Toggle Light / Dark / Auto color theme
Toggle table of contents sidebar
Supervision observations
¶
Supervision Observations: LII vs. IEE vs. ESI
¶
I have noticed a recurring pattern in my interactions with LIIs and
ESIs: in discussions, LIIs often don’t take seriously what I have to
contribute. Likewise, I don’t take seriously what ESIs have to
contribute. Supervision dynamics, as explained on this wiki, does quite
a good job of explaining all this, although I think the description
lacks nuance, in the sense that it doesn’t stress enough that the
relationship is asymmetrical in a psychological sense
only
. Imo, some
Supervision descriptions make it sound like the supervisor is sort of
superior to the supervisee in the sense of their mental abilities as
well. This is definitively not the case. First of all, by definition
each type has specific abilities that make it unique.
But more importantly: Supervision dynamics seem to put a lot of emphasis
on the use of the leading function of the supervisor, which is stressful
indeed for the supervisee because of the PoLR attacks. What is ignored
in the description, is that in supervision dynamics, the supervisee
often makes use of their valued functions, e.g. their creative function.
The potentially worthwhile contributions resulting from the use of these
functions, is often simply overlooked or misunderstood by the
supervisor. From the POV of the supervisee, this makes the supervisor
look like he or she is willfully or obstinately ignoring valid
arguments. So, in addition to the stress of the PoLR attacks, the
supervisee might also get angry because they feel the supervisor is not
actually listening very well, that their arguments are not being heard,
i.e. that their creative function is being ignored.
So how does Supervision play out from my perspective? With LIIs, to me
it seems they have a systematized view of reality, which is often
ridiculously limited in scope: their view of reality is not just a
simplified model of reality, it is very much a simplified model of a
limited
part of reality. To them, anything that I have to contribute
that does not fit their model, can, by definition, not be true or
worthwhile, and as such is discarded. (Note: the LII response is not
merely a matter of cognitive dissonance, which would not be type
related. It is something proactive, something more specific to their use
of Ti). This makes me repeat myself over and over again, adding more and
more arguments, even attacking the supervisor’s ‘lack of arguments’ or
their ‘ad hominem’ arguments, which typically involve pointing out to
what they perceive as logical contradictions.
Something similar happens in my interactions with ESIs as well: when
they operate from their creative function, to me it seems like they are
giving me worthless advice on
which
course to take, whereas in reality
it is their intention to prod me
to take action
, so I actually
accomplish the goals I have set for myself. I simply ignore this
prodding, which results in them repeating their point over and over
again, until I stop countering their arguments with my own, and simply
state that their suggestions are simply not what I
want
to do.
If it wasn’t for the frustration of the supervisee, the joke of
Supervision relations would actually be on the supervisor, for it is the
supervisor who fails to gain from a learning opportunity.
–
Consentingadult
07:46, 24 February 2012
(GMT)
LIE and IEI
¶
As friends and co-workers, written by Danil Barabanov:
“The relations of revision are perhaps even more unfortunate than
conflict ones due to inequality of partners. The supervisor pressures
the painful function of the supervisee, while the severity of this
pressure is at maximum: 4D business logic of Jack London (LIE) is rather
unpleasant for Esenin (IEI).
During the first phase of relations, the LIE will seem to the IEI as a
kind of a “guru”. He will accomplish that which the IEI attains with
great difficulty: quickly grasp, optimize, and improve the algorithms of
activities, adeptly identify existing patterns and reap advantages from
them; his practicality, energy, and work drive will all seem impressive
to the IEI. Meanwhile that which the IEI is able to do well, the LIE
also doesn’t do too poorly. Jack’s intuition of time Ni is not as good
as Esenin’s (the ability to feel the flow of events and to see when it’s
better to act and when to relax and stand down, ability to distribute
periods of exertion over time) - it is Jack’s creative function, not his
program one. But the difference in one dimension is not so significant
and striking (especially at first). Same applies to ethics of emotions
Fe, which is role function of Jack and creative for Esenin. Jack is able
to generate emotions and create moods, to charge others with his energy,
though he doesn’t do this as regularly and not as skillfully as Esenin.
However, once again at first it will seem that Jack copes well with this
function.
