personality type and the written word - February, 1999
About the Guesses in the Last Issue
Although there were far fewer guesses overall for last issue’s pieces than
for the previous issue, a few interesting observations can be made about
how people guessed and about the authors’ actual types.
The authors’ types are:
‘Aman’s Grave’, by Linda Rosenthal, INFP, probably a 4 with 5 and 9.
‘Hell’, by Malia Fee, ENFP, 6w7
‘Writing’, by ‘Penelope’, INTP, swinging between 1, 5 and 7.
‘A Tale of Two Personality Types’, Susan Geldart, ENTJ, 3.
The consensus on the poem ‘Aman’s Grave’ by Linda Rosenthal seemed to be
that she was an INFJ and a 4, though one person guessed INFP and 5w4. The
evocative, intuitive-feeling tone of the poem was noted by most people,
and it seems that these qualities are seen as representative of both 4 and
INFX. Because most people weren’t specific about whether they had first
guessed the MBTI type based on these qualities, and then extrapolated from
that the eneagram type, or vice versa, it’s hard to draw conclusions as
to people’s reasoning.
Perhaps the closest guess came from Malia Fee (ENFP, 6w7) who noted that
the sense of both melancholy and detachment (created by the imagery of
whiteness and aloneness) in the poem put it somewhere between 4 and 5. In
fact, Linda says that while she is probably a 4, she also can identify
with a lot of 5 and 9. Malia also chose INFP over INFJ: “INFP seems right,
although some of the author’s comments seemed to have a J feel.
However…INFPs are said to be ‘closet Js’ anyway, so maybe this is where I
get that feeling.”
Interestingly, another guesser commented: “I…thought her deliberate style
seemed J in orientation.” P/J issues continue to come up in the guesses
made in Type Writer, though the accuracy of typing based on it vary
greatly.
Malia Fee’s poem ‘Hell’ was typed correctly as a 6 by Marylin Mitman
(INFP, 9) who wrote, “I’m afraid I depend a lot on gut feeling/intuition
and can’t always explain.” As an INFP myself, I find myself really
identifying with this response, and wondering if this is a greater factor,
for all types, in typing than people are aware of or will admit to.
Walter Geldart (INFP, 9) came close with his MBTI guess of ENTP for Malia,
and with his enneagram guess of 4 or 7. Malia had originally thought
herself to be a 7, and now says that she is a 6 with a very strong 7 wing.
To me, a strong 7 influence shines through in this piece with its cheerful
enjoyment of its own wry humour, with the darker thoughts expressing the 6
side.
When we come to ‘Writing’, the poem by ‘Penelope’, things start to become
rather complicated, as the author has since become somewhat uncertain of
her type, making it difficult to assess the accuracy of guesses. Penelope
comes out INTP most often on tests, but feels she could be INTJ or INFP as
well. Similarly, she swings between 1, 5 and 7 on the enneagram.
I felt that guesses that specified INTJ were on the right track, while guesses of 5 can
be considered accurate.
Malia, who guessed INTJ, wrote, “The style of writing and also the
attitude of the author’s comments reminds me greatly of an INTJ friend of
mine. Straightforward, good natured, among other things.” Here, it seems
to me, are intuition and gut feeling again.
For Penelope’s enneagram type, Malia guessed 6w7 based on the author’s
comments rather than the writing itself. Given that Penelope swings
between 1, 5 and 7, it does seem a possibility for 6w7 to be her type, in
which case 5 and 7 might be strong wings for her; while 6 and 1 do have
certain traits in common.
Interestingly, from the ‘On the Spot’ section of the page, here is a
poem sent in by Paul Sturtevant (ENFP, 4) which, as he pointed out,
is very similar in theme to Penelope’s ‘Writing’.
‘Straight & to the Point’
Don’t know why I write this poem.
Don’t know what I thought I’d sho’em
So here I sit.
I think I’ll quit.
Naturally, although the content of Penelope's and Paul's poems are
similar, their styles or tones do differ. But this does bring up the very
significant question of how possible it is to type someone by a single
piece of writing. Should we be tempted to assign the same type to Penelope
and to Paul on the basis of their poems? In this case, probably not,
because there simply isn’t enough distinctively different type-wise in
either piece to come to a clear type choice, in contrast to some pieces of
writing which present us with a narrower choice of likely types. Linda
Rosenthal’s ‘Aman’s Grave’ is an example of a poem whose qualitites seem
more clearly and less ambiguously to point towards one or two most likely
types.
