INTJs as Leaders [Archive]

mkay

05-09-2008, 09:46 AM

Here is my theory on how INTJs develop. INTJs are born/learn early on to be very good thinkers and very bad at social skills and emotional intelligence.

I - Our unsuccessful social and emotional challenges lead us to become more withdrawn.

N - This ties in with the inward focus, but doesn't completely explain it.

T - We are good thinkers so we use thinking to solve most or all of our problems.

J - Our success at thinking gives us self confidence and even arrogance.

However, as we mature we should try to develop the things we are not good at extroversion and feeling. This makes a person more well rounded and complete.

I don't understand how INTJs can be good leaders (as MBTI sometimes describes) if they cannot relate well to others socially / emotionally. An appeal to pure logic doesn't work with most people.

Personally, I would prefer that people were more logical and less emotional. But that's just not the case.

Uytuun

05-09-2008, 04:26 PM

I don't understand how INTJs can be good leaders (as MBTI sometimes describes) if they cannot relate well to others socially / emotionally. An appeal to pure logic doesn't work with most people.

From experience I can tell you that we are natural leaders...we are not afraid to take on responsibility and a higher workload. We have no problem speaking our mind, making decisions and commanding other people (many people have problems with this, I think we can be pretty authoritative) and we are highly competent and mostly have a vision of how things should be (a strong one we believe in, this helps a lot, way more than pure logic, don't forget that INTJs are Ni first and foremost)...and we're confident. I think that most INTJs are pragmatic/intuitive enough to understand how other people work and how they can use that to their advantage when in leadership positions. We really do have empathy. As leaders we probably aren't loved, but I suspect that we are feared and looked up to at the same time.

To be honest, I'm just too impatient to listen to a group of people beating around the bush about how to make a group decision just to make sure that no one feels like they have been ignored or that no one feels like they want to assert their opion or feel more important than the others...someone will have to have the final say...I have no problem with that someone being me.

mkay

05-09-2008, 08:36 PM

From experience I can tell you that we are natural leaders...we are not afraid to take on responsibility and a higher workload. We have no problem speaking our mind, making decisions and commanding other people (many people have problems with this, I think we can be pretty authoritative) and we are highly competent and mostly have a vision of how things should be (a strong one we believe in, this helps a lot, way more than pure logic, don't forget that INTJs are Ni first and foremost)...and we're confident. I think that most INTJs are pragmatic/intuitive enough to understand how other people work and how they can use that to their advantage when in leadership positions. We really do have empathy. As leaders we probably aren't loved, but I suspect that we are feared and looked up to at the same time.

To be honest, I'm just too impatient to listen to a group of people beating around the bush about how to make a group decision just to make sure that no one feels like they have been ignored or that no one feels like they want to assert their opion or feel more important than the others...someone will have to have the final say...I have no problem with that someone being me.

I agree that the elements you referred to are key to leadership. But the second graph, about being too impatient to listen to a group of people, etc., is what I see as the sticky part. It depends on the group of people (I think if they are intelligent and can overcome their feelings, they will go along with another intelligent person who has the characteristics you mentioned, even if that person lacks patience to take in their point of view). I just don't see that that is the case in many work situations (speaking purely from my observations and reading). Most people just aren't that intelligent and able to overcome their feelings. Even the intelligent ones often seem gripped by emotional retardedness.

I ask about this because this is my sticking point in leadership roles. Beyond the job requirements, I know how to relate to each person on a team differently depending on his/her personality. I can come up with the patience, but it's something I'd much rather not have to do. So I wonder how a "typical" INTJ handles that part, because if there is a more effective way to handle it, then I want to know. But I don't think overlooking others' needs is a mark of leadership. It might work in isolated cases and/or short term, but I think you need people to feel invested or they will not excel. (I mean invested beyond making a paycheck, because there are lots of people doing half-ass work and still getting paid.)

RoyalINTJ

05-10-2008, 04:55 AM

speaking about leadership... i think if you understand the "game" its not very hard to be a leader for INTJ... Uytuun already explained the main things we are good at... but speaking of weaknesses... what i have found to work the best is listen to others... i think it shouldnt be that hard... just listen what he has to say and prove the person or group wrong... you dont have to go in deep discussions about something... they say how they think things should work and then you just point them out that there are 5 things that doesnt work about their approach... thats it...
As long as you can provide a solutions to most problems/situations they wont questions you that much... if someone is causing problems with his personality then you just warn them and then replace them if they continue to act as they are acting...
+ creating value in what you do ( you cant be replaced) is a key point to having good control as a leader...

