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.
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.
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.
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.