[INTJ] Descriptions of the MBTI Step IIť Facets - Page 2

Descriptions of the MBTI Step IIť Facets

Hello Guest! Sign up to join the discussion below...
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 54
Thank Tree100Thanks

This is a discussion on Descriptions of the MBTI Step IIť Facets within the INTJ Forum - The Scientists forums, part of the NT's Temperament Forum- The Intellects category; The Thinking-Feeling Facets The Five facets of the Thinking-Feeling dichotomy are Logical-Empathic, Reasonable-Compassionate, Questioning-Accommodating, Critical-Accepting, and Tough-Tender. Logical-Empathic This core ...

  1. #11

    The Thinking-Feeling Facets

    The Five facets of the Thinking-Feeling dichotomy are Logical-Empathic, Reasonable-Compassionate, Questioning-Accommodating, Critical-Accepting, and Tough-Tender.


    This core facet of the T-F dichotomy emphasizes the criteria we tend to use to reach a judgment.


    People at this pole understand the world best if it makes logical sense. Objects, events, and statements must be analyzed using reason. If they are internally consistent and logical, they are accepted as true. If not, the issue in question must be either untrue or not understandable. It should therefore be rejected because illogical statements are not worthy of time and attention.

    Logical people start with a set of assumptions or facts and use specific rules to make deductions. They assume that universal rules permit such logical deductions. Therefore, when they don't understand something, they try to find out what the prevailing premises or assumptions are. Even when the other person is unaware of his or her implicit assumptions, the Logical person must discover the relevant premises in order to understand and proceed.

    A person at this pole receives a great deal of confirmation that reason is a direct means to accuracy and understanding. This is because many things can be understood logically. Logical people may therefore find it hard to accept contradictory explanations that don't follow the laws of logic. Their worldview is internally consistent and they expect everything to function in that same consistent way. Even though Logical people may at times be inconsistent in their views of themselves, other people, and the world, such inconsistencies are not bothersome if they do not directly contradict a Logical person's scheme for understanding things.

    When there are several competing viewpoints on a matter, Logical people are likely to be persuaded only by arguments that make logical sense. Facts must support conclusions and must be capable of fitting into the relevant logical scheme. Facts about another person's emotional state may be just as relevant as "objective" facts. However, they too must fit into a consistent analytical framework. Any inconsistencies in another person's chain of reasoning weaken the credibility of the other person, the other perspective, or both. This is especially true when the inconsistency is central to the person's argument. A person at this pole can strongly disagree with another and still have respect for that individual. This is because logic is a personally detached process. The Logical person respects the other person's ability as a thinker, not his or her viewpoint, because the person is separate from the viewpoint. Being able to think clearly and consistently is a highly valued general ability. Repeated signs of illogic, inconsistency, and contradiction in another's statements can easily lead to diminished respect.

    People at this pole tend to apply generalized and impersonal principles to a broad range of relationships. They value rights, fairness, and reasonableness as standards for making decisions in personal and contractual relationships. They apply these standards for deciding about others, and they expect others to judge them the same way. They view rights and reasonableness as good tools for relationships because they can be consistently, fairly, and logically applied. Everyone involved then knows what to expect from the others.


    People at this pole see the world as operating within a rational framework of relationships that link people and things to one another. They view detached logic as only one way (and a limited way) of understanding the world. For Empathic people, relationships, life experience, and personal meanings are what is important. Interactions within these areas are transformative. Thus life and the world are best understood as a drama with characters, themes, and plots. Just as the characters in a novel have distinct motivations and personalities that affect the twists and turns of an evolving drama. For Empathetic people, truth is not separate from people and their lives. It therefore makes no sense to apply logically consistent principles irrespective of the people involved. Understanding of the world comes from the mutual sharing of experiences, so understanding can occur through knowing someone else's experience and not just one's own experiences.

    Empathic people put logic and reason into their conceptions of how life may be experienced and understood; just as Logical people put empathetic concerns into their logical schemas as a way of understanding them. The use of logic is just another human characteristic among many others. What is known through logic simply takes its place among many other human experiences, modes of understanding, and ways of living. These are all valuable and even necessary for grasping the meaning in life.

    Empathetic Intuitive people have an implicit notion that every person's life is a miniature variation on timeless, universal themes. Sharing a common humanity with others is a central aspect of caring for and staying connected to another person. For Empathetic Sensing people, the central focus is on the ups and downs of people they know or their own significant relationships. Empathy and meaning are grounded in the shared experience of personal histories. However, regardless of their Sensing or Intuitive preference, people at the Empathetic pole value other people for their basic humanness as well as for their worth as unique persons.

