Book Summary: Give and Take - Why Helping Others Drives Our Success

According to Give and Take – Why Helping Others Drives Our Success, there are three reciprocating styles you can adopt when interacting with other people:

Taker (give only when you expect to receive more in return)
Matcher (give only as much as you expect to receive)
Giver (give more than you expect to receive)

Recommendation

Underestimating Adam Grant’s book would be an easy mistake. A superficial summary would sound like a set of homilies: It is better to give than to receive, be nice to other people, and so on. However, you should look past that first impression because Grant’s examples and research provide empirical support for his argument that – properly understood – giving offers a superior way to do business. We recommend this good-hearted look beyond the Golden Rule to managers, leaders, and those interested in ethics and in making the world a better place.

Book Summary: Give and Take - Why Helping Others Drives Our Success

Take-Aways

When you interact with others, you choose how to treat them.
You can be a “taker,” a “giver” or a “matcher,” who matches others’ giving or taking.
Takers and matchers end up in the middle of the income ladder, while givers hold the top and bottom ranks.
When networking, takers seek advantage, matchers seek fair exchanges and givers freely help others.
Givers foster creativity and excellence in those around them.
If you think only of others, you will burn out. Pursue your own interests and parse out your time and energy judiciously.
Takers fall prey to “responsibility bias”: a common fallacy in which people overestimate their contributions to a collective endeavor.
Givers use “powerless communication” to earn influence without dominance. Its techniques include “hedging,” being tentative and asking questions.
To make members of a community more inclined to give, establish the proper norms.
You will benefit by adding more giving to your life, your workplace and your community.

What’s the big deal?

“The vast majority of people develop a primary reciprocity style, which captures how they approach most of the people most of the time. And this primary style can play as much of a role in our success as hard work, talent, and luck.” – Adam Grant

What can I do about it?

According to a study of 160 Engineers: “the engineers with the lowest productivity are mostly givers. But when we look at the engineers with the highest productivity, the evidence shows that they’re givers too. The California engineers with the best objective scores for quantity and quality of results are those who consistently give more to their colleagues than they get. The worst performers and the best performers are givers; takers and matchers are more likely to land in the middle.” – Adam Grant

Study after study reveals that Givers finish on top because Givers have stronger networks (people trust and are eager help them), and they inspire highly collaborative teams (team’s success = individual success).

To increase your odds of long-term career success, you must approach most personal interactions with a Givers mindset: be willing to give more than you expect to receive.

However, you’ll fall to the bottom of the success ladder if you fail to never say ‘no’. Givers who never say ‘no’ are taken advantage of and eventually burnout. Therefore, a successful Giver routinely asks himself/herself three core questions before giving freely.

Why?

“When I studied firefighters and fundraising callers, I found the same pattern: they were able to work much harder and longer when they gave their energy and time due to a sense of enjoyment and purpose, rather than duty and obligation.” – Adam Grant

According to a 2010 study in the journal of Personality and Social Psychology called ‘When helping helps,’ giving just for the sake of giving, or giving because you feel obligated to, will drain your energy over time. Limit your giving when you feel forced to give.

Give freely if your giving impacts something greater then yourself, contributes to a cause that you believe in, or benefits someone you care for.

Find your reason for giving before giving to avoid burning out.

When?

Set dedicated times to give to yourself and others. Block out time to make progress on your most important project(s), ad say not to all external requests.

Give freely outside of your personal time blocks, and do so in batches. A study at the University of California revealed that those who perform five acts of kindness in quick succession (batched fashion) were happier and more energized than those who spaced out their five acts of kindness during the day.

Strike an equilibrium between giving to yourself and giving to others to prevent becoming a doormat and burning out. At the beginning of each day, know ‘when’ you’ll give to yourself and when you’ll freely give to others.

For Whom?

If you give to a Taker, what you give will only benefit the Taker (it goes into a black hole of greed). If you give to a Matcher or Giver your giving will be paid forward and hae a ripple effect that benefits the greater good.

“A rising tide lifts all the boats.” – JFK

How yo spot a Taker:

They use ‘I’ and ‘me’ much more then ‘we’ and ‘us’ in a team setting.
They have vain profile photos on social media.
They disrespect people with less power and they kiss up to people with more power.

When you spot a Taker be a generous Matcher: Give but keep score. If they fail to pre-pay or pay forward 1/3 of your initial favors, stop giving them.

Summary

What Kind of Person Will You Be?

Every time you interact with someone else, you choose what sort of person you will be. Will you be a “taker,” looking out for yourself and letting others fend for themselves? Will you be a “giver” and do what’s best for others? Or will you shift according to the situation, becoming a “matcher” who treats others as they treat you? To complicate this decision, you might want to know which of these three styles is likeliest “to end up at the bottom of the success ladder.” It’s the givers. Engineers who give more help than they get score lowest on job performance, and the most giving first-year medical students have the lowest grades. But givers also occupy the highest ranks of the ladder. The middle is full of takers and matchers; givers fill the top and bottom.

“By shifting ever so slightly in the giver direction, we might find our waking hours marked by greater success, richer meaning and more lasting impact.”

Giving aligns with the core values of many religions and cultures, and its importance grows as the economy changes. Think back a few generations to when people worked more or less independently, whether producing goods or growing crops. Today, people collaborate, often in teams. With teams, giving works better than taking. Giving is also more fruitful in service businesses, a sector that is steadily expanding.

