Sunday, December 22, 2013

An MBTI Christmas - Hollywood Holiday Character Type Table

You don't have to look very hard to find an MBTI type table that relates your preferences - or, four-letter "Type" - to a set of popular fictional characters. While intended to be a fun easy way to help people relate to their MBTI Type, I'm usually very skeptical of these tables.

Too often they are put together by non-type practitioners and are a poor representation of the actual characteristics of a Type; they make huge assumptions about about what's going on in the mind of a two-dimensional fictional character who's lines don't actually reveal all four of their preferences; it trivializes the real value of actually understanding preference and Type-theory. Of course, it doesn't help that nearly all of them represent the INTJ (my Type) as the evil villain, bad guy, or otherwise undesirable character.

I was delighted to find a Type Table recently that not only had solid matches on every one of the 16 characters, but even better, the INTJ wasn't a "bad guy." Check out this Type Table for the cast of "The Big Bang Theory" posted on http://www.graspingforobjectivity.com.

Now having restored hope in MBTI type tables and in a holiday mood, I searched high and low for an MBTI type table for our favorite Christmas-special characters but could not find one. Well! (...said the INTJ in my head) That must be corrected!

So here you have it, what apparently is the first Christmas Character MBTI Type Table! It was a whole lot more time consuming than I expected. Hope you enjoy!


Some interesting notes about the process...

While I might be the MBTI practitioner in the family, my husband is an ISFJ and his memory and retention of details is far superior to my conceptual "N" so he was a great partner to me in drawing on specific examples of a character's behavior that could narrow them to one preference or another. However... as we started the process, every warm and desirable character was "and ISFJ, of course." Sorry, honey - you don't get all the good guys and I get all the bad guys.

The INTJ on this chart is NOT a bad guy, villain or otherwise undesirable.

There were several Christmas characters that we "Typed" but did not end up using on the chart as we opted for one over another for whatever reason. Here are a few others we discussed:

Miracle on 34th Street (the original)
Kris Kringle* - - INFJ
*While there are several articles and posts out there "Typing" Santa Claus, they all seem to be focused on the general historical figure of Santa, not a specific movie/television version. We figured out pretty quickly that each Hollywood representation of Santa is different from another (and often influenced by the actor). If we looked hard enough, we could probably find a few more Santas of different Types, but I would imagine they'd all be Feelers. Well, except for Willy from "Bad Santa" who is an ISTP.

The Ref
Gus - ISTP
Lloyd - ISFJ
Rose - ENTJ

Christmas Vacation
Clark - ESTJ
Eddie - ESFP

Are there characters we missed? Any of these not feel like a "fit" for your type? If you have feedback, please share.

If you would like to re-post this Type Table on your own blog, feel free - just be sure to link back to this page, please.

Merry Christmas!
 

Saturday, December 21, 2013

Managing Management

Over the last nine years I have had several management and business articles published in Parks & Recreation magazine. To my delight, several of those articles have been picked up or reprinted in other digital or print publications.

I enjoy writing (thus, this blog) but since it's not my full time job finding the time is a challenge.

If you've followed my blog for any period of time, you've probably noticed a little bit of digital dust collecting on it. Where I used to make a point of posting two to four times a month, I think it's dwindled to one to two times a year.

One contributor to the lack of writing here has been the increased writing elsewhere. In March of Parks & Recreation magazine called "Managing Management." This column is intended to offer advice and guidance to front-line managers who are trying to develop into leaders and has received quite a few positive reviews.
2013, I was asked to write a regular monthly column in

It occurred to me that the content for Managing Management is just as appropriate here as it is there, so, at a minimum, I'm going to cross-post the content. Actually, since, as an INTJ, I tend to be long winded, there are always a few words that end up on the editing room floor (sometimes a few hundred) so the version you read hear may have bonus material you can't get in the magazine!

In the meantime, while the Managing Management Page is under construction, here are the links to this year's articles:

March 2013: It Seemed Like A Good Idea At The Time
April 2013:  Measuring Performance: Impact vs. Output
May 2013:  Death In The Workplace
June 2013:  Duty To Respond
July 2013:  A Black Swan Song For Unpaid Interns
August 2013:  Battlefield Leadership
September 2013:  From "One Of The Guys" To "The Man"
October 2013:  What Are You Being Paid?
November 2013:  Micromanagement (part 1 of 3)
December 2013: Micromanagement (part 2 of 3)

If there are any topics you'd like to see me write about, please don't hesitate to let me know. While the supply concepts that managers and leaders need to know is endless, I much prefer to focus on topics that are relevant to what readers are experiencing on the job right now.

Enjoy!