    Truth for Empathetic people is both personal and universal, a view that is easily understood by Empathic people but difficult for Logical people to accept. Similarly, Logical people may find it difficult to convince Empathic people of the universality and absoluteness of detached logical truth. The inconsistencies in values of the Empathetic person primarily involve relationship issues. Compartmentalizing may be one way of handling these inconsistencies, as in heaving separate, circumscribed contacts with friends who don't like each other. The Empathetic person may handle differences in more intimate relationships by accepting them as part of the other's uniqueness as a person. This works best when the differences do not involve key values.

    People at this pole pay more attention to the feelings than to the rights of other people. Someone who uses power in the name of "rights" demonstrates heartless self-interest, especially if another person is hurt by this. For the Empathetic person, impacts on people and personal feelings are of far higher value than any rights of standards of fairness that ignore the individuals involved.


    This facet emphasizes the standards we use to maintain relationships when we make Thinking or Feeling judgments.


    People at this pole tend to see their relationships as primarily task-focused. This includes factoring human needs into one's problem-solving logic, since each person brings his or her needs into situations. Reasonable people, especially men, often demonstrate caring for others by analyzing and solving problems. They may analyze both the immediate situation and the long-range consequences of proposed solutions. They do not believe that sympathizing is a helpful approach to problem solving and decision making. While they may feel sympathy, they demonstrate their care for others by fixing or modifying things. This may involve adjusting an employee's work schedule to deal with a family crisis, making exceptions when circumstances arise, or doing something special in recognition of someone's extra effort.

    Being Reasonable means being consistent. When exceptions are made for individuals, they must also be made for others having similar problems. If this does not happen, the making of exceptions is the same as playing favorites. There should be no favorites before the law. For reasonable people, mercy may be equivalent to letting sympathy for one individual overrule principles of fairness.

    Reasonable people find it difficult to work for someone who is not consistent. Rewards and punishments from such a person would be divorced from task performance and therefore illegitimate. Reasonable people try to resolve disagreements so that positive or negative consequences are equitably distributed. The fairness in such solutions and the effort it takes to arrive at them are expressions of caring. For the Reasonable person, both giving and receiving fair treatment are ways in which everyone's worthiness is acknowledged. This is far more important than attending to one's own or others' feelings or emotional states, since equity of treatment is independent of oneself or the particular other people involved. Their view is that attending to the feelings won't really solve anything; it is more helpful to attend to the behavior or help the person see the consequences.


    People at this pole see the world as personalized and interconnected rather than impersonal and detached. They therefore pay attention to the unique needs that other people bring to situations. Recognizing each person's uniqueness is more important than policies, procedures, and rules. Laws, rules, and agreements help define the boundaries of relationships, but they are not their essence. People relate to each other through their shared experience as human beings. Each person has hopes, hurts, dreams, and discouragements that are similar to one's own. They must be treated with recognition of that fact, not merely with fairness. Compassionate people also care for and about other people in a personalized way. For them, mercy is not spinelessness or an excuse to put sympathy ahead of law. Rather, mercy is the basis on which judgments of another person should be made. It also takes into account unique (and possibly mitigating) circumstances or characteristics of the person, and thus values the person over abstract principles. For the Compassionate person, fairness is not defined as treating everyone the same. Rather, it is judging each person in terms of his or her unique character and circumstances. Failing to take into account another person's uniqueness when making a judgment hurts the other person as well as oneself. That "no man is an island" (in the poem by John Donne) is one reason that the hurt goes both ways for Compassionate people.

    Compassionate judgment is active rather than passive. This quality is shared with the Feeling poles of several of the other T-F facets, specifically the Accepting and Tender facet poles. Both failure to recognize the need for compassion and failure to act compassionately hurt the other person because both failures yield the same outcome.

    Finally, Compassionate people respond best in relationships if they are treated sympathetically and compassionately. They highly value being recognized as individuals who are connected to others in a network of friendships. Such recognition validates their uniqueness and the importance of their relationships. Sympathy, pleasantness, and compassion will give rise to devotion and loyalty in them, whereas fairness or mere consistency is unlikely to have such an outcome.


    This facet focuses on how people deal with differences in point of view as they attempt to arrive at a judgment. It is the part of the judgment-forming process that is involved when the judgments must be shared with others.


    People at this pole seek detached, impersonal truth. There are three typical motivations involved. The first is to find reasons that make logical sense; when questions, statements, events, or observations don't fit together logically, Questioning people ask direct questions. They want what others say to be logically consistent with what they already know. Their Questioning approach is not a personal attack or disregard for other people. Rather, it is a attempt to get at objective truth. Questioning people may be somewhat distrustful of others who want them to agree to something before all their questions have been adequately answered. They tend to approach all statements with some degree of skepticism.

    Questioning is also a way to solve problems. A Questioning person who prefers Intuition may question established practices, beliefs, information, principles, designs, or even facts. A Questioning person who prefers Sensing may similarly question solutions, changes, predictions, or the likely success of proposed problem solutions. Questioning people believe that there is a logical order to everything. If something is not working, it must be because assumptions about how its parts should go together are wrong. Questioning such assumptions may very well lead to a solution.

