MBTI: Intentional Drivers/Mind Types Ultimate Guide 🧠📝✅ Cognitive Styles: Expanded Details 1. Enhancing™ Mind (SFJ-NTP) • Intention: Looking for inconsistencies-identifies what doesn’t align or meet the set standards. • Value: A drive for accuracy, precision, and refinement in processes or outcomes. • Seeking: • What’s best about the world based on established standards or norms. • Focuses on improving and polishing systems, processes, or people. • Contribution: • Deep integration of information from various sources into a cohesive whole. • Bridges inconsistencies to create stronger, more aligned structures. • Filter: • Comparisons: Constantly evaluates similarities and differences. • Filters out what doesn’t align with desired standards or expectations. • Desires: Refinement-wants every detail to align perfectly for a polished outcome. • Shadow Style: • Dark Orchestrating™: Can become overly controlling, manipulating situations for efficiency at the cost of fairness. • Strengths: Highly detail-oriented, analytical, and focused on ensuring things are done correctly. • Challenges: Can become overly critical or stuck on minor inconsistencies. • Associated Types: ISFJ, ESFJ, INTP, ENTP. • Examples: • Real-Life Behavior: A teacher creating a curriculum, ensuring every student’s needs are met. • Profession Fit: Editors, quality assurance specialists, and architects. 2. Customizing™ Mind (STP-NFJ) • Intention: Looking for reciprocities-seeks balance and fairness in relationships and systems. • Value: A drive for equality and fairness. • Seeking: • What’s vital about the world based on differences. • Sees diversity and uniqueness as a strength, tailoring solutions to individual needs. • Contribution: • Deep simplification-breaks down complex issues into manageable and understandable components. • Finds meaningful ways to bridge differences. • Filter: • Objectives: Focuses on what aligns with goals and purpose. • Desires: Movement-pushes for progress and actionable outcomes. • Shadow Style: • Dark Authenticating™: Becomes rigid in enforcing values, overly focused on ideals without compromise. • Strengths: Empathetic, adaptable, and skilled at resolving conflicts and tailoring solutions. • Challenges: Can overextend themselves trying to please others or uphold equality. • Associated Types: ISTP, ESTP, INFJ, ENFJ. • Examples: • Real-Life Behavior: A manager tailoring work responsibilities to match their team’s strengths. • Profession Fit: Counselors, negotiators, diversity and inclusion specialists. 3. Authenticating™ Mind (STJ-NFP) • Intention: Looking for evaluations-judges actions based on alignment with core values and ethics. • Value: A drive for ethics, morality, and integrity. • Seeking: • What’s right about the world based on deeply held values. • Seeks to validate and authenticate ideas or systems to ensure they align with a moral code. • Contribution: • Deep investigation-examines actions and systems thoroughly to uncover truths and uphold values. • Challenges assumptions to ensure they align with ethical standards. • Filter: • Rightness: Acts as a moral compass, filtering out what feels ethically or morally wrong. • Desires: Integrity-ensures actions align with values and ethics. • Shadow Style: • Dark Customizing™: Rigidly enforces personal standards without considering other perspectives. • Strengths: Principled, thorough, and focused on ethical consistency. • Challenges: Can struggle with flexibility when their values are challenged. • Associated Types: ISTJ, ESTJ, INFP, ENFP. • Examples: • Real-Life Behavior: A whistleblower exposing corruption in a company. • Profession Fit: Judges, auditors, investigative journalists. 4. Orchestrating™ Mind (SFP-NTJ) • Intention: Looking for workabilities-evaluates practical solutions that maximize efficiency. • Value: A drive for credibility-actions must be effective and reliable. • Seeking: • What’s effective about the world based on utility. • Maximizes resources and opportunities for practical and impactful outcomes. • Contribution: • Deep negotiation-finds compromises that benefit multiple parties while maintaining efficiency. • Persuasively brings people together to work towards a common goal. • Filter: • Persuasiveness: Focuses on influencing others to agree with the most effective course of action. • Desires: Utilization-ensures resources are used to their full potential. • Shadow Style: • Dark Enhancing™: May manipulate people or systems for personal gain, disregarding ethics. • Strengths: Strategic, persuasive, and efficient in organizing people or resources. • Challenges: Can be overly pragmatic, sometimes sacrificing values for efficiency. • Associated Types: ISFP, ESFP, INTJ, ENTJ. • Examples: • Real-Life Behavior: A CEO restructuring a company for maximum profitability. • Profession Fit: Politicians, business strategists, entrepreneurs. Additional Themes Across All Styles 1. Intention Drives Behavior: • Each cognitive style has a unique intention (e.g., refining, customizing, evaluating, or orchestrating). This intention shapes how individuals interact with the world. 