What is your opinion about "team spirit"

[jessica129]

vodka + internet forum posting = cool

[aestrivex]

still lol

[Exodus]

As much as this amuses me...

OK, that's what I thought. In that case, do you have other evidence for INFp over ENFp?

These quotes from the "preferred co-workers" thread in Any Relations:

So, much worse and the real test for "team spirit" is if someone feels happy when the team loses. This feeling is usually based on some subjective criteria according to which they "performed good". If the team lost then they didn't perform good _enough_ to achieve the goal. Thus they failed. Thus they SHOULD be UNHAPPY about it This is bad character in people imho. But feeling bad about failing to do your part...well ok if you go from theory to practice that is quite reasonable.

Now are all people who are capable of committing themselves to the team in a way which can bring the championship home Fe people? I don't think you can win this kind of competition without "team spirit" as I defined it. I have no knowledge a team which has. So are Gammas and Deltas somehow naturally incapable of winning big championships in team sports? Are they incapable of forming an unstoppable military unit? Are they incapable of forming a hyper effective business unit? I just can't see how this kind of feats can be done without the kind of commitment I'm talking about. So Fe is what is needed in order to win a competition where teams are competing against teams? I never thought about it that way. That would make Fe awesomely powerful.

Why is it all about winning?

That is a good question Somehow I always talk in terms of winning and losing. I kind of see that in all situations that kind of division exists. Actually that is one of the main ways to motivate myself. If it is not about winning then why even bother?

These are all Ti-Fe quotes IMO, and the last one is anti-Delta.

I agree, the last one is certainly anti-Delta. Not so sure whether the rest are Ti-Fe.

But I was thinking more along the lines of analyzing XoX's behavior and thought process as evident on the forum - which do not indicate INFp, IMO. I'm skeptical of the utility of self-characterizations like this; they are clouded by extrinsic opinion and distorted self-image.

I could easily see an ENFp (like Dale Carnegie) making most of those statements, especially if the debate becomes as intellectualized as this one.

[FDG]

It could also be argued that the natural inclination of some types towards competitivness (ex. typically estps) makes for the types themselves hard to realize wether they are actually competitive or not, simply because it is so much embedded that it's hard to discern from other type behaviours.

[jas05]

I prefer team spirit as XoX does. I sense a special "feeling of unity" or something like that - it's difficult to describe - in some events where there is a strong team spirit, like in a ice hockey match, for example. Does that mean I'm more likely an INFj than INTj? I've observed that INTjs seem not to be so enthusiastic about it.

Yet I am a lot more confident when talking about things such as logic or mathematics than about things. That, however, may be a male quality, too, in a country with a stereotype of men showing no emotions.

[Kim]

I could easily see an ENFp (like Dale Carnegie) making most of those statements, especially if the debate becomes as intellectualized as this one.

ENFps always care more about the individual than the group. If a team loses because one individual does not perform, ENFp would make sure the individual does not feel bad about it and worry less about the team's frustration about having lost. "It's just a game, get over it. But this invidual feels guilty and is sad, let's make sure s/he gets better and then go for a drink." That's delta IMHO. If you wish, the delta team spirit is created through individuals creating a positive and accepting atmosphere rather than motivating people through "it's all for the team and it's your obligation to do your best."

I apologize if that has been said. I only skimmed this thread.

[Exodus]

Kim, I have no idea whether that is true in general. Yet I don't see any other INFps agreeing with XoX either. In fact, they seem greatly opposed.

This whole issue is not type-related.

[XoX]

I could easily see an ENFp (like Dale Carnegie) making most of those statements, especially if the debate becomes as intellectualized as this one.

ENFps always care more about the individual than the group. If a team loses because one individual does not perform, ENFp would make sure the individual does not feel bad about it and worry less about the team's frustration about having lost. "It's just a game, get over it. But this invidual feels guilty and is sad, let's make sure s/he gets better and then go for a drink." That's delta IMHO. If you wish, the delta team spirit is created through individuals creating a positive and accepting atmosphere rather than motivating people through "it's all for the team and it's your obligation to do your best."

I apologize if that has been said. I only skimmed this thread.

I don't, in principle, disagree with anything said here. I find that sweet and it has potential to increase the performance of those individuals and make them integrate more with the team instead of disintegrating. Which is a good thing. Only thing I'm wary about this kind of approach is that if taken too far it can lead to an atmosphere where the goal is forgotten. I.e. that the goal is to win the championship not just to have fun with teammates. It can lead to "ok we lost...well who cares let's have a party!" attitude. I'm not quite looking for that kind of team spirit even though I can see how that can be tempting I'm already a bit tempted by that kind of environment..but back to basics...I would think that my approach would focus a bit more on "staying on target" and bit less on just creating comfort. You need a little pain to get growth but not too much to demotivate you.