Giving, Taking and “Matching” in Networks

“Givers, takers and matchers develop fundamentally distinct networks.” Takers often network actively. Like disgraced former Enron CEO Ken Lay, they can be “charming.” However, takers reserve their charm for more popular or powerful people. As takers ascend in their organizations, they openly “pursue self-serving goals,” and treat their peers and subordinates badly. They contrive to loom larger than others by sharing only that information which makes them look good. This causes their networks to decay over time. People lose patience with constant takers.

“Do we try to claim as much value as we can or contribute value without worrying about what we receive in return?”

Matchers try to match their behavior with the actions of the people around them. They initially treat takers well, but after takers inevitably betray them, matchers mete out punishment. Matchers build networks based on reciprocity and fairness. Reciprocity is great, but deploying it as the normal balance within your network has drawbacks. If you give to someone who operates solely on reciprocity, that person will expect the gift to come attached to a request. Matchers focus on the immediate benefit in all transactions.

Adam Rifkin: A Giver

Givers use networking to go beyond fairness. In 2011, Fortune magazine looked for “the best networker in the United States.” Its research identified Adam Rifkin, who co-founded Renkoo, which develops apps for social networking sites. Rifkin is a classic giver. For instance, in 1994, he built a website for the then-emerging band Green Day because he liked the musicians and their music. Rifkin believes that what goes around comes around. He arranges meetings within his network to link people together, helping start-ups meet investors and job seekers find jobs. In smaller interactions, he follows “the five-minute favor” rule. If someone asks for a favor and if accomplishing it will take five minutes or less, you should do it. As a result, Rifkin enjoys a vast network of “weak ties” (acquaintances) and “dormant” ties (back-burner relationships). Like other givers, his network contains a more extensive, varied group than the networks of takers or matchers, and the people he reaches are predisposed to helping him.

Frank Lloyd Wright: A Taker

Givers and takers have a radically different impact on those they encounter. Architect Frank Lloyd Wright was a classic taker. He succeeded as an architect when he lived in Chicago, where he interacted with other creative people. Convinced that he built his success alone, he created Taliesin, his Wisconsin summer home and studio, to set up the isolation he craved. That isolation stymied his creativity. When Wright started working with apprentices, “his productivity soared.” Even then, he failed to appreciate what others gave him. Wright “refused to pay apprentices” and forced them to cook and clean.

Jonas Salk: A Taker

Jonas Salk, pioneer of the vaccine against polio, showed similar taker tendencies. In 1955, when Salk spoke about his discovery, he “didn’t acknowledge” the work done by his colleagues, even though their contributions fueled his breakthroughs. Salk didn’t thank the lab personnel who helped create the vaccine, reducing his team to tears. He fell prey to the “responsibility bias,” a common fallacy in which people overestimate their own contributions to a collective endeavor.

George Meyer: A Giver

Contrast this with the impact George Meyer has had on those around him. He wrote for Saturday Night Live for years. The show’s production process has “a Darwinian element” in that the writers compete to get their sketches on air. To win airtime, many writers focused on writing for big-name guest hosts. Meyer often wrote for lesser-known hosts and took time to give other writers feedback.

“The fear of being judged as weak or naïve prevents many people from operating like givers at work.”

He followed a similar pattern in his years of writing for The Simpsons. Often, staff writers wanted “to write the first draft of an episode,” so they would receive credit for that show. In contrast, Meyer came up with ideas and then let others write the first draft, which he’d revise to make the show stronger. Meyer engaged in what the National Outdoor Leadership School calls “expedition behavior”: He worked behind the scenes, doing what was necessary without worrying about getting credit. Meyer helped create a safe environment for other writers to take creative risks.

Giving Through Teaching

Teaching demonstrates the real power of giving. Great musicians or athletes don’t necessarily show the best potential or the highest intelligence early in their lives. Many bloom after they receive mentoring from a giving teacher who motivates them. Giving managers also see the possibilities in their people. When givers hire, they can make mistakes as readily as takers. They can choose the wrong prospects and be fooled by appearances. Takers tend to cling to their choices because admitting a bad decision reflects poorly on them. Givers value the people they chose, but move them to other positions or let them go if that’s what’s best for the company.

How Givers and Takers Communicate

You can influence others by “dominance” or by “prestige.” When you “establish dominance,” people see you as authoritative and powerful. If you “earn prestige,” you gain influence because people “respect and admire” you. These two options spring from your style of reciprocity. Takers choose dominance and seek “powerful communication.” They assert themselves and emphasize pride and accomplishments. However, “dominance is a zero-sum game”: If you dominate your co-workers, you gain influence, and they lose it.

“Success involves more than just capitalizing on the strengths of giving; it also requires avoiding the pitfalls.”

“Powerless communication” establishes lasting influence. Show that you are vulnerable, either intentionally, by sharing, or inadvertently, as would happen if you stuttered. Listening to others, asking questions and showing genuine curiosity about their interests are all aspects of powerless communication. This offers an alternative way to gain influence: people don’t feel as if you’re forcing them to do something. Instead, they feel as if they’re choosing to act a certain way. Asking for advice or “hedging” – being tentative – are facets of this style. Rather than asserting that one choice is the only way, pose a suggestion as a query: “Do you think it might be possible to do it this way?” Such phrasing helps people open up to your ideas without feeling threatened.

