Newsletter #20

 

In this issue:

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator® and INTJs and ESFPs in Organizations

About the Strong Interest Inventory®: Person - Environment Fit, Part II

About the FIRO-B™: Team Transitions III

 

INTJs and ESFPs in Organizations

This issue we'll consider INTJs and ESFPs and examine where they might fit best and some of the possible weak spots for each.

Our friends the INTJs often like workplaces that allow for independence and some private time to reflect. Efficiency is usually important, as is productivity. They frequently like work environments that focus on long-term goals and where creativity is valued. Most times they prefer to work with competent colleagues, particularly those who are intellectually demanding. INTJs can be rather driving types, pushing themselves and others to reach the stated goals. They tend to be tough-minded and forceful, working to move ideas into action plans. Many INTJs are good at design and concept development. Still, they tend to be task-focused, decisive, and deliberate in their actions.

Potential problem areas include letting go of impractical ideas, forgetting to get input from others, and ignoring details. Sometimes INTJs can appear stubborn and unyielding so colleagues may avoid or work around them. For some INTJs, their ideas are so clear, it's not necessary to share them with others. Unfortunately, others might not have the same vision, so consulting with others could be a very good idea. INTJs' style can be hard for other types to deal with, so they might need to learn to be aware of their impact on others. Likewise, feedback from others on their ideas could be quite useful.

In contrast, ESFPs often enjoy action-packed and lively workplaces. They usually like a fast pace, with colleagues who are spontaneous, flexible, and adaptable. They like working with easy-going types who are energetic, friendly, harmonious, and appreciative. Many ESFPs prefer workplaces that are attractive, colorful, socialable, and have positive feelings. They tend to be quite enthusiastic, generous, and cooperative types. Many ESFPs are good at easing tensions at work, and help the group get along better. Others can quickly see what realistic steps need to be taken to solve the problem at hand.

Some areas for concern could be rushing in to fix a problem without reflecting first about the future consequences. ESFPs can spend so much time socializing that work can suffer. Since they often like action, they might prefer to start projects more than finish them, leaving a string of incomplete tasks. Because ESFPs tend to focus on people and maintaining harmony, they might be less objective than others in solving problems or tackling unpleasant issues. Many ESFPs can run into time management problems of their own making. Some enjoy the rush from beating deadlines, and so might artificially create pressure by waiting until the last minute to start tasks.

 

About the Strong Interest Inventory: Person - Environment Fit, Part II

One of the foundations underlying the Strong is the idea that both people and environments can be sorted into six primary areas. While it's true that most jobs and people are more complex than a single category, it's likely the case that one of the six environmental types is dominant in a workplace. The concept is that the more closely a person's personality matches his or her work environment, the more likely that person is to enjoy a career, stay in a job, or persist in developing a career.

This time we'll examine how this interaction works with Investigative environments and people.

Investigative people usually see themselves as analytical, intelligent, skeptical, and having academic talent, and probably lacking in interpersonal skills. Many value acquiring more knowledge or developing existing skills. Others might view Investigative people as anti-social and intellectual. Investigative types often want to avoid any type of sales job or where persuasion is a major component of the work. Instead, they might prefer activities where they can explore, understand, predict, or control natural or social phenomena.

As you might imagine, Investigative work environments are quite similar. They require analytical, technical, scientific, and verbal skills. Likewise, skepticism, persistence in problem solving, and acquiring new knowledge are expected. People in Investigative jobs often continue learning through scholarship or self-study. Many of these jobs require trouble-shooting skills or the creation and use of new knowledge. Some examples of jobs that fit this category are psychologist, microbiologist, statistician, social scientist, and electronics technician.

 

The FIRO-B: Team Transitions III

This issue we'll continue with how team members might respond to transitions in the team roles, composition, or tasks.

For example, what happens when a team encounters a crisis or trauma? Well, those who have low scores on Expressed Inclusion might find it hard to share information during a crisis. They might withhold useful facts, which can hinder effective decision making. Likewise, such individuals might erroneously assume others will want them to share all they know about an issue. Instead, these people should focus on how they can make the situation better through participation. People who have low scores on Expressed Affection or Wanted Affection will react differently: they will tend to overlook the emotional impact of a crisis. Such individuals might spend time checking with other team members on how they are dealing with the crisis. Making sure others feel involved and showing concern can help a great deal.

Another scenario involves the loss of key resources or competition from outside the team. People with low scores on Expressed Control might not act quickly to respond to the challenge. In such cases, they could ask a more experienced team member for guidance or asking another team member to address the issue. In contrast, those with high scores on Expressed Control are likely to respond with competitive behavior. It might be more advantageous to wait before acting. Not all change is negative, so waiting might reveal new information. People with low scores on Wanted Inclusion might decide to tackle the problem on their own. They might ask others for input before moving forward.