Uytuun

05-10-2008, 08:38 AM

But I don't think overlooking others' needs is a mark of leadership

That's not what I meant...I'm interested in listening to other people's opinions and have no problem whatsoever with using someone else's idea if (!) it's a good idea (and I then tell them I value their input), but I have no patience for their socially conditioned beating around the bush behaviour..."Yeah, this is my idea, but I mean...we don't have to use it...I'm just saying...yours sounds good too...what oh what should we pick?...I don't want to make the decision...and on and on and on." nor for ill-conceived ideas (I'll listen to them, but point out their flaws)...I make sure that everyone works on an area they feel good about and help them out...I try to be humane when leading. Even if the idea is not optimal, for example, and it's a minor thing, I'll let them have their way so they can feel like they've contributed. Of course ENTJs are the quintessential leaders. I believe that it is written that INTJs are natural leaders, but prefer to remain in the background when good leadership is already in place and work from behind the scenes. I would agree with that. Sadly, quality leadership is few and far between. ;)

In my experience many people want to be told what to do and have a problem with making decisions or doing things on their own...they often turn to me...we project the confidence and competence thing and people seem to require reassurance or a final decision from us. I'm not too keen on being pushed into that role, mind you.

mkay

05-11-2008, 12:08 PM

speaking about leadership... i think if you understand the "game" its not very hard to be a leader for INTJ...

The "game" is what hangs me up. I don't want to fake it. And I think most people eventually figure out you're faking it, though they won't necessarily say so.

Uytuun, I agree that people often just want to be told what to do or how to do it. But they also want to hear these things in a way that is palatable, and making it palatable often is a chore, one that INTJs have mentioned and one that I have little taste for.

Uytuun

05-12-2008, 06:37 AM

Indeed, sugar-coating things or rendering them more palatable aren't INTJ talents. One of the INTJ characteristics is that we strive to improve everything, however, so if we find that sugar-coating is what we need to survive in our occupation, I think we'll learn how to do an acceptable job at it (without ever liking it)...I guess it largely depends on the group you work with...if you lead a bunch of ESFJs and your own boss is an ESTJ, then odds are the INTJ will not do a great job, but as the leader of an IxTx group of computer programmers, the INTJ will do great...and as a dictator he will truly pwn, of course. :D Communication is important of course and I freely admit that INTJs tend to...have very different norms when it comes to communicating. Don't underestimate the pragmatism of the INTJ, however.

mkay

05-12-2008, 09:26 PM

I guess it largely depends on the group you work with...if you lead a bunch of ESFJs and your own boss is an ESTJ, then odds are the INTJ will not do a great job, but as the leader of an IxTx group of computer programmers, the INTJ will do great...and as a dictator he will truly pwn, of course. :D

Yes, I see it being more situational than the general MBTI descriptions. I'm sure there are INTJs who can figure out / have figured out emotional intelligence, but I think people tend to gravitate toward what they're comfortable with and avoid what they're not. Of course, ambitions, perseverance and maturity come into play.

punkyplatypus

05-13-2008, 06:06 PM

When in a leadership position, one usually desires to be in that position. They aren't just pushed into it. I think that if an INTJ who does not want to be a leader is pushed into such a postion, you're assertion is correct. The INTJ would probably focus on how to get out of the position than try to focus on being a good leader. However, I believe that an INTJ who desires to be in the position of leadership can be a very good leader.