Give and Survive

Knowing how to build on “the strengths of giving,” won’t necessarily ensure success. You can end up exhausted with little to show for all you’ve done. Without spreading yourself too thin, be a giver but don’t let takers take advantage of you. You want to be “other-interested” and see others prosper, but not to your own detriment. You must be somewhat self-interested. Successful givers act based on concern for others balanced with fulfilling their own interests. Some people become “selfless givers,” so other-centered that they suffer “low self-interest.” They give without caring about themselves and can end up mired in “pathological altruism.” Under the influence of these two independent “engines,” givers are in danger of imbalances. When they put others’ interests ahead of their own, they might burn out.

“Otherish givers build a support network that they can access for help when they need it.”

Exhausted givers suffer physical and emotional health problems. To revitalize, they don’t need a break – they need more giving in the right context. Those, like teachers, who give when their results might not be visible for years often find that giving becomes harder over time. These givers need to increase their “perception of impact.” When they realize how much their actions matter, they’ll revive. Givers should personalize their actions by linking their ways of giving, however intangible, to specific beneficiaries. Radiologists’ diagnoses based on CT scans improved when photos of the patients accompanied the scans. Nurses did a better job assembling surgical kits when they met the doctors who would be using them.

Volunteering

People can also revitalize their motivation to give by volunteering. Doing enough volunteer work to change your mood takes time, so “chunk” your actions to do several giving things at once. The threshold for volunteering seems to be 100 hours a year, or two hours a week. If you give more, you don’t feel more of a return. If you give less, you don’t see as much of a result.

“Otherish givers may appear less altruistic than selfless givers, but their resilience against burnout enables them to contribute more.”

People can take advantage of givers who are too trusting, which can translate to lower salaries and fewer promotions. Even the most dedicated givers must protect themselves still seeing the good in others. Givers are often initially weak in negotiations, while takers are strong, but givers can re-educate themselves. By negotiating on behalf of other people (like their families), by casting their negotiation platforms in terms of fairness or by discussing what will benefit the company they represent, givers can move past their fear of becoming takers.

“Although we often stereotype givers as chumps and doormats, they turn out to be surprisingly successful.”

When asked to mentor, givers usually comply and put in generous time. They must discipline themselves, discern takers who impose on them and protect their personal priorities. Givers can switch to matching, that is, arranging things so that takers, too, must give to get what they want.

Craigslist and Freecycle

Craig Newmark started Craigslist in the mid-1990s because the list of people he was emailing about area events got too big to manage. Craigslist, which offers person-to-person sales and services, appeals to people’s “basic matcher instincts” since they can meet online and agree on fair prices. This is useful, but it’s not the only way for people to interact within an online community. Freecycle demonstrates how a community can reshape normative values about giving. On this site, people give things away to anyone who wants them, and people can ask for what they need. Users turn to Freecycle for both selfish and altruistic reasons. Since the exchange of items involves the whole community, Freecycle establishes a new kind of balance, a new norm of giving. It encourages “matchers and takers to act like givers.”

Resources for Making Your Life More Giving

You can bring more giving into your life. To test “your giver quotient,” take a survey at the GiveAndTake website. Start a Reciprocity Ring at HumaxNetworks, where people ask favors of those online and help others obtain what they want. “By making contributions visible, the Reciprocity Ring sets up an opportunity for people of any reciprocity style to be “otherish.” That is, they can both “do good and look good.”

“Givers reject the notion that interdependence is weak.”

Take steps to make your job and your workplace more reflective of the values that matter to you and your colleagues. This might include pursuing personal projects, linking existing work to your values or shifting the skills your work emphasizes. For information, visit the JobCrafting website.

To express your appreciation of people at work, make expressions of gratitude routine and methodical.

Start small by using the “Five-Minute Favor” (giveandtakeinc.com/blog/culture/the-five-minute-favor/).

Invite anyone in your organization to ask a favor, so long as fulfilling it takes five minutes or less. From there, build up to daily acts of kindness, underwrite someone’s dream project, ask for help and or join a “community of givers.”

About the author

Adam Grant is an organizational psychologist at Wharton, where he has been the top-rated professor for seven straight years. He is an expert in how we can find motivation and meaning, and lead more generous and creative lives. He is the #1 New York Times bestselling author of five books that have sold over 2 million copies and been translated into 35 languages: Give and Take, Originals, Option B, Power Moves, and with his wife, Allison Sweet Grant, The Gift Inside the Box. His books have been recognized as among the year’s best by Amazon, the Financial Times, Harvard Business Review, and the Wall Street Journal and been praised by J.J. Abrams, Richard Branson, Bill and Melinda Gates, Malcolm Gladwell, and Malala Yousafzai.

Adam’s TED talks have been viewed more than 20 million times. He hosts the chart-topping TED podcast WorkLife. His speaking and consulting clients include Google, the NBA, Bridgewater, and the Gates Foundation. He has been recognized as one of the world’s 10 most influential management thinkers, Fortune’s 40 under 40, Oprah’s Super Soul 100, and a World Economic Forum Young Global Leader, and received distinguished scientific achievement awards from the American Psychological Association and the National Science Foundation. Adam writes for the New York Times on work and psychology and serves on the Department of Defense Innovation Board. He received his B.A. from Harvard and his Ph.D. from the University of Michigan, and he is a former Junior Olympic springboard diver. He lives in Philadelphia with his wife, their two daughters, and their son.

The Wharton School’s highest-rated professor, Adam Grant is the youngest tenured faculty member. He’s a former advertising director and a junior Olympian.