[XoX]

This is exactly the reason why your poll is pointless.

Well it could have been better, lol. I was more interested in the following discussion anyways.

That doesn't make sense - I have been saying the same things as Expat is saying (in some places I even declined to say anything, noting that Expat had already said it). Why are you not also accusing me of deliberately misinterpreting you? Why are you not questioning my motives?

I just got a little worried and I didn't like it that he manipulated Slacker Mom's opinion about the whole issue. He could have stated what HE thinks and let me say what I think instead of going on stating what I think and how that is wrong and why she should disagree with me (after which she did). I found that manipulative behavior so I started to think why is he doing that. It seemed he acted somewhat out of character, he seemed frustrated, he was explicitly converting people against my opinion my sending them a message which I wasn't trying to send, his opinion is generally listened to more carefully than average forum member's, and he had more direct power over me because he is an admin (i.e. in case his ethics DOES fail there will be worse consequences even to the point of him banning me). I'm always wary of people who have power over me no matter how fairly they have used that power in the past.

I can't explain it better currently. There was a strong urge to act in that situation just in case there was something suspicious going on (even if I didn't think there really was). The whole discussion about team spirit issue makes me frustrated now and derails from more important issues. It was most unuseful discussion.

In your case, you don't have much power over me. We stand on equal basis. Then everything you have said have been well inline with what and how I expect you to say it. You create different vibes. Lack of power and better predictability. And the fact that you haven't so far gone out to convert people against my ideas but instead you have just argued your points (but you did something similar to this to Phaedrus in my typing thread which is of course a bad sign for the future).

[olduser]

fuck it. I'm into team spirit. If I can get a group of people together using my purposefulness, wit, and charisma then I feel like I've got a solid first step towards improvement. If these people can then achieve for a good cause-- i'm even more proud. Of course, if someone doesn't want to be involved, they won't reap the full benefit of my organizational skills, ability to compromise, and make manuevers for the team. Well, tough luck, because a person's really going to be fucked if they try to do that stuff themselves. You people who pander to individuality in every facet of your life don't understand that your individually doesn't fix my car better. ahahah that analogy never gets old.

[oyburger]

Alpha/irritating. No one in a group wants to take charge, so I always end up having to in order to get anything accomplished.

[XoX]

fuck it. I'm into team spirit. If I can get a group of people together using my purposefulness, wit, and charisma then I feel like I've got a solid first step towards improvement. If these people can then achieve for a good cause-- i'm even more proud. Of course, if someone doesn't want to be involved, they won't reap the full benefit of my organizational skills, ability to compromise, and make manuevers for the team. Well, tough luck, because a person's really going to be fucked if they try to do that stuff themselves. You people who pander to individuality in every facet of your life don't understand that your individually doesn't fix my car better. ahahah that analogy never gets old.

Lol. You have some cool attitude there

[olduser]

fuck it. I'm into team spirit. If I can get a group of people together using my purposefulness, wit, and charisma then I feel like I've got a solid first step towards improvement. If these people can then achieve for a good cause-- i'm even more proud. Of course, if someone doesn't want to be involved, they won't reap the full benefit of my organizational skills, ability to compromise, and make manuevers for the team. Well, tough luck, because a person's really going to be fucked if they try to do that stuff themselves. You people who pander to individuality in every facet of your life don't understand that your individually doesn't fix my car better. ahahah that analogy never gets old.

Lol. You have some cool attitude there

cool attitudes rarely fix cars. Anyway, it's time to cook dinner.

[XoX]

fuck it. I'm into team spirit. If I can get a group of people together using my purposefulness, wit, and charisma then I feel like I've got a solid first step towards improvement. If these people can then achieve for a good cause-- i'm even more proud. Of course, if someone doesn't want to be involved, they won't reap the full benefit of my organizational skills, ability to compromise, and make manuevers for the team. Well, tough luck, because a person's really going to be fucked if they try to do that stuff themselves. You people who pander to individuality in every facet of your life don't understand that your individually doesn't fix my car better. ahahah that analogy never gets old.

Lol. You have some cool attitude there

cool attitudes rarely fix cars. Anyway, it's time to cook dinner.

Lol. You have some cool attitude there too. Why are you so obsessed about fixing cars anyways? lol

[Expat]

Kim, I have no idea whether that is true in general. Yet I don't see any other INFps agreeing with XoX either. In fact, they seem greatly opposed.

This whole issue is not type-related.

And since then do all Fe-Ti types have to agree on a specific Fe-Ti concept? That's what I've been trying to say.

The issue is not that all INFps will agree with him on this specific issue, it's about whether Fi-Te - especially an INTp, of all types - could possibly see it that way.