Initially, the IEI will seem to the LIE as a “good guy/gal”, but
somewhat poorly adapted for life. After all, one of the most important
values for LIE ??is logic of actions, Te: he perceives everything around
him in this world through this aspect. The LIE will faithfully attempt
to teach and instruct the IEI on what he should do and how it should be
done. At first the IEI will try to follow LIE’s advice, but he will
hardly able to make it work. Discussions on logic of action are also
highly unpleasant for Esenin - this is not his subject. Constant
pressuring on the painful function distracts him from his contemplation,
plans, and daydreams in his free time (intuition of time), inhibits him
from creating the right setting or recalling in and re-experiencing
valuable to him impressions, and drags him out into the sphere where he
is uncomfortable, where he knows very little, and where he doesn’t feel
at ease. The LIE doesn’t notice this. He feels that he is teaching only
his best, tried-and-tested experience, most technologically sound
methods, something that should improve the life of Esenin. The list of
algorithms that the LIE can offer to the IEI is indeed extensive: from
how to do his work better to how to position the furniture in his room.
The worst case scenario of development of these relations is a situation
where LIE and IEI are colleagues at work. The LIE will very quickly
dismiss all working methods of the IEI, then he will begin to analyze
and assess his performance and total the benefit he brings for the group
(company, community, organization). At this point he will notice that
the IEI is a person of his internal states and this affects the outcome
of his work. After this the LIE will try to get rid of the IEI - push
him out of the team, transfer him to another department, or assign many
unpleasant duties, thereby plunging him into work until he gives out.
In cases when LIE and IEI have common interest (and preferably aren’t
working together), if IEI’s patience endures and LIE has enough sense to
not discuss topics pertaining to Te, then they can establish relations
and remain on friendly terms. This is quite possible, especially during
period when they are both relaxing and taking it easy, as this will
limit the focus on logic of actions and enable the IEI to express his
ethics of emotions and role sensing of experiences (which, to a limited
extent, is pleasant for Jack). Jack and Esenin can have a good time
talking about hypotherical and imaginative topics, their ideas and
daydreams. The IEI is able to create the right atmosphere that slows
down the flow of time that will allow the LIE to take a break from his
typically busy schedule.
But one should not forget that the LIE will always have Te as his
program function, and the IEI will never be able to change it from being
his vulnerable one.”
Dating experience, written from IEI’s pov:
“This is developing into a pattern now. First I fall for a man who seems
confident, dominant, and sweet at first, but then he starts doing things
that irk me. For example, not sending a response to my email or text and
leading me to think that they don’t value me or my time, because this is
how I interpret being ignored. When I feel upset and try to move on,
they become mad at me and act like they don’t know what they did wrong.
When I explain to them what they did wrong and how they were rude, and
give them another chance, they turn it around on me, say that I’m the
crazy one and break up with me.
To know that someone likes me, I need validation and emotional
reassurance. When I don’t get that I start getting paranoid and my
insecurities come out. I usually try to keep my emotions in check, but
these guys do something that makes me go crazy and become
over-emotional. This always happens with ENTj males. Eventually we end
up going our separate ways. Why can’t they simply admit that what they
did was wrong and say sorry, or at least explain why they didn’t get
back to me or give me a second chance? They end up coming off as total
jerks. I don’t feel guilty about getting so emotional over this. It is
inconsiderate to ignore someone no matter how “busy” you are - but these
guys never think that they did anything wrong. What can I do to change
this? Is this me being too clingy asking a guy to respond? Or is it him
being a rude jerk who thinks that his time is more valuable?
As an example: he asked me for a date last week, and when I responded
with “yes”, asked him when he wants to meet up, and he never got back to
me! I told him that this is inconsiderate - he replied with “that’s a
shame” and a sad emoticon. I figured I overreacted that time and decided
to give it another chance. He eventually tells me that he’s not
interested because he saw something in me that he didn’t expect. I was
vexed that he was stringing me along by saying he wanted to go out
again, when obviously he didn’t. The last part just pisses me off. What
is trivial to YOU is meaningful all-telling to ME. If someone is
important enough - RESPOND! I was going to leave after he didn’t reply,
but then he acted all sad, so I gave him a second chance. I thought I
was being nice and forgiving. Instead of taking it, he turned around and
dumped me, saying he didn’t like what he has seen in me. I felt like I
was getting kicked to the curb and not even given a chance.