Genres

Business, Psychology, Self Help, Leadership, Personal Development, Management, Productivity, Relationships, Interpersonal Relations, Workplace Culture

Good returns: the dangers and rewards of giving more than you get
The peacock and the panda: how givers, takers and matchers build networks
The ripple effect: cascading collaboration and the dynamics of giving and taking credit
Finding the diamond in the rough: the fact and fiction of recognizing potential
The power of powerless communication: how to be modest and influence people
The art of motivation maintenance: why some givers burn out but others are on fire
Chump change: overcoming the doormat effect
The scrooge shift: why a soccer team, a fingerprint and a name can tilt us in the other direction
Out of the shadows.

Overview

A groundbreaking look at why our interactions with others hold the key to success, from the best-selling author of Think Again and Originals.

For generations, we have focused on the individual drivers of success: Passion, hard work, talent, and luck. But in today’s dramatically reconfigured world, success is increasingly dependent on how we interact with others. In Give and Take, Adam Grant, an award-winning researcher and Wharton’s highest-rated professor, examines the surprising forces that shape why some people rise to the top of the success ladder while others sink to the bottom. Praised by social scientists, business theorists, and corporate leaders, Give and Take opens up an approach to work, interactions, and productivity that is nothing short of revolutionary.

Recognition for Give and Take:

Amazon’s best books of 2013
Financial Times books of the year
Wall Street Journal favorite books of 2013
Oprah’s riveting reads
Fortune must-read business books
Washington Post books every leader should read
Apple iTunes best of 2013
Inc.’s best books for entrepreneurs
Amazon customer favorites: one of the top 100 print books of 2013
Translated into two dozen languages

Review/Endorsements/Praise/Award

“Give and Take just might be the most important book of this young century. As insightful and entertaining as Malcolm Gladwell at his best, this book has profound implications for how we manage our careers, deal with our friends and relatives, raise our children, and design our institutions. This gem is a joy to read, and it shatters the myth that greed is the path to success.” —Robert Sutton, author of The No *sshole Rule and Good Boss, Bad Boss

“Give and Take is a truly exhilarating book—the rare work that will shatter your assumptions about how the world works and keep your brain firing for weeks after you’ve turned the last page.” —Daniel H. Pink, author of Drive and A Whole New Mind

“Give and Take is brimming with life-changing insights. As brilliant as it is wise, this is not just a book—it’s a new and shining worldview. Adam Grant is one of the great social scientists of our time, and his extraordinary new book is sure to be a bestseller.” —Susan Cain, author of Quiet

“Give and Take cuts through the clutter of clichés in the marketplace and provides a refreshing new perspective on the art and science of success. Adam Grant has crafted a unique, ‘must have’ toolkit for accomplishing goals through collaboration and reciprocity.” —William P. Lauder, Executive Chairman, The Estée Lauder Companies Inc.

“Give and Take is a pleasure to read, extraordinarily informative, and will likely become one of the classic books on workplace leadership and management. It has changed the way I see my personal and professional relationships, and has encouraged me to be a more thoughtful friend and colleague.” —Jeff Ashby, NASA space shuttle commander

“With Give and Take, Adam Grant has marshaled compelling evidence for a revolutionary way of thinking about personal success in business and in life. Besides the fundamentally uplifting character of the case he makes, readers will be delighted by the truly engaging way he makes it. This is a must read.” —Robert Cialdini, author of Influence

“Give and Take is a brilliant, well-documented, and motivating debunking of ‘good guys finish last’! I’ve noticed for years that generosity generates its own kind of equity, and Grant’s fascinating research and engaging style have created not only a solid validation of that principle but also practical wisdom and techniques for utilizing it more effectively. This is a super manifesto for getting meaningful things done, sustainably.” —David Allen, author of Getting Things Done

“Packed with cutting-edge research, concrete examples, and deep insight, Give and Take offers extraordinarily thought-provoking—and often surprising—conclusions about how our interactions with others drive our success and happiness. This important and compulsively-readable book deserves to be a huge success.” —Gretchen Rubin, author of The Happiness Project and Happier at Home

“One of the great secrets of life is that those who win most are often those who give most. In this elegant and lucid book, filled with compelling evidence and evocative examples, Adam Grant shows us why and how this is so. Highly recommended!” —William Ury, coauthor of Getting to Yes and author of The Power of a Positive No

“Good guys finish first—and Adam Grant knows why. Give and Take is the smart surprise you can’t afford to miss.” —Daniel Gilbert, author of Stumbling on Happiness

“Give and Take is an enlightening read for leaders who aspire to create meaningful and sustainable changes to their environments. Grant demonstrates how a generous orientation toward others can serve as a formula for producing successful leaders and organizational performance. His writing is as engaging and enjoyable as his style in the classroom.” —Kenneth Frazier, Chairman, President, and CEO of Merck & Co.

“In this riveting and sparkling book, Adam Grant turns the conventional wisdom upside-down about what it takes to win and get ahead. With page-turning stories and compelling studies, Give and Take reveals the surprising forces behind success, and the steps we can take to enhance our own.” —Laszlo Bock, Senior Vice President of People Operations, Google

“Give and Take dispels commonly held beliefs that equate givers with weakness and takers with strength. Grant shows us the importance of nurturing and encouraging prosocial behaviors.” —Dan Ariely, author of Predictably Irrational

“Give and Take defines a road to success marked by new ways of relating to colleagues and customers as well as new ways of growing a business.” —Tony Hsieh, CEO, Zappos.com and author of Delivering Happiness

“A milestone! Well-researched, generous, actionable and important. Adam Grant has given us a gift, a hard-hitting book about the efficacy of connection and generosity in everything we do.” —Seth Godin, bestselling author of The Icarus Deception and Tribes

“Give and Take will fundamentally change the way you think about success. Unfortunately in America, we have too often succumbed to the worldview that if everyone behaved in their own narrow self-interest, all would be fine. Adam Grant shows us with compelling research and fascinating stories there is a better way.” —Lenny Mendonca, Director, McKinsey & Co.