2. Shadow Styles: • Shadow styles highlight how cognitive styles can become distorted under stress or pressure, leading to rigid, unbalanced, or manipulative behaviors. 3. Practical Applications: • Understanding these styles helps in: • Conflict Resolution: Tailoring solutions to align with individuals’ cognitive preferences. • Team Dynamics: Assigning roles that match team members’ cognitive strengths. • Personal Growth: Recognizing shadow tendencies and addressing them constructively. 4. Interdependence of Styles: • Each cognitive style complements the others. For example: • Enhancing™ minds refine processes developed by Orchestrating™ minds. • Customizing™ minds mediate differences to ensure alignment with Authenticating™ minds. Quick Summary: How They Manifest in Teams • Enhancing™ Mind: The perfectionist or quality controller. • Customizing™ Mind: The mediator or facilitator. • Authenticating™ Mind: The moral compass or ethical guide. • Orchestrating™ Mind: The strategist or results-oriented leader.
While discussing the Enhancing Slide, you guys mentioned the idea of doing harm via misinformation that a lot of INTPs seem to have. My experience with them is that they sometimes have an uncertainty about the accuracy of what they are presenting. There seems to exist the challenge of discerning what is logically consistent and precise versus what is accurate, reflecting reality. But to do so requires letting go of one’s own ego, or being humble enough to take in feedback from others, or risk becoming insular in their own models. (The danger I see in INTPs is the risk of closing oneself off to outside feedback because of a false sense of superiority, using intellectual prowess as a means of feeling better about themselves in a defensive manner, rather than a truly enhancing manner)
Well I can tell you that as an INTP, I am always skeptical of new information, and often don’t share it unless I am certain that at least is reasonable and makes sense to me. I always compare information from the various sources, so as to find certain truths within overlapping information and overland certain patterns and logical consistencies. A well developed INTP will not fear to dip into Te in order to validate the Ti hero.
@ Yeah, I find Ti to be really good at hitting the pause button, and really making sure to pick apart the information, while coming up with its own deep understanding. They will often consider or see things others won’t notice. Though as someone without a Ti-preference, I sometimes scratch my head at the super unique approaches to solving something like math problems (especially the really cut and dry ones). I find my INTP friends very averse to Cookie Cutter Solutions and Approaches, with a preference for analyzing each situation individually, even if it takes longer than other people might prefer. The benefit is they really know stuff deeply in their areas of interests. “Here’s an inconsistency, here’s another one, here’s another one…” 😂 Or I have experienced listening to very long strings of reasoning, which I am really bad at. So I have to just nod my head and listen as best as I am able.
With authenticating, which certainly fits my type (infp) I think it is worth noting, at least for myself, that although the criteria that I use to evaluate something in certainly based in morality, values and emotion related standards, the way I go about actually scrutinizing, questioning and concluding about the matter at hand is carried out in a more neutral way, running checks and picking out how well or not they align with this predetermined set of standards. I wouldn't do a good job of running my checks on things if I were caught up in the emotions that set the standards. I don't know if I am explaining myself clearly, but the checking and scrutinizing stage is very much about the Ne and Si interaction and not so focussed on the Fi and Te that birthed it. I am scanning for matches and conflicts with the standards that to me are treated much the same way as the STJs data would. Effectively, I treat it as law based on "facts" (ie. it is wrong to take advantage of innocent people, so any hit of an exploitative nature to a plan would immediately stand out to me and I would bring it up. Same goes for signs of dishonest presentation of the situation and many other things) I know you don't really read my comments normally so I will leave it at that
I must truly have INTP preferences, because I was making an info chart in Excel to visualize how the Temperaments, Interaction Styles, and Intentional Drivers overlapped while watching this video.😅 The Dark Orchestrating style makes sense too--I have a bad tendency to turn rigid and neurotic and tyrannical whenever I've gotten into a leadership position where I have to deal with a lot of moving parts and not-always-cooperative people.