Friday, January 25, 2013

Murder by any other name…



Okay, so Lysol may not come right out and say that the Germs they’re killing are “Living Things” but by the mere fact they use the word “kill” the implication is obvious. Why would you need to kill something that’s already dead, or was never living to begin with? The bacteria, germs, mold and mildew can’t even be seen by the naked eye, but we know that it is alive, and will continue to grow and spread and we need to kill it to stop it from interfering with our lives. There’s nothing wrong with NOT wanting these germs in our lives so we have no shame about wanting to kill them. We don’t even hesitate to use the word “kill” despite the potential for societal sensitivity or judgment.

Why? Because there is no moral wrong. We feel righteous in referring to the ending of the life of a germ “killing” because we all believe the germ has no rights, no value to us and deserves to die.This we can all agree on.

Why, then, if the people who lobby to protect the legalization of abortion truly feel righteous that the act of ending a pregnancy is not a moral issue, simply a medical issue, why would they go through so much effort to call it something other than what it really is? Killing.

Pro-choice? Women’s rights? Reproductive freedom? More accurately it’s pro-killing, killing rights, killing freedom. If they really believe, like Lysol, that there is absolutely nothing wrong with what they are doing, why would they work so hard to call it something other than what it is?

Could the argument be made that Lysol killing a germ on a counter-top is very different than removing something from the body? We don’t say we killed our kidney when we had it removed or that we aborted our appendix. True, but the kidney and appendix do not have the potential to grow into something that can live outside the body.

Well, perhaps it’s simply distasteful to use a term like “killing” when it comes to something inside the human body. Nope, that doesn’t fly either. I don’t think anyone would hesitate to say they killed the fungus (a living thing) under their toenail (a part of their living body) or that they killed the wart on their knee. How about cancer? Just Google “kill cancer” and you’ll get about 88,900,000 results in 0.35 seconds, most of which are foundations or medical sites.

So clearly "killing" something in or on our body that doesn’t raise any issues of distaste if it truly a widely accepted, perfectly acceptable, legitimately moral thing to do. And no argument can be made that it is a life for it is irrefutably alive, otherwise no action would need to be taken to “discontinue” its existence. In every other arena, we would refer to a few microscopic cells as alive. If any cell or organism were in a petri dish, even an atheist scientist staring down the microscope would refer to it as “alive” if it were moving. So why does the location of those cells inside a woman’s uterus make it no longer a life?

The answer is obvious, we know it’s a life – they know it’s a life. We know it’s killing, they know it’s killing. And while I would still disagree with them, I’d have more respect for them if they were honest enough to call it what it is. They are promoting the taking a life - a baby whose transfer orders from inside the womb to outside the womb are in the mail, but has not yet arrived. By using terms that imply empowerment they deliberately brainwash women (and men) into equating it to civil liberties issues like racial equality or women voting.

Their use of the word “choice” is ironic when choice is the one thing they are taking away from this woman they have brainwashed into believing it’s okay to kill her baby. That woman can’t choose to forget what she’s done as it continues to haunt her. She cannot choose to un-break her heart when she mourns each year for the child whose life she ended. She cannot choose the reaction of her future husband when she tells him that an abortion is part of her past. She cannot choose to have a healthy, low-risk pregnancy later in life (she may get lucky, but statistically the odds are against her). She cannot choose to watch her child grow up happy and healthy, or know that they are in someone else’s family. The only relationship between abortion and “choice” is that it’s the last one she’ll really have and she will be a captive of that choice for the rest of her life.

Murder by any other name is still murder. Life, regardless of size, or location is still life. If those who are pro-abortion are so secure that there’s nothing wrong with the actions they promote why don’t they call it what it is? Lysol does.

On My Bookshelf...

Shelfari: Book reviews on your book blog

My Sample Tray ...

Clients, Networks and Partnerships

Member of the Financial Coaching team at Fair Oaks Church which provides one-on-one, step-by-step confidential financial assistance to help people structure their finances in such a way that they can prosper the way God intended and honor Him with their financial stewardship. Financial Coaching at Fair Oaks Church

At Fair Oaks Church one of our five purposes is to prove God through giving. This can be a challenge especially for those who are struggling in the area of finances. We desire for everyone to be able to experience the blessings that flow from getting your finances in line with God’s will. Find out more about our FREE Financial Coaching Ministry here at Fair Oaks Church.

Member of the Mesothelioma Community Resource Coaching Network. The Mesothelioma Cancer Alliance is dedicated to providing comprehensive information and community support for those affected by mesothelioma. Mesothelioma Community Resource Network

The Mesothelioma Community Resource Network is a comprehensive mesothelioma cancer and family resource database. Find out more at the Mesothelioma Cancer Alliance.