I’m having trouble understanding how expecting others to respond is
neediness and not basic courtesy. I hate how I’m seen as needy bc I
demand respect. When he pulled something similar, I didn’t get bent out
of shape. He probably saw me as submissive and an easy target at this
point. But once I stood up for myself and my values, he proceeded to
label me as “needy”.”
IEE and ESI
¶
Margie (ESI):
I feel tension around IEEs due to the fact that they
“know” about me. That is, they go on to interpret my actions, my
feelings … and wrongly. The most stressful thing that is often their
interpretations are not quite wrong (intuition gives them valuable
hints) but somehow in essence it turns out to be completely different,
and there’s nothing to object. Not only do they “know”, but they also
act on the basis of their knowledge. And I can’t change their minds …
however I tried to gently explain to one IEE that the guy with whom I
came to her on a visit is not my young man, and will never be, so
there’s no need to create “conditions” for us - the horror, I could not
get through to her. In general, it is clear that she wanted only good
for us, but the outcome was the reverse. The overall feeling from this
control is a feeling of helplessness from the fact that a person thinks
something up about you and you cannot explain anything to him or her or
persuade them otherwise. Not even because they don’t believe you, but
because they do not hear you. And by the way - communicating with IEE
men is much easier. As a rule, no such problems arise.
Lench (ESI):
When I discovered that IEEs and ESIs are in relations
of revision, I started to think and figure out what’s what, and came
to the following conclusions:
- In questions of fashion, novelties of cosmetics, clothes, shoes,
where to buy something, etc., one cannot find a better adviser than
IEE. They give me clues, advise me. I recommend to listen to such
advice. IEE’s sense of style is constantly evolving. If an ESI would
miss an opening of a new store, the IEE will definitely go and tell
about it, that is, an IEE keeps in the course of everything new,
fashionable, and advanced.
- Communicating with an IEE is easy and pleasant. Their optimism
inspires, they have so much energy, you learn something new from them
all the time, and, in general, communication does not feel like a
burden. Slowly you realize that you are being set to a good mood. And,
if at one fine moment you suddenly see an eternally cheerful IEE
feeling down - you know that you are trusted. Perhaps only Dreiser can
appreciate and value this to its full extent. Because, it is so
difficult for ESIs to let anyone into their soul, and if the IEE has
done so … With us this attitude is more noticeable - initially we
are prickly, but an IEE seems always cheerful. So, the relations of
revision are not the worst relations for friendship. I describe this
from my own experience, there is an IEE in my close environment.
Dolce_Vita (ESI):
I have a close female friend of type IEE. I’d like
to add that IEEs are very helpful for introducing an ESI to new people.
They strike up conversations with people and join new groups so
seamlessly and with such ease! For this, I love and appreciate them. We
have been friends for a long while. There have been moments of tension,
as someone has already mentioned the IEEs like to “know” about us, which
is like they know something about us, but somehow it’s not quite so …
But these are minor things tbh. On my own experience I can say that the
IEE helps ESI to open up his or her eyes to the world around him or her,
to the people and ideas that the ESI would not have noticed otherwise
(“We must look broader at such questions” to cite an IEE friend). As a
result of which an evolution happens to ESI’s ideals. At the same time,
to some extent the IEE “opens up” the ESI to the people around him. It
also seems to me that the IEEs seem to be “calmed down” by Driesers,
after dashing side-to-side. That is, when it is completely unclear what
is good and what is bad, then they have someone to turn to.
Lench (ESI):
This is one quality of IEE friends that I forgot to
mention! For IEEs with their laid-back playful humor (of course if they
are in the mood) it is easy in a group of unfamiliar people. They’ll
find common topics for conversation that are interesting to everyone,
and smooth out any awkwardness and sharp corners, and say a toast … no
matter for whom or for which occasion, since there was a reason for a
meeting after all. I very much like listening to my IEE friend’s toast:
“For fulfillment of our dreams!” When I heard it for the first time, I
did not understand it, it seemed somehow angular. And later I liked it -
it’s short and very telling! And if you imagine what kind of attractive
dreams are spinning at the same time in IEE’s mind, in general one wants
to not only support the toast but also start making the dream into a
reality.
