Give and Take: Why Helping Others Drives Our Success

Although 2013 is still young, I predict that Give and Take, by Wharton professor Adam Grant, has a great chance of being the best book I've read all year, for three reasons: it's inspirational, it's instructional, and it's solidly research-based. The premise of the book is quite simple: the world comprises three types of people: givers, takers and matchers. Which type tends to be most successful? Although we've all been raised on the homily that it's better to give than to receive, the bad news is that the left side of most bell curves is populated by givers, those who contribute more to others than they expect in return. Quite simply, they do less for themselves, people take advantage of them, and they are prone to burnout. But the real surprise is that the right side of bell curves is also a givers' neighborhood. Combining extensive research with inspiring examples, Grant shows us how and why successful givers do well for themselves at the same time that they contribute so much to others. Successful givers approach four principal aspects of relationships differently. The four aspects are networking, collaborating, developing talent and communicating. Successful givers are excellent networkers, but so are a lot of takers and matchers. The difference is that successful givers proactively do things without expectation of return, creating goodwill and possibly setting an example that may be contagious. One of the excellent tips in this chapter is the suggestion to revive dormant connections. The benefit is that when most people tap into their network for help, their strong ties are trusting and disposed to help, but their weak ties have more diverse information. People you haven't talked to in a long time combine the assets of strong ties and weak ties. Givers are also excellent collaborators, quick to help others in a team environment and without spending too much time worrying about who gets credit. They tend to demonstrate what the National Outdoor Leadership School calls expedition behavior, putting the needs of the mission and the team ahead of your own. In the long run, this behavior increases their prestige and the willingness of others to help them when they need it. Givers are also excellent at spotting talent, because they're not worried about creating rivals who may outshine them. Also, because they tend to assume competence and talent on the part of others, they may be generating self-fulfilling prophecies. I found this chapter to be rather long on anecdote and thin on evidence, but the next chapter made up for it. For me the meatiest chapter covered the successful practices that givers follow in communicating with others, in presenting, selling, and negotiating. Successful givers ask more meaningful questions and have an effective mix of confidence and humility in their advocacy. They also tend to be good at perspective-taking, which is the cognitive equivalent of empathy: instead of feeling what the other person is feeling, they are adept at thinking what they're thinking. In studies, people with high empathy do worse in creating value, because they are more apt to give the other person what they want. Those high in perspective taking are better at coming up with creative ideas to give both sides more of what they want. The second section of the book is for those who are too giving, and tend to fall at the bottom of the success distribution because they get taken advantage of and exhaust their energies serving others rather than themselves. The key insight is that self-interest and other-interest are not opposite points on a single line; they are separate axes on a graph. Those who give too much have a high score for other-interest, and a low score for self-interest. Successful givers are at the top right of the graph, combining a high other-focus with high self-interest. As a result, they are in better control of their giving, seeing it as a positive choice rather than an obligation, and being more proactive in allocating their giving time and energy. If you get inspired by Grant's book, what you'll really want to know is how to become a more successful giver. The Catch-22 is that giving has to be sincere it it's to work, and if you try to make it strategic it's not sincere. I do think, however, that if you begin changing your behavior for strategic purposes, and start doing more for others, two positive things may happen. First, regardless of the motive, you're contributing to the sum total of benefit and happiness. Even more important is that your attitude may begin to catch up with your actions. The mind does not like cognitive dissonance, so if we're acting in a giving manner we will begin to see ourselves more as givers, leading to a virtuous circle. The book finishes with ten suggestions for becoming more of a giver--I'll keep you posted on how it works. The one weakness in the book is that in some of the chapters, as mentioned above, there was less evidence than it seemed on first reading. You get pulled in to the inspiring stories, but on closer reading you don't find enough evidence to be able to make up your mind whether those examples are the rule or the exception. Despite this, the message in Grant's book is so powerful that I give it five stars. But it's not a gift--it's truly earned. The book itself is a gift to anyone who reads it, and to countless others who may be on the receiving end of their stepped-up giving. Disclaimer: I may be subject to some confirmation bias, because although I don't know Adam Grant personally, I found out about the book through the very complimentary article profiling him in the New York Times Magazine. (Of course, that's one way highly successful givers work their magic..)

