and fresh possibilities is a pretty constant trait of his, and goes well with Ni ignoring as he has a dismissive attitudes towards gloomy predictions of his plans.

I agree with all of this, as I think Michael is IEE. It's important to note that Michael is clearly an unhealthy example of whatever type he is, so we should be careful not to compare "unhealthy ILE" to "healthy IEE".

He is Fe HA as he has this conception of himself as this adept entertainer who is popular, fun, and well-liked, while everyone else finds him irritating exhausting, and awkward (characteristic of HA, you feel you are adept at it, everyone else see's how horrible you are at it) and shows a compulsive habit of trying to elicit responses much to his own detriment (which is how I feel HA tends to manifest after awhile, little hits aren't bad, prolonged exposure is detrimental).

I think Michael's strongest desire is for everyone to like him (Fi) rather than for everyone to have fun (Fe). He tries to entertain people as a way of getting them to like him; if people are having a good time but ignoring or excluding him, he gets upset and tends to deliberately squash the good mood. To me this seems more consistent Fi-valuing and Fe-demonstrative -- he uses Fe when it suits his purposes, but ultimately doesn't see it as very important if it doesn't produce the Fi results he wants.

Also just a note on Toby, I don't know what type he is but what seems to irritate Michael about Toby is his regulatory nature. Toby tries to sway Michael out of his crazy ideas, many times by questioning Michael about the appropriateness of his actions(Fi), or downright making value judgments about his actions. Fi is a system of 'rules' much like Ti is, except it has to do with behavioral 'correctness/appropriateness' in the context of people as opposed to theoretical correctness/appropriateness. This is Toby's job and why he is there, his job is basically to give Michael PoLR hits.

I totally agree that Toby's job on the show is to give Michael PoLR hits. But it seems pretty clear to me that these PoLR hits are Ti-based, not Fi. When Toby speaks up, it's more commonly to quote this or that rule from the company rule book (Ti = explicit rules), rather than reprimanding Michael for how his actions will affect relationships (Fi = implicit rules).

Michael being IEE explains all the data quite satisfactorily for me, and I'm quite confident in that conclusion (in a way that I wasn't for my previous theories of SEE and EIE). He's an example of an unhealthy IEE, as seen from an Alpha perspective.

[thePirate]

I agree that Michael is socially oblivious and has a horrendous style of relating, which would seem to indicate weak Ethics, but this is counter-balanced by the fact that his Logic is also horrendous. It's important to note that his one skill of salesmanship revolves primarily around building a personal relationship with the potential client (Fi) rather than explaining the logical reasons his company is the best one (Ti). If you watch how Jim approaches sales, he's much more focused on the Logical approach.

I can see how he does this, but I don't see it as something outside of an ILE's capability, especially in the sales realm. In the episodes I have watched him 'closing', I've seen the real strength in his selling be where he actually starts talking about the company after disarming the client(which sometimes he hasn't succeeded in doing). That may be a personal distinction though, either way, its less of a stretch looking at it as an ILE developing or having been taught a specialized style of selling than seeing Micheal as an ethical type, for me anyway(for reasons coming up).

I think Michael's strongest desire is for everyone to like him (Fi) rather than for everyone to have fun (Fe). He tries to entertain people as a way of getting them to like him; if people are having a good time but ignoring or excluding him, he gets upset and tends to deliberately squash the good mood. To me this seems more consistent Fi-valuing and Fe-demonstrative -- he uses Fe when it suits his purposes, but ultimately doesn't see it as very important if it doesn't produce the Fi results he wants.

I don't see why any type would use their demonstrative to attain their creative in such a way, Micheal's use of Fe is premeditated, sustained, and weak which all together contradicts it being in the demonstrative position. Actually your description supports my analysis as I have come to understand that HA is there to compensate for the PoLR. This fits Micheal's way of being, it's a clear way of compensating, not just substituting. It seems as if he thinks 'if they are laughing they like me' which is not typically how people strong in ethics think. If he were simply substituting he wouldn't be so oblivious, among other things. Also as far as Fi goes, it's not just about being liked, everyone wants that, but being liked in the sense of being liked for who they are and the values they have, a focus on that which includes entails a certain sense of intimacy and closeness that Michael seems to have no particular interest for

