Download Episode Here – right click link and select “Save Link As…”
In this episode of the Personality Hacker podcast, Joel and Antonia talk about personality types and the principles of leadership.
Discover more about subtypes in Dr. Dario Nardi’s “The 64 Subtypes in Depth”
————————————————
In this podcast you’ll find:
-
What do Joel and Antonia mean by the term leadership?
- Some different ways to define leadership.
- Does leadership always involve having to be in a leadership role?
- The first step on the journey towards leadership.
- What are the sacrifices and privileges of being a leader?
- The challenges presented by symbolic leadership.
- What’s the difference between a manager and a leader?
-
What does it mean to be a good leader?
- What good leaders really need.
- The one thing that matters when it comes to leadership.
- How does self leadership relate to this topic?
- Why leadership is conflated with Effectiveness (Extraverted Thinking) within the type community.
- How our preferred judging functions shape our leadership style.
- The difference between gaining cooperation vs consensus when leading people.
- The story of how one person used type to shape their leadership style.
- Why you should lead in a way that makes sense to you.
To subscribe to the podcast, please use the links below:
Subscribe with iTunes
Non-iTunes Link
Soundcloud
Stitcher
Google Play
Spotify
Radio Public
PlayerFM
Listen Notes
If you like the podcast and want to help us out in return, please leave an honest rating and review on iTunes by clicking here. It will help the show and its ranking in iTunes immensely! We would be eternally grateful!
Want to learn more?
Discover Your Personal Genius
We want to hear from you. Leave your comments below…
Share:
Unlocking Your Personality Flow State | Podcast 0473
ESFP Careers - 4 Work Styles Of The Personality Type | Podcast 0475
2 comments
I think another interesting point here, and I don’t know if you guys mention it later in the episode (hedging here), is age-
Older folks do, by virtue of being alive on this planet longer and having more energy flowing through their running system, earn a certain amount of leadership through this – in particular niches where they’ve spent their life.
A problem I’ve run into recently among some younger millennials – this comment is more or less a subtweet of a nasty interaction I had with someone on Discord who suddenly banned me without discussion – is a recoiling of the idea of anyone older than them “talking about age,” as if we’re not allowed to do it, not allowed to assume even a superficial sense of authority on the subject. I find this odd and puzzling but ultimately makes sense if what Joel is saying – that Western societies are coming upon a value system of “democratization of everything” including leadership – could apply here in that “assumed democratization of leadership” is running roughshod over the simple matter that age, as a sort of “inherited” leadership, could exist at all as a form of leadership.
Reality bats last though. The reality is even a younger person may hold more authority than an older person on some subjects simply because the older person never applied the same amount of energy to a particular topic, but the reality is most older folks have been exposed to a wide array of things in their life, and have seen the world’s changes for a longer time period.
An “Ni thought” for me is occurring to the notion that this assumption of democratization of leadership is part of a larger “anti-hegemony” archetypal energy showing up in this world, which we see in a wide variety of contexts – anti-racism, anti-sexism, etc. whereby an “inversion of hierarchy” is assumed to act as a shadow mirror of the hierarchies that seem to show up in our society.
Oh man this has been a good ep so far (not done, only 43min in yet). I’ve been working towards a promotion at work for a while and right now I’m noticing the archetypal energy of leadership welling up inside of me, and Joel’s insights on leadership being non-democratic is an interesting notion. There’s something truly raw about “earning” leadership through the internal change, the application of energy through that archetype and the way people respond to the results, that tells me – ultimately anyone CAN be a leader, but leadership cannot be built upon hollow sand castles. It’s democratized in the sense that anybody has the potential to do it, but few actually do, and democratization by “voting” is simply a load of bullcrap, it’s a hollow sand castle.