# NF: Direct/informative communication



## roxtehproxy (Sep 9, 2009)

*Your Preferred Communication Style*
*
*​ Another way to distinguish between whether you are an INFJ or an INFP is to determine your 2 preferred communication styles.​ _(This is part of another Type model, and it's the most reliable way to sort INFJ from INFP. If you write me wondering which Type you are, I'm going to push you to sort on this polarity -- so you might as well do it now. Spend some time on this page -- in fact, read it TWICE!)_​ Both INFPs and INFJs are "responding" types. That's another way of saying "introvert." All introverts prefer the responding communication style. This is often a simpler yardstick than choosing between "gregarious" and "shy," which is how extraversion and introversion are sometimes defined. The "responding" communication style simply means that other people are more likely to start up a conversation with you than you are to start up a conversation with them. It's all about who goes first. In contrast, extraverts are "initiating" types, which means they tend to initiate dialogue more often than "responding" types do. That doesn't mean extraverts can only initiate and introverts can only respond -- it simply reflects what each type is more _inclined_ to 

do.​ 







​ Many responding Catalysts often wonder whether they are actually extraverts, because they can be downright gregarious in certain situations, especially with their natural interest in teamwork and other people. It's hard to imagine a Catalyst not wanting to be around people! The question to ask yourself is whether you have a tendency to initiate conversations, or wait to respond to someone else's overtures. If the latter, you're probably a "responding" communicator -- which fits for _both_ INFJ and INFP.

To sort out whether your preferences are for INFJ or INFP, investigate whether you possess the directing or informing style of communication.

"What's that?" you are probably asking. Well, it's a concept that's nearly impossible to explain via the internet, but I'm going to try. According to Dr. Linda Berens, the founder of Interstrength Associates (formerly Temperament Research Institute), each of us is _hard-wired_ to utilize one communication style over the other. That means you're just plain born that way -- it's innate! And it's not only about the words we use; it's how we communicate our intent (though some of us have been conditioned to soften or amplify our natural style, depending on our environments and how we were nurtured).

​  David Keirsey titles these styles of communication "role-informing" and "role-directing" -- which is the same concept with longer labels. And let me make it clear: directing and informing are on a continuum, and everyone is _ capable_ of doing either one at any given time.


​ 










​ The question is, which style are you more comfortable with? (And nobody gets to live on the mid-point.)​ The directing style of communication is easiest to spot. The extreme form is the style used by traffic cops, stressed parents, and military commanders. It includes communications that would be classified as a "direct order." Examples include:

​ "Sit down."
"Put it over there."
"Clean your room."​ The message is delivered in an authoritative tone of voice. The reason Keirsey calls this "role-directing" is because the person speaking the words assigns what roles are to be played in the interaction. In the examples above, the speaker adopts the "in charge" role, while the recipient is automatically subordinated. The listener is expected to cooperate and play the role the speaker has determined.​ The informing style of communication is harder to detect. Sometimes those with the directing style are simply _ oblivious_ to it, not recognizing that a defining interaction just transpired. Extreme forms of this communication include messages that might be classified as "victim talk." Examples include:

​ "I don't have any money."
"That music is so loud."
I'm not feeling good."

​ These communications are delivered in a _non_-authoritative tone of voice. The reason Keirsey calls them "role-informing" is because the person speaking the words is deliberately _not_ defining what roles are assigned in the interaction. In these examples, the listener gets to choose what roles are to be played -- meaning they have been granted authority whether to ignore the remark or act upon it. The critical factor is that the _ recipient_ of the message gets to determine what part they choose to play. They can act on the information, or not -- the decision is freely theirs. ​ The examples I've posed are those of extremes -- bossy on the one side, victim on the other. But please don't think I'm painting INFPs as victims and INFJs as persecutors -- I'm using extreme examples and descriptions to make my point! In real life, most normal communications fall somewhere closer toward the mid-point. Perhaps the best example is the simplest one:​Informing communication: The light is green.
Directing communication: Go.​Chances are you've spoken phrases of both these kinds during various episodes in your life. Which reinforces the point I made earlier -- everyone is capable of doing both styles of communication. And one episode of directing does not define you as having the directing style; nor does one episode of informing define you as having the informing style. The appropriate question to ask yourself is, which style are you more comfortable with?

