The fast-paced modern workplace requires teams, departments, and organizations to make decisions quickly, consistently, and above all effectively. However, when multiple people find it challenging or even impossible to reach a consensus, tempers may heat, and time and resources are both squandered. One of the greatest challenges in these situations is understanding where others are coming from—what is important to them in a particular situation, and how we can find a compromise that is acceptable for everyone. According to Hirsh and Hirsh (2007), The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator® (MBTI®) can offer a “behind the scenes” perspective of how and why people make decisions. This increased awareness can smooth out negotiations and help everyone involved remember that they are all on the same team—literally!
Introverted-Intuitive-Thinking-Judging INTJ personality types are strong theoreticians—they enjoy creating concept maps and frameworks that broadly guide the decision-making process, while remaining relatively detached themselves. However, they may find it challenging to bring themselves down to earth and consider how exactly their visions can be implemented. They may need others’ support to handle the “reality check”, but would also do well themselves with having two rounds of reflection: the first can be theoretical and visionary, but the second should fact-check their ideals with practical constraints.
This theme also permeates generating and committing to decisions. INTJ personality types tend to explore and learn as much as possible about all of their options, and enjoy debating and contemplating in-depth the positives and negatives of each. This process, while thorough, may frustrate personality types who value action over reflection or who may interpret INTJs’ debating as argumentative or resistant. In these cases, it is important for others to remember that different individuals may make decisions differently, and for INTJs to consider compromising by balancing contemplation and action more equally.
When it comes time to actually make a decision, INTJs strive to create thoroughly-researched decisions that will be sustainable and impactful in the long-term. They are strong abstract-thinkers, who are also able to run mental simulations of the outcomes of each possibility, while also breaking down complex implementations into manageable, measurable steps. That said, articulating their ideas in ways that others can understand and become invested in may pose a challenge. Ironically, Myers-Briggs® INTJs may need to relax and take a step back from their work before being able to implement decisions that require the support or cooperation of others, even those whom they respect highly. As they move farther into the implementation and mobilization of a decision, INTJs again need to keep their feet on the ground. Rather than becoming overwhelmed by imaginary roadblocks in the future, they should recognize the positives, and celebrate their victories—remember that objective evaluation includes the good also!
INTJ personality types clear, systematic thought process also applies to evaluating and reflecting on their decisions. They are able to accept and give constructive criticism, but again, should remember to give and receive compliments as well. One way to facilitate this is to design checklists that evaluate outcomes based on specific, objective criteria. They should also make an effort to consider the impact of their decisions on others, as well as how they can improve their and their teams’ interpersonal relations. By taking these simple steps, and making an effort to understand others’ personality types and decision-making tendencies (perhaps by reading other recent posts on this blog!), you can begin working towards a more positive, productive and efficient workplace.
Learn your Myers-Briggs test type’s strengths and weaknesses, and discover how to use both to your advantage with the MBTI test below:
Your preferences and skills are directly linked to your happiness- wouldn’t you like to know what they are, and how assured you are in your ability to perform them? Find out with the Strong Interest Inventory test below:
Discover which abilities and interests you feel best about so that you may apply them to your work and home life.
Your preferences and skills are directly linked to your happiness—wouldn’t you like to know what they are, and how assured you are in your ability to perform them? The Strong Interest Inventory® Profile with Skills Confidence offers you a breakdown of your interests in work, play, academia, and communication styles, with the added bonus of showing you how confident you are in certain abilities and comparing them to your mapped-out interests and skills. The profile aids in understanding how this confidence is affecting your career and personal life, and whether you should seek new paths that align more with your beliefs in yourself—after all, success and satisfaction in a career is connected to one’s faith in their own abilities.
Learn More About the MBTI® INTJ Personality Type:
Explore Our INTJ Personality Type Page For Detailed Information on The INTJ Personality Type
Learn About INTJ Careers
Click on one of these corresponding popular INTJ Careers for detailed information including Career Stats, Income Stats, Daily Tasks and Required Education: Anesthesiologist, Electronics Engineers, Biochemist, Industrial Engineers, Biologist, Information Security Analysts, Chemical Engineers, Lawyer, Computer Programmer, Surgeon.
Explore Our Other INTJ Blog Pages
Explore additional information that delves deeper into the INTJ Personality Type by examining various personality and career based subjects:
- How the MBTI INTJ Type relates to Innovation
- How the MBTI INTJ Type relates to Project Management
- How the MBTI INTJ Type relates to Emotional Intelligence
- How the MBTI INTJ Type relates to Leadership
- How the MBTI INTJ Type relates to Communication
- How the MBTI INTJ Type and Learning Styles Blog
Click on a link below to read more about different MBTI Personality Types
Introduction to Type and Decision Making. (Hirsh, K., & Hirsh E. CPP. 2007)