It seems that you can't see how an INTJ would deal with the emotional parts of a leadership position. I was stumped for a minute, but I put myself in the postion of leadership and questioned how I'd deal with it and I think I figured out what most INTJs would figure out. Most INTJs know that they lack in the emotional/social area. I'm thinking most INTJs would be sure to safeguard this deficiency with a social/emotional advisor, by delegating social/emotional tasks to others with guidance, by working on personal social/emotional skills, and/or other approaches. I'm sure if the INTJ was interested enough in the task of leadership this would be a must on their checklist.

darkkodiak

05-13-2008, 08:21 PM

First off I won't speak for all INTJs but someone who scored very high as an INTJ. Well, I've held bunch of leadership position in my life and most of it landed on my lap so to say lol. Being a leader isn't all that hard instead it's more or less annoying(I can't find a better for to replace annoying atm but I hope I get my thought across). I've worked with all kinds of people, to the most diligent to the most lazy annoying emotional bastards. I handle everyone differently and I do something that everyone seems to appreciate and that is I listen to them whether I like their ideas or not because I learned real quick that by doing that, more problems are avoided. I also delegate work depending on what each person or groups of persons are skilled at or like. For those emotional annoying bastards, well, that's where manipulation comes in handy since on the most part they are too dumb to realize that you are manipulating them.
As for people responding to how I lead, so far they've all respected me and usually flock to me to lead. I think the reason for that is because I make sure they know what I know and what I'm capable of. Also, I make it my job to know how to do everyone's job. People who've worked under me like that, knowing they have some kind of security blanket if they are stuck with a problem and can come to me(as leader) knowing I will applaud them for coming to get help to get it right the first time. I don't think I appeal to the emotions of other people, more like I've learn how to create a good atmosphere for other people to work in(through trial and error). I hope I open some insights.

mkay

05-14-2008, 12:32 AM

Elfrun

05-14-2008, 01:28 AM

I very much agree with darkkodiak's post, and annoying (at times) is a good explanation!

I'm strongly NT and personally the part of my job that I love the most is the people management side of things.

Sometimes it takes me considerable effort to hold my frustrations for incompetency's but I deal with issues straight away so problems do not linger, my bosses like that because I get results and my staff respect it because they know where they stand and that no one will be treated 'specially'.

I'm not an emotional person but that doesn't mean I can't talk to my emotional staff (and they are soooo emotional) half the time I feel like their therapists but they come to me because I listen to what they have to say, give them a chance to vent if necessary then offer some practical solutions. In fact I encourage them to come to me with their problems, that way I understand them better and therefore have an even clearer idea of how to get the results that I want - the side effect is my staff believe that I am one of their friends and want to tell me all about the latest greatest reality TV show ;)

I don't agree that I play a 'game' I simply use my knowledge of the temperaments to ensure I take the best approach to get the results that I want from a staff member, which lets face it, results are what I'm for.

mkay, in my opinion anyone who is unaware of how others perceive them would make a bad choice as manager, if they don't understand themselves how can they understand other people and if can't do that they will not be able to manage them. Too often the 'wrong' people are promoted.

mkay

05-14-2008, 01:42 AM

Sometimes it takes me considerable effort to hold my frustrations for incompetency's but I deal with issues straight away so problems do not linger, my bosses like that because I get results and my staff respect it because they know where they stand and that no one will be treated 'specially'.

I'm not an emotional person but that doesn't mean I can't talk to my emotional staff (and they are soooo emotional) half the time I feel like their therapists but they come to me because I listen to what they have to say, give them a chance to vent if necessary then offer some practical solutions. In fact I encourage them to come to me with their problems, that way I understand them better and therefore have an even clearer idea of how to get the results that I want - the side effect is my staff believe that I am one of their friends and want to tell me all about the latest greatest reality TV show ;)

I don't agree that I play a 'game' I simply use my knowledge of the temperaments to ensure I take the best approach to get the results that I want from a staff member, which lets face it, results are what I'm for.

mkay, in my opinion anyone who is unaware of how others perceive them would make a bad choice as manager, if they don't understand themselves how can they understand other people and if can't do that they will not be able to manage them. Too often the 'wrong' people are promoted.

Good stuff, Trinity. I appreciate your perspective.

The guy I mentioned didn't get promoted. Then he took a job elsewhere, something he was much better suited for.

Antares

05-14-2008, 04:51 AM

I've always considered myself an effective leader; because I've developed my Extroverted side, getting my idea across isn't that difficult. I'm usually well-paced, demanding but nevertheless gets the job done. Even if you don't want to listen to other people, ask their opinion anyway. It'd make PR much easier.

knock7

05-14-2008, 07:25 AM

I think there are a few misconceptions here. INTJs can be good leaders by playing to our strengths, understanding our weaknesses and developing them.