​ In this special situation we are investigating -- meaning our attempt to distinguish a preference for INFJ or INFP -- it can be tricky to discern which communication style one prefers (compounded by how this is nearly impossible to explain through the internet). In a nutshell, INFJs are more comfortable telling other people what to do than INFPs are, despite both being introverts. INFPs are more comfortable just providing information. ​ I'll provide a couple more examples:​ 
Directing​ "Ask Jerry for specific instructions on balancing the budget."​ "Jerry has some information that might help you balance the budget."

Informing​ "Marion, would you find a restaurant to host fifty people at a banquet in September?"​ "Marion, do we have information on any restaurants that could host a banquet in September for fifty people?"
​ See how both columns request the same outcome, but in entirely different ways?

​ And here's a domestic example. Let's imagine we have run out of milk. A spectrum of remarks to a family member might include ​We're out of milk. 
We need milk. 
Would you be able to get us some milk? 
We're out of milk and I was wondering if you could get us some? 
We're out of milk. Would you please get us some? 
Would you please get us some milk? 
Please get us some milk. 
Get some milk.​Can you find which phrase you're most likely to say?​ Asking someone to get milk might seem like a pretty simple thing, and yet, with all the uniqueness in the world, can still cause a communication gap! Within this small range of possible choices, a whole lot of misunderstandings can still occur. (It doesn't take an extraordinary situation to create extraordinary conflict.) Depending on one's style and how they ask, one may think the requestor is being rude or even being manipulative, or not asking for what they really want. And the way people cope with these communication mismatches is by labeling behaviors "passive-aggressive" or "bossy."

​ According to Linda Berens in "Understanding Yourself and Others: An Introduction to Interaction Styles," the directing style of communication has a task/time focus, while the informing style has a process/motivation focus. The intent of directing is to give structure; direct. The intent of informing is to evoke, draw forth, inspire, seek input.

​ Certain work roles emphasize one style of communication over the other -- for instance, therapists are taught to be informing in their communication. It is considered undesirable to tell patients what to do. However, the military emphasizes directing -- giving orders is an expected behavior. (One of my clients served in the military, and all these years thought she had INFJ preferences. It was an awakening for her to discover her true preference for Informing!)

​ The ticket is to look for the thing you prefer, the thing you do naturally -- not the thing you believe you are _supposed_ to do or have been trained to do. I have seen plenty of INFPs employ directing, but they have usually ratcheted themselves up and are using extraverted Thinking, and it looks stressed and is not graceful to witness. (I look for how relaxed and natural the style is in order to uncover the true preference. Sometimes an INFP will inform and inform and inform, and then they get "triggered" and the directing bursts out.)

​ The directing/informing dimension is often linked to the J/P dimension on the MBTI. People believe that "J's" have the directing style, while "P's" have the informing style. But this is * not* the rule, although it _ is_ true in the case of INFJ vs. INFP. (Examples where it's _not_ true include how ISFJs prefer the informing style, while ISTPs prefer the directing style.)

​ According to Dr. Linda Berens, for people with informing preferences (like INFPs), it's as if people are just a leetle bit more important than Task. And for people with directing preferences (like INFJ), it's as if Task is a leetle bit more important than people. It's as if one concern is operating in the foreground, and the other is operating in the background. So NFJs -- who do care very much about people -- sometimes may seem insensitive when Task is looming and they feel pressured to accomplish a goal. And NFPs may not care enough about Task to suit NFJs. (It is _ impossible_ to have equal concern about both at once -- one must take primacy.)

​ INFPs feel uncomfortable "intruding" on other people's choices -- they want people to decide for themselves to do things. INFJs may inform up until things aren't getting done -- and then they direct (and may even take charge). This may come across as harsh or out-of-character to others, but it really isn't unnatural. I found my directing style most clearly when piling my nieces and nephews into the car, and it was a big contrast to my brother-in-law's informing style as he gave them information that would make them _want_ to get into the car. (Unless he gets stressed out, of course, in which case he manifests a mean and ugly directing style.)