    A third approach to Questioning is in dealing with other people. Questioning people may raise questions or objections when they are asked to accept or conform to things that don't make logical sense. They question in order to find a common ground of understanding from which they and the other party can proceed. Truth is independent of personalities for Questioning people. Therefore, their questioning is not intended to disparage another viewpoint or person. If someone cannot satisfactorily answer their questions, however, Questioning people may take offense. Forcing a Questioning person to accept an important decision that has not been thoroughly examined is experienced as an affront to his or her intelligence. Such devaluing of truth is not likely to go unchallenged, and the Questioning person may use sarcasm to communicate his or her disdain. The hurt such a tactic may cause another person is felt to be justified by the offense to truth that has occurred.


    For people at this pole, reality is socially defined. Accommodating people are much more concerned with how truth is understood, valued, ad used by others than with an assumed "objective" truth. Their primary focus is on their own and others' experience and understanding of the world. If a person's understanding is incorrect, he or she can be gently corrected, but never disparaged. Direct questioning of someone's statements can be construed as a personal attack. Once that happens, the opportunities for growing a relationship or established consensus are diminished. If their questioning might threaten a relationship or their membership in a group, it is better to trust the statements and motives of others.

    People at the Accommodating people may value harmony so highly that they are simply unwilling to question another viewpoint. If differences of opinion occur, they will try very hard to encourage a decision that satisfied everyone. If they are unsuccessful, they will feel somewhat dissatisfied with themselves. Accommodating people also work to ensure that harmony prevails at family gatherings. They will be greatly distressed if other family members are unable or unwilling to make concessions that will keep the peace.

    For people at the Accommodating pole, the most important truths are validated by group consensus or by personal relationships. Truth is not separate from people, and groups cannot function well if different perspectives are not accommodated. Agreement and harmony are not merely signs of a good relationship; they are the mortar that keeps it together. Accommodating people avoid hurting other people's feelings and expect the same consideration from others. Disagreements in intimate relationships are particularly distressing; people at this pole often avoid such disagreements and confrontations by letting matters pass unchallenged. It seems better to preserve the relationship by being agreeable than to risk the relationship itself.


    This facet describes what we do after our initial judgment has been made.


    People at this pole are interested in correct what is incorrect and settings things right. They want to get at the truth in order to improve things, situations, or procedures. Their overriding motivation is to make things better; to do this, critiquing is necessary to determine an issue's relative merits. Then a way to make things better can be devised. For the Critical person, not to critically evaluate is irresponsible. Because truth is more important than others' feelings, Critical people may not exercise tact in communicating their judgments. They tend to see being honest with themselves and others as kinder in the long run than being untruthful. They usually point out what is wrong before noticing or commenting on what is right. That is because achieving accuracy is a major concern. They believe that there is no point in mentioning things that are all right because it wastes time and will make no improvement. On the other hand, telling someone what they did wrong may help them avoid getting hurt again.

    Truth is so valuable to Critical people that they find it distasteful and dishonest when others try to smooth over disagreements or disagree so mildly that their objections are not registered. They do not value merely getting people to agree because that might compromise the truth and make things worse. Hurting someone's feelings is a small price to pay for needed corrections and improvements. Critical people hold that people can recover from hurt feelings but the consequences of a wrong judgment or decision can hurt many people in the long run.

    People at this pole tend to put others' feelings, viewpoints, and emotional needs into broader contexts than their Accepting counterparts. They are not oblivious to the human factor, but they do not want to lower their standards or forget what they see as truth. They hold themselves and others to very high standards. To suppress the natural competitiveness that accompanies their high standards would be dishonest. For Critical people, collaborating with others or complimenting them simply with a goal or creating harmony compromises their beliefs or values and is disrespectful. However, when absolutely necessary, they can consciously decide to put up with others' shortcomings and tolerate less-than-optimal standards, performance, or outcomes.


    For people at this pole, truth is quite different. Accepting people want to affirm a truth that focuses on the value and worth of other people's ideas and viewpoints. "Objective" judgments about the truth are less important than the truth about other people and their relationships. For an Accepting person, the environment is primarily human and social. Passing critical judgment on someone's ideas or contributions may harm the person and also destroy the relationship, whereas being open to and accepting of others' views validates the person and enhances the relationship. Factual or nonpersonal issues are only of passing concern in comparison.

    Building up relationships and people is as important to the Accepting person as is avoiding harm. Accepting people, therefore, do not merely tolerate lapses and "deficiencies" in others, they overlook them. Harmony is as essential to human sustenance as sunlight is to living creatures. Even though disharmony may sometimes be unavoidable, it must eventually give way to agreement between people. Acceptance brightens human relations and also nourishes them so they can achieve their full potential.

