Download Episode Here – right click link and select “Save Link As…”
In this episode of the Personality Hacker podcast, Joel and Antonia explore the 4 work styles that influence ENTJ careers.
Discover more about subtypes in Dr. Dario Nardi’s “The 64 Subtypes in Depth”
————————————————
In this podcast you’ll find:
- Why are Joel and Antonia discussing careers for each of the personality types?
- What are some popular career choices for ENTJs?
-
Introducing the ENTJ subtypes by Dr. Dario Nardi.
- How to approach the concept of the four subtypes.
- Check out our previous podcast episode where Dario introduces the four subtypes of each personality type.
- The energy and flavor of the four subtypes.
-
The four ENTJ subtypes:
- Dominant subtypes – how these ENTJs show up beyond their proclivity for leadership.
- Creative subtype – how these ENTJs bring curiosity and idealism to their careers.
- Normalizing subtype – why these ENTJs excel in mentorship
- Harmonizing subtype – how these ENTJs apply utilize their people skills
- Using your career and subtype to influence each other.
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:
ISFJ Careers - 4 Work Styles Of The Personality Type | Podcast 0485
ENFP Careers - 4 Work Styles Of The Personality Type | Podcast 0487
3 comments
Interesting episode. I had no idea about the sub types. I thought I fit the creative sub type perfectly but then you talked about harmonizers and that they could be Shaman. I actually laughed because I’ve been told numerous times throughout my life by many different types of people that I should be a Shaman lol. It was even a nickname in college. So weird. My husband has been telling me this for years. I always thought it was joke. Who knows maybe it’s my next career.
Just finished listening to this podcast for the 2nd time. I’m impressed how accurate it seems. What a helpful series of podcasts especially for the folks that are not stereotypical types. No question I’m a normalizing ENTJ which makes perfect sense given that I’ve been a homeschooling mom for 20 years. It’s super interesting. I would say I had more initial potential to be a dominant subtype when I was young, but my choice to be a stay at home mom (which was strongly influenced by my strict religious community) has certainly shaped me – although, this role as never been ergonomic for me. It makes sense that this life would shape one to be almost more sensor like, since raising children is a very sensor type activity. As I’ve said, I knew that this life was uncomfortable, but there is NO question that I have grown into it and become SO MUCH MORE patient and people focused, which are not bad things at all, especially for an ENTJ. (Even if the normalizing subtype does seems like the most boring kind of ENTJ :) I can see that I am likely beginning to slide more toward harmonizing, as it felt very much like the direction I see myself heading in this second half of life.
A couple of the details of the normalizing type were so right on for me such as wanting to have time to myself when I am processing new information (I know it’s extreme, but I even put up “closed” and “open” signs to let my family know not to bother me – it is that important to me, and interruptions are so painful. In my defense – I have 6 kids. :), I thought I was an introvert, I have developed a life giving hobby of studying intuitive topics such as personality theory and existential meaning making, and I want to use the skills I learn to benefit others. This final thing is exactly what I call my “Essential Intent.” It says, “I believe in loving others by developing useful, beneficial skills and gaining knowledge and influence to raise others up. I want to see the good in others and encourage them to believe in themselves, to brook the difficulties of life with strength, and to be the best version of themselves. By doing this I will maximize my own impact for good in world.” It sounds exactly like what was said about a normalizing ENTJ. Regarding the intuitive type hobby that normalizing ENTJ’s benefit from – I would say it was an absolute NEED for me. Without it I would die inside. It is the thing that keeps me wanting to get out of bed in the morning in the midst of my super “traditional role.” Crazy how specific and accurate it was.
Finally, I will make a comment on Justine’s comment above about details. I have wondered at my relationship to details. I have essentially puzzled it out this far – I have a huge capacity for details and nuance when there is something very complex that I am very interested in. In that scenario I love understanding and producing detailed work. However! When it is something I am not interested in, I have NO capacity for details and I am not patient. I only care about the big picture, and only pay enough attention to hopefully not botch something completely. Examples: I am super into personal growth & existential meaning and therefore spend a lot of time hashing through the details, but the other day I had to watch the child of a friend and my husband asked me where the friend was going and I had no idea; those details were irrelevant – all I needed to know was that a kid was coming over that day from morningish to afternoonish and that I was going to be home. ’Nuf said.
The impression I’m now getting having listened to these podcasts so far is that the essential difference between the dominant and normalising sub-types in respect of ‘analytic’ judging (according to your own interpretation of this), is that the dominant is more about how things ‘should’ (or would be best done) in a macroscopic, high-level sense, while the ‘normaliser’ is more about about how things should (or would be best done) in a lower ’ground-level sense, with more focus on the details of execution. I say this partly as this would more likely reflect the area of control they are most likely to have in a job based on the stated sub-type preferences.
This would explain why normalisers are often good with details, be they logical, technical, humanistic (or whatever), because they are patient with details, understand the value of details and are able to make decisions in this regard. This does not necessarily mean that they have an opinion on or would be any good at deciding how to do things in a bigger, broader-sweep respect.