​ I'll never forget the day my sister put her wine glass on the floor and a child went stumbling toward it. My brother-in-law called out, "The wine glass is in the path of the oncoming child!" I called out "Move your glass!" Not that it mattered -- wine was spilled. But how obvious a contrast between the two communication styles.​ A good situation to investigate which style you naturally prefer is seeing how you deal with customer service people. When you have a complaint to make, do you prefer to direct or inform? (Unless you are angry, of course, in which case you may be inclined to do directing, regardless of preference.)

​ The directing types are inclined to "tell, ask, urge." They are "moving forward" and they sound "definite." The informing types, on the other hand, tend to "inform, inquire, explain, describe." They are "flowing, open, eliciting." INFPs sound patient while INFJs sound impatient. INFPs tend to perpetuate conversations; INFJs often kill them. INFJs focus on time and task, while INFPs focus on the emergent process. INFPs can sometimes be longwinded; INFJs can sometimes be short-winded (both to their own detriments!).

​ INFJs fool themselves into believing they only use the informing style of communication because they dilute their requests with "please," and "would you mind," and "could we maybe..." They think this dimension is really about how polite people should be. (It's not!) By "softening" their orders this way, INFJs delude themselves into believing they utilize only the informing communication style, because their self-image often prevents them from identifying with a communication style that might be perceived as "bossy" or "harsh." (I know one INFJ who concedes that she is "refreshingly direct.") INFJs bristle at being called "directing," especially when they "only want to help" or "offer some advice." Their directing tends to include other-centered remarks, such as, "You should quit smoking," or, "Why don't you take a vacation?" The question they must ask themselves is whether or not they make clear what results they want. If it's clear -- that's directing, no matter who's the focus or how many hesitant "would-you-mind's" and "do-you-suppose's" are slathered onto their remark. And take a good look at what communication looks like when a task is "at risk"!​ Directing types are sometimes shocked to discover that informing communications could even be classified as instruction or contain requests! To them, it just sounds like unproductive "noise." I myself provide an excellent example of this. I would have gone to my death insisting I had the "nicer" informing style of communication until I took a live workshop with Dr. Berens. During this workshop, I encountered my own directing style -- to the extent that they used my interaction with an INFP as an _example_ of what extreme directing looks like! Yikes! But what a wonderful gift of self-discovery -- to identify and own my innate "bossiness." (You get to witness my directing style in action all throughout these articles -- I make no bones about telling readers what to do!)

​ INFPs, on the other hand, sometimes believe they have the directing communication style because they can be tyrannical with some others, such as family members or close friends -- but tyranny in itself is not directing! It's often useful to investigate how an individual operates in the workplace or at school to see whether it's different than how they relate to people they are intimate with. For instance, if an INFP invites someone to visit their home, do they tend to be directing or informing with that someone...?

​ Sometimes INFPs are in situations where they are required to give orders, such as to children or students. These directing episodes are sometimes painfully memorable, so they assume they display the directing style. In point of fact, they _did_ -- just not gracefully. Because it isn't natural, it isn't really their _preference_. ​ Also, some INFPs believe saying, "Shoes don't belong on the bed" is interchangeable with saying, "Don't put shoes on the bed." But it's not! Here lies the rub -- that's exactly the sort of difference we're looking for. Can you determine which style is which in those examples? (I share more examples here.)

​ Without practice, INFPs don't appear graceful when they adopt the directing style, and INFJs don't appear graceful when they adopt the informing style -- both need lots of practice.​ INFJs like to think they communicate in the manner of INFPs -- flowing, open, eliciting. INFPs like to think they communicate in the manner of INFJs -- assertive and self-confident. Both types often delude themselves around this point, and it can be a challenge to separate out the truth from idealized self-image. Dr. Berens also says: "My experience has been that INFJs and ENFJs tend to see themselves as having an informing style, but when you get down to it, they are rather unhappy if the person [they are relating to] isn't taking some kind of responsibility and action toward achieving their potential. In this case, living up to or developing potential is the task! And they often don't realize that there is a one-up kind of quality to this having a vision for someone else."