    Acceptance for the person at this pole is a very active response that gives others the space and freedom to be themselves or to be right about an issue. Accepting someone in this way is not weakness, failure to recognize truth, a lack of sound judgment, or a mere passive reaction. Active affirmation of others is so important that it is often maintained despite potential risks to the Accepting person. Risks may range, for example, from financial loss from accepting a spouse's decision to pursue a dream, to personal disappointment at seeing a child fail when given the freedom to test his or her wings. Accepting people tend to first notice and comment on what is right or well done, and offer correction only secondarily. This helps in accepting and affirming others; they are likely to take a collaborative approach, at times putting their own desires or ambitions aside in favor of those of others.


    This facet focuses on the impact of our judgment and how we carry out a decision once a judgment has been made.


    People at this pole stand firm in the judgments they have made. This stems from exercising other facets of their decision making in their assessment. For the Tough person, a thorough, well-considered evaluation must result in the best decision that can be made. Compromise is not appropriate under these circumstances, even if it would avoid hurt feelings or outcomes that might hurt some people. A judgment that was honestly and thoroughly processed must stand, regardless of one's own or anyone else's personal opinion. Anyone who used the same information and the same judging process would arrive at the same conclusion. It does not matter to Tough people whether those conclusions are popular or welcome. The rightness of a conclusion is independent of both the person making the decision and other people.

    Tough people distrust considerations based on feelings, personal attachments, or a desire to maintain warmth and harmony. Judgments based on such criteria play havoc with their trusted decision-making process. Personal considerations should be weighed along with all nonpersonal factors in making a decision. But once a judgment is reached, there is no justification for changing it simply because it is unpopular or may have negative personal impact. In fact, the value of a detached Thinking assessment is that unassailable logical truth can be achieved regardless of personal attachments. Compromising the truth is repugnant for Tough people, even if they themselves experience a negative outcome. They want to "stand firm" behind a decision that they believe in.


    For people at this pole, the effects one's decision may have on others far outweighs any logical process by which one reaches the decision. Tender judgments focus on the impacts of a decision on people. Tender judgments focus on the impacts of a decision on people. Kindness, caring, and consideration of others are primary concerns in both making a decision and implementing it. Tender people bring warmth and concern for others to decision making because the well-being of people is integral to their decision-making process. Having arrived at a Feeling decision, the Tender person may be just as convinced of the rightness of a conclusion as if the Tough person. However, his or her tenderness, warmth, and gentleness will be used to communicate the decision to others. If that decision is unpopular or hurtful to some of the people involved, the approach of the Tender person includes caring concern for those people. For Tender people, there is no absolutely correct truth apart from the way things affect people. They therefore insist that others be treated with kindness and consideration. People at this pole also respond best when they are treated with the same gentleness and warmth they so willingly give to others.
    Zero11, ilphithra, L and 21 others thanked this post.

  2. #12
    INTJ - The Scientists

    Very interesting, I hope we get to see the rest if there's more. It gives quite a view into what goes into each "side" of the spectrum. So far, I have "found myself" in the receiving, contained, intimate, reflective, quiet, logical, reasonable, questioning, critical and tough facets. As "minor" facets, I find that I have a bit of Initiating and Empathetic lurking around.

  3. #13

    Quote Originally Posted by ilphithra View Post
    Very interesting, I hope we get to see the rest if there's more. It gives quite a view into what goes into each "side" of the spectrum. So far, I have "found myself" in the receiving, contained, intimate, reflective, quiet, logical, reasonable, questioning, critical and tough facets. As "minor" facets, I find that I have a bit of Initiating and Empathetic lurking around.
    I'll try to finish the last dichotomy, J-P, by later tonight (pacific).
    ilphithra thanked this post.

  4. #14


    I know I promised the final J-P dichotomy facets a few days ago, but I've been working everyday since then and for some reason this week has been pretty grueling. As soon as I get a day off, which should be in the next couple of days, I'll type up the final dichotomy and complete this article.

    In the meantime, giving this a bump so people who haven't seen it can skim it and educate themselves about MBTI Step II. Knowing how these facets work is like breaking each dichotomy down into 5 sub-scales to get a better insight into what makes up each of the four MBTI dichotomies.

    Realistically, you can just read this and you don't even really need to do much research into the cognitive functions themselves. You can, if you want to really grasp this stuff deeply, but even just understanding the facets of Step II will make it a great deal easier to place yourself on each of the four major dichotomy scales and figure out your type, in addition to giving you a few examples of aspects of your own preferences that you might not generally prefer, because not all of us favor all five of the sub-scales of each dichotomy, and yet we still are introverts or extraverts, because we otherwise still favor the others strongly, or to different degrees.

    This makes more sense if you take the introversion-extraversion scale for example, and break it down into the five sub-scale facet poles.