It was also Malia Fee who came closest to correctly typing Susan Geldart,
author of ‘A Tale of Two Personality Types’. She wrote, “The author’s
writing style reminds me of an INFJ, but her comments told me ‘E’, and I
am torn between ENFP, ESFP and ENFJ. I am going to stick with ENFP.”
Interestingly—perhaps due to her own type?--Malia inaccurately asssumed
that Susan is an F and an enneagram type 2 or 7. Because of the detached,
thoughtful nature of the piece, it might have been expected for people to
guess Susan is a T, but no-one accurately typed Susan. There is not enough
information to draw any conclusions here, as in most of the pieces in this
issue, although it increasingly seems to me that the attempt to type
someone is such a very personal matter as to be almost unfathomable, as
shown by the intuitive way many people go about doing it, and by the most
of us find it easier to do when we know someone in our lives who seems
similar to the person we are considering.
Once again, thank you so much to this issue’s authors, Linda Rosenthal,
Malia Fee, ‘Penelope’ and Susan Geldart, all of whom wrote thoughtful
pieces of substance and generously allowed others to read and comment on
them. Thanks also to those who made guesses and engaged in discussion
about them.
As always, please feel welcome to comment about anything you read on this
page. Submissions of short pieces of writing are also very welcome. Please
send them to gross@interfusion.net.au , together with your MBTI and
enneagram type, if you know them. Some comments about how you go about
writing and why you wrote this particular piece are often as helpful in
guessing an author’s type as the piece itself.
You can also comment on this column, or the poems, at our Message Board
Four New Pieces
Below are four new pieces. You are invited
to make guesses as to their authors' types, and to explain why you made
your choice in the "Any further comments" box. It's very interesting and
helpful to get an idea of why people guess the way they do. Please keep in
mind, when you read these and comment on them, that the pieces are here
not be be examined as literary works, but to help us to understand what
links there might be between writing and type. Have fun and guess away!
|
Under the Sea
I'd like to be
Under the sea
Living the life of a telepathic sponge
Forever now
Everywhere here
Extended by sympathetic telepathy
We would be so happy you and me
Awash in each other's purity
No predatory eyes
No need for lies
Living in telepathic harmony
No grasping hands
Set in the sand
Happy to be in spongy society
We would be brainlessly
In a spongy frame of mind, you and me
I'd like to be
Under the sea
Living the life of a telepathic sponge!
|
To Pass the Night Away
And he went home each night and went to bed,
And wrapped his arms around the empty air
And pretended that someone was there.
Succor and Comfort
When Larry-the-Lonely
Met Neoprene-Nancy
At the Triple-X toy shop,
He knew that she was made for him,
Because she didn't run away.
It was not-run-away-at-first-sight at first sight.
He suggested that they go back to his apartment,
So the sales clerk had her wrapped in brown paper
and included the instructions.
Back at his place at first her interest seemed a bit flat,
But with a little smooth talk
And a vacuum cleaner
She started to perk up.
But Larry thought he might be rushing it,
So that night they just held hands.
And out of fear of rejection,
And out of fear of deflation,
They never consumated their relationship,
Even though it lasted for years.
And each night, when Larry came home from work,
Nancy would be there waiting for him.
And they would lay there holding each other,
Comforting each other,
Until the crying stopped,
And they drifted off to sleep.
|
|
I, Borg
The star show operators ran the console in the dome theater that
controlled the myriad of projectors, sound system, lights, the star
globe and other technical jiggery pokery used in putting on such an
event. The console itself was a chest high U-shaped carrel that
resembled an airplane's cockpit (except no labels - the functions
changed from show to show.) There were a few hundred variably
illuminated switches, knobs, levers and dials of differing colors. It was
actually quite pretty in its way when fully illuminated.
At that time the only part of the show that was pre-canned was the
soundtrack which consisted of the script narration and background
music. The operators had full control over which effects got done
when and how, though most effects were made for specific points in
shows which formed the backbone of how to proceed. But there was
still a large amount of personal touch that went into it and as I
ushered I got to know the distinctive styles of each operator. With
most of them I was rather unimpressed.... Wooden, no imagination, no feel
for the devices or audience, no subtleness, the list could go on for some
of the worst.