Seagul (IEE):
It is interesting how information passes from IEE to
ESI …. I tell you, it’s necessary to translate. According to the
creative function of Fi, an IEE can quarrel, make up, reconcile
everyone, or make everyone quarrel. Or in the beginning make everyone
quarrel, then regret it and reconcile. Everything depends on the
upbringing, the moral position, the mood of the IEE, and so on. For ESI
such a position is too unsteady and unpredictable - painful Ne. It
presents them with so many options of relationships that they cannot
understand when this or that will manifest. To an IEE ESI’s stubbornness
and insistence on one opinion may seem inadequate to the situation. I
ask our dear “revisees” to not take offense to this. I thickened the
colors for greater clarity.
ColdSun (IEE):
Can I express my point of view based on experience?
I just have a mother-ESI, so I understand a lot …
How does IEE exert pressure on the ESI? By Ne! For ESI it looks like
inconstancy. The rationality of ESI is very much affected, which is
always guided by some accepted norms, principles, etc. How does ESI
exert pressure on the IEE? By Se! This is also important and very
annoying … to me at least. ESIs always want to control people close
to them and always put pressure on them. At least for the time being,
within a given situation. Still, their leading Fi is primary… And
now I will write out some points, for further contemplation:
1. Fi. In ESI it isn’t as flexible as for the IEE, but more permanent
somehow … In whatever infernal quarrel you are with a Dreiser he
won’t immediately try to reconcile with you, but he will always show
the necessary care on creative sensing. IEE’s Fi in general allows
them to do and to create within a relationship whatever they want. And
this is not always done seriously.
2. ESIs and IEEs have the same functions in conscious and subconscious
blocks. So sometimes there is an understanding. On the other hand,
there is always the feeling that a person can understand you - but
doesn’t want to! … For IEEs, there is some advice here - smile and
be as sweet as possible. It works.
3. Both types are negativists. And here let me quote my ILE friend:
“If an IEE complains that everything is bad (although sometimes it is
clear that not everything is so bad), the the ESI will PRESS ON that
everything is bad.” There is no better way of putting it, in my
opinion. IEEs like very much to feel sorry for people, to show
compassion and care, which the ESI doesn’t always understand. But when
the ESI complains he does it in a way that there is a desire not to
feel compassion, but to object, to protest, as they complain as if not
specifically to you, but to the whole world. Here is another quote
from the same ILE friend whose grandmother is of type ESI: “Everything
is bad for her .. It’s hot outside - bad, it’s cold outside - also
bad. The pension sum was raised - this is good, but also somehow BAD!”
4. ESIs are much more caring than IEEs in everyday life and activities
… And IEEs are caring in feelings and relationships … So, as you
see, we cannot cover each other’s suggestive functions. For the ESI it
is very important that you do something around the house SPECIFICALLY
for him or her. But IEE’s sensing functions are not guided as much by
ethics, so the IEE will do anything for anyone whom he likes or
admires. As a result, to the ESI it seems the the IEE spreads himself
to thinly or broadly, which causes fits of misunderstanding and
judgements from the ESI.
5. Both people value their loved ones very much, but for ESI this
feeling is more filled with a sense of duty and has an enduring,
lasting character.
To survive next to an ESI try the following:
1. Don’t be lazy and perform “socially useful” work (that is, work
that is visible and understandable to ESI). In extreme cases, just
keep active and do something.
2. Be punctual. Although ESIs will tolerate it if you run late, it’s
better not to provoke them, if you don’t want to hear reprimands
pouring on your ears that is.
3. Don’t live like a pig. For Dreiser cleanliness and order are
sacred.
4. Don’t give confusing gifts. Better buy something edible, or even
arrive early and help ESI in the kitchen.
5. Don’t try to sound like a witty joker. You will be perceived as an
empty talker.
6. Show your feelings by actions.
7. If you like an ESI, but there is still no established relationship
between you, be proactive but ONLY in platonic sense.
8. Smile at each other more often. This way your relationship will run
smoother.