Misconception #1 - Extroverts make better leaders.
I don't think a good leader has to be heavily extroverted. I prefer one on one conversations to reach a consensus and then short meetings to confirm those decisions. I can be extroverted when I need to, but I can generally work around it.

Misconception #2 - Feelers make better leaders.
Managers don't need to be a constant shoulder to cry on. Employees aren't all emotional and incompetent, don't forget you are or were someone's employee. However, I would say the F needs to be more developed than the E to be effective.

Employees - I don't think this takes as much F as you think, if you are smart about it.
A.) Ask our employees what motivates them and reward them with it when they do well. Training is a big incentive in IT. Flexibility in work hours and time off is a huge seller across the board.
B.) If they do something wrong, point it out quickly and move on.
C.) Shield your team from paperwork and office politics.
D.) Make sure they get what they need to do the job.
E.) Share your plans and hammer the business objectives for the year they will be judged by. We have four big objectives this year and I hammer it into every conversation. People don't like to be in the dark or not included in the plan.

We do have some great traits in dealing with people. We do excell in other areas of management - you need to be open to criticism, fair and judicious, a good project manager, subject matter experts, and decisive. If you need to reprimand, do it as soon as possible and quickly.

Supervisors - We need to be sensitive to the personalities above us and we need to work at this, but our results driven decisiveness can more than make up for it.

Peers and Office Politics - This is probably the hardest part of the job. I try to maintain a low profile, be very factual, follow the rules of other departments, and help people behind the scenes, because I know I could say or do something that may be taken the wrong way. I find that companies do prize and reward employees that Take Care of Business without making waves as much as or more than political weasels.

Misconception #3 - We don't have the strengths of a good manager
I disagree business is very bottom line driven and this works to our advantage. Upper management cares about meeting deadlines and saving money. We can be very logical, methodical, efficient, and cost conscious.

punkyplatypus

05-14-2008, 11:43 AM

punkyplatypus, I was thinking about a former co-worker who was looking to move up in management. I'm pretty sure he was INTJ. I was trying to imagine him doing the job, for instance. Very smart guy, lots of talent, but no clue about people. It wasn't a job that could be done by someone like him. He wasn't even considered for it, and he'd spent nearly 15 years at the company and didn't realize where he stood. That really surprised me. ... I haven't really typed many people -- I think appearances can be misleading except for some really obvious types, like that guy. Lots of others, I wouldn't put money on. ... I'm relatively new to MBTI and I was trying to do some rewinding in my head, applying it to various people and situations to see whether anything jumped out.

This is all speculation and based on my limited personal experience. I'm fairly young and so have not been given the chance to hold a job for a time period even close to 15 years, but I can try to put myself in his shoes to help explain the situation from my above given point of view.

As you said, he's smart and talented. He's obviously devoted and a good worker because he's held the job for 15 years. That's a long time and he's probably put in a bunch of work. Working for that long I'd probably feel I deserved a promotion, too. 15 years of loyalty and service, it'd only be fair that he got the recognition he deserved and a promotion to management when a position opened. Now here's the difference I see: he wants to move up out of merit, not out of desire to be a leader.

Now if an INTJ would make great leader, how come this guy wasn't considered? This is just how the world works. When a company comes across a hard worker, they are more likely to take advantage and exploit him than award his loyalty and quality service. He's a good worker; we don't come across his kind very often; why would we stick him in a position we don't know he's good at and hire a possibly lower quality worker to fill his position? This is how the company thinks and the only way to change their mind is to convince them otherwise....using social skills. This is where us INTJs lack, but we do have them and it's not impossible for us to use them & use them well.
INTJs are thinkers and not so much doers. However we do do, and we know this because of previous INTJs who are famous for all sorts accomplishments. But how does an INTJ gain the ability to do? It happens from a push of some kind. We go to parties when we're pushed to go by friends. We communicate in class when we're pushed to gain knowledge and understand. The basis of most of these pushes is desire. We desire to please our friends, we desire to gain knowledge, we desire to have a position of leadership... It is this desire that helps us to overcome the things we'd rather not do (social skills) to achieve a greater goal (leadership).

I don't believe your ex-coworker desired a leadrship position. I believe he desired proper recognition for his loyalty & service over the years. He probably felt he had already earned the position and that using social skills would be unnecessary. So why would he do something he'd rather not do that seemed to be unnecessary anyways? That is why he didn't work harder for the position and that is why he wasn't even considered...