@@sylviaowega3839 😂 One thing great about my good INTP friend, he is okay with my long winded explanations. I warn him ahead of time, and he encourages the long explanations when we text. But when we talk on the phone, he is the one who talks for hours and hours, giving me updates, after not talking for months or even years at a time… while I just listen.
Under the slide of The Authenticating Mind, the part about Morality… I experience it as very obvious in FP types, especially when they take on roles of advocates and activists. My facebook page is littered with animal rights posts questioning our morality, and many of the posts are from likely FP types… And there also seems to exist the temptation of projecting an image of moral superiority, and being better than the next person because of personal beliefs. I am wondering if the roles we take on in life might override some expressions of type… whether we are adapting to the environment, or emphasizing a specific facet of our cognitive patterns…. I imagine roles taken on make everything much more difficult to cleanly categorize.
Maybe the (presumed) NFPs on your FB page have fallen into their Dark Customizing shadow style? According to the expanded details in the above comment by @warxdevilx , when the Authenticating style warps into Dark Customizing, the result tends to be "rigidly enforc[ing] personal standards without considering other perspectives."
Assessment and awareness is another way to describe rational or irrational functions, but even rational have an awareness aspect to it and irrational an assessment aspect. Meaning: Nice naming for the general population, but not for people that go deep in the theory.
⏲Timestamps
4:36 Intentional Drivers Presentation Begins
21:25 Enhancing Style (ENTP INTP ESFJ ISFJ)
27:45 Customizing Style (ENFJ INFJ ISTP ESTP)
32:41 Authenticating Style (ENFP INFP ISTJ ESTJ)
37:19 Orchestrating Style (INTJ ENTJ ISFP ESFP)
42:52 Shadow Styles
Thank you
MBTI: Intentional Drivers/Mind Types Ultimate Guide 🧠📝✅
Cognitive Styles: Expanded Details
1. Enhancing™ Mind (SFJ-NTP)
• Intention: Looking for inconsistencies-identifies what doesn’t align or meet the set standards.
• Value: A drive for accuracy, precision, and refinement in processes or outcomes.
• Seeking:
• What’s best about the world based on established standards or norms.
• Focuses on improving and polishing systems, processes, or people.
• Contribution:
• Deep integration of information from various sources into a cohesive whole.
• Bridges inconsistencies to create stronger, more aligned structures.
• Filter:
• Comparisons: Constantly evaluates similarities and differences.
• Filters out what doesn’t align with desired standards or expectations.
• Desires: Refinement-wants every detail to align perfectly for a polished outcome.
• Shadow Style:
• Dark Orchestrating™: Can become overly controlling, manipulating situations for efficiency at the cost of fairness.
• Strengths: Highly detail-oriented, analytical, and focused on ensuring things are done correctly.
• Challenges: Can become overly critical or stuck on minor inconsistencies.
• Associated Types: ISFJ, ESFJ, INTP, ENTP.
• Examples:
• Real-Life Behavior: A teacher creating a curriculum, ensuring every student’s needs are met.
• Profession Fit: Editors, quality assurance specialists, and architects.
2. Customizing™ Mind (STP-NFJ)
• Intention: Looking for reciprocities-seeks balance and fairness in relationships and systems.
• Value: A drive for equality and fairness.
• Seeking:
• What’s vital about the world based on differences.
• Sees diversity and uniqueness as a strength, tailoring solutions to individual needs.
• Contribution:
• Deep simplification-breaks down complex issues into manageable and understandable components.
• Finds meaningful ways to bridge differences.
• Filter:
• Objectives: Focuses on what aligns with goals and purpose.
• Desires: Movement-pushes for progress and actionable outcomes.
• Shadow Style:
• Dark Authenticating™: Becomes rigid in enforcing values, overly focused on ideals without compromise.
• Strengths: Empathetic, adaptable, and skilled at resolving conflicts and tailoring solutions.
• Challenges: Can overextend themselves trying to please others or uphold equality.
• Associated Types: ISTP, ESTP, INFJ, ENFJ.
• Examples:
• Real-Life Behavior: A manager tailoring work responsibilities to match their team’s strengths.
• Profession Fit: Counselors, negotiators, diversity and inclusion specialists.
3. Authenticating™ Mind (STJ-NFP)
• Intention: Looking for evaluations-judges actions based on alignment with core values and ethics.
• Value: A drive for ethics, morality, and integrity.
• Seeking:
• What’s right about the world based on deeply held values.
