ISTJ vs ESTJ: The Differences
Often times, the hardest personality types to differentiate from one another are the introverted and extraverted counterparts. ISTJ vs ESTJ is one of these comparisons. Like all such comparisons, these two have a remarkable amount in common with each other when it comes to their thought processes and their general approach to life. Things can get even more confusing when you take into account that you can have socially extraverted ISTJs and socially introverted ESTJs. So, let’s dive into the subject and untangle these two personality types.
ISTJ vs ESTJ: Their Top Priority
One of the first areas where ISTJ vs ESTJ will differ is in their top cognitive priority. ISTJs are first and foremost an introverted perceiving type. As such, their main priority is to create a subjective impression of the world around them. This typically manifests in them taking an “observation first” attitude toward most situations. They will want to take in whatever sensory details they can about what ever is happening. Any action they take will be of secondary importance to their introverted perceiving priority. Action will be largely dictated by the judgement they formed off the initial impression. While ESTJs can do this as well, it will not be their default response when faced with a situation.
ESTJs are first and foremost an extraverted judging type. As such, their main priority is to look at the situation primarily through the lens of cause and effect. They will mentally organize the surrounding objects based on how they impact each other. This tends to be the way they gain an understanding of external events that happen regularly. As a result, they will frequently take a more active approach to these situations in comparison to the ISTJ, who is inherently more passive. ESTJs take a more active approach by maintaining a structure, desiring to adopt objective standards. These standards form through seeking out approaches that can be collectively agreed upon and are based on logical connections between objects in the external world.
ISTJ vs ESTJ: Weaknesses
Similar to point one, there will be fundamentally different primary cognitive weaknesses in the ISTJ vs ESTJ. This is due to them having different inferior functions. The ISTJ, for example, has inferior Ne. Inferior Ne will cause the ISTJ to dislike the unknown and make them want to plan for as unforeseen circumstances in order to not be blindsided. In short, they will have a mild to severe fear of the unknown. While some personality types may be energized thinking about unknown possibilities, the ISTJ type typically will not care for such an activity. They will either find it to be irrelevant when it doesn’t concern them personally somehow, or they will tirelessly make those unknowns into known quantities to the best of their ability, if it does impact them in some significant way.
The ESTJ, on the other hand, has inferior Fi. This leads to a fundamentally different kind of weakness in comparison to ISTJ. Inferior Fi in the ESTJ will cause them to either avoid thinking about themselves or obsess about their own perception of themselves. This is due to poorly honed Fi. They will struggle to form an internal sense of self, looking to the external world for ways to define themselves. This can lead them to feeling hollow and unfulfilled. They may find themselves striving toward goals but not knowing why, or they may find that they have crossed too many lines and end up despising who they have become in hindsight. In short, inferior Fi leads to struggling with self awareness. Without some kind of goal or external structure to adhere to, they will feel lost and may spiral as a result.
Si-Te vs Te-Si: Observation vs Structure
While both the ISTJ and the ESTJ should want to create structure of some kind based off of sensory observations, how that manifests will be somewhat different in the ISTJ vs ESTJ. This is due to how dominant/auxiliary dynamics are structured. Te in service to Si will look different from Si in service to Te. What you should look for to tell the difference is what function is being highlighted.
If Si is the main focus, and you see Te in service to those Si interests, then you have Si-Te. This will generally look like a desire to fulfill a very specific vision. The Te will want to enforce a meticulous rendering of whatever the ISTJ has in mind. The focus will be more on getting the details of a structure right rather than the overall structure itself. This is due to the main focus being on the sensory impression that Si has in mind.
If Te is the main focus, and you see Si in service to those Te interests, then you have Te-Si. This will generally look like a desire to maintain a stable structure and an order that is based on logical criteria of cause and effect. They hate anything that doesn’t make sense, and Si in service to the Te will allow them to work out any discrepancies within the system they are trying to maintain. They will not be nearly as focused on the minute details of the structure, rather preferring to ensure that the entire system keeps running (IE: progress is happening). Instead of grinding everything to a halt just to fix something that isn’t exactly right, they attempt to patch things on the go.
