Comments on: Work and Play http://www.dunning.ca/blog/work-and-play/ Mon, 14 May 2012 20:34:27 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Donna Dunning http://www.dunning.ca/blog/work-and-play//comment-page-1#comment-11320 Donna Dunning Wed, 01 Feb 2012 22:11:22 +0000 http://www.dunning.ca/?p=3005#comment-11320 Andrea, The experimentation versus outcome focus is a good point when considering differences in how people interpret work/play. Thanks for adding this and for reminding us that whole type (the combination of preferences) also influences how we interpret situations and use language. Andrea, The experimentation versus outcome focus is a good point when considering differences in how people interpret work/play. Thanks for adding this and for reminding us that whole type (the combination of preferences) also influences how we interpret situations and use language.

]]> By: Andrea Wenger http://www.dunning.ca/blog/work-and-play//comment-page-1#comment-11302 Andrea Wenger Wed, 01 Feb 2012 03:33:32 +0000 http://www.dunning.ca/?p=3005#comment-11302 I think that when perceiving types use "play" in this context, they're talking about experimentation. It's productive, but not necessarily with a preconceived outcome, and it makes room serendipity. When judging types use "work" in this context, they're talking about finding a solution that DOES fit a preconceived outcome, so even if they engage in experimentation to get there, they may be less inclined to follow a path that would take them somewhere different than where they expected to go. So the judging type's "work" lacks the sense of openness and fun that the perceiving type's "play" has. It's more taxing to answer the question, "How do I get there?" than "Where does this go?" So for judging types, it's often true that work is work. For perceiving types, work is often play *if* they're not constrained to someone else's preconceived ideas. That said, even though I'm an INFJ, I try to find ways to turn my work into play as much as possible -- maybe because I've got a strong N and a weak J. I think that when perceiving types use “play” in this context, they’re talking about experimentation. It’s productive, but not necessarily with a preconceived outcome, and it makes room serendipity. When judging types use “work” in this context, they’re talking about finding a solution that DOES fit a preconceived outcome, so even if they engage in experimentation to get there, they may be less inclined to follow a path that would take them somewhere different than where they expected to go. So the judging type’s “work” lacks the sense of openness and fun that the perceiving type’s “play” has. It’s more taxing to answer the question, “How do I get there?” than “Where does this go?” So for judging types, it’s often true that work is work. For perceiving types, work is often play *if* they’re not constrained to someone else’s preconceived ideas.

That said, even though I’m an INFJ, I try to find ways to turn my work into play as much as possible — maybe because I’ve got a strong N and a weak J.

]]>