“Adam Grant, a rising star of positive psychology, seamlessly weaves together science and stories of business success and failure, convincing us that giving is in the long run the recipe for success in the corporate world. En route you will find yourself re-examining your own life. Read it yourself, then give copies to the people you care most about in this world.” —Martin Seligman, author of Learned Optimism and Flourish

“Give and Take presents a groundbreaking new perspective on success. Adam Grant offers a captivating window into innovative principles that drive effectiveness at every level of an organization and can immediately be put into action. Along with being a fascinating read, this book holds the key to a more satisfied and productive workplace, better customer relationships, and higher profits.” —Chip Conley, Founder, Joie de Vivre Hotels and author, Peak and Emotional Equations

“Give and Take is a game changer. Reading Adam Grant’s compelling book will change the way doctors doctor, managers manage, teachers teach, and bosses boss. It will create a society in which people do better by being better. Read the book and change the way you live and work.” —Barry Schwartz, author of The Paradox of Choice and Practical Wisdom

“Give and Take is a new behavioral benchmark for doing business for better, providing an inspiring new perspective on how to succeed to the benefit of all. Adam Grant provides great support for the new paradigm of creating a ‘win win’ for people, planet and profit with many fabulous insights and wonderful stories to get you fully hooked and infected with wanting to give more and take less.” —Jochen Zeitz, former CEO and chairman, PUMA

“Give and Take is a real gift. Adam Grant delivers a triple treat: stories as good as a well-written novel, surprising insights drawn from rigorous science, and advice on using those insights to catapult ourselves and our organizations to success. I can’t think of another book with more powerful implications for both business and life.” —Teresa Amabile, author of The Progress Principle

“Adam Grant has written a landmark book that examines what makes some extraordinarily successful people so great. By introducing us to highly-impressive individuals, he proves that, contrary to popular belief, the best way to climb to the top of the ladder is to take others up there with you. Give and Take presents the road to success for the 21st century.” —Maria Eitel, founding CEO and President of the Nike Foundation

“What The No *sshole Rule did for corporate culture, Give and Take does for each of us as individuals. Grant presents an evidence-based case for the counterintuitive link between generosity and finishing first.” —Douglas Stone and Sheila Heen, coauthors of Difficult Conversations

“Adam Grant is a wunderkind. He has won every distinguished research award and teaching award in his field, and his work has changed the way that people see the world. If you want to be surprised—very pleasantly surprised—by what really drives success, then Give and Take is for you. If you want to make the world a better place, read this book. If you want to make your life better, read this book.” —Tal Ben-Shahar, author of Happier

“In an era of business literature that drones on with the same-old, over-used platitudes, Adam Grant forges brilliant new territory. Give and Take helps readers understand how to maximize their effectiveness and help others simultaneously. It will serve as a new framework for both insight and achievement. A must read!” —Josh Linkner, founder of ePrize, CEO of Detroit Venture Partners, and author of Disciplined Dreaming

“As brilliant as it is wise, this is not just a book–it’s a new and shining worldview. Adam Grant is one of the great social scientists of our time, and Give and Take is brimming with life-changing insights.” ~Susan Cain, author of Quiet

“A truly exhilarating book–the rare work that will shatter your assumptions about how the world works and keep your brain firing for weeks after you’ve turned the last page.” ~Daniel H. Pink, author of Drive and To Sell Is Human

“Perfectly timed and beautifully weighted . . . A refreshing change after years of reading angry indictments of fallen corporate idols. . . . [An] excellent book.” ~Financial Times

“Now shaking up the business world: science that may change the way the world does business.” ~Willie Geist, The Today Show

“Give and Take… might just be the best business book of the year.” ~Fast Company

“Give and Take is a very interesting book… I can’t put it down.” ~Ryan Seacrest, host of American Idol, radio personality, and producer

“In this riveting and sparkling book, Adam Grant turns the conventional wisdom upside-down about what it takes to win and get ahead. With page-turning stories and compelling studies, Give and Take reveals the surprising forces behind success, and the steps we can take to enhance our own.” ~Laszlo Bock, senior vice president of people operations, Google

“Packed with cutting-edge research, concrete examples, and deep insight, Give and Take offers extraordinarily thought-provoking–and often surprising–conclusions about how our interactions with others drive our success and happiness.” ~Gretchen Rubin, author of The Happiness Project and Happier at Home

“Give and Take is an enlightening read… Grant demonstrates how a generous orientation toward others can serve as a formula for producing successful leaders and organizational performance. His writing is as engaging and enjoyable as his style in the classroom.” ~Kenneth Frazier, chairman, president, and CEO, Merck & Co.

“Give and Take provides a refreshing new perspective on the art and science of success. Adam Grant has crafted a unique, ‘must have’ toolkit for accomplishing goals through collaboration and reciprocity.” ~William P. Lauder, executive chairman, The Estée Lauder Companies Inc.