ISTJ vs ESTJ: Tertiary Functions
The cognitive function sitting in the tertiary spot will also cause some interesting differences between the ISTJ vs ESTJ. Just like different inferior functions fundamentally change the mindsets of these personality types, so too does the tertiary. ISTJ’s with tertiary Fi will in most cases have a relatively set view of their Fi. They won’t care much to adjust it or change it once they have something that works for them. This frequently leads to a rigid set of guidelines that the ISTJ references when making internal judgements. In this way, they can look more rigid than the ESTJ.
The ESTJ, on the other hand, has tertiary Ne. Ne in the tertiary position will give them a fascination with possibilities and a greater degree of flexibility in their thinking. They will be more prone to adjusting their expectations to whatever possible outcomes are available to them as things evolve. They won’t be nearly as bothered following a moving target, and will not be quite as stuck on a super specific outcome. Furthermore, they will even sometimes come off more like a Ne dominant (ENFP or ENTP) when delving into their Ne, especially if they decide to question their established understanding of something.
Conclusion
It is my hope that with these distinctions, you will more easily be able to tell the difference between ISTJ vs ESTJ. In many ways, they can look very similar. Hopefully, keeping out an eye for some of these tendencies or leanings will help you with recognizing the different thought processes they each possess.
Hi there, reader! If you enjoyed that article, leave us a quick comment to encourage us to keep writing. In addition, if you've found our content helpful in some way, please consider Buying Us A Coffee to support our efforts and help keep this website running. Thank you!
Another good article, looking for next one
Content on XSTJs is definitely needed. Nice article!
Good job comparing the two STJ types, thank you, Ryan.
Here are my thoughts: (again, formatted in Word but may not show here)
1. In popular MBTI, people tend to view STJs are ultra-conservative and authoritarian-minded people who blindly follow orders and traditions. Why? There are numerous reasons. In my view, it’s partially due to the stereotypical descriptions of the types and on the other hand, the problematic Grant functions model – EIEI/IEIE.
2. The two STJs are two very different types. The distinction might be more noticeable if we apply the Jungian model, in which ISTJ is TiSiNeFe and ESTJ is TeSeNiFi. Do they have functions in common? None. Does anyone have dom- Si? No. And why does this model even make sense? Simple, J types lead with judging functions, not perceiving functions. If anyone leads with Pi or Pe, they are a P type.
3. Biases against the STJs also come from the misunderstanding of Si. What is Si? In my view, Jung’s explanation makes the most sense, even though it was written >100 years ago. Modern MBTI has distorted Si into something that is confusing, contradictive, and negative. For example, how can “following tradition” be attributed to Si? Si is a perceiving function and its job is to collective sensory data and form subjective sensory impressions and archetypes, “following tradition” clearly involves judging, so it cannot be Si alone. Any type may do that, including those without Si.
4. As you mentioned, both STJs value the importance of sensory data in their logical frameworks. I agree. Sensory information is prioritized by both STJs. For the ISTJ, it is the subjective perceptions (Si) and for the ESTJ, it is the objective reality – what is out there, right now (Se).
5. If viewed under Jung’s model, the major differences between the STJs lie in Te and Ti, as well as Se and Si. ESTJs (TeSe) are attentive to objectivity and the empirical methods, as well as efficiency and clearly defined goals. They are practical problem solvers that can act timely to analyze and solve problems. They value a theory mostly because of its real-world applications. ISTJs (TiSi), on the other hand, focus on subjective logical reasoning, value consistency, and theory construction. The data used is mostly subjective perceptions (Si), including but not limited to, knowledge learned, experiences, subjective sensory archetypes, personal understanding, and even dreams. The ISTJs can be described as theorists who prioritize what is known, available, and accessible. They can also be great problem-solvers but due to Ti, they tend to work more slowly and perhaps more thoroughly as well.
6. Both types can be seen as the typical types for scientists and engineers. Modern sciences, with their emphasis on empiricism, can be said as typical T-S (thinking aided by sensation).
7. It can also be understood in this way – ESTJs work with the external world in the same/similar ways as ISTJs work with the internal world. The ISTJ can be seen as the mirror image of the ESTJ with all the functions in the opposite attitude (E/I).
———-
To conclude, why I would mention the Jungian model here. This is a viable alternative that can offer further food for thought, I think. It is consistent with itself. It is in accordance with Jung’s theory, and it helps address the misunderstanding of Si, SJ types, etc.
Sorry for the long comment. I can elaborate further but that will be way too long. If you are interested, I have discussed in more detail cognitive functions and many other topics, in PerC.