In the opening pages of Give and Take: Why Helping Others Drives Our Success, Adam Grant says: “Every time we interact with another person at work, we have a choice to make: do we try to claim as much value as we can, or contribute value without worrying about what we receive in return?” Then Grant defines three characteristic ways of dealing with that choice. “Takers” try to get as much value as they can. They want to come out on top. They want to win. “Givers” are their polar opposite. Givers try to give as much as they can without worrying about what they get back. According to Grant, both of those styles are rare and at opposite ends of a continuum. In the middle are what he calls “Matchers.” Matchers worry about a fair exchange. They’re willing to help others, but they also try to protect themselves, and many of their transactions come out even. Which type is most likely to succeed? Here’s Grant: “Across occupations, it appears that givers are just too caring, too trusting, and too willing to sacrifice their own interests for the benefit of others. There’s even evidence that compared with takers, on average, givers earn 14 percent less money, have twice the risk of becoming victims of crimes, and are judged as 22 percent less powerful and dominant.” Wow. I’ve always thought of myself as a giver. My instinct is to say “Yes” when somebody asks me for something, without worrying too much about what’s in it for me. In fact, one of the hardest things I had to learn during my lifetime was that if I wanted to be successful, I needed to say “No” a lot more. I’ve been taken advantage of many times in my life because of that giving nature. I figured that was okay, though, because I couldn’t see myself really acting like either a taker or a matcher. Grant’s statement made me stop and think. The bottom of the pile? I had to stop reading for a while and process what I read. It took a while and a bunch of soul searching, but I finally realized that I was okay with that. If that had to be the cost, then that was the cost. Besides, I thought I’d done pretty well in my life. When I returned to the book, here’s the next thing I read. “So if givers are most likely to land at the bottom of the success ladder, who’s at the top—takers or matchers? Neither. When I took another look at the data, I discovered a surprising pattern: It’s the givers again.” When Grant outlined the things about the differences between the givers at the top and bottom of the career achievement heap, they matched up well with my life experience. One of the neat things about being 72 is that you’ve got a lot to look back on, and what I realized was that my giver behavior was very different today than it was 50 years ago. As I went through the book, I discovered that most of the strategies that Grant talks about to make givers more successful and productive were things that I had learned over my lifetime. It took longer that way. Plus, learning from experience is much more painful than learning from reading. But what’s in Give and Take matches up with my life experience and is supported by an awful lot of evidence. I will admit, that as a writing coach, I wanted to applaud Grant for the way he handled that revelation. It was an absolutely masterful bit of writing. Masterful writing’s characteristic of Adam Grant’s books and Give and Take is no exception. He tells you what you’ll find in the different chapters, and then supports his points with both story/examples and research. The examples are good, and the research is solid and wide-ranging. Whether you decide to change your behavior and become more of a giver or not, you’ll still learn a lot from this book. It’s a good read with good lessons. Grant summarizes many of those lessons in a final chapter called “Actions for Impact.” That chapter has 10 suggestions for specific things that you can do based on what you’ve learned in the book. It is a solid, practical chapter, and gives you a way to experiment with some ideas you might have gotten in the earlier pages. In A Nutshell In Give and Take: Why Helping Others Drives Our Success, Adam Grant reveals that a life strategy of being a giver as opposed to a taker or a matcher can work for you, but only if you do it in a sensible and intentional way. The book is filled with great examples and the points are supported with research.

In this book the authors divide the world into three types of people, givers, takers, and matchers. As expected, givers are the suckers, those people who mentor, donate, and always help others at personal cost. Matchers, who give and take equally, do better. Takers, the kind of people who say that it's no holds barred out there and that's why they're justified in screwing over everyone dumb enough to get screwed over, tend to do okay too. But here's the weird part, the people who do even better than that are also givers. I had to find out if there was a way in which I could still be generous and not come to regret it. The authors tell stories in which selfish jerks lose out and the generous trusting sorts have their good works repaid. The book has some other information, which is tangential but fascinating, such as how to keep from getting burned out if you are in a job, which requires you to give and give and give. Also, it shows how to motivate charitably minded people versus how to motivate people who are more self-centered. Overall well written and an easy read.