(yeah, yeah Phaedrus thinks he agrees with him but he's an INTp etc etc -- no comment).

You people who pander to individuality in every facet of your life don't understand that your individually doesn't fix my car better. ahahah that analogy never gets old.

That is not the issue here.

I just got a little worried and I didn't like it that he manipulated Slacker Mom's opinion about the whole issue. He could have stated what HE thinks and let me say what I think instead of going on stating what I think and how that is wrong and why she should disagree with me (after which she did). I found that manipulative behavior so I started to think why is he doing that. It seemed he acted somewhat out of character, he seemed frustrated, he was explicitly converting people against my opinion my sending them a message which I wasn't trying to send,

Yet you claim you're not Fe-focused. You are attributing to me Fe motives, and you are clearly confident in doing that.

I would ask again (but I won't because this is my last post to you) how is this:

Wait a moment, some people may be confusing "team spirit" with "being cooperative" or "being able to work with others" or "being civil" etc. That is not what the discussion is about at all.

The discussion is about whether a team works better if all its members feel the team spirit in the sense of "I won't feel proud of my own performance if the team failed even if I work well myself" etc.

Different from what Isha just quoted:

Think of it like this. You are in a sports team whose objective is to win world championship. You get to the final and you personally play ok in the final but your team loses the match and the championship. What I suggested was that if you are satisfied with the result even if you were not able to reach the team objective and win the championship you most likely lack in team spirit and commitment to the team and this lack of team spirit might have contributed to the loss (e.g. people who are more interested in how many goals they personally score instead of if the team wins or loses lack team spirit).

If I am misunderstanding something, it's a honest misunderstanding. You don't really- explain it - you just repeat the same things over and over again. Yet, your default assumption is to assume emotions on my part, and even attribute unethical behavior due to that.

Your area of confidence is ethics, not logic. That much should be clear to anyone.

his opinion is generally listened to more carefully than average forum member's, and he had more direct power over me because he is an admin (i.e. in case his ethics DOES fail there will be worse consequences even to the point of him banning me). I'm always wary of people who have power over me no matter how fairly they have used that power in the past.

And you don't even realize what a monstrous accusation that is? So I would ban you because of a difference in opinion, is that what you're saying?

XoX, I don't particularly care about your type, except as (1) an exercise in Socionics and (2) because, FWIW, I feel I'm doing something useful for those who really want to understand this stuff. Yet I have spent - or wasted - my time in your never-ending quest for your type, also over PM if anyone wants to know. Now, in this issue, which touches on things that I do care about, all I have done is intepret what you have said and continue to say. If I haven't got it right, it's also because you fail to make it clear.

If you doubt my ethics, XoX, what's the point in discussing anything with me? Maybe I actually think you are INTp and all of this is some sick joke or experiment on my part. How do you know that's not the case? Maybe my ethics are "failing" in his subject, too.

You're not an INTp, and those who think so haven't got a clue. But I will drop this issue.

I have nothing more to say to you. You wouldn't want my "failing ethics" to "manipulate" again what you say, would you?

[FDG]

Well, tough luck, because a person's really going to be fucked if they try to do that stuff themselves.

Ahahaha, you wish this was true. Better death than being part of a team!

[olduser]

Good luck doing business all by yourself.

[olduser]

You people who pander to individuality in every facet of your life don't understand that your individually doesn't fix my car better. ahahah that analogy never gets old.

That is not the issue here.

I know. The issue is team spirit, a feeling of belongingness or whatever. But that was the argument others were purporting against team spirit. This thread's a big mess.

[Slava]

When I think of spirit, I think of people screaming at a football game. and also a giant ghost. and that one nirvana song.

[snegledmaca]

If a team loses because one individual does not perform, ENFp would make sure the individual does not feel bad about it and worry less about the team's frustration about having lost. "It's just a game, get over it. But this invidual feels guilty and is sad, let's make sure s/he gets better and then go for a drink." That's delta IMHO. If you wish, the delta team spirit is created through individuals creating a positive and accepting atmosphere rather than motivating people through "it's all for the team and it's your obligation to do your best."

Uhmmm, how is that not pure Fe (+ Si)? IMO that's just Fe crating a warm, friendly atmosphere. In fact, that's exactly how I would expect an alpha SF (ESE is what I had in mind) to behave, creating a creating a positive and accepting carefree atmosphere (And what has been my experience in dealing with alpha SF-s). What you have described is (stereo)typical alpha behavior (IMO).

[XoX]

Yet you claim you're not Fe-focused. You are attributing to me Fe motives, and you are clearly confident in doing that.

I'm not sure what does it mean to "be confident" in that matter. The whole issue happened because of inconfidence about what is happening. The fact that I tried to perceive motives and ethics (which I constantly do, yes) might point to me being ethical type if your assumptions that logical types don't really pay attention to those things holds true.