Margie (ESI):
My views on this: ESIs have some ideal - that is,
some (in ESI’s opinion) optimal state of the world, to which the ESI
tries to bring this world, as much as is possible. Accordingly to this
ideal, an ESI can evaluate any phenomenon (thing, attitude) as being
good or bad. These are not “moral norms” per se - but rather “good” is
what leads towards that goal, and “bad” is what detracts and leads
away from it. (Therefore, if you want to “shift” and change the moral
“settings” of Dreiser - you must either change ESI’s ideas about the
ideal (for ethical types) or prove to him or her that in this case
this is the best behavior (for logical types)). Looking at IEE’s
behavior it is unclear to the ESI why the IEE does this or that. For
which purpose the IEE first quarrels, then reconciles … and it is
unclear whether the IEE simply doesn’t understand what is “good”,
whether the IEE does “bad” on purpose, or whether things are somehow
more complex here … As a result, the ESI will come to view the IEE
as:
1) A villain who purposely takes the world away from happiness for the
sake of own nefarious purposes or just to have some fun (this attitude
is rare but it happens).
2) A short-sighted person who thinks only about his immediate
interests (this also happens, but if the ESI is not stupid, sooner or
later he or she notices that if IEE was such a fool - they would get
figured out pretty easily).
From 2) there are two paths - to point 1) or to point 3) Apparently
IEEs move to the ideal somehow in “zigzags”, or even (oh horror!) they
do not think in terms of the ideal at all. In this case, let them live
as their know and as they wish, and “the future will show which one of
us was right”.
Margie (ESI):
IEE’s ideal, IMHO, approaches from the sides towards
the center: that is, they’ll first gather everyone, then everyone will
come to like each other. ESI’s ideal comes from the center to the
outside: ESI’s will first check that their ideal works in some given
“corner”, check that it is truly ideal, and then slowly start to expand
it from that center to others. Again, ESIs rarely think in terms of
all-inclusive love. Love may not be a part of this ideal. It may be more
important, for example, that people don’t offend each other and don’t
interfere with one another.
exzistenciya (IEE):
I’ve been friends with an ESI for 2 years. We go
to the same school and sit at the same desk. During the sessions, when
we meet every day, she sometimes irritates me, but in general the
relationship is very good. I secretly admire her, although I don’t
understand her at times. For example, I clearly see that her
relationship with her boyfriend is completely hopeless and lacks any
prospects. My tongue is itching to give these relations an appropriate
assessment, but at the same time I understand that she won’t listen to
me, and if she listens, she will do her own thing, so I don’t see the
point to tell her anything …. and so I keep quiet … although
sometimes I very much want to tell her.
cymaly (ESI):
Out of the whole socion, my most difficult
relationships are with IEEs. They seem like light, easy-going, nice
people, but somehow unreliable in relations. With IEEs it is difficult
to establish the right distance: you move away - they seem not to
notice, you move in closer - they don’t last long. There is a sense of
uncertainty and that you are being used. Apparently, this is how
irrationality works and creative Fi ethics, whose manifestation for ESI
is like a mockery of this very ethic. The advise to “be simpler” coming
from an IEE sounds like they are saying: “Forget about your principles
and your morals.” How can ESIs forget about their leading function? What
is Dreiser without principles? And if the ESI considers it necessary to
adjust them in some way, then he or she won’t even accept any advice on
this function. Perhaps exchange glances with an EII. Thus,
“supervisor’s” attempts to “re-educate” the ESI through his manipulative
creative function lead to misunderstandings and protests. Although this
isn’t IEE’s fault, this is just how relations of supervision work.
yin (IEE):
In an IEE-ESI relationship, the IEE automatically
receives the role of a “motor”, and ESI - that of a “brake” (technical
comparisons). How this plays out is that the ESI very critically and
skeptically watches the IEE from a distance, while the IEE, exerting
himself or herself to the point of exhaustion, is making many attempts
to move the ESI from his or her spot of keeping a foot pressed on the
brake pedal. The IEE can endure this for a while, but eventually the
IEE’s strength wanes. With SLIs relationships are similar, but the
effectiveness and the outcome of their interaction with IEEs are a level
higher and there is at least some reverse feedback for the IEE (that is,
SLI’s foot gets taken off the brake once in a while), and sometimes
there is even a short-term reversal of roles.