He doesn't even show adequate(any?) Fi in 'close' relationships that he has had, he always defaults and is stuck in that 'entertainer' role. He has made large leaps in Fi 'logic' that I just don't see an Fi creative doing, he has no sense of boundaries with anyone; he treats his employees like anything but employees. He has an inability to judge closeness, not just an aversion. Not to mention, I don't see how he values Te when time and time again he has shown distaste for regulatory procedures that people like Jan and David Wallace have attempted to impose on him to increase productivity. He always tries to weasel out of it by either rebelling or attempting to assign someone else to do it, his main motivation being not to gain negative emotional reactions from his employees(Fe>Te). His understanding of the world is prized over objectivity; as far as Toby's rules go, I don't agree that Fi is implicit LOL. Many times it can be but I wouldn't categorize it as that necessarily:

Michael Scott: Oh, and another fun thing. We - at the end of the night - are going to give the check to an actual group of Boy Scouts, right Toby? We're gonna...
Toby: Actually, I didn't think it was appropriate to invite children since it's, uh, you know there's gambling and alcohol, and it's in our dangerous warehouse, and... it's a school night, and, you know, Hooters is catering, you know... is that... is that enough? Should I keep going?

Michael Scott: Why are you the way that you are? Honestly, every time I try to do something fun... or exciting, you make it *not* that way. I hate... so much about the things that you choose to be.

This quote I feel clearly encompasses Michael as an Fe valuing type, he hates Toby because of how he destroys any excitement or 'fun-ness', which wouldn't be a major complaint of any Fi valuing type, certainly not enough to warrant Michael's hatred. Oh and lastly, looking at it in terms of quadras, he's much more an alpha(child) infantile than a delta (senior) infantile. That's more so an intuitive subjective impression, though.

[marooned]

I had a dream about Dwight last night. In the dream Dwight in every situation managed to prove his manliness--that he wasn't a pushover and had personal integrity despite a somewhat soft or vulnerable appearance that comes out at times. And I was surprised in every situation that Dwight had once again not caved and his manliness had prevailed. Therefore Dwight must be LIE.

(Although I think I really would consider LIE the most for Dwight. I think he has what I see as "free-flowing Ni" at times and I think his Se may just well be his over-blown Se HA and that this is related to his obsession with power and being in charge. Of course I am dissuaded by episodes like the one where he was in charge where he assigned everyone their own ridiculously long copier code such that no one could remember their code and kept messing up trying to enter it and so people just started using one code and leaving it at that... but of course Dwight caught wind of this and told them they had to use their own codes... Anyway this is not in the least productive... But the point is that I think that a lot of times in shows/movies when there has to be an obviously logical>ethical character that the writers feel this means the character must be excessively anal about rules/regulations/designations/etc. and devise more and more of these things so I feel almost that this has been grafted upon the true Dwight who would not really be so into some of those things.)

(Oh and I still see Michael as EIE but I have problems with this.)

[717495]

I sometimes watch this show because my dad, and Dwight is awesome.

[Sumer1an]

Michael:Ethical- non Fi valuing. Possible EIE.

Jim: ILE though I have no real reasoning behind this assertion. Possibly an XEE

Dwight: LII

Ryan: Either SLI or ILI

Kelly: not sure.

Pam: SEI

Angela: ESI seems likely

Phyllis- EII

Stanley- LSI or SLI

Andy- IEE

Roy- SLE or SEE

Kevin- dont know

Oscar- dont know

Toby- ESI

Darryl- SLI possibly LSI

Creed- maybe an LSI

Karen- SEE?

Jo bennett- LSE

[summerprincess]

Kelly - ExFj
Michael - ENFj
Jim - ENTp
Pam - ISFp
Angela - ISFj
Oscar - ISTj
Creed - INTp lol
Karen - Same as her type on Parks and Rec INFj or ISFj

[summerprincess]

Michael Scott - a goofy INFp
Dwight Schrute - ISTj Edit: I change my choice to ESTp
Jim Halpert - ENFp He reminds me of a low key Pauly Shore
Pam Beesly - INFj
Ryan Howard - ESTj
Angela Martin - ISTj
Roy Anderson - ISTp
Kevin Malone - INTp

Edit: a few of the minor characters

Stanley Hudson - ISFp
Phyllis Lapin - seems like an unhealthy INFj
Andy Bernard - ENTj
Karen Filippelli - INTj
Kelly Kapoor - ESFp
Creed Bratton - ENTp
Toby Flenderson - ISTp

Omg these typings are literally some of the worst ever

[wacey]

Micheal - ILE
Pam - EII > SEI
Jim IEE / SLI
Ryan - SLI
Shrute - LII
Angela - LSI>SLI
Andy - ESE
Kelly - SEE
Roy - SLI
Phyllis - SEI
Daryl - SLI

[schwiftyrickty]

Is this show still relevant?