Wait a moment, some people may be confusing "team spirit" with "being cooperative" or "being able to work with others" or "being civil" etc. That is not what the discussion is about at all.

The discussion is about whether a team works better if all its members feel the team spirit in the sense of "I won't feel proud of my own performance if the team failed even if I work well myself" etc.

Different from what Isha just quoted:

Think of it like this. You are in a sports team whose objective is to win world championship. You get to the final and you personally play ok in the final but your team loses the match and the championship. What I suggested was that if you are satisfied with the result even if you were not able to reach the team objective and win the championship you most likely lack in team spirit and commitment to the team and this lack of team spirit might have contributed to the loss (e.g. people who are more interested in how many goals they personally score instead of if the team wins or loses lack team spirit).

If I am misunderstanding something, it's a honest misunderstanding. You don't really- explain it - you just repeat the same things over and over again. Yet, your default assumption is to assume emotions on my part, and even attribute unethical behavior due to that.

I might focus on this again. Right now it looks like one big blur. But if you are not planning to go on with this then I'm not sure what is the point of me going on either. Anyways it is probably best that way, heh.

Your area of confidence is ethics, not logic. That much should be clear to anyone.

"Confidence" is an interesting word. I have to think about it. I might be quite confident in ethics even though my focus of interest is generally not people. This might yes point to ethical type if logical types don't generally have confidence in their ethics.

his opinion is generally listened to more carefully than average forum member's, and he had more direct power over me because he is an admin (i.e. in case his ethics DOES fail there will be worse consequences even to the point of him banning me). I'm always wary of people who have power over me no matter how fairly they have used that power in the past.

And you don't even realize what a monstrous accusation that is? So I would ban you because of a difference in opinion, is that what you're saying?

Well I really don't understand that. Isha wanted to hear how I rationalized what I posted and I tried to honestly explain it. This is again somehow connected to the individual vs group thinking stuff anndelise keeps mentioning. You expect me to treat you differently in this matter than I would some other person in your position. From my pov I should be careful and a bit on my toes when interacting with any person who has power over me. I believe in that people are fallible and make mistakes. You see that I should concentrate only on you and not use a such generic rules. Because you believe that YOU do not do the stuff I mention then I should not suspect YOU. I might be aristocrat or something because I can't force myself to think of you only as an individual but also through your position in the chain of power. Murphy's law or something. If a thing could happen then eventually it probably will. If someone has a red button in their keyboard then there is always at least a small chance that they will push it. I think this boils down to group thinking vs individual thinking. You feel that I heavily accuse you personally when I'm perhaps just thinking through stereotypes and theoretical possibilities. Blah. Hard to explain I guess I haven't been able to get a total understanding with ann about this either.

XoX, I don't particularly care about your type, except as (1) an exercise in Socionics and (2) because, FWIW, I feel I'm doing something useful for those who really want to understand this stuff. Yet I have spent - or wasted - my time in your never-ending quest for your type, also over PM if anyone wants to know. Now, in this issue, which touches on things that I do care about, all I have done is intepret what you have said and continue to say. If I haven't got it right, it's also because you fail to make it clear.

Good to know why you spend so much time on this. I have been wondering how guilty or greatful I should feel. I think this clears it up a bit. I think this has anyways contributed to general understanding in socionics and will eventually be one essential piece in the type search puzzle. It also shouldn't be news that there have been also PM discussion which you and I both have been referring to explicitly lately.

If you doubt my ethics, XoX, what's the point in discussing anything with me? Maybe I actually think you are INTp and all of this is some sick joke or experiment on my part. How do you know that's not the case? Maybe my ethics are "failing" in his subject, too.

I suspect everyone's ethics can fail in certain circumstances. As I don't know you personally I only have your word and via web it is hard to perceive your character accurately. I have many times said that it seems you have strong ethics but no one is above and beyond doubt. The more power you have the more your ethics should be under constant evaluation. I don't see why I should not still discuss with you? You again think I'm accusing YOU specifically of something. I'm not. There is a gap in thinking here.

You're not an INTp, and those who think so haven't got a clue. But I will drop this issue.

Currently there is pretty much only relating to INTp descriptions and relating to Phaedrus as a person left in the case for INTp (and perhaps enneagram type). Other evidence generally points away from INTp so yes it is not that probable that I would be INTp. I need to still understand some things better in order to drop it completely. It is not and has not been the number one choice for some time. I need to objectify some subjective opinions of mine before I can drop it.

I have nothing more to say to you. You wouldn't want my "failing ethics" to "manipulate" again what you say, would you?