irisha (IEE):
I have never met tactful and flexible ESIs, probably
because otherwise it won’t be an ESI. The two ESIs whom I know well, in
relationships and in situations of great uncertainty start to think,
say, and even do things that seem nonsensical, whatever is the
“alignment” motives might be in that situation. Sometimes I want to help
them, draw their attention to their mis-perception of others’ motives,
while the ESI immediately protests: “Don’t try to pick me apart!” They
are also greatly upset when I explain some work-related details to them,
where their shortage of information gathered and issuing incompetence,
are evident. If complex issues are avoided, it’s interesting around
ESIs. I don’t see long-term relationship as possible - too heavy, I need
to breathe.
murmurful (IEE):
I was in a relationship with a guy of type ESI. He
courted me very beautifully, cared for me, surprised me, worried for me,
tried to do everything possible so that I would be well. But
surprisingly, whatever he did … it didn’t make me gush with positive
emotions, even though he did everything! He was not a man - but a dream!
… just not my dream. I couldn’t understand how “revision” manifested
itself. Then, one time I head the following phrase from him: “You’re
hiding your emotions, and character. All the time scrutinizing,
analyzing.” After two months he left me, telling me that “if there is no
love - there is no meaning in this”. We met again later, but there were
no previous kind of relations. There was a huge gap between us - we
couldn’t sincerely talk to each other, about our problems and feelings.
I am a great “obscurator” and he didn’t attempt to pry information out
of me. However, to my questions he answered as if he was at a
confessional. In general, our relationship was like “loneliness
together”. I would sometimes slam the door and leave. Later we would
resume talking as if nothing has happened. It happened that we went on a
vacation together. Everything was great, but I began making comments to
which he only replied “I will correct myself”, but he didn’t want to
listen to me. After this we have parted ways and forgotten about each
other. He, I feel, still has some feelings. He always writes first, but
I act coldly. He’s a great person - but what’s to do without reliability
and understanding?
Tilde (EII):
Vulnerable Ne is not that the person sees very few
options. With the same success we can say that with vulnerable Ti a
person is incapable of seeing logical arguments, and someone with
vulnerable Si does not feel taste and smells. The ESI sees different
options - just that they don’t need them. If the options are being
imposed from the outside - this is annoying and unpleasant to them,
since it is unclear what to do with all of this. In general, the key to
understanding the “painful” functions lies in the “creative”. Creative
Se manifests itself in stubborn, confident, concrete and solid progress
in a single direction. If, however, this person starts to receive
information about a million of some sort of options, this devalues
??their efforts and disorients them. Perhaps “painful” Ne also shows in
the fact that Dreiser cannot be certain in advance that he or she will
make the right choice and find a way out of a hypothetical situation (if
the ESI hasn’t run into a similar experience before). Ne-types,
especially base Ne, commonly believe that somehow they’ll make it out
whatever happens. Generally, the behavioral model does not describe
these things accurately, because the key here is in perception and
processing of information, i.e. both Ne PoLR and Leading Ne may
experience uncertainty as to the future, and both may feel worried about
this, but still this will be differently conceived.
yaponski_bog (ESI):
How does Se work to counter Ne? With one willful
decision it “stomps out” all that is unnecessary, clamps it down, such
that it becomes a kind of thin layer, almost invisible. Thus the Se
makes decisions for two - to limit “senseless” discussions, that has
100% already happened - thus curbing it at its origin. “Why, why this
way and not that way” - is an abstract question, not a specific concrete
“I don’t like it because..” - and gets thrown into the same basket.
Around Ne types I have quickly learned to stop listening in order to
avoid being in a constantly irritable state. And if he “doesn’t hear”
then he wants peace in the family.
Tobick (IEE):
What I see in my joint life with Dreiser is that we
are severely lacking in Te. What is needed is that the decisions aren’t
made simply by willful effort, but also with an assessment of their
effectiveness. But with an ESI I might be just sending this request to
the universe. An example from real life. We’re discussing expanding our
living space, with modest resources. While on the road, I lay out 8
different ways we can solve this problem. If there was a SLI nearby, he
would have rationally sorted them on Te and decided on the most optimal
course of action. But, nearby I have ESI. He quietly absorbs all of
this. After a week, when I have completely forgotten about the
conversation, he suddenly tells me that he did so-and-so research
already, made some calls, that is, he already started realizing one of
the options. To my question: “Why this one?” he answers: “But we have
agreed!” No, we haven’t agreed! And he cannot explain to me why this
option. He can’t say, because all the other choices went by his ears.