Michael- EIE
Dwight- LSI
Jim- ILE
Pam- SEI
Ryan- Gamma NT
Phyllis- EII
Toby- Delta introvert
Meredith- SLE
Kelly- ESE
Angela- ESI
Roy- SLE or some ST
Darrel- ??
Creed- ??
Oscar- Has anyone tried Oscar? NT most likely, but I really have no clue.
Jan- LSE or perhaps LIE
Andy- ESE
Kevin-SEI

[ruined]

Michael is just a really dumb EIE imo (or rather an Alpha's perspective of an EIE lol)

[yifflord]

Michael Scott: Oh, and another fun thing. We - at the end of the night - are going to give the check to an actual group of Boy Scouts, right Toby? We're gonna...
Toby: Actually, I didn't think it was appropriate to invite children since it's, uh, you know there's gambling and alcohol, and it's in our dangerous warehouse, and... it's a school night, and, you know, Hooters is catering, you know... is that... is that enough? Should I keep going?

Michael Scott: Why are you the way that you are? Honestly, every time I try to do something fun... or exciting, you make it *not* that way. I hate... so much about the things that you choose to be.

This quote I feel clearly encompasses Michael as an Fe valuing type, he hates Toby because of how he destroys any excitement or 'fun-ness', which wouldn't be a major complaint of any Fi valuing type, certainly not enough to warrant Michael's hatred. Oh and lastly, looking at it in terms of quadras, he's much more an alpha(child) infantile than a delta (senior) infantile. That's more so an intuitive subjective impression, though.

I loved your analysis! I have similar typings to everyone here-

Michael - ILE
Dwight - LSI
Jim - ILE
Pam - SEI
Toby - EII
Roy - SLE
Kevin - SLI
Phyllis - EII
Stanley - SLI
Andy - LSE
Angela - ESI
Ryan - LII
Kelly - SEE

[Nobody]

Micheal ILE EIE he's too EJ to be ILE.
Dwight LSI
Jim IEE
Pam EII
Stanley SLI
Angela ESI
Jan LSE
Creed LIE
Ryan ILI
Kelly ESE
Toby LII

[Nobody]

What's Darryl? SLE?

[kingslayer]

I love this show haha. Most of these characters are meant to be caricatures. They did a pretty good job socionically speaking

Michael Scott is LIE
Dwight is LSI though he acts LSE at times too.
Jim ILE
Pam SEI (Alpha P dualty)
Roy: LSE (Pam's supervisor)
Oscar: LSE
Kevin: SEI
Angela: The most ESI person ever
Daryl: SLI
Kelly : SEE

These are the only types I'm certain of.

[Nobody]

Been watching a lot of this and changing some typings
Kelly: SEE
Andy: ESE
Daryl: SLE

Creed: ENTx, can't decide between LIE or ILE, too senile.
Kevin: Just Si and slow

[EUDAEMONIUM]

Types in TV shows can change a lot because they have so many writers.

Michael Scott is most likely a ILE, mainly because he makes so many Fi polr related behaviors throughout the show. But his logic is so poor and he's hard to type beyond his most characteristic flaws.

Pam, Jim, Kevin, Phyllis, Holly are all SEIs.

Dwight is a LSE, clearly a logical rational type that doesn't value Fe.

Angela is a stereotypical ESI.

Andy is an ESE. Kelly is an ESE.

Darryl is another LSE.

Toby is either an SEI or an EII.

Jan is hard to type but she acts like an EIE later in the show, in the beginning she had no personality apart from being Michael's boss.

Stanley is an SLI.

Roy is an SLE or LSE.

Creed is too weird to type.