Lol this whole thing is a way bigger deal to you than it is to me. It becomes a big deal to me only after your ethics DOES actually fail. Until then it is just speculation and verification of those speculations in order to feel secure again. I don't see it as accusations really. I just need to occasionally verify where we stand in case there is some controversy. We have somewhat differing views on what is offensive and what is not. I guess it points to different Quadra values.

[FDG]

More than area of interest ethics seems to be what comes naturally to you, probably. At least judging from the majority of your posts (beware: I might be missing some/I might be victim of a confirmation bias here).

[leckysupport]

If a team loses because one individual does not perform, ENFp would make sure the individual does not feel bad about it and worry less about the team's frustration about having lost. "It's just a game, get over it. But this invidual feels guilty and is sad, let's make sure s/he gets better and then go for a drink." That's delta IMHO. If you wish, the delta team spirit is created through individuals creating a positive and accepting atmosphere rather than motivating people through "it's all for the team and it's your obligation to do your best."

Uhmmm, how is that not pure Fe (+ Si)? IMO that's just Fe crating a warm, friendly atmosphere. In fact, that's exactly how I would expect an alpha SF (ESE is what I had in mind) to behave, creating a creating a positive and accepting carefree atmosphere (And what has been my experience in dealing with alpha SF-s). What you have described is (stereo)typical alpha behavior (IMO).

Yeah, I think ENFps would probably concentrate on offering options and ideas on skills you could work on, or suggest you maybe change your position in the team. Or convince you that this sport isn't really for you and its best you do something which you could really do well in.

Something like that.

[oyburger]

You people who pander to individuality in every facet of your life don't understand that your individually doesn't fix my car better. ahahah that analogy never gets old.

I don't know what's wrong with your car per se, but when the mechanics I know fix a car, they do it alone. If other people happen to be around, the only thing they're contributing to a "team effort" is to drink themselves silly and crack jokes thus distracting the mechanic from fixing your car in a quick manner.

[cracka]

You people who pander to individuality in every facet of your life don't understand that your individually doesn't fix my car better. ahahah that analogy never gets old.

I don't know what's wrong with your car per se, but when the mechanics I know fix a car, they do it alone. If other people happen to be around, the only thing they're contributing to a "team effort" is to drink themselves silly and crack jokes thus distracting the mechanic from fixing your car in a quick manner.

hahahaha, the southern way of fixing cars...lol

[cracka]

I wonder how many people who voted that they don't care much for team spirit have ever been on a "really good team."
I mean, the type of team that achieves everything flawlessly, gets things done, keeps everyone working hard toward a common goal, and allows everyone to be happy when things go very well... The same team that, if something goes wrong, it's fixed or improved upon with ease and no hard feelings toward anyone in particular on the team.
I could imagine it would be very easy for a person to say they don't care about team spirit at all if they never have been in a situation where they actually had "good" team spirit.
Then again, being a VERY team-oriented person like I am, I may not see it like those who have a different view on this issue. Don't get me wrong, I hate when a person or corporation expects you to run around happy just because they want you to have good team spirit... F- That. I'm a firm believer that good team spirit just happens when things are done right by a group of individuals and should never be forced on anyone. It's kind of like, give respect before expecting to be respected.

[Kim]

Uhmmm, how is that not pure Fe (+ Si)? IMO that's just Fe crating a warm, friendly atmosphere. In fact, that's exactly how I would expect an alpha SF (ESE is what I had in mind) to behave, creating a creating a positive and accepting carefree atmosphere (And what has been my experience in dealing with alpha SF-s). What you have described is (stereo)typical alpha behavior (IMO).

No, it's not first of all about creating a positive atmosphere. It is about the well-being of the individual and to protect him/her from a hostile atmosphere. If the team doesn't like it and would rather go home and gripe, fine. I would still stay with the individual and make sure s/he is ok and to figure out what could be done.

Yeah, I think ENFps would probably concentrate on offering options and ideas on skills you could work on, or suggest you maybe change your position in the team. Or convince you that this sport isn't really for you and its best you do something which you could really do well in.

Something like that.

I am supervising a team this semester and one member just could not perform well and showed an attitude of "I don't care." There was no proactivity, creativity, and a lot of "what do you think?" It was really pretty bad. I had to figure out a a way to a) motivate and b) integrate him into the group more. I did this by pointing out where his approach worked (to instill some confidence which he badly needed) and by phrasing criticism in a way that focused on overcoming insecurities ("I remember when I first stood in front of a group like that. I was totally nervous, too, but this worked for me...") instead of saying he is doing it badly (because ultimately insecurity was the reason behind all the the crappy attitude. So I worked with him one on one this entire time, exploited one very crucial moment during which he worked really well with a student and now he is a lot more confident and eager to be part of the group and pull his weight. I did not even drag the others into it. For the sports example, it would be a similar approach: lift the person up, avoid exposure to group frustration and when the time is right, point out what went well before gently analyzing why some things didn't go so well. I would say all of this is Fi because first of all it is for the benefit of the individual, but of course happy group members make for a good team.