    You might, for example, be a very strongly intimate person, a slightly expressive person, a very strongly reserved person, etc etc. If you tally up how many points you have overall in one direction or the other, you'll end up favoring introversion and that will explain why you tend to get introversion on most of the tests, but don't fully agree with the outcome, or feel unsure about it and believe you might actually be an extravert. What might actually be the case, in the above example, is that you simply favor introversion overall, but still have some facets that demonstrate a slight preference for extraversion in one or two facets.

    This can also be the case with all four dichotomies, so, for example, you might favor intuition overall and that makes you an intuitive type, but you might also favor some of the sensor sub-scale facets, and not be as strongly intuitive as someone who prefers all the intuitive sub-scale facets.

    I strongly urge anyone browsing this forum to take what I have just said into consideration and then set aside the time to read and become familiar with these facet descriptions, if you are at all uncertain about your type at this point in time.

    Again, I'll try to post the final J-P dichotomy within the next few days. Keep an eye out, or subscribe.

    Post any questions you might have about MBTI Step II, or just general feedback.
    beth x, ilphithra, Perhaps and 18 others thanked this post.

  5. #15
    INTJ - The Scientists

    Quote Originally Posted by Abraxas View Post
    I'm quoting all of this directly from the MBTI Step II Manual.
    Thanks Abraxas for posting this. I'm doing an MBTI workshop tomorrow, which briefly touches on the Step II report (only to validate the type, if participants are unclear) and this definitely helps.

  6. #16

    As promised, the final dichotomy - Judging-Perceiving. Please forgive the lateness of my conclusion, I'm lazy and these were a pain in the ass to type up.

    It is my fervent hope and desire that this last dichotomy stirs up some controversy and some introspection among the lot of you who are still on the fence about whether you are an INTP or an INTJ. Some of these facets are going to have a strong impact on those of you who think you are INTJs but don't really agree with most, or any, of the judging facet descriptions. On the contrary, I imagine a lot of INTPs will tend to agree with the perceiving facets and feel they fit nicely.

    Perhaps this will lead some of you who are uncertain of being INTJs to a conclusion about your type.

    The Judging-Perceiving Facets

    The five facets of the Judging-Perceiving dichotomy are Systematic-Casual, Planful-Open-Ended, Early Starting-Pressure-Prompted, Scheduled-Spontaneous, and Methodical-Emergent.


    This core facet of the J-P dichotomy focuses on how we organize our physical environment, including the flow of events, activities, tasks, and projects.


    People at this pole have a variety of ways of achieving orderliness in their lives. They have a methodical and deliberate approach to doing both small, brief tasks and large, long-term ones; they have a need to schedule tasks and activities efficiently; and they want to be punctual in beginning and ending things on time. They use structures, methods, and deliberate systematic approaches to use their time efficiently, meet deadlines, and predict how long activities will take. Their approach permits them to have reserves of energy and time that would otherwise be wasted. This gives them the freedom to enjoy doing things for which they would not otherwise have time. They manage their leisure time and activities in the same systematic, well-ordered way, and for the same reason - it allows them to make the most of their leisure time and enjoy it more.

    People at this pole maintain that if they were not systematic, too many things could go awry, wasting time, effort, and resources. Inefficiency and waste are unacceptable to them. They try to keep their homes and offices free of clutter and disarray. Clutter disrupts their ability to concentrate. Chaotic environments, be they at work or at home, interfere with their ability to get things done. Systematic people prefer to spend a few hours organizing things at the outset, and a few minutes a day to keep them that way, to avoid wasting time looking for misplaced files, memos, or tools. They consider it crucial to control their time, physical environment, and approach to work. They are quite uncomfortable if they do not have that control because that will lead to disorder that will have disastrous consequences. However, they can readily yield personal control to someone else who is also Systematic, once they know that the other person will maintain the necessary orderly structures.

    The need for order and system extends beyond the physical environment for Systematic people. They also seek closure. Leaving decisions hanging is the same as having a messy desk or leaving tools scattered all over. When a task or decision is left unfinished, its incompleteness creates tension. Such tension depletes energy that could be better used for acting on the decision or tending to other matters.


    People at this pole prefer a more spontaneous approach for accomplishing things. For them, system and order are burdens and impediments to working effectively, especially when being orderly inhibits their immediate response to what interests them. Casual people dislike the effort it takes to be systematic and may find such efforts to be quite difficult. They are most comfortable with an easygoing approach to schedules, deadlines, decision making, their physical environment, how they spend time, and how they perform tasks. This casualness entails openness to seeing and experiencing things in new and fresh ways. At times, others may mistake this for laziness. When there is too much order and predictability, Casual people miss the excitement, energy, and variety that spontaneity brings. They actively seek variety and newness and avoid constraining structures and systems. A loose, unstructured approach allows them to see, experience, or respond to opportunities they might otherwise miss. Casual people bring the greatest energy and enthusiasm to their work when, for example, an unexpected task is dropped in their lap. They do not being interrupted and asked to do something else in the middle of the day. Such interruptions create the kind of variety that keeps work from becoming patterned and boring. They like surprises that keep their days from being too predictable and repetitive.