• Seeks to validate and authenticate ideas or systems to ensure they align with a moral code.
• Contribution:
• Deep investigation-examines actions and systems thoroughly to uncover truths and uphold values.
• Challenges assumptions to ensure they align with ethical standards.
• Filter:
• Rightness: Acts as a moral compass, filtering out what feels ethically or morally wrong.
• Desires: Integrity-ensures actions align with values and ethics.
• Shadow Style:
• Dark Customizing™: Rigidly enforces personal standards without considering other perspectives.
• Strengths: Principled, thorough, and focused on ethical consistency.
• Challenges: Can struggle with flexibility when their values are challenged.
• Associated Types: ISTJ, ESTJ, INFP, ENFP.
• Examples:
• Real-Life Behavior: A whistleblower exposing corruption in a company.
• Profession Fit: Judges, auditors, investigative journalists.
4. Orchestrating™ Mind (SFP-NTJ)
• Intention: Looking for workabilities-evaluates practical solutions that maximize efficiency.
• Value: A drive for credibility-actions must be effective and reliable.
• Seeking:
• What’s effective about the world based on utility.
• Maximizes resources and opportunities for practical and impactful outcomes.
• Contribution:
• Deep negotiation-finds compromises that benefit multiple parties while maintaining efficiency.
• Persuasively brings people together to work towards a common goal.
• Filter:
• Persuasiveness: Focuses on influencing others to agree with the most effective course of action.
• Desires: Utilization-ensures resources are used to their full potential.
• Shadow Style:
• Dark Enhancing™: May manipulate people or systems for personal gain, disregarding ethics.
• Strengths: Strategic, persuasive, and efficient in organizing people or resources.
• Challenges: Can be overly pragmatic, sometimes sacrificing values for efficiency.
• Associated Types: ISFP, ESFP, INTJ, ENTJ.
• Examples:
• Real-Life Behavior: A CEO restructuring a company for maximum profitability.
• Profession Fit: Politicians, business strategists, entrepreneurs.
Additional Themes Across All Styles
1. Intention Drives Behavior:
• Each cognitive style has a unique intention (e.g., refining, customizing, evaluating, or orchestrating). This intention shapes how individuals interact with the world.
2. Shadow Styles:
• Shadow styles highlight how cognitive styles can become distorted under stress or pressure, leading to rigid, unbalanced, or manipulative behaviors.
3. Practical Applications:
• Understanding these styles helps in:
• Conflict Resolution: Tailoring solutions to align with individuals’ cognitive preferences.
• Team Dynamics: Assigning roles that match team members’ cognitive strengths.
• Personal Growth: Recognizing shadow tendencies and addressing them constructively.
4. Interdependence of Styles:
• Each cognitive style complements the others. For example:
• Enhancing™ minds refine processes developed by Orchestrating™ minds.
• Customizing™ minds mediate differences to ensure alignment with Authenticating™ minds.
Quick Summary: How They Manifest in Teams
• Enhancing™ Mind: The perfectionist or quality controller.
• Customizing™ Mind: The mediator or facilitator.
• Authenticating™ Mind: The moral compass or ethical guide.
• Orchestrating™ Mind: The strategist or results-oriented leader.
Love this channel. Thanks Joyce.
Thank you both for sharing this. More to contemplate..
While discussing the Enhancing Slide, you guys mentioned the idea of doing harm via misinformation that a lot of INTPs seem to have. My experience with them is that they sometimes have an uncertainty about the accuracy of what they are presenting. There seems to exist the challenge of discerning what is logically consistent and precise versus what is accurate, reflecting reality. But to do so requires letting go of one’s own ego, or being humble enough to take in feedback from others, or risk becoming insular in their own models. (The danger I see in INTPs is the risk of closing oneself off to outside feedback because of a false sense of superiority, using intellectual prowess as a means of feeling better about themselves in a defensive manner, rather than a truly enhancing manner)
Well I can tell you that as an INTP, I am always skeptical of new information, and often don’t share it unless I am certain that at least is reasonable and makes sense to me. I always compare information from the various sources, so as to find certain truths within overlapping information and overland certain patterns and logical consistencies. A well developed INTP will not fear to dip into Te in order to validate the Ti hero.