[Samson]

My take:

--------------------------


Michael - IEE

Contrast him with Robert "Lizard King" California - EIE

Robert is the extroverted version, as it were, of Creed - IEI

Robert reminds me of the following Creed quote:
"I've been involved in a number of cults, both as a leader and a follower. You have more fun as a follower. But you make more money as a leader."

Creed, being the playful IEI that he is, can shapeshift into the role of leader or follower as he pleases. Robert, however, wants only one role: that of leader. He ends up running the company as if it were a cult. Se Mobilizing is seen in his constant need to see his impressive self reflected in other people cowering before him. Yet, perhaps ironically, Robert California is more a poet than a fighter. He is an ideologue.
Both Robert and Creed are intentionally seductive: they charm on purpose.

All this stands in sharp contrast to Michael Scott.

This is where it gets interesting.

Jan - LIE

Jan initially can't stand Michael, but was ultimately charmed by him. "Normal Jan," the Jan we initially see, is an uptight but forceful and direct business woman with zero patience for playing games. Your typical straight-laced boss type.
Since she is sensitive to relational direction (Fi seeking), she ended up falling for her benefactor, Michael, who genuinely seeks out deep connections but is often very playful with them. Michael's skills at quickly creating personal bonds with clients is what made him a great salesman (but a horrible boss, as it turns out). Jan is annoyed at Michael's unwillingness to 'get to business,' but she is impressed with Michael's ability to quickly yet deeply affect both herself and his clients on an emotional level. Jan, unlike Michael, values Se: recall her clumsy attempt at 'seduction' by unbuttoning her shirt and revealing her deep cleavage to him. Michael was as a deer in the headlights. IEE does not know how to respond to strong Se actions, and their dual SLI will surely spare them from this. Their relationship quickly turns sour as she begins to distrust Michael's intentions. Jan is looking for Fi-Se, indeed Angela would have been a better match for her, if both had been gay, and Michael Scott cannot deliver on providing firm and impactful moral standards. Michael's 'random' humor and his reliance on avoidance and deflection angers Jan greatly. It makes her feel as if Michael could have charmed anyone into being with him (which surely isn't true), so she loudly 'flirts' with a co-worker in order to induce jealousy in Michael. To an ESI, this would signal that they need to intensify their focus on the LIE. Again, Michael cannot deliver: instead he scatters and avoids. Jan's low Fi starts acting up because her emotions aren't given orientation: she needs an ESI (or similar type) to give meaning and direction to her frustration. Similar to Robert California (EIE), she is a pro-active person who seeks to be formidable and successful, but she is in need of a strong focused hand to back her up.
Also consider how Jan 'decorated' their house: a sterile unwelcoming place with no place for comfort. Poor IEE Michael could not relax in her choices. Jan's room with self-made candles is her attempt at providing Si, though overdone via unchecked Se, but she separates and compartmentalizes it away from the rest of the house. Si PoLR.


Dwight - LSE

Michael's right hand. Activity partners. Dwight cannot be LSI for he does not respect Fe. Compare to Oscar (LSI). Dwight "doesn't smile," he thinks it's a sign of "submission." Typical Te lead talk, reminds me of Ben Shapiro's logic. Dwight values efficiency and loyalty in the workspace above all - yet constantly shoots himself in the foot by half-assing on his Ne-plans to thwart his 'rival' Jim without any regard for the consequences. ESI and LSI (Ne PoLR) both are constantly worried about the future. Look at Angela (ESI) and Oscar (LSI). These types over-value consequences. Dwight doesn't even see them and instead recklessly risks his livelihood and relationships to act on a poorly thought-out spur-of-the-moment idea (Ne Mob). Dwight is a successful multi-tasker: not only is he a salesman at Dunder Mifflin, he also operates a beet farm where he rents out rooms as a BnB. He later buys the building in which Dunder Mifflin is located, effectively becoming the landlord to his own boss. Te-Ne magic at work, with strong Si to firmly ground him in reality. I have yet to see an LSI willingly engage in this many separate enterprises at once.
His relationship to Angela is one of semi-duality. Angela does not care one bit for Dwight's Ne adventures, but their Te-Fi attraction comes easy.