True or false--"Nice guys finish last"? It depends on what question you ask. If you mean selfish people versus selfless people, the answer is "True". But Adam Grant asks: Who will most consistently find both success and happiness in their work, "takers", "matchers", or "givers"? Takers aim in every human interaction to get the better deal--more money, more recognition, more power. Matchers help and support others in proportion to help and support received or anticipated. Givers persist in offering help and support not expecting the other person will ever give anything back. Then the answer is that nice people, the givers, finish last--and first. Some givers finish last, takers do somewhat better, matchers may outperform takers, and some givers far surpass matchers or takers in achievement, fulfillment, and respect and appreciation from others. I'll summarize his thesis in my own words. I want to do first-rate work and earn the respect of others as a gifted and effective self, on my own behalf and on behalf of people I love (family and friends). I want to enhance the lives of people who matter to me (colleagues, clients and acquaintances). The happiest and most effective people embrace both intentions. Committed to the quality of the work itself, disregarding immediate reward in status or pay, they cooperate with others and persistently help people who cannot return the favor, motivating others to "pay it forward" (become givers themselves) rather than "pay it back". Matchers debilitate their own performance and that of the organization, afraid to give to anyone who won't "earn" their trust or assistance. Takers do worse and are more unhappy; unable to trust, grabbing short-term "wins" at others' expense, they engender suspicion and resentment, subverting their own self-interest and the culture of the enterprise. "Selfless" givers, failing to honor their own gifts and desires, negate their effectiveness not only at work but in their efforts to help; they finish last, burn out, and resent the "fact" that no one appreciates how "good" they are. Selfish people disregard the interests of others; one way they undo themselves is by evoking hostility and resentment when they do succeed, and colleagues may decide to fight back. Selfless people disregard their own interests; one way they undo themselves is that (like takers but for different reasons) they refuse to ask for help. Both pathologies leave us unhappy, unrespected, and unloved. Matchers weigh their own interests against the interests of others, compromising both. Effective givers, to paraphrase an old book, love their neighbors as they love themselves, with unstinting regard and generous care for the gifts and potentialities in every individual they meet--including the individual they meet in the mirror. Characteristically, effective givers turn many of the strangest strangers into devoted friends; were I an effective giver might I befriend even the stranger within myself? Fortunately few people are completely selfish. Fortunately few (if any) can be completely selfless--and we'll be better off if we stop berating ourselves when we can't be (especially since it doesn't work anyway). And unfortunately very few are always effective givers; for better or worse, we need to respond intelligently to people who are employing every gradation of "matching" on the grid. Here are a few of my favorites among Grant's suggestions for dealing with real-world complexities. 1) If it takes less than five minutes you should be willing to help anybody you meet. 2) "Clump" rather than "sprinkle" your generosity with your time; you'll be happier and more effective if you devote, say, a Saturday afternoon to volunteering rather than trying to wedge in an hour of "otherness" five days a week. 3) "Tit for tat" might describe a typical matching strategy. Especially when you're dealing with a taker, try "generous tit for tat", giving one out of three times when the taker tries to exploit your generosity, refusing to play (just do straight "matching") the other two times. 4) Rather than worrying much about what the other person feels, thoughtfully image what the other person needs or intends; offering to help meet key objectives on the other side can free both of you to find "win-win" solutions that are better for everyone. My schematics do justice neither to the first-rate academic research (in no small part his own) Grant summarizes, nor to the moving and inspiring stories he relates, nor to the nuanced and practical counsel he provides, in this unusually well-written book. I suggest you own it, read it, mark it, and keep going back to it until it's part of who you are. It's that good.

Good guys Good finish last, right, certainly in business. Don’t we all want to win when we have a negotiation? Don’t we all know some colleagues around us how openly show their success and you know you helped them out but for some reason, they forgot t mention you? Don’t we all want the career move, faster than our network? When I was younger I was certainly one of them. When I started my career I was that kind of person that had 1 goal in my mind, go to the top as fast as possible whatever it takes. Yes, I was a taker and you know what, It worked…. until a certain point and I fell down… The saying was “fail, stand-up, try again fail…. “ Well, that was my life. I felt something was not right. Why did I fail? I was giving a lot of my time, money and still, I got nothing back Maybe it was because I was a taker, I gave in a very selfish way? Sorry to some people along my way, they know who you are! One day, my life became very dark, due to 2 huge investments that went wrong, at the same time. I couldn’t continue my life the same way, the system didn’t work. Someone told me “It’ better to give before you receive” and “give more than you receive”. I was ready to test out anything in a serious way It worked, my life became better, I became more successful and I gave more. But as a Fact person, it didn’t look logic? Giving (with no immediate return) was more successful than just thinking of my goals and just go for it. How come? Finally, I found this book, oh dear god, how come I didn’t found you earlier, It would have saved me from many sleepless nights This book not only shows with research why people who give more, in a natural way, reach higher success than takers and matchers, It gives also why givers are the “biggest loosers” and “ the “biggest winners” and how you can grow to become successful as a giver. This book gave me an insight into my network, why some people have huge success, career and money wise (and I was thinking, I can do that too) and who of my connections are takers and I should review the way I give to them “This book demonstrates that success doesn’t have to come at someone’s else expense. “ This book is one of the missing links in reaching my goals in a much better way and I’m sure this book will open the mind of many others like entrepreneurs and people in big corporations (even CEO’s should read this book, as the book is not only explanational, it gives also ideas to incorporated to have an impact on a daily basis Thank you, Mr Adam M Grant , for sharing your book with the world. Book on Give and Take: Why Helping Others Drives Our Success

