It’s an interesting framing overall, but I’m not really convinced that the R/E distinction is as clear in real life. The key attribute that both R and E types

It’s an interesting framing overall, but I’m not really convinced that the R/E distinction is as clear in real life. The key attribute that both R and E types here seem to share is _caring_ and a commitment to a larger team goal/outcome. The care/don’t care distinction seems clearer to me and much more recognizable. Within _cares_ people, there may be a further divide in styles, between progressive idealist and tactical/strategic (corresponding to R and E). But the thing about caring, is if you care, you’ll notice if your approach isn’t working or you need to change your style to suit the environment. The implication of this framing is that leaders really need to make sure there is a clear vision/goal/outcome/mission for the _cares_ people to organize around. They also may need to recognize that most people unfortunately don’t care about their work or their contribution to society beyond raising their children and consuming, and that’s fine/not likely to change. For people who care, then, the task is to recruit/organize the people in the organization to help avoid counterproductive work, and nudge things in the right direction. (And of course, like nearly all categorizations of complex human systems into binary, my categorization is just a concept to organize thought, not an assertion of truth; people are fluid and drift between and sit on a spectrum between those categories)