    Casual people are at their best when they are free to act on impulse, work on whatever tasks happen to strike their fancy, or respond to whatever requests or events come their way. Although they are certainly able to work systematically when necessary, variety and newness are intrinsically very satisfying to Casual people. They may therefore be at their best in work settings where procedures are not well established, and in non-routine types of jobs and activities. They are likely to thrive and perform well on projects types of jobs and activities. They are likely to thrive and perform well on projects requiring rapid development of goals and methods.

    People at this pole are comfortable postponing decisions, and often prefer to do so. They may postpone making an important decision until they are satisfied that they have considered it from all angles. For minor decisions, they may simply prefer to let a period of time pass before they make their final decision. When it is time to decide, they make a decision based on all the information that has been brought to their attention. They are able to make a decision before they are ready if circumstances require this, but they may change it if new information becomes available later. On the other hand, when they have reached a decision after thoroughly weighing the issues involved, they may be quite reluctant to change it later. This is because they have invested so much effort in making the decision the first time.


    This facet emphasizes how we arrange our leisure time or social activities. Both daily and future plans are involved.


    People at this pole like a definite schedule for their leisure time, one that specifies what day and what time they will do something. Such advance scheduling ensures that everything planned will actually happen. This requires knowing what you want to do ahead of time so a schedule can be devised. Planful people tend to structure any areas of their lives in orderly, planned ways. They like to pan in advance how they will spend each day, including vacation time and recreational activities. They prefer to know the dates and times of parties, dinners, and other social affairs in advance. They can then be certain that they will not miss something by scheduling another activity at the same time. This planfulness also means that they will likely not be available to accept invitations or attend social events on short notice, since their time will already be scheduled.

    Their planfulness also extends to future events and goals. Such long-range planning ensures, for example, that they will meet their important financial and education objectives. Planful people are not comfortable leaving such important areas of life to chance occurrences in the future over which they will have no control. They are therefore likely to devote time and energy to gathering the information needed to accomplish such long-range planning.


    People at this pole prefer their leisure time to be unscheduled so they can take advantage of unexpected opportunities that may arise. Planning free time in advance virtually guarantees that something else will come up that is more interesting, important, or rare. In such situations, Open-Ended people may cancel preset plans rather than miss out on a more appealing activity. Their approach to leisure time involves the vibrancy and enthusiasm that results from interacting with an ongoing flow of events. Their liking for variety and improvisation in their use of such time is as meaningful as the specific activities in which they participate.

    For Open-Ended people, variety and having the freedom to choose among the events that present themselves are what is most important. They do not necessarily feel they have missed something by choosing one thing over another on the spur of the moment. They may regret having to bypass a particular activity, but this is usually balanced by being able to choose something that matches the mood of the moment. This matching of oneself to the flow of life events and activities cannot occur if the activities and events are planned far in advance. It is only possible with an Open-Ended approach.

    Early Starting-Pressure-Prompted

    The fairly narrow focus of this facet is on how we manage time with regard to deadlines.

    Early Starting

    People at this pole much prefer to cope with deadlines by starting a task far enough in advance to allow plenty of time to finish. They tend to become quite stressed when they find themselves working until the last minute on projects that have deadlines. The stress caused by time pressure often spills over into relationships outside of the task they are trying to complete because their tension becomes general and persists until the task is done. This is often noticeable to the other people around them.

    Early Starting people prefer to know their assignments well in advance. They can then begin their work early and not be pressured to get it done at the last minute. They do their best work when they can avoid last-minute rushes. Unexpected tasks or events that use up the time they had reserved for a scheduled project will be quite distressing for them. Severe time pressure can become so stressful for Early Starting people that they may find it hard to concentrate on what they are doing. They will then use their available time inefficiently.

    Early Starting people feel like failures when they miss a deadline or were so rushed that they were not able to do their best work. Finishing just in time may be somewhat disconcerting, particularly if they have not had a chance to check their work thoroughly. Having time to spare after a task is completed is especially satisfying to them and they explicitly include such time for checking or reviewing in their plan.


    People at this pole do their best work when they are under sufficient time pressure that meeting the deadline is a challenge. They find it hard to work well without the time pressure of a deadline. In fact, others observing them may have grave doubts that they will complete the job on time. Pressure-Prompted people find the adrenaline rush of trying to meet a tight schedule almost enjoyable. They may put off working on a project until the deadline is close enough that they will have to make a significant effort to finish it in time. This can be mistaken for procrastination, but it is actually not an avoidance of doing the task. While they appear to be doing nothing and letting valuable time slip by, they are actually working inside their heads. During this "inactive" time these people are doing something very similar to what a steam engine does when it stands idly by building up a head of steam. Pressure-Prompted people need a "gestation" period to stimulate the energy they need to tackle the project. If they are working on several projects, this gestation may even occur while they rush to finish other tasks whose deadlines are imminent.