This planetarium was a county government agency and seniority played a
large part in some positions. For my position of employment, that
included becoming a show operator. So for nearly 4 (quite happy) years, I
did other jobs, biding my time for when I got a chance to operate the
console. I knew I'd be good at it; better than most of the others.
Nor was I mistaken. I was instantly propelled to the unofficial
position of planetarium flagship show giver upon review of my checkout show
which all new operators had to give privately to the director before
giving shows to the public.
I couldn't help myself....
I had this kind of insight of the other operators I'd watched over the
years. There were different relationships of person to console. Some
used it effectively as a tool. They had an idea of what it could do and
how to get it to do it. Others had little feel for it and did minimal
things with it - not unlike the proverbial grandparents relating to their
VCRs. A couple were downright disdainful of technology and were only
doing this for the money or prestige. A couple approached it not unlike a
large dog - wary and a little fearful.
When my turn came I was a gonner. Resistance was futile, I was
assimilated. I didn't "operate" the console. I wasn't "at" the
console. I *was* the console. And it was me. We melded; we became
one entity. And our influence extended to the whole interior of the
chamber including the audience we could play like a fine musical
instrument.
When I gave a show every piece of equipment was part of me. I knew
every single sound made. A preternatural tactile feel bridged us. If a
slide or effect didn't cycle properly I knew just which one it was and
more often than not was able to silently fix it so nobody even knew
(except the person whose chair back I was standing on to get at the
equipment :-) There were many variations I developed on how to pre-check
an effect without the audience knowing. If something still wasn't going
to work, I improvised ways around it so the show was seemless.
It was very much a physical experience for me. My blood flowed into
the equipment and their electrons flowed back into me. I didn't
execute effects, I willed them. Think of walking - you don't think
"contract this muscle, then this, then - oops, inner ear is supplying
feedback, correction", etc. - you just walk - you just 'do it.' That's how
I gave shows - I just did them. It was more instinct than anything else
and explaining why or even what I did during a show to others was nearly
impossibly until I'd had considerably time to reflect. Giving a show
wasn't a thing of words, it was a thing of nameless kinesthetic willed
action and reaction.
I only got to run shows for nearly a year before I needed to move on
to other work. But it turned out to be a good time to leave anyways.
Technology marches on. The beautiful mechanical star globe which nearly
always caused gasps when ignited into life was replaced with a digital CRT
projector and fisheye lens. Crisp beautiful stars, planets and nebulae
turned into dim fuzzy phospho-green blobs with raster lines running
through them. A couple months after I left they got an umpti-track
digital sound system which could be programmed to execute the effects.
The job of giving shows was reduced to a bored usher punching a button to
start another competant but lifeless identical copy of the show. If
anything broke everything came to a stop and the audience was ushered out.
Looking back on my time as show giver I have a visceral emotion
attached to the term "halcyon days". They were mine. I'm glad I had
them.
|
|
Corporate Politics (An Interview)
Interviewee: Sam Snidely, Senior Vice President, Marketing Analysis
Company: Amalgamated Products Company (my employer)
Relationship: Sam is my boss's boss. I have a dotted line reporting
relationship to Sam for departmental communications. In this role I
produce a widely distributed report each month summarizing the
department's accomplishments. I consider Sam to be one of the most
political people I've ever worked with.1 Dealing with him is one of the
key reasons I decided to take this course.
Sam contrasted the political environment at Amalgamated under our current
CEO, Phil Dodge, with that of the previous CMO, Larry Runner. Sam did not
work at Amalgamated until after Larry left; however, Sam's previous job
was working with a major supplier to Amalgamated, so he felt he had
considerable historical knowledge of our organization.
Under Jeff, Amalgamated had high esprit de corps, but there was lots of
internal competition. This competition was pretty much out in the open
and more based on merit than political concerns. Back then all the
marketers had to make a grueling monthly presentation to senior marketing
management. This caused many internal rivalries and an unwillingness to
share information with those viewed as competition.