...or at least, that's how it looks to me ;)

mkay

05-14-2008, 12:57 PM

Actually, Knock, I don't think extroverts or feelers necessarily make better leaders. I think INTJs have a weakness with dealing with people, as many INTJs have indicated, so I asked how that worked with the MBTI description of being natural leaders. It's clear there are some good INTJ leaders, as there are good leaders from all types, and I wanted to know how good INTJ leaders handled the relating to people if it doesn't come naturally. (If I were to ask another personality type about leadership, I would ask about overcoming that type's specific weaknesses.)

The elements of leadership you mentioned are necessary, and I think someone with those skills would lead well in many situations. In some cases, that would not be enough. For instance, I worked in newspapers, where the ability to do the work as well as to manage personalities was very valuable. People respond very differently to stress -- daily deadlines and competition (against the rest of the industry as well as against others in a newsroom -- how much space you'd get, where your story would run in the paper, etc.) ... The need for managers who could relate well to people was heightened because the industry is contracting; advertising revenue rapidly moving online, so there have been heavy job losses throughout the industry. Even people who were highly productive needed more feeling from their managers. ... That's the case in any industry in turmoil or transition. And I think such situations are a good test of leadership.

punkyplatypus, the guy I was referring to, he definitely wanted to lead. He was in a lower-level management role and pursued a promotion when his boss quit. But he was ill-suited for management. ... He would fix others' mistakes instead of helping them improve (he didn't want to interact much). Several of his team members were later laid off in various waves because once he wasn't there to cover for them, all their weaknesses were highly apparent. ... His talents and personality were better suited to staying out of management. To fulfill his ambitions, he needed to work on his people skills. But he seemed blind to that.

punkyplatypus

05-14-2008, 03:22 PM

punkyplatypus, the guy I was referring to, he definitely wanted to lead. He was in a lower-level management role and pursued a promotion when his boss quit. But he was ill-suited for management. ... He would fix others' mistakes instead of helping them improve (he didn't want to interact much). Several of his team members were later laid off in various waves because once he wasn't there to cover for them, all their weaknesses were highly apparent. ... His talents and personality were better suited to staying out of management. To fulfill his ambitions, he needed to work on his people skills. But he seemed blind to that.

I think I sometimes build a superiority complex when I imagine the typical INTJ. I like to think we're all invincible and able to handle any situation, but I guess we're not. I'd like to think that this fellow could see his flaws and would work to improve himself, but I guess nobody's perfect. I know I'm no where near perfection, but I still work hard to prove myself wrong :)
Also I still stand next to my original position, that INTJs (or at least some) are capable of great leadership given their skills and despite their flaws.

knock7

05-14-2008, 04:52 PM

I wanted to know how good INTJ leaders handled the relating to people if it doesn't come naturally.

We do have many good leadership qualities. However, I agree we aren't naturally very good with social situations. I also think INJs need to overcome fear and develop the F and E. It doesn't come easily. I think I am much better at it. I analyze a bunch of interactions with other people and correct mistakes. I avoid talking until I have time to think about something as much as possible. I plan out what I am going to say when I have advance notice. I also bounce ideas off other managers and friends.

The elements of leadership you mentioned are necessary, and I think someone with those skills would lead well in many situations. In some cases, that would not be enough. For instance, I worked in newspapers, where the ability to do the work as well as to manage personalities was very valuable. People respond very differently to stress -- daily deadlines and competition (against the rest of the industry as well as against others in a newsroom -- how much space you'd get, where your story would run in the paper, etc.) ... The need for managers who could relate well to people was heightened because the industry is contracting; advertising revenue rapidly moving online, so there have been heavy job losses throughout the industry. Even people who were highly productive needed more feeling from their managers. ... That's the case in any industry in turmoil or transition. And I think such situations are a good test of leadership.

I disagree. I find I am generally at my best under stress.

Aronnax

05-14-2008, 04:58 PM

I don't understand how INTJs can be good leaders (as MBTI sometimes describes) if they cannot relate well to others socially / emotionally. An appeal to pure logic doesn't work with most people.

Personally, I would prefer that people were more logical and less emotional. But that's just not the case.

INTJs can relate to others, we relate though direct communication and empathy. You won't get much in the way of sympathy from an INTJ but sympathy isn't necessary for leadership.