All (IEE):
I have a daughter-in-law of type ESI. She suffers in
these relations more than I do. An example from real life: Yesterday I
asked her to help me with the choice of impeccable attire. I needed to
be the perfect lady for one evening. It happens. Choosing dresses
lasted more than two hours, though I honestly tried to reduce this
time, making different offers:
- Let’s take all four dresses?
- Let’s take three?
- How about we go home - think about it - and come back tomorrow?
- Let’s simply forget about his, and go out grab something to eat?
Nope. She choose a dress, then she choose the shoes, then a purse,
then a scarf. She did her job flawlessly.
I was thoroughly exhausted by the end of that day. This is despite the
fact that shopping for me is always energizing! And how exhausted was
my little girl - only she knows of it.
The other day we went out to buy her a mascara. She looked at one,
second, tenth - at the end she picked two. She’s standing there
thinking, thinking .. I take both of them and buy both. She doesn’t
understand - why? I say - well, you’ll look at them at home - and give
second one to someone else! And again the question - for what? And I
offer another option - you’ll have two! She answers - but they will
dry out? Me - who cares about it. I think that me being her
mother-in-law dictates certain tolerance on her part - it would be a
lot worse otherwise.
Meatburger (IEE):
Ne Polr / supervision conversation between me
and my ISFj mum (written from IEE’s pov):
“Hey mum i have been reading about this guy that hijacked a bus in Rio
De Janeiro”
“oh thats terrible”
“Yeah. He didn’t have a father, his mother was killed infront of him
as a kid and he was beaten as a street kid by police”
“That doesn’t excuse what he did”
“But mum you have to understand that his actions were due to how
traumatic his life has been”
“He could choose to be nice if he wanted too”
“No your just not getting it. You were brought up in a perfectly happy
environment and thats largely why your nice. If you hadn’t been loved
when you were younger you could be the one on the bus etc…”
Anyway after a bit more of that i decided i was being mean and
stopped.
Rick (IEE):
I know a IEE + ESI daughter-mother combination among my
relatives, and that’s exactly the type of conversations they inevitably
drift to. The conversations are about people, and the IEE always tries
to show objective factors that shaped
Slacker (IEE):
My poor ISFj brother usually calls our ENTj mom for
advice, but her health isn’t great, and my dad’s isn’t either, and he’s
afraid of getting them stressed out. I’m [IEE] next on the list of
advice-givers apparently. So he’s going through this really really nasty
divorce asking me to help him figure out what is going to happen, and my
natural inclination is to tell him everything that could possibly happen
and let him sort through which things are most likely. But of course
this doesn’t work with him. He gets anxious and I have to backtrack and
say, “well this isn’t all that likely, so don’t worry about that.” But
it’s too late at that point because I’ve brought it up and it’s out
there. *sigh* He said at one point, “there isn’t much more she can do
to me at this point” and without thinking I listed several things she
could do. It was a mistake. I am making things worse.
EII and ILE
¶
Lara (SLI):
I will describe a case of this type of supervision at my
workplace. I have a colleague of type ILE, while our director is of type
EII. Our EII director was the one who hired this young ILE for work - to
help him, instruct him, guide him, etc. Two years have passed since that
time. The EII is categorically dissatisfied by ILE’s performance. His
main grievances are irresponsibility, unwillingness to work, and that
the ILE cannot be assigned to do anything serious. Meanwhile, the ILE
morally is in a poorer shape than he was before taking this job. He is
terribly afraid of our EII director, doesn’t believe in himself, has
little confidence in his own abilities and knowledge. The EII pays him a
salary that is much less than what he could have gotten at other
companies, but the ILE cannot apply and go work elsewhere due to
catastrophic lack of confidence and low self-esteem. It is likely that
this becomes visible during his interviews with prospective employers,
thus he doesn’t get hired anywhere else although he has a lot of work
experience. I tell him: “Be more bold in writing your resume. You did
this before - you know how to do it”. He says, “Eh, what am I able to
do? What of it if I have done this before …” It’s impossible to
convince him otherwise. I told him straight up that he needs to leave
this company and go anywhere else, wherever they will take him,
otherwise things will get even worse. (He is aware of socionics and his
revision relations with our director). Those ILEs who start to
“misbehave” around EIIs - they are doing it out of resistance, trying to
loosen themselves under the influence of their supervisor. But I don’t
take their side. I think this is a difficult situation for both.