@ Yeah, I find Ti to be really good at hitting the pause button, and really making sure to pick apart the information, while coming up with its own deep understanding. They will often consider or see things others won’t notice. Though as someone without a Ti-preference, I sometimes scratch my head at the super unique approaches to solving something like math problems (especially the really cut and dry ones). I find my INTP friends very averse to Cookie Cutter Solutions and Approaches, with a preference for analyzing each situation individually, even if it takes longer than other people might prefer. The benefit is they really know stuff deeply in their areas of interests. “Here’s an inconsistency, here’s another one, here’s another one…” 😂 Or I have experienced listening to very long strings of reasoning, which I am really bad at. So I have to just nod my head and listen as best as I am able.
@@VeggieJohnx2 what type are you?
@@exnihilonihilfit6316 👁️ En Eff Pee. (INFP) I would fit the Harmonizing Clarifier by Linda Berens’ Best Fit Type names/descriptions.
Every opener sounds like "Welcome ted talks" LOL
With authenticating, which certainly fits my type (infp) I think it is worth noting, at least for myself, that although the criteria that I use to evaluate something in certainly based in morality, values and emotion related standards, the way I go about actually scrutinizing, questioning and concluding about the matter at hand is carried out in a more neutral way, running checks and picking out how well or not they align with this predetermined set of standards. I wouldn't do a good job of running my checks on things if I were caught up in the emotions that set the standards.
I don't know if I am explaining myself clearly, but the checking and scrutinizing stage is very much about the Ne and Si interaction and not so focussed on the Fi and Te that birthed it. I am scanning for matches and conflicts with the standards that to me are treated much the same way as the STJs data would. Effectively, I treat it as law based on "facts" (ie. it is wrong to take advantage of innocent people, so any hit of an exploitative nature to a plan would immediately stand out to me and I would bring it up. Same goes for signs of dishonest presentation of the situation and many other things) I know you don't really read my comments normally so I will leave it at that
This explains so much of why I as an NTP find NFP and STJ so insufferable to discuss what makes sense with
I must truly have INTP preferences, because I was making an info chart in Excel to visualize how the Temperaments, Interaction Styles, and Intentional Drivers overlapped while watching this video.😅
The Dark Orchestrating style makes sense too--I have a bad tendency to turn rigid and neurotic and tyrannical whenever I've gotten into a leadership position where I have to deal with a lot of moving parts and not-always-cooperative people.
My hubby is INTJ, and he tend to lose patience very quickly, and will often complain that I over explain. -INTP
@@sylviaowega3839 😂 One thing great about my good INTP friend, he is okay with my long winded explanations. I warn him ahead of time, and he encourages the long explanations when we text. But when we talk on the phone, he is the one who talks for hours and hours, giving me updates, after not talking for months or even years at a time… while I just listen.
23:22 Is that a burn to Mongolian Mindset?
no it's not =]
Feeback: Outro is a little loud compared to your talk. Might wanna level it down so the contrast isn't as big and easier to listen ☺
where is Countertype Michael（intj）？
Sitting! ❤
Under the slide of The Authenticating Mind, the part about Morality… I experience it as very obvious in FP types, especially when they take on roles of advocates and activists. My facebook page is littered with animal rights posts questioning our morality, and many of the posts are from likely FP types… And there also seems to exist the temptation of projecting an image of moral superiority, and being better than the next person because of personal beliefs.
I am wondering if the roles we take on in life might override some expressions of type… whether we are adapting to the environment, or emphasizing a specific facet of our cognitive patterns…. I imagine roles taken on make everything much more difficult to cleanly categorize.
Maybe the (presumed) NFPs on your FB page have fallen into their Dark Customizing shadow style? According to the expanded details in the above comment by @warxdevilx , when the Authenticating style warps into Dark Customizing, the result tends to be "rigidly enforc[ing] personal standards without considering other perspectives."
Assessment and awareness is another way to describe rational or irrational functions, but even rational have an awareness aspect to it and irrational an assessment aspect. Meaning: Nice naming for the general population, but not for people that go deep in the theory.
Is it possible to get typed by Berens?
You can type yourself from her website bestfittype
I think this is overly kind to the Fe of the customisers and unkind to the Fe of the enhancers
You need to ask her what she thinks about CSJ next time you got her here lol.
LOL
What was it?
Csj is overhated
@@tcggggg I actually like him. But there is drama between the 2 lol.
She couldn't handle CSJ. That's the thing. Her Te inferior was afraid.