Now we are working very well together because everyone feels that s/he has something to offer. I have supervised teams before and this approach has always worked like a charm for me.

[leckysupport]

This:

If a team loses because one individual does not perform, ENFp would make sure the individual does not feel bad about it and worry less about the team's frustration about having lost. "It's just a game, get over it. But this invidual feels guilty and is sad, let's make sure s/he gets better and then go for a drink." That's delta IMHO. If you wish, the delta team spirit is created through individuals creating a positive and accepting atmosphere rather than motivating people through "it's all for the team and it's your obligation to do your best."

seems very different from this:

I am supervising a team this semester and one member just could not perform well and showed an attitude of "I don't care." There was no proactivity, creativity, and a lot of "what do you think?" It was really pretty bad. I had to figure out a a way to a) motivate and b) integrate him into the group more. I did this by pointing out where his approach worked (to instill some confidence which he badly needed) and by phrasing criticism in a way that focused on overcoming insecurities ("I remember when I first stood in front of a group like that. I was totally nervous, too, but this worked for me...") instead of saying he is doing it badly (because ultimately insecurity was the reason behind all the the crappy attitude. So I worked with him one on one this entire time, exploited one very crucial moment during which he worked really well with a student and now he is a lot more confident and eager to be part of the group and pull his weight. I did not even drag the others into it. For the sports example, it would be a similar approach: lift the person up, avoid exposure to group frustration and when the time is right, point out what went well before gently analyzing why some things didn't go so well. I would say all of this is Fi because first of all it is for the benefit of the individual, but of course happy group members make for a good team.

why is that?

[Kim]

This:

If a team loses because one individual does not perform, ENFp would make sure the individual does not feel bad about it and worry less about the team's frustration about having lost. "It's just a game, get over it. But this invidual feels guilty and is sad, let's make sure s/he gets better and then go for a drink." That's delta IMHO. If you wish, the delta team spirit is created through individuals creating a positive and accepting atmosphere rather than motivating people through "it's all for the team and it's your obligation to do your best."

seems very different from this:

I am supervising a team this semester and one member just could not perform well and showed an attitude of "I don't care." There was no proactivity, creativity, and a lot of "what do you think?" It was really pretty bad. I had to figure out a a way to a) motivate and b) integrate him into the group more. I did this by pointing out where his approach worked (to instill some confidence which he badly needed) and by phrasing criticism in a way that focused on overcoming insecurities ("I remember when I first stood in front of a group like that. I was totally nervous, too, but this worked for me...") instead of saying he is doing it badly (because ultimately insecurity was the reason behind all the the crappy attitude. So I worked with him one on one this entire time, exploited one very crucial moment during which he worked really well with a student and now he is a lot more confident and eager to be part of the group and pull his weight. I did not even drag the others into it. For the sports example, it would be a similar approach: lift the person up, avoid exposure to group frustration and when the time is right, point out what went well before gently analyzing why some things didn't go so well. I would say all of this is Fi because first of all it is for the benefit of the individual, but of course happy group members make for a good team.

why is that?

Because you want to be difficult and hit my PoLR?

From the perspective of the team leader: of course you want a positive and accepting group atmosphere. But I think it is more effectively created by making sure that each individual as an individual feels good in this group and with his/her task. You make sure that all individuals are confident with the task, comfortable with their assignment, feel comfortable with each other, etc. Then everyone feels good as a member of the group and that creates an accepting atmosphere. I would not run the risk of improving "team spirit" if it meant to put down a member in whatever way. Note the use of "individuals."

[snegledmaca]

Uhmmm, how is that not pure Fe (+ Si)? IMO that's just Fe crating a warm, friendly atmosphere. In fact, that's exactly how I would expect an alpha SF (ESE is what I had in mind) to behave, creating a creating a positive and accepting carefree atmosphere (And what has been my experience in dealing with alpha SF-s). What you have described is (stereo)typical alpha behavior (IMO).

No, it's not first of all about creating a positive atmosphere. It is about the well-being of the individual and to protect him/her from a hostile atmosphere. If the team doesn't like it and would rather go home and gripe, fine. I would still stay with the individual and make sure s/he is ok and to figure out what could be done.

Lol, why do you confirm what I said? Placing ones priorities does not in any way change the nature of the action, it's still as very much Fe as in any other situation like that including when it involves multiple people. Except that now it sound like beta Fe as along side creating a positive, friendly, emotional atmosphere you try to foster the personal growth of the individual (How very... FeNi of you). To put it shortly, you are still dealing with the people the Fe way, just one-on-one.