    The Pressure-Prompted approach to work involves more than just enjoying the energy aroused by time pressure. People at this pole feel that they actually do their best work under the stress of a severe time constraint. They have more ideas, work more efficiently, and think more clearly under those conditions. Depending on what kind of work they are doing, they may not know how long it will take them to finish. However, their awareness of the time available helps them determine what to include in the finished product and what to discard. Time pressure is thus an important part of their work style and they can use this to structure their finished product. If Pressure-Prompted people meet a deadline with time to spare, they are likely to feel that they began too soon and wasted time that could have been spent on something else. In fact, their enthusiasm may also fade near the end of a project if they finish too early. Such waning of enthusiasm may be a short-lived problem, however, as Pressure-Prompted people usually have several other imminent deadlines to which they can turn their attention.


    This facet centers on the degree of structure in one's daily activities.


    People at this pole are comfortable with routine because it enables them to function efficiently. The appeal of routine is that time and energy are not wasted and things can be done "correctly." Routine promoted concentration and ensures continuity in work, so that it all flows together smoothly, efficiently, and as flawlessly as possible. Scheduled people enjoy fitting themselves into a routine that allows them to blend their own abilities and energy with those of other people. This ensures a predictable and productive flow of tasks and activities. They like structuring their daily activities in a known sequence because it prevents the energy waste that could occur if they had to suddenly shift gears. Scheduling their time allows them to look forward to all parts of their day, whether they are restful, satisfying, personally meaningful, or exciting. For scheduled people, routine itself is restful and comfortable in that one is not caught by surprise.

    For the Scheduled person, routine also includes broad spans of time, in addition to morning rituals of rising, dressing, and getting ready for work. Weekly, seasonal, and yearly patterns of work, leisure, and family time are involved. The repetition used for some daily and longer-term routines is itself meaningful, providing a kind of anchor by which friendships and family relations are maintained.

    Scheduled people are able to function without a fixed pattern of daily activities, for no one's days are all the same. However, they are apt to feel uncomfortable without a structure by which their days and weeks can be organized. If such a structure is missing, they may seek was of recapturing at least parts of their previous routines to restore order and avoid distressing confusion.


    People at this pole are energized by the prospect of variety in their daily work. The very thought of following the same routine day after day feels cramped and confining. They can work within a routine when it is necessary but find it painful to do so. They work best and with greatest energy when their work presents them with constant variety, and they will likely find as many ways as possible to introduce it into their work. Otherwise, they will become bored. They like the freedom to decide what tasks they will do and when. If they have this freedom, they may begin their workday by tackling whatever task strikes their fancy first, moving on to the others as they feel inclined, regardless of any deadlines attached to tasks.

    Spontaneous people may also be bored by the thought of longer-term routines. Annual family vacations, holiday and birthday celebrations, and other recurring events may leave them cold. They may suggest some variations in ways of celebrating seasonal holidays just to keep them fresh. If there is too much routine in too many areas of their lives, people at this pole can break the monotony by exploring new activities. They may take courses at local colleges, join clubs, do volunteer work, or otherwise spend leisure time doing things they have never tried before. Variety and the freedom to respond on the spur of the moment are essential for their mental health. Being stuck in a rut from which there is no obvious escape is one of the worst things that can happen to them.


    This facet is narrowly focused on how we sequence the smaller tasks that need to be done in order to finish larger projects. Time and scheduling are not considerations here.


    For people at this pole, getting ready to tackle a large project begins with organizing themselves and whatever materials, tools, or other people they will need. They may make lists of what they need to do and make notes about the specific steps required and the order in which they will do them. They make sure they have the necessary materials available or arrange to acquire them when they are needed. They may even arrange their materials in the order in which they will be used. They therefore will be unlikely to have trouble finding what they need when they need it. If help from others in doing something is necessary, Methodical people will contact those people well in advance. They may also call to remind these helpers shortly before they are needed.

    Methodical people believe that approaching tasks in this way saves time; it also minimizes mistakes and reduces costs. These efficiencies produce faster and better work, as well as personal satisfaction. Methodical people enjoy organizing their work, tools, and materials. Doing so frees them to concentrate on doing a good job. If they have to work on a task with someone who is not Methodical, they may find the resulting inefficiencies frustrating. They may do as much advance organization as possible to minimize such frustration and accomplish the task efficiently.

    Methodical people are likely to read through the complete set of directions that come with a project before starting to work on it. That way they know what tools and tasks are required and what sequence they should follow. By doing this, they may get a good enough grasp of the project that they can complete it correctly with only minor detours. Methodical people like to set sub-goals or milestones to help them assess whether they are on track.