“Good guys finish first–and Adam Grant knows why. Give and Take is the smart surprise you can’t afford to miss.” ~Daniel Gilbert, author of Stumbling on Happiness

“One of my favorite new business discoveries of 2013.” ~Claire Diaz-Ortiz, manager of social innovation, Twitter, and author of Twitter for Good

“Give and Take is a brilliant, well-documented, and motivating debunking of ‘good guys finish last’! With fascinating research, engaging style, and practical wisdom, this is a super manifesto for getting meaningful things done, sustainably.” ~David Allen, author of Getting Things Done

“An important book, destined to be a classic.” ~Stephen Roulac, New York Journal of Books

“Give and Take is… garnering plaudits for the rigor of its science, the freshness of its arguments, and the pleasure of its prose.” ~Leigh Buchanan, Inc.

“Give and Take is just brimming with studies… They amaze and instruct… Thoughtful and well-researched… a book that means something.” ~Bryan Urstadt, Bloomberg BusinessWeek

“Grant’s extraordinary book [is] my favorite on behavior since Quiet.” ~Kare Anderson, Forbes

“I was so enticed by Grant’s research that I decided to enlist him to help me increase my giving.” ~Joel Stein, Time Magazine

“Give and Take… wields a large body of social science research… to challenge the idea that career success is a zero-sum game in which your gains equal my losses… Grant explodes that myth.” ~Emily Esfahani Smith, The Atlantic

“Give and Take defines a road to success marked by new ways of relating to colleagues and customers as well as new ways of growing a business.” ~Tony Hsieh, CEO, Zappos.com

“One of the great secrets of life is that those who win most are often those who give most. In this elegant and lucid book, filled with compelling evidence and evocative examples, Adam Grant shows us why and how this is so. Highly recommended!” ~William Ury, coauthor of Getting to Yes and author of The Power of a Positive No

“Adam Grant has written a landmark book that examines what makes some extraordinarily successful people so great. By introducing us to highly impressive individuals, he proves that, contrary to popular belief, the best way to climb to the top of the ladder is to take others up there with you. Give and Take presents the road to success for the 21st century.” ~Maria Eitel, founding CEO and president of the Nike Foundation

“Give and Take presents a groundbreaking new perspective on success. Along with being a fascinating read, this book holds the key to a more satisfied and productive workplace, better customer relationships, and higher profits.” ~Chip Conley, head of global hospitality, Airbnb

“Adam Grant, a rising star of positive psychology, seamlessly weaves together science and stories of business success and failure, convincing us that giving is in the long run the recipe for success in the corporate world. En route you will find yourself re-examining your own life. Read it yourself, then give copies to the people you care most about in this world.” ~Martin Seligman, author of Learned Optimism and Flourish

“Give and Take is a game changer. Reading Adam Grant’s compelling book will change the way doctors doctor, managers manage, teachers teach, and bosses boss. It will create a society in which people do better by being better. Read the book and change the way you live and work.” ~Barry Schwartz, author of The Paradox of Choice and Practical Wisdom

“Give and Take is sensational, with fascinating insights on page after page. I learned much that I intend to incorporate into my life immediately. The lessons will not only make you a better person; they will make you more capable of doing good for many people, including yourself.” ~Rabbi Joseph Telushkin

Video and Podcast

Read an Excerpt/PDF Preview

1
Good Returns
The Dangers and Rewards of Giving More Than You Get The principle of give and take; that is diplomacy—give one and take ten.
—Mark Twain, author and humorist

On a sunny Saturday afternoon in Silicon Valley, two proud fathers stood on the sidelines of a soccer field. They were watching their young daughters play together, and it was only a matter of time before they struck up a conversation about work. The taller of the two men was Danny Shader, a serial entrepreneur who had spent time at Netscape, Motorola, and Amazon. Intense, dark-haired, and capable of talking about business forever, Shader was in his late thirties by the time he launched his first company, and he liked to call himself the “old man of the Internet.” He loved building companies, and he was just getting his fourth start-up off the ground.

Shader had instantly taken a liking to the other father, a man named David Hornik who invests in companies for a living. At 5’4″, with dark hair, glasses, and a goatee, Hornik is a man of eclectic interests: he collects Alice in Wonderland books, and in college he created his own major in computer music. He went on to earn a master’s in criminology and a law degree, and after burning the midnight oil at a law firm, he accepted a job offer to join a venture capital firm, where he spent the next decade listening to pitches from entrepreneurs and deciding whether or not to fund them.

During a break between soccer games, Shader turned to Hornik and said, “I’m working on something—do you want to see a pitch?” Hornik specialized in Internet companies, so he seemed like an ideal investor to Shader. The interest was mutual. Most people who pitch ideas are first-time entrepreneurs, with no track record of success. In contrast, Shader was a blue-chip entrepreneur who had hit the jackpot not once, but twice. In 1999, his first start-up, Accept.com, was acquired by Amazon for $175 million. In 2007, his next company, Good Technology, was acquired by Motorola for $500 million. Given Shader’s history, Hornik was eager to hear what he was up to next.

A few days after the soccer game, Shader drove to Hornik’s office and pitched his newest idea. Nearly a quarter of Americans have trouble making online purchases because they don’t have a bank account or credit card, and Shader was proposing an innovative solution to this problem. Hornik was one of the first venture capitalists to hear the pitch, and right off the bat, he loved it. Within a week, he put Shader in front of his partners and offered him a term sheet: he wanted to fund Shader’s company.

Although Hornik had moved fast, Shader was in a strong position. Given Shader’s reputation, and the quality of his idea, Hornik knew plenty of investors would be clamoring to work with Shader. “You’re rarely the only investor giving an entrepreneur a term sheet,” Hornik explains. “You’re competing with the best venture capital firms in the country, and trying to convince the entrepreneur to take your money instead of theirs.” The best way for Hornik to land the investment was to set a deadline for Shader to make his decision. If Hornik made a compelling offer with a short fuse, Shader might sign it before he had the chance to pitch to other investors. This is what many venture capitalists do to stack the odds in their favor.