This:

If a team loses because one individual does not perform, ENFp would make sure the individual does not feel bad about it and worry less about the team's frustration about having lost. "It's just a game, get over it. But this invidual feels guilty and is sad, let's make sure s/he gets better and then go for a drink." That's delta IMHO. If you wish, the delta team spirit is created through individuals creating a positive and accepting atmosphere rather than motivating people through "it's all for the team and it's your obligation to do your best."

seems very different from this:

I am supervising a team this semester and one member just could not perform well and showed an attitude of "I don't care." There was no proactivity, creativity, and a lot of "what do you think?" It was really pretty bad. I had to figure out a a way to a) motivate and b) integrate him into the group more. I did this by pointing out where his approach worked (to instill some confidence which he badly needed) and by phrasing criticism in a way that focused on overcoming insecurities ("I remember when I first stood in front of a group like that. I was totally nervous, too, but this worked for me...") instead of saying he is doing it badly (because ultimately insecurity was the reason behind all the the crappy attitude. So I worked with him one on one this entire time, exploited one very crucial moment during which he worked really well with a student and now he is a lot more confident and eager to be part of the group and pull his weight. I did not even drag the others into it. For the sports example, it would be a similar approach: lift the person up, avoid exposure to group frustration and when the time is right, point out what went well before gently analyzing why some things didn't go so well. I would say all of this is Fi because first of all it is for the benefit of the individual, but of course happy group members make for a good team.

why is that?

Cause the first is her idolized version of her actions?

[Kim]

To put it shortly, you are still dealing with the people the Fe way, just one-on-one.

I disagree. Of course I use Fe. Every type with Fi in his/her ego-block uses Fe. That does not make the approach Fe. The information I get in that particular situation is filtered through NeFi and Fe is used to communicate the possibilities and such to the person. The difference is that it is about the individual, not the group in the moment. As a team leader you HAVE to make sure that the group works, of course. But that is not MY primary concern. Fe would be slogans like "we need to be the best group we can be, so we all pull our weight for the benefit of the group."

Cause the first is her idolized version of her actions?

How is that idolized? It was a casual description of how things can be handled for the benefit of the individual. I have been there when I played on a team and we lost because one member "sucked" that day and was afraid of facing team hostility. You have to deal with the group sometimes to "protect" the individual, but your concern can still be about the individual.

People need to get past the notion that a person uses ONLY one or two functions at a time. It does not work like that. In order to communicate the results of NeFi filtering effectively and "gently," I need Fe. That does not make me Fe dominant.

[leckysupport]

That's delta IMHO. If you wish, the delta team spirit is created through individuals creating a positive and accepting atmosphere rather than motivating people through "it's all for the team and it's your obligation to do your best.

Creating emotion/atmosphere has to go through individuals no matter what. And that is related to . So "individual" in the first post is definatly not the same as the one in the second.

Because you want to be difficult and hit my PoLR? Razz

If some particular view is a view which relates to your true self(type) there would be no contridiction, since you would be being yourself.

[Kim]

That's delta IMHO. If you wish, the delta team spirit is created through individuals creating a positive and accepting atmosphere rather than motivating people through "it's all for the team and it's your obligation to do your best.

Creating emotion/atmosphere has to go through individuals no matter what. And that is related to . So "individual" in the first post is definatly not the same as the one in the second.

Ok, the emphasis was off and it failed to highlight the intent of making the individual feel better vs. the intent of optimizing group atmosphere. The effect is an improved group atmosphere, but it's not the primary goal. At least for me. And of course it's related to Fe. NeFi cannot communicate without Fe.

[snegledmaca]

To put it shortly, you are still dealing with the people the Fe way, just one-on-one.

I disagree. Of course I use Fe. Every type with Fi in his/her ego-block uses Fe. That does not make the approach Fe.

That specific approach you described here is a very good example of usage of Fe

If a team loses because one individual does not perform, [s:02f3da888c]ENFp[/s:02f3da888c] would make sure the individual does not feel bad about it and worry less about the team's frustration about having lost. "It's just a game, get over it. But this invidual feels guilty and is sad, let's make sure s/he gets better and then go for a drink." [s:02f3da888c]That's delta IMHO[/s:02f3da888c]. If you wish, the [s:02f3da888c]delta[/s:02f3da888c] team spirit is created through individuals creating a positive and accepting atmosphere rather than motivating people through "it's all for the team and it's your obligation to do your best."

as a matter of fact, it's so good that it can't even be confused for anything else. I agree that a type with Fi in their ego block can use Fe, but not as if it were in the ego itself like it seems to be for you.

Fe would be slogans like "we need to be the best group we can be, so we all pull our weight for the benefit of the group."