Today it is not "in" to be political.2 If Phil perceives you as
political, you're in big trouble. Phil and his staff (includes Sam) got
serious about this issue in 1991, and had a major off-site team building
session to deal with it. It was made clear that you will be hurt if you
get caught in political behavior. The ethic was that everybody shared the
company's problems, and that we wanted to foster a decent environment for
doing so. 3
Sam described "organizational politics" as a set of behaviors and
attitudes that show that one has a personal agenda rather than an agenda
that is focused on the good of the team and company. "You can't be an
effective team player if you're political." 4
When I asked what organizational politics contributed strategically, Sam
felt that a positive political environment contributed to the development
of strategy, to alignment around a strategy, and to expectations of that
strategy. 5 However, if the political environment is negative -- like the
federal government's -- politics produces gridlock. Politics can also
produce problems of "role definition." 6 If the politics are positive,
roles are clear. If they're negative, politics produces a trickle-down of
role problems.
Sam seemed to implicitly associate well-understood politics as an aspect
of what he called a positive political environment. If the politics are
well understood, individuals "understand the maze," and if they understand
the maze in a positive political environment, their comfort is higher. If
you're completely suspicious and frightened, you're going to clam up and
say and do nothing. Correspondingly, he couldn't think of any negative
associations with a well-understood politics.
To teach organizational politics to a younger person, Sam felt it was
important to define for that person the ideal end state that was desired
for the organization. 7 Then the younger person should be "oriented
towards that end state" -- they should come to understand the attitudes
and behaviors that are expected as necessary for contributing to that end
state.
As an example, Sam said that Amalgamated's end state was to create an
environment where people would feel completely free to speak up, where
high value would be placed on "challenging the existing paradigms, and
challenging the conventional wisdoms." There would also be a "high
tolerance for ambiguity" and focus on "change management." It would be an
organization where there would be "no sacred cows and no holy grail." 8
The younger person should understand that the political environment starts
with the CEO. Phil isn't a political person and is in fact intolerant of
a political environment. So, "if you're perceived as a political person
at the top management level 9 it's the kiss of death." Phil believes that
the good of the company and the team should supersede the good of the
individual. "Woe to the individual caught 10 with a what's-good-for-me
attitude."
Also, Sam would advise a younger person to pay close attention to hiring
and promotional practices. What one did in this area was critical.
Another item that is also critical is personal integrity.
Sam was very interested in changing the politics of the organization. 11
Sam felt that he was good at assessing the mood of top management, but
he'd like to change middle management -- "that's where our greatest
problems are." 12 "I'd like to foster an open, positive political
environment at the top level to get the VP level to perceive themselves
less functionally and more strategically, to create an environment that
fosters a strategic alignment -- away from a functional alignment." 13
"Our key area to make progress in is new-customer acquisition. All our
other problems are relatively under control." We "need all the quality
thinking of the organization on this issue." Our thinking should "not
just be stuck in our specialties. We need to bring out the whole
company's focus on this issue. 14 A political environment drives this out.
It's a focus on personal interests instead of what good for all. It's
dangerous to be me-oriented and function-oriented." 15
Sam said his biggest learning in the area of politics was to be very
careful about your intentions, as your motivations could be misunderstood.
Sam said he learned this in a senior-staff team-building session. Phil
had originally offered Sam the opportunity to manage the OEM Marketing
area. Sam declined because he thought his talents would be better utilized
by focusing on Marketing Analysis (market and sales analysis, market
research, competitive intelligence). However, after a year had passed,
Phil still wanted Sam to take OEM Marketing. Because of these
conversations with Phil, other members of top management perceived Sam as
trying to gain control of OEM Marketing, rather than as responding to
Phil. In hindsight, Sam felt that he should have been clearer and more
cautious with his communications and he should have been more careful to
let his intent be known by talking directly to the person managing that
area.
In conclusion, Sam said that "I don't aspire to anything beyond where I
am. If you do here, it is difficult. Then you have an agenda." 16
Footnotes:
1.