Polina (EII):
From a distance the EII can see such a mysterious,
extraordinary, and, most importantly, such an intelligent person as an
ILE in a rather positive light, and even be in awe of this person. The
most important, and most celebrated strong point of the ILE is his
intelligence - a quality that the EII values very much. ILEs can
understand such things that sensing types struggle to grasp, and this
quality sometimes is in very short supply, even though their intuition
has a logical slant to it. Often ILEs love literature, art, science,
architecture, and generally anything of this kind, and very eagerly
await intuitive communication - when they can speak such alluring,
intelligent, original nonsense that seems attractive and charming, and
even brings up an inferiority complex in the listener, though in this
respect things usually turn out well.
This is the first impression of the ILE with whom an EII hasn’t yet
spent much time together. Now the question is if the EII will be able to
attract his supervisee. Try to capture the moment when you have
interested the ILE and at this point proceed to gently draw attention to
yourself. Show yourself off reading a good book, for example, then
listen and heed. ILEs know how to court and take care when they wish:
here completely naturally there may be poetry, original locations, and
other unthinkable charms, in addition some ILE are endowed with a
remarkable share of charisma and charm.
However, here the good parts end. So how does this supervision
relationship manifest? Honestly speaking, I don’t know what the ILE
feels, I can only guess. My ethical judgments were taken seriously by
all the ones that I’ve met. The following is the impression from my side
as an EII. Lets suppose that this is a romantic relationship, or at
least a very close one. Here I write more from the female point of view.
Everything was so swell, then communication becomes more intimate and
all the flaws of the person come out. To your disappointment you see
that this person is a rag in all respects. EIIs in general are more or
less conservative about matters of gender roles. It is worth considering
that their ideal is their dual LSE, and that speaks for itself. In
general, A MAN SHOULD NOT BE A RAG!
In addition, EII is a rational type and appreciates reliability. And
ILEs are usually the type of people on whom one cannot depend. They live
their entire lives in a sinusoidal manner - at times taking over
everyone and everything with his wit and charm and cutting down the
jackpot, and at other times creating considerable problems and troubles
on the spot, meanwhile living on the brink of utter poverty, which with
enough perversity can go as far as going around hungry. Here what is
needed is a SEI for whom Te, including money, as a painful function, is
combined with their ability to listen, cook, eat, and in some unknown
way write up all the cabbage, apartments, cars over to themselves, which
from my point of view is very beneficial for the ILEs.
In general, from my point of view ILEs look like they have been spoiled
by fate, and in presence of all their talents and an enormous potential
they waste their lives, meanwhile being often unable to take any
responsibility not only for the others but even for themselves. ILE is a
big baby, no matter what age he is, who may live off the efforts of
anyone who allows for it. The tales of their bottomless stomachs, by the
way, are not a myth. ILEs themselves rarely bother about keeping
cleanliness and order, to the contrary, and ILE living by himself
usually amasses an incredible mess, but at the same time he expects
sensory vigilance from the people who live next to them and are pretty
picky about the food. EIIs take care of all of this when it is necessary
and without pleasure, but the main motivator here is duty and example.
If somebody is working next to you, then it’s shameful to not carry out
your share of duties, and if this person cares for order very much, then
it’s even more important.” - Polina (EII)
ESI-SLE
¶
Vladislav (ESI):
Recently interacted with the “supervisee”, and I’ve
noticed this kind of tendency : the SLE can say something offensive to
people without having a second thought about it, and without working out
the consequences. When I explained to him this moment: see, you have
offended this person now, and then later you might need their help, or
this person will have an opportunity to take revenge on you, to kick you
behind your back, and they will do it, too, you will then have to use up
your own base of resources for digging yourself out of this situation
he had such an expression on his face as if I’ve uncovered some
universal truth for him. Something like this is what they tend to
overlook. SLEs build their own structures, they control their resources
and expand their sphere of control - but the consequences of
interactions of people inside of this process is something they don’t
account for at all. Looking at it externally, from point of view of the
“supervisor” - their “painful” function looks like this.
Related discussions
¶
Supervision relations discussions on PerC
Supervision relations discussions on 16t
Supervision relations discussions on Typoc
Supervision relations discussions on Reddit