“We will never be able to repay the privileges we have been given, but we can try.”—Seth Godin
Our Bible study this week was on the parable of the laborers in the vineyard (Matthew 20:1-16). As with most parables, we might interpret it in various ways. One way is to think about it as an expression of an equitable community. Everyone who was willing to work received a fair day’s wage. This meant that everyone was cared for and provided a positive ripple effect for the larger community; however, the first hired were interested in their own reward rather than whether the other workers had what they needed. Rather than celebrating the landowner’s generosity, they questioned it.
The bottom line is that in real community, we look out for each other. How might we apply this to the world of work today?
In Give and Take: Why Helping Others Drives Our Success, Adam Grant poses this question: “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?”
Grant divides people into three groups: takers, givers, and matchers. He explains: “Whereas takers strive to get as much as possible from others and matchers aim to trade evenly, givers are the rare breed of people who contribute to others without expecting anything in return.”
It turns out that at work, most people operate as either takers, matchers, or givers. Whereas takers strive to get as much as possible from others and matchers aim to trade evenly, givers are the rare breed of people who contribute to others without expecting anything in return.
· Takers. Takers are self-focused and only help others strategically, when the benefits to themselves outweigh the personal costs. In the words of Grant: “Takers have a distinctive signature: they like to get more than they give. They tilt reciprocity in their own favor, putting their own interests ahead of others’ needs.”
· Givers. On the other hand, givers will help whenever the benefits to others exceed the personal costs. As Grant explains: “In the workplace, givers are a relatively rare breed. They tilt reciprocity in the other direction, preferring to give more than they get. Whereas takers tend to be self-focused, evaluating what other people can offer them, givers are other-focused, paying more attention to what other people need from them.”
· Matchers. Finally, matchers strive to preserve an equal balance between giving and getting. “Matchers operate on the principle of fairness: when they help others, they protect themselves by seeking reciprocity. If you’re a matcher, you believe in tit for tat, and your relationships are governed by even exchanges of favors.”
Of course, most people are not locked in one reciprocity style. “Giving, taking, and matching are three fundamental styles of social interaction, but the lines between them aren’t hard and fast. You might find that you shift from one reciprocity style to another as you travel across different work roles and relationships.” For instance, you may be a giver when mentoring a less-experienced colleague, act as a taker when negotiating your salary, and be a matcher when exchanging productivity tips with a friend.
Instead of an automatic behavior, choosing how we engage with friends and colleagues can be a conscious choice. Grant explains: “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?”
The surprise in Grant’s research is that givers ultimately are more successful than matchers or takers.
Most important, Grant writes, “Givers succeed in a way that creates a ripple effect, enhancing the success of people around them. You’ll see that the difference lies in how giver success creates value, instead of just claiming it.”
When we care for and support others, they will value us both as colleagues and coworkers. When we help them win, we win, too.
Comments