Jim - ILE

Kindred to Michael. They share a sense of humor, though Michael cannot easily pull off playing with people's reactions in real time. Valued Fe versus unvalued Fe. This is a different skill from Demonstrative Fe: Michael is better at keeping an audience's attention than Jim is. However, their playful wit rivals the other's. Jim also sucks at deeply connecting with others, something that comes as child's play to Michael.
His looooves pushing Dwight's Ne buttons to then see Dwight take it as a serious offence. This could be interpreted as Dwight being Ne PoLR were it not so obvious that Dwight's response is so reliant on a shallow version of the same Ne testy play. Imagine an Ne lead 'playing with' ESI Angela. Angela does not suffer Michael's (IEE) idiotic actions, nor does she care for Jim's childlike behavior. Similarly, an LSI such as Oscar would simply not know how to respond to Jim's Ne teasing, except for immediate anger putting the Ne lead in place - very different from Dwight's anger. Both LSI and ESI gives the Ne lead the cold shoulder, which deeply discourages the Ne lead from continuing their 'play.' Dwight, however serious he might deem the 'offence,' knows how to play back with his own Ne.


Pam - SEI

Jim's dual. Very grounded and very 'sweet.' A sucker for Ne comedy.


Toby - LII

Ah, the dangers of supervision. Toby consistently points out the flaws in Michael's ideas (Ti). Similar to Oscar (LSI) in his search for inconsistencies. Yet Michael likes Toby less because he represents Michael's worst fear: Michael is terrified of being the person nobody wants around, the person who 'is a downer,' the person who pines for relationships but ends up alone, divorced, pathetic. Michael sees his worst nightmare version of himself reflected in Toby. Toby desires a good relationship, but does not easily act on this wish (Se PoLR). He does not know what to do with Fe: he tries to get close to Pam (SEI) but mistakes her Fe politeness for genuine interest in 'more.' Some ESE needs to smother him with her love. Interestingly enough, there was indeed a romance happening between Toby and Nellie (ESE). I think he turned out to be too creepy even for her.


Roy - SEI

Pam's Identical. Very grounded and very 'sweet.' Too much of the same.


Todd Packer - SLE

Aggressive and impulsive asshole with no regard for 'personal feelings.' A shallow stereotype of a character and type, but you'll notice that in The Office, the SLE (Todd Packer) and the EIE (Robert California) were the 'villains' of the story. The relatively quiet productivity of a paper company (how very Delta) is thrown in sharp contrast to the bombastic presence of extroverted Betas. The more subdued IEI (Creed) can co-exist here because of his chameleon-qualities. Even though he is technically part of the core crew of The Office, he is the 'weird outsider' who perplexes everybody by being so much cooler than his coworkers. LSI Oscar similarly flies under the radar, but lives in constant quiet frustration with his crazy conflictor boss.


Creed - IEI

The charm of an Fe creative coupled with the 'cool' of Beta. Creed is adaptive, can effortlessly talk his way out of any situation, yet seems to live quite outside the 'real world.' Maybe it's the drugs, they say. Maybe. Maybe it's Creed. He is a rock n roll hippie who is into cults and drugs and playing music and having sex with whomever wishes to join in. Apparently, he's also into scuba diving, but that's probably his off-beat fantasy at work. Yet, despite all this, he is weirdly insightful about the world and his coworkers - even if he can't remember their names.


Oscar - LSI

Works quietly, but seems to be the only one who is actually serious about his work - aside from maybe Angela (ESI). Cares much about 'common sense' and is incredibly frustrated with the incompetence around him, yet doesn't know how to get people to change their approach. Confident in his own logical view of the world, Oscar is in dire need of an EIE to instruct people in his vision for the company. His boss and conflictor Michael (IEE) does not know how to handle Oscar - Oscar cannot laugh at Michael's attempts to lighten the atmosphere and will react fiercely to perceived offense - though he will fold when it threatens to endanger the spirit of the group. Oh, and he's gay, because that's somehow important to Michael (much to Oscar's chagrin).


Angela - ESI

ESI stereotype. I don't believe there is any different typing for her on this thread or anywhere else in the Socion universe.


Kevin - SLI

Si stereotype without the charm of Fe (SEI Pam).


Phyllis - EII

The Toby with balls. Shares Fi lead with Angela and their rivalry checks all the petty-bitch marks. Michael recognizes her as the timid version of himself, treats her as if she was his baby sister.


Stanley - SLI

The angry version of Kevin.


