Adam Grant is an organizational psychology wunderkind at Wharton Business School; this groundbreaking book spans the genres of both business psychology and self-help to reveal what successful networking, collaboration, influence, negotiation and leadership have in common.
Takers see life as an equal-pay system where their wins come at the expense of others; Givers prioritize giving and sharing.
The Subversion of Traditional Notions of Power in the Workplace
Traditional workplace power dynamics have altered significantly with teams increasingly relying on collaboration. Do the traditional drivers of success — talent, hard work, luck and persistence — still apply in this new environment? Or is there another path toward remarkable career and life results?
Organizational psychologist Adam Grant has studied givers, matchers and takers and found that success depends on not just who but also how one helps others. Givers seek proactively to assist others, while matchers aim to return as much help they receive and takers seek ways to profit from helping others. He found that individuals who adopt giver values – giving before receiving, connecting people together and sharing knowledge and expertise – were more successful than those taking more traditional routes.
One key to giver success, as he has found, is setting boundaries. Selfless givers risk burnout and becoming doormats for anyone needing their assistance; otherish givers, on the other hand, balance their caring with goals that support their careers and wellbeing.
Givers understand the power of powerless communication – engaging in conversations without resorting to hierarchies for guidance – in order to encourage other colleagues to experience self-organization or direct democracy for the first time. This approach may even inspire some colleagues to try something similar themselves!
The Power of Interdependence
Grant’s research illustrates that individuals who place others before themselves tend to be more successful in business. He uses stories and studies to show there are three types of people: Givers, Takers and Matchers. Givers focus on helping others without expecting anything in return; Takers look to get as much out of each interaction; while Matchers aim for equal trading arrangements. Takers typically end up at the bottom of the success ladder while givers often reach greater heights of achievement.
Chapter 2 introduces Grant’s theory on networks and how they can help individuals achieve success in life. He details how givers are better at building expansive and diverse networks by aiding others, while takers develop them by moving from connection to connection seeking personal gain. Matchers focus on striking an equilibrium between giving and taking, with smaller networks likely as a result.
Chapter 3 Grant discusses the significance of sharing credit. He uses examples like architects Frank Lloyd Wright and Jonas Salk who failed to recognize their collaborators’ contributions, leading them to suffer in their careers. By contrast, The Simpsons writer George Meyer valued and actively sought ways to share credit for team efforts; as a result, his teams became more productive and fulfilled their work more efficiently and satisfaction was greater with his teams’ work than before. Grant argues that givers create environments in which other people can flourish, with generosity becoming part of group culture over time.
The Power of Powerless Communication
We’ve all met people who only appear interested in themselves, hoarding money, status and admiration at any cost to themselves – Grant calls these “takers.” On the other hand, there are those who put others before themselves and sacrifice themselves for others’ good; these rock stars of any organization.
Communication plays a key role in building collaborations. Givers employ “powerless communication” strategies to foster trust and prestige without coming across as arrogant or arrogant; for instance they speak less assertively, express doubt freely, ask advice of others (“um,” sorta,” this may be bad idea but…”), signal vulnerability by asking questions about the audience; these practices foster Psychological Safety that underlies collaborations.
Takers on the other hand employ strong communication. They speak forcefully, express certainty, promote accomplishments and use broad body language – almost like military generals issuing orders. Problematic collaborations often result from people failing to cross perspective gaps with their teammates and concluding that other people are taking advantage of them – leading them to avoid full-throated partnerships altogether. One danger associated with these approaches is that recipients can fall prey to responsibility bias, wherein they accredit their successes to themselves rather than to those who helped make them possible. Conversely, givers have the power to transcend perspective gaps and form true collaborations. These collaborations not only reduce burnout but also foster an environment of giving within an entire company, which has the power to have a profound effect. According to Samuel Johnson, one measure of human character was how they treated someone who couldn’t do them any good – an assertion supported by Give and Take.
The Power of Believing in Others
Belief in others can help create more productive teams and stronger organizations. Individuals who believe in one another tend to trust and support them more readily, leading to stronger team dynamics. Furthermore, believing in others can motivate individuals to take risks and pursue their dreams; provide new perspectives on issues or ideas which help with problem-solving and decision-making; as well as facilitate better decision-making processes overall.