​ Ironically, INFJs are wont to label informing communication as "passive-aggressive" (and it can be), while INFPs are wont to label directing communication as "bossy" (and it can be). Neither completely comprehends why the other communicates the way they do -- but INFPs are perhaps handicapped more, because INFJs (and others) are often downright oblivious to their style of communication. (Thus many INFPs complain about feeling invisible.) Sometimes it takes another informer to recognize when a request has been tendered. It's like a dog whistle -- some people can't even hear it!​ In public circumstances (like school and work), one's communication style becomes painfully apparent, and discrepancy between these styles can create serious problems. INFPs often get overlooked at work and are sometimes not considered "leaders" due to their informing communication style, while INFJs sometimes find themselves in leadership positions they didn't intend, due to speaking up with a directing "voice" and discovering themselves suddenly "in charge." I've boasted to my husband that I can inadvertently "direct" with my little finger, while my INFP friend can yell "fire!" in a crowded room and be utterly ignored. That's what Linda means when she talks about the communication style being "hard-wired" -- it's not only the words we use, it's how clearly we telegraph our wishes. Don't get hung up on specific content -- ask yourself whether you're a person who naturally causes people to jump into action (or cease action instantly), or whether you normally eschew that kind of delivery. 
​


----------



## Functianalyst (Jul 23, 2009)

I am glad to see another person who appreciates Berens' system. I have suggested for years, that if you want to know your best fit type (nothing is 100% or full proof), then determine your core temperament and interaction style. The four letter code instantly will be revealed. 

After reading Interaction Styles, I understood the reasons I initially mistyped as INTJ then INFJ, ten years ago. It was only after I had the Step II administered to me that my results were INTP. That is where the journey began in appreciateing that the test did get my dominant function correct, but I was too direct in my interactions, needed to see movement instead of controlling information and ultimately preferred the "Chart the Course" interaction style similar to INTJ, INFJ and ISTJ.


----------



## roxtehproxy (Sep 9, 2009)

This couldn't determine your lifestyle function completely if you ascribe your behavior to this, though. I find myself mainly in situations when the dynamics of my sentences tamper in order to avoid offending anyone for seemingly demanding communication, and it's often most of the time albeit a preference for direct communication.

I would only use this as information to support other existing theories that terminate a systematized personality definition, this alone can be misinterpreted entirely; if not, intentionally astraying it's initial purpose.

P.S Beren has defined the differences between judgers and perceivers rather well though


----------



## roxtehproxy (Sep 9, 2009)

NOTE: Who the hell rated this two stars? :angry:


----------



## Rustang (Dec 31, 2009)

haha, probably a non-reader

[trying to accumulate posts]


----------



## Functianalyst (Jul 23, 2009)

Mr.Katzenjammer said:


> This couldn't determine your lifestyle function completely if you ascribe your behavior to this, though. I find myself mainly in situations when the dynamics of my sentences tamper in order to avoid offending anyone for seemingly demanding communication, and it's often most of the time albeit a preference for direct communication.
> 
> I would only use this as information to support other existing theories that terminate a systematized personality definition, this alone can be misinterpreted entirely; if not, intentionally astraying it's initial purpose.
> 
> P.S Beren has defined the differences between judgers and perceivers rather well though


But that is the essence of "Chart the Course". When I meet someone, I prefer a brief opening with limited small talk. I am matter of fact and explain things systematically. On the other hand an INTP will prefer a frendly tone when greeting someone and may drag out a conversation. They like to reflect. I realized this a few years ago when I have discussions with my supervisor. He goes on tangents and like to discuss things that are irrelevant to work on occasions. I just want to discuss business and get the heck out of his office. 

I also can get frustrated with him because he likes controlling information that I personally consider precludes movelment on a project. If I draft something, he may nitpick for weeks before getting it back to me, and generally I have to remind him several times. Granted part of this may be his training as an Attorney, but it is quintessential INTP and "Behind the Scenes" in waiting until for the best results whereas I want to move on the project. To the contrary I think the overall theme, at least from my experience, does determine my lifestyle functions when interacting with others.