What ever gave you that idea? That's not Fe. Fe doesn't care about group or no group. In fact, shouldn't solidarity, commitment, obligation and generally concepts pertaining to connections/relationships between people all be Fi concepts?

Cause the first is her idolized version of her actions?

How is that idolized? It was a casual description of how things can be handled for the benefit of the individual. I have been there when I played on a team and we lost because one member "sucked" that day and was afraid of facing team hostility. You have to deal with the group sometimes to "protect" the individual, but your concern can still be about the individual.

People need to get past the notion that a person uses ONLY one or two functions at a time. It does not work like that. In order to communicate the results of NeFi filtering effectively and "gently," I need Fe. That does not make me Fe dominant.

Lol, it's not about using one or two functions, it's how you use them. You can't use Fe as an ego function if it's not in your ego. If you do, you are a Fe ego type. Simple as that.

That's delta IMHO. If you wish, the delta team spirit is created through individuals creating a positive and accepting atmosphere rather than motivating people through "it's all for the team and it's your obligation to do your best.

Creating emotion/atmosphere has to go through individuals no matter what. And that is related to . So "individual" in the first post is definatly not the same as the one in the second.

Ok, the emphasis was off and it failed to highlight the intent of making the individual feel better vs. the intent of optimizing group atmosphere. The effect is an improved group atmosphere, but it's not the primary goal. At least for me. And of course it's related to Fe. NeFi cannot communicate without Fe.

Uhhhm, yes they can (And most often do IME). A NeFi communicating through Fe I view as something weird and a sign of problems, something that normally shouldn't be happening (I mean, their dual has a Fe PoLR). Normally a NeFi communicates through Ne and Fi, or their ego. Normally people use their ego cause that is their identity and that with which they are the most comfortable. I have actually yet to see a NeFi use Fe in the manner you describe, as the primary means. Usually it's because they were imitating their environment while adapting to fit in, because things were out of control and other circumstantial reasons where they are pushed into using Fe. For you it seems like a primary mode of operation.

Also I think you have a wrong idea of what Fe exactly is. From my understanding of the functions and how they manifest themselves Fe is about the state the person is in (Happiness, content, general disposition) while Fi is how they interconnect to reality (Integrity, reliability, character traits).

Because you want to be difficult and hit my PoLR? Razz

If some particular view is a view which relates to your true self(type) there would be no contridiction, since you would be being yourself.

But she *is* being herself, that's her instinct, her immediate reaction, how her ego functions, this person has problems - apply Fe.

[XoX]

I'm mystified that you judge me by my "vibe" rather than the content of my thought, but anyway...

Your content of thought is what carries the vibe. I'm not a mystique

You seem unnecessarily paranoid and preoccupied with power. imho.

Probably more so here than IRL, lol. Ok, I'm a bit paranoid in real life too but not nearly as much as here where it is harder to read people. About power...I'm preoccupied about perceiving power and understanding its effects. Not that much about having power or using it. Although I tend to play with that thought too and wonder whether I should set my aim for true positions of power which I haven't so far. I have been aiming for "expert positions" which are pretty much separate from any real power structures. I doubt I could reach any position of power though as I lack in Se (the kind which you can actually use) so I better stick to observing and analyzing it. Perhaps even developing that side a little bit further.

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[Expat]

In conclusion, heh, a team is nothing without the individuals who contribute to it. And if you don't take responsibility for your actions both good and bad, IMO, you're just a drone.

Exactly. Which is why I can't agree with what Phaedrus said, "a team is not a group of individuals".

[Expat]

More than area of interest ethics seems to be what comes naturally to you, probably.

Yes that's exactly what I meant with "confidence".

[Phaedrus]

In conclusion, heh, a team is nothing without the individuals who contribute to it. And if you don't take responsibility for your actions both good and bad, IMO, you're just a drone.

Exactly. Which is why I can't agree with what Phaedrus said, "a team is not a group of individuals".

There is no contradiction between what Diana says in the quote and what I say in your quote.

[XoX]

In conclusion, heh, a team is nothing without the individuals who contribute to it. And if you don't take responsibility for your actions both good and bad, IMO, you're just a drone.

Exactly. Which is why I can't agree with what Phaedrus said, "a team is not a group of individuals".

There is no contradiction between what Diana says in the quote and what I say in your quote.

I agree with Phaedrus here. My pov doesn't conflict with Diana's pov. Diana's opinion just doesn't grab all of what I was trying to say. Diana took an individual pov where I took the team pov. It still doesn't conflict with the overall message. I was trying to talk about the "elephant" where Diana talks about the "leg of an elephant" and claims we are talking about different things (perhaps I just managed to talk about the "head of an elephant" and failed at talking about the whole elephant).