We have been actively involved in business networking for years. When we heard that "Give and Take" was being published, we pre-ordered. The premise of the book is that there are three types of people that you will meet in your business life; Takers, Match makers, and the focus of the book - Givers. One of the most i9nteresting chapters talks about the differences between those Givers that rise to lead their companies - and those that stay on the bottom rung. For those of us that have a natural Giving bent - this is the one chapter you should read. At the end of the day, the best part of the book is to read the one chapter, then skip to the end of the book. There is a GREAT section on how to apply the principles that the author took soooo long to make. David Spatz

SUMMARY: Dr. Adam Grant's new book, Give and Take: A Revolutionary Approach to Success, provides a masterclass on the concept of generosity. If you're already a natural giver, you'll be fascinated by his research on the science behind the psychology of giving. And if you've based your behavior around reciprocity, it will give you insights into the benefits of generous (but smart) behavior. I recommend this book as a must-read. WHO SHOULD READ THIS BOOK: Give and Take is a much needed book, and I think it'll make a big impact on two types of people: * Help givers understand how to be more successful with otherish mindsets (and minimize their downside risks) * Encourage "socialized takers" to try the give-first mindset Dr. Adam Grant teaches at The Wharton School; he earned a Ph.D. in organizational psychology; and he has an impressive publication record. In this book, he has translated powerful (but sometimes dry) research into clearly illustrated ideas which are often very actionable. I recommend this book as a must read if you want to be successful in today's interconnected world, where you can't get anything done on your own. You need to understand otherish behaviors, so that you can give generously and receive much-needed help. KEY TAKEAWAYS: Give and Take makes a very compelling case for generosity as a baseline behavior, because it: * Offers a very thoughtful (and accessible) exploration on the science of generosity * Explains how givers can experience burnout and recover from it. (I've been there and felt it.) * Provides a new vocabulary to articulate things you may already instinctively knew about human behavior (takers, fakers, matchers, selfless, and otherish) * Makes complex research very accessible (academic journal articles tend to be dry, even when they contain brilliant work!) MY EXPERIENCE WITH THE BOOK The New York Times Magazine featured an excellent article about Dr. Grant and his book, so I ordered the book. A few days later, I started flipping through it at about 8:30 p.m., just after dinner. I was hooked by both the concepts and the clear writing. I didn't put the book down until after 2 a.m., when I finished it.