Grant explores how our approach to reciprocity affects workplace success in Give and Take. He and his colleagues discovered that people tend to fall into three distinct groups based on how they interact with others: givers, takers, and matchers. Givers give freely without expecting anything in return while takers and matchers strive for maximum gain from every interaction. Givers tend to experience greater success but often in different ways than takers and matchers do – Takers typically strive for maximum gain from every encounter they have while takers/matchers focus on making maximum gain from every interaction whereas givers/matchers do; giving without expecting something in return is likely. Givers tend to find more success while takers/matchers focus on making as much gain out of every interaction as possible from each interaction whereas takers/matchers do when it comes to reaching goals while takers/matchers are likely achieve their objectives differently from takers/matchers/matchers// matchers/matchers/matchers/matchers/matchers/matchers// matchers/ matchers (givers/matchers focus more than themself within every interaction) in return whereas givers give without expecting something in return while matchers/matchers look out for ways they could potentially gain as much from interactions as possible through exchanges like exchange while matchers/matchers focus more often gain; givers/matchederss gain/gain out; thus; matchers or both in relation to gain gain as possible gain/or not doing. Givers. In many other types; givers/gives/. Givers). Givers generally achieve goals or don’t achieve goals than others due to potential interactions (some don’/give). Givers do differently from taking/gainers are/ givers may just how their interactions focus in return but the approach their goals differently in return (done them anyway! (or do). Givers more likely find success due to any interaction). Givers do….. takers matchers focus more likely achieve goals but differ considerably versus each interactional exchange vs may compared.). Givers could achieve goals by doing different
While some givers become exploited and burnout quickly, most find great success across multiple industries. Givers often find success because their contributions provide high value to others with minimal cost to themselves – for instance Adam Rifkin is widely renowned as one of the world’s best networkers; one way he accomplishes this task takes less than five minutes per person introduced and reaps huge benefits for both parties involved.
The Power of Burnout Prevention
Collaboration and teamwork are integral parts of many roles, which makes burnout a growing concern. Adam Grant of Wharton School’s organizational psychology department has devised an effective solution: instead of focusing solely on oneself, employees should put more energy into aiding other people instead.
His research demonstrated that people who give without expecting anything in return (givers) experience superior career outcomes, including reduced stress levels and higher job satisfaction. Conversely, matchers and takers perform poorly and face an increased risk of burnout.
He further found that giving can reduce the likelihood of burnout by creating an ecosystem of support that can be called upon when needed. Givers tend to access these weak ties more readily than takers or matchers and can also reap greater advantages from connections that had once been strong but have since faded.
Grant proposes several approaches for encouraging more people to embrace a giving mindset: decreasing demanding aspects of one’s job such as high expectations of availability and excessive back-and-forth communication; encouraging colleagues to share their struggles; providing designated support roles such as nurse preceptors for new nurses to make asking for assistance easier; this shifts the organizational culture from viewing assistance as weakness to understanding it as essential to success, ultimately leading to transformation within teams, companies and industries alike.
The Power of Reciprocity Rings
As the leader of a small staff organization, it can be challenging to cultivate an environment of giving–not in terms of money but collaboration and support. Professor Adam Grant from Wharton School of Business’s Reciprocity Ring exercise offers one way for staff teams to create this type of workplace environment.
The Reciprocity Ring is a collaborative networking exercise designed to increase social capital through sharing expertise and connections between individuals. According to Grant, this can be conducted with groups ranging from 15-50 people either physically in one location or online – it allows everyone on both teams to take turns asking and offering help; during which everyone learns more about other team members as networks expand. Furthermore, when receiving help, feelings associated with that experience often encourage subsequent people to pay it forward as well.
Although this concept may sound idealistic, its implementation has been tested in organizations worldwide. Companies like Bristol-Myers Squibb, Citigroup and Estee Lauder have all used The Ring to establish high performing work cultures.
Start a Reciprocity Ring by inviting employees to participate. Next, give each of them the opportunity to express personal or professional requests they have for the group, then challenge everyone involved to find ways to support those goals. Keep the circle as small as possible so every participant has an equal chance at getting help when needed.