----------



## fiasco (Dec 25, 2009)

So, being myself and lacking clear self-awareness, I needed a test to help me figure it out. I didn't actually find one, but I got something similar. I was wondering if anyone here can relate it to one of the 4 interaction styles or 2 communication styles? This is all probably going over my head. I fell under Contemplator.



















*You Feel Most Comfortable With...*
*Work*: Well-organized, private, casual
*Co-Workers*: Respectful, pleasant, focused, fastidious, independent workers
*Management Style*: Logical, articulate, honest, tactful, but decisive to offset your conservatism and avoidance.
*Job*: Accounting, quality assurance and service evaluations need your attention to detail. Computers, financial operations, engineering, processes and systems are great fits for your style



I'm guessing it's closer to Behind the Scenes than to Chart the Course?


----------



## wolfberry (Feb 14, 2010)

Or, our interest in ourselves is greater than our interest in others :happy: 
People ask me questions and I answer them shortly and they say, All right! I was only trying to make conversation! And then I get in a tizz trying to think of a question to ask them, and come out with something completely inappropriate.


----------



## pinkrasputin (Apr 13, 2009)

I am bumping this because I find it to be valuable. :happy:


----------



## Mei (Feb 5, 2011)

I find this fascinating as well, as I often get criticism from my boss that I "am not a leader", and that I won't progress! Often, I respect my customers' opinions, and then I try and analyse it against my own technical knowledge, and judgement, and also experiences. To me, it's the "win-win" sentiment of a NF. 

I think, I am impacted by my upbringing as well. Whereby each individual is equal, and each person can voice their preferences, wants, and needs. Then the collective decision should always be a win-win overall which satisfies all of the requests. As much as it could. So it balances out. Also, each person has to give and take on whether the outcome is truly what they want. So you may get say 70% of one thing, but 20% of another. I don't know whether this is a very Confucius thing again. Or a NF thing. This concept is something that I learnt as a kid, dining with family. You don't order something if no more than 50% of the diners will eat it. Also, you don't not tell the person who does the ordering your preferences. Each person say yay or nay. These were kind of unspoken rules? 

I guess in the idealistic part of me, I thought that this kind of method should extend to working life too. So, if I was the team leader, I expect my sub-ordinates to voice their concerns and opinions, of why and of why not. Then the team leader should indeed make the ultimate decisions based on all angles, concerns, and facts. I noticed that in reality, it is hard to apply because not everyone know and accept that all people are different. So if you are not a ISTJ, whom have worked in business for N number of years, then you will be faulted out of the running. I noticed that new business methodology such as "Project Management" has crept into the world recently, so thereby, each decision has to be collective, and accepted as the ultimate thing. This is to stop any downfalls on the business, and in a way to bring collective communication across the whole company. As, if a company had all ISTJ, then each person will only listen to their own boss and do just enough to satisfy their own part without consideration into the big picture of the company? 

I've come to learn that ISTJ will see INFP as having no leadership because the communication may not be direct, or that we do not come up with the concepts. Whereas I can see that INFP wants the collective communication, as a way of acceptance of the buy-in of the concept, and also of the overall decision, and it informs the other person what could be the possible downfalls. I have had ISTJ bosses whereby they tell me, if something fails, then let it fail, cos it is not your responsibility to fix it. Whereas the INFP part of me feels, it is my responsibility cos I was a part of it.


----------



## Aelthwyn (Oct 27, 2010)

Thanks for posting this! It's very interesting. I'm definately an Informer. That was one of my issues with writing papers for school. My teachers were always telling me I needed to be more direct, more concise, more definate in my statements, while I just could not bring myself to do it. Also I definately experience being overlooked all the time even when I try to speak up. I really hate intruding on others, and don't like telling others what to do because I hate being bossed around myself. 

A funny thing I noticed about myself recently is that when I talk with children I seem to constantly add "ok?" to the end of all my directing sentences. It rather annoys me because I sound like a parrot who just keeps repeating the same phrase, hehe. It's definately because I'm not comfortable giving orders, so I have to soften it and request agreement, as if leaving it open for them to say no. 

for the 4 communication styles thing there I seem to fall somewhere in between the empathizer and the contemplater.


----------