“Givers”, “Takers”, and “Matchers” are three fundamental styles of interacting with others. “Takers” use other people solely for their own gain. “Givers” focus on acting in the interests of others, even when the benefits to others exceed the cost to themselves. “Matchers” operate on the principle of fairness by seeking reciprocity. Which one best describes you in business? Of course, in marriage and friendships, we contribute whenever we can without keeping score. We also shift from one style of behaviour to another, across different work roles and relationships. However, we all have a primary style and it has been shown to play as much of a role in our work success as hard work, talent, and luck. Which style of relating is most likely to end up at the bottom of the success ladder, and which style on top? Pause here for a moment and reflect on your personal experience. Research demonstrates that givers sink to the bottom of the success ladder - they make others better off, but sacrifice their own success. In a study of more than 160 engineers in California the least successful engineers were those who gave more than they received. A study of more than 600 medical students in Belgium, showed the lowest grades going to those described as givers. Salespeople were no different, with givers generating 2 ½ times less in annual sales. “On average, givers earn 14% less money, have twice the risk of becoming victims of crimes, and are judged as 22 % less powerful and dominant,” reports author Professor Adam Grant, the youngest full professor of the Wharton School of Business. If the givers are at the bottom of the success ladder, who then is at the top—takers or matchers? The data reveals a surprising pattern – the givers again! “This pattern holds up across the board,” Grant reports. “The top performers were givers, and they averaged 50 percent more annual revenue than the takers and matchers.” It was only at the start of medical school that givers underperformed. They increased their scores each year and by the sixth year, the givers earned substantially higher grades than their peers. When the givers became doctors, they climbed still further ahead. And this pattern holds true across occupations. David Hornik, a venture capitalist, is admired for his commitment to acting in the best interests of entrepreneurs. When he gives an entrepreneur a term sheet - a bullet-point document outlining the material terms and conditions of a business agreement - he also suggests that they shop around to ensure they get the best deal for themselves. Other investors, and if it is a promising deal there are always others, give entrepreneurs a tight deadline to respond to their offer in order to prevent shopping around. The best venture capitalists have an acceptance rate of nearly 50% of the term sheets they offer. In the 11 years as a venture capitalist, Hornik has offered 28 term sheets and twenty-five have accepted. “In this book, I want to persuade you that we underestimate the success of givers like David Hornik,” Grant asserts. Giving can be more powerful and less dangerous than most would believe. “Givers reverse the popular plan of succeeding first and giving back later, raising the possibility that those who give first are often best positioned for success later,” Adam explains. The venture capitalist Randy Komisar remarks, “It’s easier to win if everybody wants you to win… (If) you don’t make enemies out there, it’s easier to succeed.” Success is less about raw talent or aptitude, and more about the strategies givers use. Givers are not necessarily nice, and they’re not necessarily altruistic. In a purely win-lose interaction, giving rarely pays. Most of life is not win-lose. People who choose giving as their primary reciprocity style end up reaping rewards. One reason why givers take time to succeed, is that it takes time for givers to build goodwill and trust, and establish reputations and relationships that enhance their success. “Being a giver is not good for a 100-yard dash, but it’s valuable in a marathon,” says Chip Conley, founder of Joie de Vivre Hotels. Today, speed is making the long-run shorter, and technology is amplifying the advantages of being a giver. In the past, most people worked in independent jobs that rarely required collaboration, so it was fairly inefficient to be a giver. Today, more than 80 percent of Americans work in service jobs where giving is not a choice, but a business necessity. Steve Jones, the former CEO of one of the largest banks in Australia, commissioned a study of successful financial advisers. It was not financial expertise or effort that made for success, it “was whether a financial adviser had the client’s best interests at heart, above the company’s and even his own.” All this needs to be calibrated by observation, that too many givers become pushovers and doormats, and fail to advance their own interests. What differentiates successful givers from failed givers is the degree to which the givers expressed two key motivations: self-interest and other-interest. Self-interest involves pursuing power and achievement, and other-interest focuses on being generous and helpful. This is well illustrated by a study of “Caring Canadian” award winners. The award is made by the Governor General of Canada to honour volunteers. In their life stories, these highly successful givers mentioned a quest for power and achievement almost twice as often as the comparison group. They also had roughly 20% more objectives related to gaining influence, earning recognition, and attaining individual excellence. Takers score high in self-interest and low in other-interest and selfless givers score high on other-interest and low on self-interest. Selfless giving is a form of pathological altruism, an unhealthy focus on others to the detriment of one’s own needs. “If takers are selfish and failed givers are selfless, successful givers are “otherish”: they care about benefiting others, but they also have ambitious goals for advancing their own interests,” Grant concludes. Much food for thought. Readability Light --+-- Serious Insights High +---- Low Practical High --+--Low *Ian Mann of Gateways consults internationally on leadership and strategy and is the author of Strategy that Works

Thanks

Interesting read. Author argues that people are divided into three groups: givers, takers, and matchers. Givers are often at the very bottom and very top of the success ladder. As a selfless giver, I often wondered if my personality as a giver made me less successful at work. This book made me realize that by being a giver but also looking after my own self-interest, I can actually become very successful and be able to give more at the same time, creating a win-win environment in the world.

I learnt a lot about myself and many people around me from reading this book. I also picked up essential lessons for optimising my approach to supporting colleagues, friends and family in various endeavours where I have generally considered giving some form of support.

Saw the book in a bookstore in Amsterdam Airport. Bought it, read it, loved it. Bought a couple more of them and gave them away to friends as a gift. Why? 1) I like self help books 2) I like when the "good people" win (ok, I may look a bit simple minded) 3) I like success (mine as well as success of others) This book shows how the "good people" win and generate success beyond their own lives as well as for themselves. The book explains how selflessly helping of others ("giving") is not "outright stupid" in a capitalistic world. Yes, you can exhaust yourself and help without ever getting something back. Yes, you can be a money grubbing capitalist ("taker") and have - at least a short lived - success. This book shows why - with some minor tweaks - a giving attitude creates abundant success around you as well as for you. Yes, this book asks for commitment, dedication, hard work and the other virtues we may have heard about in school. There is no way around it. At the same time it shows how these disciplines go along with joy, fun, good mood, and most importantly success. Altruism is concept thought of and discussed at least since Auguste Comte in the 19th century. Adam Grant explains and refines it in an easy to read and easy to digest way. Watch out, the book might change your live or at least your way of living :-)

Llego en muy buenas condiciones.