Elfrun

05-14-2008, 08:54 PM

INTJs can relate to others, we relate though direct communication and empathy. You won't get much in the way of sympathy from an INTJ but sympathy isn't necessary for leadership.

Oh, likes that one :thumbsup:

mkay

05-15-2008, 01:37 AM

I think I sometimes build a superiority complex when I imagine the typical INTJ. I like to think we're all invincible and able to handle any situation, but I guess we're not. I'd like to think that this fellow could see his flaws and would work to improve himself, but I guess nobody's perfect. I know I'm no where near perfection, but I still work hard to prove myself wrong :)
Also I still stand next to my original position, that INTJs (or at least some) are capable of great leadership given their skills and despite their flaws.

It'd be great if everyone could self-actualize. I don't know how possible it is, but cool idea.

I agree that some INTJs can be great leaders. I see that possibility in all types, depending on circumstances.

A couple of years ago, I had a boss who was 28 years old and was just the most amazing manager I've ever seen (I'm 39; have worked with tons of people). He had quantitative, critical thinking, creative and people skills, and was completely down-to-earth and direct. ... He'd learned from good people, but there was so much innately talented about him. Fascinating to observe. I wish I knew what type he was.

mkay added to this post, 0 minutes and 54 seconds later...

We do have many good leadership qualities. However, I agree we aren't naturally very good with social situations. I also think INJs need to overcome fear and develop the F and E. It doesn't come easily. I think I am much better at it. I analyze a bunch of interactions with other people and correct mistakes. I avoid talking until I have time to think about something as much as possible. I plan out what I am going to say when I have advance notice. I also bounce ideas off other managers and friends.

I disagree. I find I am generally at my best under stress.

Knock, not sure what you're disagreeing about....

knock7

05-15-2008, 03:53 AM

Knock, not sure what you're disagreeing about....

I was disagreeing with the idea that we are not good under stress. When a stressful situation comes up, remaining cool and unemotional is important. We are also hands on and confident. We recently had a computer virus outbreak at work. I calmly directed our IT people and gave them all jobs to fix the problem. I would think an F or a P type wouldn't be as decisive or quick to resolve the problem.

mkay

05-15-2008, 03:59 AM

I think you misunderstood, because I didn't write anywhere that INTJs weren't good under stress. ... I wrote that people respond very differently to stress. I wrote "people" and meant "people," as in everyone. ... Like I said, I haven't gone around typing people I know, and I sure don't know enough INTJs to say they don't handle stress well. In RL, I know my INTJ husband and that guy I thought was INTJ. I'm not going to run off and make generalizations about INTJs based on that. :)

Uytuun

05-15-2008, 06:30 AM

Actually, INTJs tend to be great listeners as well...I guess that would help too.

knock7

05-15-2008, 08:52 AM

I was responding to this when I was talking about us being good under stress. I respectfully disagree with you that managers need to focus heavily on F. Management positions can be very different. Managing an IT department or Financial's Trader floor is very different than a McDonalds or a newspaper. There is also more than one successful management style and probably degrees of success as well.

The elements of leadership you mentioned are necessary, and I think someone with those skills would lead well in many situations. In some cases, that would not be enough. For instance, I worked in newspapers, where the ability to do the work as well as to manage personalities was very valuable. People respond very differently to stress -- daily deadlines and competition (against the rest of the industry as well as against others in a newsroom -- how much space you'd get, where your story would run in the paper, etc.) ... The need for managers who could relate well to people was heightened because the industry is contracting; advertising revenue rapidly moving online, so there have been heavy job losses throughout the industry. Even people who were highly productive needed more feeling from their managers. ... That's the case in any industry in turmoil or transition. And I think such situations are a good test of leadership.

knock7 added to this post, 10 minutes and 54 seconds later...

I think you misunderstood, because I didn't write anywhere that INTJs weren't good under stress. ... I wrote that people respond very differently to stress. I wrote "people" and meant "people," as in everyone. ... Like I said, I haven't gone around typing people I know, and I sure don't know enough INTJs to say they don't handle stress well. In RL, I know my INTJ husband and that guy I thought was INTJ. I'm not going to run off and make generalizations about INTJs based on that.

I am confused. You already did make generalizations about people and INTJs in the initial post.