But Hornik didn’t give Shader a deadline. In fact, he practically invited Shader to shop his offer around to other investors. Hornik believed that entrepreneurs need time to evaluate their options, so as a matter of principle, he refused to present exploding offers. “Take as much time as you need to make the right decision,” he said. Although Hornik hoped Shader would conclude that the right decision was to sign with him, he put Shader’s best interests ahead of his own, giving Shader space to explore other options.

Shader did just that: he spent the next few weeks pitching his idea to other investors. In the meantime, Hornik wanted to make sure he was still a strong contender, so he sent Shader his most valuable resource: a list of forty references who could attest to Hornik’s caliber as an investor. Hornik knew that entrepreneurs look for the same attributes in investors that we all seek in financial advisers: competence and trustworthiness. When entrepreneurs sign with an investor, the investor joins their board of directors and provides expert advice. Hornik’s list of references reflected the blood, sweat, and tears that he had devoted to entrepreneurs over the course of more than a decade in the venture business. He knew they would vouch for his skill and his character.

A few weeks later, Hornik’s phone rang. It was Shader, ready to announce his decision.

“I’m sorry,” Shader said, “but I’m signing with another investor.” The financial terms of the offer from Hornik and the other investor were virtually identical, so Hornik’s list of forty references should have given him an advantage. And after speaking with the references, it was clear to Shader that Hornik was a great guy.

But it was this very same spirit of generosity that doomed Hornik’s case. Shader worried that Hornik would spend more time encouraging him than challenging him. Hornik might not be tough enough to help Shader start a successful business, and the other investor had a reputation for being a brilliant adviser who questioned and pushed entrepreneurs. Shader walked away thinking, “I should probably add somebody to the board who will challenge me more. Hornik is so affable that I don’t know what he’ll be like in the boardroom.” When he called Hornik, he explained, “My heart said to go with you, but my head said to go with them. I decided to go with my head instead of my heart.”

Hornik was devastated, and he began to second-guess himself. “Am I a dope? If I had applied pressure to take the term sheet, maybe he would have taken it. But I’ve spent a decade building my reputation so this wouldn’t happen. How did this happen?”

David Hornik learned his lesson the hard way: good guys finish last.

Or do they?

According to conventional wisdom, highly successful people have three things in common: motivation, ability, and opportunity. If we want to succeed, we need a combination of hard work, talent, and luck. The story of Danny Shader and David Hornik highlights a fourth ingredient, one that’s critical but often neglected: success depends heavily on how we approach our interactions with other people. 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?

As an organizational psychologist and Wharton professor, I’ve dedicated more than ten years of my professional life to studying these choices at organizations ranging from Google to the U.S. Air Force, and it turns out that they have staggering consequences for success. Over the past three decades, in a series of groundbreaking studies, social scientists have discovered that people differ dramatically in their preferences for reciprocity— their desired mix of taking and giving. To shed some light on these preferences, let me introduce you to two kinds of people who fall at opposite ends of the reciprocity spectrum at work. I call them takers and givers. 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. Takers believe that the world is a competitive, dog-eat-dog place. They feel that to succeed, they need to be better than others. To prove their competence, they self-promote and make sure they get plenty of credit for their efforts. Garden-variety takers aren’t cruel or cutthroat; they’re just cautious and self-protective. “If I don’t look out for myself first,” takers think, “no one will.” Had David Hornik been more of a taker, he would have given Danny Shader a deadline, putting his goal of landing the investment ahead of Shader’s desire for a flexible timeline.

But Hornik is the opposite of a taker; he’s a giver. 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. These preferences aren’t about money: givers and takers aren’t distinguished by how much they donate to charity or the compensation that they command from their employers. Rather, givers and takers differ in their attitudes and actions toward other people. If you’re a taker, you help others strategically, when the benefits to you outweigh the personal costs. If you’re a giver, you might use a different cost-benefit analysis: you help whenever the benefits to others exceed the personal costs. Alternatively, you might not think about the personal costs at all, helping others without expecting anything in return. If you’re a giver at work, you simply strive to be generous in sharing your time, energy, knowledge, skills, ideas, and connections with other people who can benefit from them.

It’s tempting to reserve the giver label for larger-than-life heroes such as Mother Teresa or Mahatma Gandhi, but being a giver doesn’t require extraordinary acts of sacrifice. It just involves a focus on acting in the interests of others, such as by giving help, providing mentoring, sharing credit, or making connections for others. Outside the workplace, this type of behavior is quite common. According to research led by Yale psychologist Margaret Clark, most people act like givers in close relationships. In marriages and friendships, we contribute whenever we can without keeping score.

But in the workplace, give and take becomes more complicated. Professionally, few of us act purely like givers or takers, adopting a third style instead. We become matchers, striving to preserve an equal balance of 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.

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. It wouldn’t be surprising if you act like 3a taker when negotiating your salary, a giver when mentoring someone with less experience than you, and a matcher when sharing expertise with a colleague. But evidence shows that at work, the vast majority of people develop a primary reciprocity style, which captures how they approach most of the people most of the time. And this primary style can play as much of a role in our success as hard work, talent, and luck.

