I invite you to read an article (the first of a new series) showing how time management influences personality: The Timeline. This is a fundamental meta-feature that dominates one’s personality, although it can vary in different contexts. “In Time” is its continuation: detailing the first main perception.
In Time (partial association with the perception function, defined by Jung; not to be confused with the monochromaticity or the polychronic from the chronemics)
The timeline, visualized in space, passes through the client’s body or touches him in any way. The classical position is the future in front, the present within, and the past behind. But this is rarely observed; the most incredible odds are that it will only be found in books. Very often, such a perception of the timeline will have a series of exciting and diverse shapes, such as: vertically from the top of the head to the feet; in front, but without touching the body; a spiral shape around the body; partially vertical and partially horizontal; etc.
Robert Zemeckis’ masterpiece from 2015, The Walk, offers a great depiction of the In Time perception right on its poster:
(keep reading ↓)
Usually, it’s considered that the individual that will have an In Time perception over Time will have a high capacity to live emotions in that respective context, and he will not be able to detach himself/herself. This is not the case for people in trauma, and their unconscious defense strategies determine them to have a disassociated behavior, an unfitting description from an In-Time perspective. For an objective opinion, an outside person will be needed. In some rare cases, that person will manage to understand certain emotions only by empathizing with someone that is also living those emotions and by observing from the outside to then (afterward) realize that they can be found within himself/herself. The motivation of someone like that can be stimulated by reminding them to live in the now and by offering them a rich emotional activity or adopting a “we care” politics.
The distinction has a strong impact on the work context. An In Time behavior will provide the conditioning to do one thing, start to finish, and it will create difficulties when, in that context, the individual is forced to do more things simultaneously. The beliefs associated with an In Time perspective are «Do something start to finish and do it well or don’t do it at all »; «If you do more things at the same time, then you cannot do them well ».
Those who use this perspective might consider those with a Meta Time perspective as shallow because they start doing more things simultaneously timed don’t finish them; agitated people that waste their life away with plans without living the joy of just being. From this point of view, a person with an In Time perspective will feel motivated by activities that have a clear and defined beginning, middle, and end. They will not accept explanations such as “Do this first, and then we’ll see” because there is the risk that this activity will not be carried out in the end. They will feel paltering if they do not have all the elements presented in an In Time language.
Time perception prevents any kind of planning. Those who use it regularly in the work environment will not have a lot of professional achievements compared to those with a Meta Time perception in the professional context because they cannot manage their time« Something always comes up! ». A person with an In Time perception will waste money on time management books and courses; these will not help, though, as they will only present foreign and hard-to-apply perspectives.
In meetings, people with an In Time perspective will regularly be 15-45 minutes late. Almost every tiTimenever on tiTimeonly accidentally or with a great deal of sacrifice. They will set their watch forward to force themselves to make the meetings. They will write it on a scrap of paper (not on the agenda, no way, this is an accessory that does not exist or is relatively empty for a person that delights in the Perception function) the meetings 20 minutes before they take place because they know they will be late, etc. If someone tells them: «You’re 10 minutes late! » they will naturally reply: « 10 minutes isn’t late. 10 minutes is exactly on time ». Or they will invoke the «academic quarter». These delays can also be based on an associated conviction attributed to an unfortunate experience like « either way, most people I meet either don’t show up or are late, so why should I be the one that waits? ».
In certain situations, it can be a nightmare for a Meta Time practitioner to set up a meeting with a person with an In Time perception. If it is about two people that use the In Time perception, it is highly likely it will be even more frustrating because each of them has his/her own perception of tiTimeand they can differ a lot. This will generate answers such as «I can’t tell you now my schedule two days from now. Call me that morning» or «I don’t know what will come up tomorrow. We’ll talk then».
People with an In Time perspective can be excellent: artists, actors, art critics, anchorpersons, entertainers, politicians, and people that work in creation (artistic, publicity) because they manage, by living in the now, to express their reactions spontaneously. But on the other hand, they are awful as financial auditors, accountants, engineers, architects, project editors, and strategists. Still, they will need an assistant or a staff with a Meta Time perspective that they will listen to perform in one of these fields. This way, they will live moment to moment until they no longer have the freedom to live in the now. And then they will get frustrated. This is why there are so many «starving artists»: they could not partner up with someone with a «Meta Time» perspective that can support them to highlight their preference to live in the now.
Sentimentally, the In Time perspective offers those who have it the possibility to be involved in the relationship and to live the present moment now with the partner. The In Time perspective on love is that it is beautiful and that it needs to be lived in every moment as it is. This perspective, manifested exaggeratedly, leads to the «love is blind» phenomenon. Actually, it’s not the love that is blind, but the ones that have an In Time perspective that cannot disassociate what they feel and observe from the outside. Also, taking into consideration different combinations with other personality structures, people with the In Time perspective, although they can live and share with others (including through literature and art in general), are also the ones that suffer the most significant disappointments and ask themselves «why?», especially when they do not have a «Meta Time» person as a counselor that can «open their eyes» objectively from the outside. Unfortunately, a lot of people choose to disappoint themselves (after they have deceived themselves) and to draw pejorative conclusions such as «there is no right partner for me» at young ages, up to 30 years old, and that can usually be the result of an In Time perspective focused on negative emotions, without paying attention to the suggestions of people that have a Meta Time perspective.
In timely, also be the favorite behavior that “shelters” in sentimental relationships: the mental dependency from the physical codependency of the partner (the partner using In TiTimeccuses the one that uses Meta Time that he/she does not make timer him/her), the abandonment complex and the games from the drama triangle. For a long-term functional relationship, each partner needs to have a Meta Time preference in a professional context or separately.
Examples of personalities that (might) have had or have this behavior structure: are Mihai Eminescu, Traian Băsescu, Steve Martin, and Gwyneth Paltrow.
Copyright © Marcus Victor Grant 2007-present. Translation by Ștefan Constantin Bădrăgan in 2017 of the article” In Time“ published in Romanian on the 10th of August 2012 on Discerne. The original material was written and initially published in 2015. Copyright © Marcus Victor Grant, all rights reserved. Updated by Marcus Victor Grant at 21.10.2017