One aspect of this is that I perceive that Sam speaks in a special
political code that one must be among the cognoscenti to understand. When
I first heard Sam, I thought he was simply full of bullshit and was just
trying to sound good. Since then I've changed my mind. I still think
he's trying to sound good and is full of bullshit, but I also think he is
speaking in a subtle political argot. Several of my later footnotes
indicate how I translate what Sam says. One of the consequences of all of
this code language is that Sam's conversations often, on the surface, lack
a clear logical flow. I've tried to present here a flavor of how he says
things, rather than just the meaning of what he said (which can often be
obscure). I believe that there is hidden meaning in the non-linearity of
Sam's statements: Many of these non-linear transitions are juxtapositions
that point to a hidden political meaning that cannot be said directly.
I've also wondered -- if I could figure out how to play them backwards --
whether they also contain Satanic messages.
back to text
2. My perception is that the company is becoming increasingly political. Further, the politics are becoming less well understood because they are increasingly hidden.
back to text
3. I think Sam is trying to divert the conversation from the real issue of
politics. I don't think Sam is as naive to think that it's not "in" to be
political here. Rather, he's saying that its important to keep politics
under wraps here. In other words, this is a political statement to divert
attention from the true politics around here.
back to text
4. My experience with teams is that they are more political than traditional work groups. In a traditional work group, power is clear. This reduces the need for the
group to work on political issues. In a team, power is ambiguous. Teams,
therefore, spend a considerable amount of time working out political
(i.e., mostly status, but also power) issues within the team, and trying
to preserve a status quo once it's established. Consequently, I think
that you have to be better at politics to be an effective team player than
to be a traditional manager. I don't think Sam understands this, however,
because he has privately criticized teams in my prior conversations with
him -- a politically dangerous thing to do here. I think Sam better
understands and is more comfortable with traditional hierarchical
politics.
back to text
5. Translation: A positive political environment is one in which
people know their place in the hierarchy and do what they're told.
back to text
6. I interpret "role definition" to be a euphemism for "place in the power
hierarchy."
back to text
7. It's interesting to note that Sam chooses to interpret this
question as an opportunity to teach a younger person how to fit into the
political environment -- not as an opportunity to teach actual politics.
Sam took this as an opportunity to tell me, the younger person, how to fit
in better (i.e., to be more politically compliant -- not how to be more
politically skillful).
back to text
8. Sam is being very political here. This statement
is full of Amalgamated bullshit and shibboleths. Amalgamated values the
appearance of speaking up -- God forbid you should actually say something
meaningful. 'Challenging the existing paradigms' is a code term for
challenging the paradigms put in place by prior management. Challenging
one of the paradigms put in place by current management will get you in
trouble. 'High tolerance for ambiguity' is a code term meaning that
employees should tolerate management's practice for giving highly
ambiguous direction, then beating up on you when you don't do what they
told you to do. 'Change management' is a code term meaning that you
should go with the flow here as we reorganize every few months as a cover
for management's failure to know what it's doing. 'No sacred cows and no
holy grail' is simply a lie. The corporate Mission and what we call the
'New Strategic Model' (Phil's pet projects) are the holy grails that will
lead us to the promised land. Nobody may attack these sacred cows
publicly.')
back to text
9. Phil's direct reports.
back to text
10. It's interesting that he used the
word "caught." Does he mean you can have such an attitude, just don't get
caught? Did he mean to let that slip...?
back to text
11. Of course -- how political of
him -- this is one of Phil's pet interests.
back to text
12. It's certainly where the
political threats are in this organization. Middle management knows the
truth, and the truth here is dangerous (our sales projections are
seriously inflated). Top management is falling into a spiral of group
think -- they've learned to collectively ignore the truth in return for
their quarter-million-plus salaries. The lowest level employees generally
accept top management's bullshit because they don't know any better.
back to text
13. Translation: They should concern themselves less with their technical
expertise and trying to do what is technically correct, and concern
themselves more with making top management happy by being better yes men.
back to text
14. The rumor is that Phil will be replaced after the first of the year if
we don't make our sales numbers. Sam is saying that the political change
he wants is for everybody to pull together to protect his boss. If Phil
loses his job, Sam is in danger.
back to text
15. Translation: It's dangerous if you're
not a yes man.
back to text
16. I've heard him say this before. Translation: "It is
impolitic to say that you are out for yourself. As I said before, it's
the kiss of death. I am interested in advancing, but I know I can't admit
it; therefore, I admit it by making a point of denying it. You'll never
get ahead here if you have an agenda to change anything."
back to text
|
|