Ryan - ILI

A shrewd and scrawny guy who wishes he were cool and successful. Wants Se but sucks at it. Instead he spends his time analyzing how the Se world works but fails at implementing his strategies, resulting in criminal activity. The ILI 'bad boy.' Cannot - or will not - put his money where his mouth is; crumbles in confrontation (remember Stanley yelling at Ryan). In an on-off relationship with Kelly (SEE).


Kelly - SEE

Hyper-active talkative touchy-feely person with no regard for Fe (stands in contrast to Fe-overdose Andy). Her 'charm' is similar to Michael's: accidental and only a result of her trying to create personal bonds with others. But in contrast to Michael, she goes about it an overly direct way. Very forceful personality. Her romantic relationship with Ryan was very tumultuous, but seemed like one of the few real ones on the show.


Andy - ESE

Fe all the way. People-person boy scout with an emphasis on mutual comfort and singing around the campfire. Sugar-overload, I wonder if anyone ever got diabetes from watching him. His rivalry with Dwight shows their very strange Ne in action. Both men come up with the strangest of 'duels' to prove who is worthy. It's rather absurd, but then so is Ne Mob. His 'relationship' with Angela was, frankly, completely unbelievable. They had zero chemistry and I think the writers of the show messed up on this one in an attempt at pitting Andy against Dwight.


Meredith - SEE

The older depressed version of Kelly: disillusioned after many relationships.


Erin - IEE

Michael's younger echo.


Nellie - ESE

Who knew an even more annoying version of Andy could exist?


Darryl - SEI

Very similar to Roy. I will repeat what I said for both other SEI's (Roy and Pam): Very grounded and very 'sweet.' His sweetness is slightly offset by a more grumpy persona, but he still shares the ability to easily influence others at his own leisure (in contrast with Kevin and Stanley).


Gabe - ILI

Geek version of Ryan.


David Wallace - LSE

The boring version of Dwight.

[Lolita]

Michael IEE (conflictor with Dwight)

Dwight LSI (conflictor with Michael and quasi-identical to Pam)

Jim ILE (supervises Dwight, kindred to Michael, semi-dual to Pam))

Pam SLI (Michael’s dual and only one who can control Michael, semi-dual with Jim)

Jan LIE (Michael is benefactor)

Ryan LIE (Michael is benefactor)

Kelly SEE (Ryan’s activity partner)

Angela ESI (she basically hates everyone, Michael supervises her)

Toby LII (supervises Michael)

Oscar LSI (conflictor with Michael)

Kevin SEI (Jim’s dual)

Phyllis EII (Michael’s mirror)

Bob Vance LSE (hates everyone who’s incompetent including Michael)

Darryl SLI (a younger Stanley, Michael’s dual)

Holly EII (Michael’s mirror)

Stanley SLI (supervises Ryan and terrifies him, Michael’s dual)

Andy SEE (same as Kelly and also supervised by Dwight)

Karen LSI (started off with Jim supervising her)

Erin IEE (Michael’s identical, lookalike to Andy/Kelly)

Jordan SLI (a younger Pam)

David Wallace ILE (he’s like Jim and is tolerant of weirdness)

Charles Miner SLE (superego) told Michael “I don’t care if I’ve hurt your feelings or you do not agree with my methods. But it is over.”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lolita]

Creed ILI (mirror to Ryan)

Jo Bennett CEO of Sabre LSE

Danny Cordray LSI (identical to Oscar and Dwight)

Meredith SEE (identical to Andy and Kelly)

Katy SEI (Jim’s dual and hot girl who sold handbags)

Gabe IEI

Tom Packer SEE Why don’t witches wear panties? Because they need to grip the broom

[Moou]

kelly - SEE
michael - SEE
pam - ESI
jim - SLI
dwight - ILI
angela - LSI

some of my guesses

[Lolita]

Robert California aka The Lizard King LIE
Nellie ILE
New Jim EII
New Dwight SEI

[eiemo]

My Typings of The Office Characters:

Michael Scott: IEE-Ne
Dwight Schrute: LSI-Se
Pam Beesly: SEI
Jim Halpert: ILE
Angela Martin: ESI-Se
Kelly Kapoor: ESE-Fe
Jan Levinson: LIE-Te
Toby Flenderson: SLI
Kevin: Si base