I don't understand how INTJs can be good leaders (as MBTI sometimes describes) if they cannot relate well to others socially / emotionally. An appeal to pure logic doesn't work with most people.

Personally, I would prefer that people were more logical and less emotional. But that's just not the case.

I personally, think its ok to generalize with the implied understanding that it applies to most situations, but not all of them.

mkay

05-15-2008, 05:19 PM

I agree that management situations differ, something I think I mentioned earlier in the thread but am too lazy to look up. About generalizing in my initial post: I was going off what MBTI descriptions said (natural leaders) contrasted with the INTJ posts on this forum and the MBTI descriptions of INTJ problems with relating to people. I'm not sure how that is me generalizing -- I was trying to make sense of things. Again, I know few INTJs in RL and don't have a clue about most people's types in RL, so I don't have any generalizations to make that INTJs haven't referred to repeatedly on various threads. Beyond that, I'm just learning about INTJs, people in general and myself.

mkay added to this post, 19 minutes and 22 seconds later...

Knock, thinking on it, I'm sensing that you perhaps took my original post as some kind of criticism, which was not my intention. I was trying to make sense of two "statements" that did not make sense to me. I figured there was some kind of explanation, which is why I was asking. ... My posts are not an attack on you or INTJs' ability to lead. You might be a great leader, but that is neither here nor there in regard to my question, because it was about INTJs as a group. ... I'm sure there are great INTJ leaders, as there are great leaders from all types. But I didn't understand the blanket MBTI statement about INTJs being great leaders.

Aronnax

05-17-2008, 01:56 PM

I don't understand how INTJs can be good leaders (as MBTI sometimes describes) if they cannot relate well to others socially / emotionally. An appeal to pure logic doesn't work with most people.

Your confusion is understandable, you see a lot of posts on this forum complaining about a sense of alienation. You have to realize that most of those posts are made by younger posters who are still trying to develop communication skills. This is common among most IN types, they're socially withdraw and the N pushes their thinking internal.

INTJs also tend to focus on flaws, not areas of success. If it works we don't worry about it, leaving more energy to fix "problem areas". So people who need help are asking for it and the people who are succeeding aren't usually discussing it. The posts you read aren't giving you the big picture.

What makes an INTJ good at leadership isn't our natural communication skills but communication skills can be developed. Communication is only half of leadership, the other part is leading people somewhere useful. Our strength lies in our vision, confidence, drive and organizational abilities. Being able to separate our emotions from our decisions and being able to determine "what works" is essentially what makes an INTJ a "natural leader". If an INTJ bothers to develop good communication skills so he/she can share their vision they become very effective in a leadership role.

mkay

05-17-2008, 04:05 PM

Aronnax, thanks. Yes, you make good points.

Aronnax

05-17-2008, 04:49 PM

You're welcome.

demaugustus

05-17-2008, 08:00 PM

I've found myself in leadership positions a few times, simply because enough people in the particular social circle valued my honesty and straight-forwardness. They seemed to be tired of previous leaders who were less decisive and/or pandered to the pressure of the gossipers. In some sense, they knew what they were getting from me, there was no mystery.

cBorg

05-18-2008, 10:34 PM

I don't understand how INTJs can be good leaders (as MBTI sometimes describes) if they cannot relate well to others socially / emotionally. An appeal to pure logic doesn't work with most people.

Personally, I would prefer that people were more logical and less emotional. But that's just not the case.

I've recently been put in a leadership position and found myself to be much better at it than I expected. It certainly wasn't something I aspired to but I've found that relating with others from a managerial perspective is very different and easier than purely social settings. You have common goals and the confidence of knowing how everything and everyone needs to work to achieve them. I'm uncomfortable going to a party and talking with strangers, but put me in a conference room reviewing status updates on projects and delegating assignments and I'm perfectly at ease.

...I guess it largely depends on the group you work with...if you lead a bunch of ESFJs and your own boss is an ESTJ, then odds are the INTJ will not do a great job, but as the leader of an IxTx group of computer programmers, the INTJ will do great...

I think Uytuun has a good point here. I manage a group of engineers and I can relate to them very well, but I'd be lost in our sales group. Getting through the small talk and anecdotes needed to accomplish anything with them tries my patience to the limits..but I'm still learning!