    Methodical teachers and trainers function best by making well-ordered lesson plans that build the students' knowledge sequentially. This ensures that important objectives are covered adequately. They also organize their lesson plans around explicit learning objectives. The lesson's parts must fit together well so that students will be best able to grasp new material.


    People at this pole tend to treat projects as explorations or discoveries and take delight in finding out what to do and how to do it as they go along. They do not usually start a large task by beginning with the first step. In fact, they may not complete any of the steps in a particular order, unless this is absolutely necessary. When they do make an outline or a list of required tasks in tackling a large project, it is apt to be very general. The list may include the tasks to be done, but it will not necessarily reflect the order in which they need to be or will be done. Taking tie to organize tools, materials, and people before beginning is not satisfying, interesting, or efficient for Emergent people. They prefer a looser, less structured approach to preparing for and carrying out tasks. They are eager to tackle parts of a task that interest them first, and they proceed to the other steps the same way. When a strict sequence of steps is required to complete the task correctly, they may discover this sequence by trial and error. As a last resort, they may read directions. Their exploratory approach means that they most likely will look for tools only when they get to a stage that requires them. At that point, they may have difficulty finding them; the tools may have been left with another project, or not yet returned to their usual place.

    If they read directions at all, people at this pole almost never read them completely through before beginning a project. That would take the exploratory spirit out of the whole endeavor. They may glance at any diagrams shown, begin looking for parts that match those in the picture, and proceed from that point. If a part is missing or mislabeled, they will likely discover this only after they have already partially assembled the piece.

    With the exploratory approach of Emergent people, the completion of one task leads to starting another. This trial of associations from one task to another can be best described as playing the whole thing by ear. At the end, the Emergent person will have an overall picture of how all the pieces fit together. This approach is particularly suited to new situations or projects where the specific tasks involved are not known, or where improvisation is needed. By tackling the core piece first, Emergent people spend most of their time and energy on what is most important. They then don't need to spend as much energy on the "frills".

    Teachers and trainers at the Emergent pole prefer an adaptable approach to lesson plans. Their plans are likely to be general rather than detailed and to leave much room for improvisation. They may introduce new material that was not in their outline or digress and explore a particular topic in greater depth than they originally had planned. They are likely to explore new areas that were not in the plan at all if class interest warrants this. They will still cover the major learning objectives, but their sequence arises dynamically out of their unique interaction with a particular class on a particular day.
    ilphithra, Elyasis, Agni and 2 others thanked this post.

  7. #17
    INTJ - The Scientists

    Systematic, Planful, Scheduled, Methodical.

    And my SO is the total opposite of all this... then again... she's a ISFP, borderline INFP...

  8. #18

    Logical-Empathetic, Reasonable, Questioning, Critical, Tough.
    Systematic, Planful, Pressure-Prompted, Spontaneous, Methodical.
    Abraxas thanked this post.

  9. #19

    Quote Originally Posted by Amaterasu View Post
    Logical-Empathetic, Reasonable, Questioning, Critical, Tough.
    Systematic, Planful, Pressure-Prompted, Spontaneous, Methodical.
    In the actual MBTI Form Q Test, you fall into each Step II facet category on a sliding scale, so you might be really strong on one facet and that balances out being strong on a facet in the opposite direction, etc. For example, in the Judging-Perceiving facets, you might fall strongly into Pressure-Prompted, but overall you have more "points" falling into systematic, planful, and methodical, making you a J with some P facets, but still a J.

    Basically, that is the purpose of the Step II MBTI tests. They explain why there are often strong variations within many people of the same type. I myself also fall into the pressure-prompted facet, as I tend to procrastinate things and then blow through them all at once. The pressure of having to get things done before it's too late pushes me to get more done than I otherwise would if I just pecked away at things in a timely fashion. My end product is hurried, but even better than what I produce when I pace myself. If I pace myself, then I tend to lose interest or my mind drifts and I just can't stay focused, for example.

  10. #20
    INFP - The Idealists

    Quote Originally Posted by Abraxas View Post
    I'm quoting all of this directly from the MBTI Step II Manual.
    Thanks. Do they say anything about reliability and validity for these facets?

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. MBTI Step II
    By 0,1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,34 in forum Myers Briggs Forum
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 03-11-2016, 07:47 AM
  2. [ENFP] MBTI Step II
    By hmwith in forum ENFP Forum - The Inspirers
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 03-28-2012, 02:33 PM
  3. [INFJ] MBTI II Facets -- Call for Assistance
    By Elinor Dashwood in forum INFJ Forum - The Protectors
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 06-23-2011, 05:05 PM


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:09 AM.
Information provided on the site is meant to complement and not replace any advice or information from a health professional.
© 2014 PersonalityCafe

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0