In fact, the patterns of success based on reciprocity styles are remarkably clear. If I asked you to guess who’s the most likely to end up at the bottom of the success ladder, what would you say—takers, givers, or matchers? Professionally, all three reciprocity styles have their own benefits and drawbacks. But there’s one style that proves more costly than the other two. Based on David Hornik’s story, you might predict that givers achieve the worst results—and you’d be right. Research demonstrates that givers sink to the bottom of the success ladder. Across a wide range of important occupations, givers are at a disadvantage: they make others better off but sacrifice their own success in the process.

In the world of engineering, the least productive and effective engineers are givers. In one study, when more than 160 professional engineers in California rated one another on help given and received, the least successful engineers were those who gave more than they received. These givers had the worst objective scores in their firm for the number of tasks, technical reports, and drawings completed—not to mention errors made, deadlines missed, and money wasted. Going out of their way to help others prevented them from getting their own work done.

The same pattern emerges in medical school. In a study of more than six hundred medical students in Belgium, the students with the lowest grades had unusually high scores on giver statements like “I love to help others” and “I anticipate the needs of others.” The givers went out of their way to help their peers study, sharing what they already knew at the expense of filling gaps in their own knowledge, and it gave their peers a leg up at test time. Salespeople are no different. In a study I led of salespeople in North Carolina, compared with takers and matchers, givers brought in two and a half times less annual sales revenue. They were so concerned about what was best for their customers that they weren’t willing to sell aggressively. 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. 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.

As we’ve seen, the engineers with the lowest productivity are mostly givers. But when we look at the engineers with the highest productivity, the evidence shows that they’re givers too. The California engineers with the best objective scores for quantity and quality of results are those who consistently give more to their colleagues than they get. The worst performers and the best performers are givers; takers and matchers are more likely to land in the middle.

This pattern holds up across the board. The Belgian medical students with the lowest grades have unusually high giver scores, but so do the students with the highest grades. Over the course of medical school, being a giver accounts for 11 percent higher grades. Even in sales, I found that the least productive salespeople had 25 percent higher giver scores than average performers—but so did the most productive salespeople. The top performers were givers, and they averaged 50 percent more annual revenue than the takers and matchers. Givers dominate the bottom and the top of the success ladder. Across occupations, if you examine the link between reciprocity styles and success, the givers are more likely to become champs—not only chumps.

Guess which one David Hornik turns out to be?

After Danny Shader signed with the other investor, he had a gnawing feeling. “We just closed a big round. We should be celebrating. Why am I not happier? I was excited about my investor, who’s exceptionally bright and talented, but I was missing the opportunity to work with Hornik.” Shader wanted to find a way to engage Hornik, but there was a catch. To involve him, Shader and his lead investor would have to sell more of the company, diluting their ownership.

Shader decided it was worth the cost to him personally. Before the financing closed, he invited Hornik to invest in his company. Hornik accepted the offer and made an investment, earning some ownership of the company. He began coming to board meetings, and Shader was impressed with Hornik’s ability to push him to consider new directions. “I got to see the other side of him,” Shader says. “It had just been overshadowed by how affable he is.” Thanks in part to Hornik’s advice, Shader’s start-up has taken off. It’s called PayNearMe, and it enables Americans who don’t have a bank account or a credit card to make online purchases with a barcode or a card, and then pay cash for them at participating establishments. Shader landed major partnerships with 7-Eleven and Greyhound to provide these services, and in the first year and a half since launching, PayNearMe has been growing at more than 30 percent per month. As an investor, Hornik has a small share in this growth.

Hornik has also added Shader to his list of references, which is probably even more valuable than the deal itself. When entrepreneurs call to ask about Hornik, Shader tells them, “You may be thinking he’s just a nice guy, but he’s a lot more than that. He’s phenomenal: super-hardworking and very courageous. He can be both challenging and supportive at the same time. And he’s incredibly responsive, which is one of the best characteristics you can have in an investor. He’ll get back to you any hour—day or night—quickly, on anything that matters.”

The payoff for Hornik was not limited to this single deal on PayNearMe. After seeing Hornik in action, Shader came to admire Hornik’s commitment to acting in the best interests of entrepreneurs, and he began to set Hornik up with other investment opportunities. In one case, after meeting the CEO of a company called Rocket Lawyer, Shader recommended Hornik as an investor. Although the CEO already had a term sheet from another investor, Hornik ended up winning the investment.

Although he recognizes the downsides, David Hornik believes that operating like a giver has been a driving force behind his success in venture capital. Hornik estimates that when most venture capitalists offer term sheets to entrepreneurs, they have a signing rate near 50 percent: “If you get half of the deals you offer, you’re doing pretty well.” Yet in eleven years as a venture capitalist, Hornik has offered twenty-eight term sheets to entrepreneurs, and twenty-five have accepted. Shader is one of just three people who have ever turned down an investment from Hornik. The other 89 percent of the time entrepreneurs have taken Hornik’s money. Thanks to his funding and expert advice, these entrepreneurs have gone on to build a number of successful start-ups—one was valued at more than $3 billion on its first day of trading in 2012, and others have been acquired by Google, Oracle, Ticketmaster, and Monster.

Hornik’s hard work and talent, not to mention his luck at being on the right sideline at his daughter’s soccer game, played a big part in lining up the deal with Danny Shader. But it was his reciprocity style that ended up winning the day for him. Even better, he wasn’t the only winner. Shader won too, as did the companies to which Shader later recommended Hornik. By operating as a giver, Hornik created value for himself while maximizing opportunities for value to flow outward for the benefit of others.

Book Summary: Give and Take – Why Helping Others Drives Our Success