Why helping others drives our success, in an increasingly individualized and secluded world. Society pushes us to focus on outward indicators of success, passion, hard work, skill, talent, status. This can lead to toxic cultures where selfish people, takers, profit at the expense of others, the selfless, the givers. By becoming an informed giver, a wiser person, this could hold the key to success in many facets of life in the modernized world. I myself have found this to be a personal top 5 book of all time as it helped me get wiser in knowing how to avoid takers, and reduce contact with matchers, of which there are plenty. In being able to learn the intangible skill of reading people like a book, discernment, this would go a long way to having the right people in your life. It would actually even help in investing by knowing who to invest in, by choosing the winners.

-those who win the most are those who give the most

-those with higher humility are actually rated more attractive; charitable is too, but tricky as it is politicized

Chapter 1 – good returns

-The Hazards and Benefits of Giving More Than You Receive

-takers: want to get more than they give: Intentionally tilt reciprocation in heir favour and feel proud of it, putting their own interests ahead of others needs. Competitive and believe the world is competitive. Dog-eat-dog mindset. To succeed, must be better than others, cut throat.

Givers: reciprocation in others favour. Other-focused, not worried about results

-Takers give strategically, only when it benefits them

-most people are matchers; especially at work

-most people act as givers in close relationships

-professionally, givers do the worst, while they also do the best

-givers longer term do better because people remember them positively and spread their reputation positively

-successful people at the top are givers; mutually increases for everyone

-givers at the bottom are pushovers and doormats. They aren’t all nice or doormats, and maybe selfish

-successful givers are as ambitious as takers and matchers. Successful givers when they succeed gave people rooting for them and supporting them

-successful takers have people envious and wanting to dethrone them

-giving works in the long-run only in situations that are not zero-sum, or win-lose interactions. But, since most of life is NOT zero-sum, giving in the long run wins. This is due to reputations, relationships, and goodwill being incurred over time, which doesn’t happen with takers. The key is the building of good relationships and actual goodwill

-being a giver is not good in a 100-yard dash, but it is good for a marathon (like marriage)

-the long-run is getting shorter in time due to relationships and reputations being more visible

-sensible people tend to remember you and come back

-in service or teamwork/collaborative situations, givers easily win

-the giver needs to not give too much initially, and especially with takers, that can put you to bed. Granting is Particularly Hazardous in Interactions with Takers

-people become more like matchers and takers if they believe the other person is that way too

-David Hornik is extremely successful as a venture capitalist, known for his giving approach

-giving is powerful and dangerous

-one can spot a taker just from looking at a Facebook profile

-You May Opt to Initiate Giving as a Promising Route to Future Success. But if you do it only to succeed, it probably won’t work

Chapter 2 – the peacock and the panda

-beware of fakers; takers disguised as givers

-takers build a network of connections and then use them to benefit themselves

-networks come with 3 advantages: private information, diverse skills, and power

-givers and takers have equally large networks, but givers produce far more lasting value through their networks than takers

-if takers view you as someone powerful, they kiss up and are very charming and manipulative to try and get your network or trust. However, if you are below them, then they kick down and view you badly, controlling and rude.

-takers are obsessed with impressions by superiors but don’t care about those below them; and when people gain power, their true side comes out as they feel more able to express their natural tendencies. So, takers end up treating people even worse. Most people are matchers, so they want to see justice served, and will try and bring down takers.

-when people get burned by takers, they punish them the easiest way, by gossip.

-over time, as reputation spreads, takers end up cutting existing ties and burning bridges with new and old ties.

-Seeking Gain Through Networks Alone Yields Limited Success; The True Value Lies in Cultivating Networks for Their Own Sake.

-takers leak, or lek clues of being takers, despite their best intention to hide.

-takers are unsmiling, competitive and driven, frowning. If they are a taker, they view others as takers, and will be very cut throat. Thinking with a competitive selfish mindset will show on the face.

-takers always talk about themselves and refer to themselves, earn huge salaries and way more than other executives intentionally

-takers: inflated sense of self, feelings of superiority, entitlement, constant need for attention and admiration, enjoying being the center of attention, arrogance, exhibitionism, showman. The bigger the photos of CEOs in annual reports, the greater the taker

-see how someone has treated others in their networks

-Takers; too many Facebook friends, all superficial friends and none very good, boastful, arrogant, self-important, self-absorbed. Takers receive more than they give. Takers think how can others help me.

-givers: you can tell by the little things via their small gestures and acts of kindness. Givers give more than they receive

-if giving is with strings attached, receiver may feel manipulated or suspicious, as many people feel cautious in approach to networking. Givers think how can they help others. Givers get lucky.

-Strong ties: friends and colleagues, that we really trust

-Weak ties: acquaintances, people we know casually

-strong ties may build bonds, weak ties may build bridges

-dormant ties: As Time Passes, Dormant Ties Multiply and Their Value Grows. In the 40s and 50s have lots of these

-matchers are obsessed with reciprocation so they view relationships as transactional exchanges.

-only givers paired with givers can make weak ties strong or dormant ties relevant. Takers are suspicious and won’t do it or initiate. So, only givers can form new bonds as people grow older

-five-minute favour: you should be willing to do something that will take you five minutes or less for anybody

-success eventually follows generosity; givers gain

Chapter 3 – the ripple effect          

-geniuses are takers; they duck the intelligence, energy, and capability from others

-genius makers: givers who use their intelligence to amplify others and make them better

-takers have supreme confidence in their own opinions, and feel free of social approval because of their greatness, the better and more creative architects and scientists had higher dominance, hostility, psychopathic deviance, aggression, demanding, self-centered. The less skilled were more concerned for others, more sympathetic

-George Meyer, comedy writer for Simpsons and other tv sitcoms, from the beginning was a giver

-Frank Wright, architect, taker, career faltered in the last nine years of his life. He even sent his own son a bill of how much his life cost when he asked to be paid

-takers long term ends up being alone and isolated, due to longer term resentment from others

-Even in Ostensibly Autonomous Roles Dependent on Fundamental brain power, our success depends more on others than we realize

-even in investment analysis, analysts performed better with high-quality colleagues to share information and ideas off of

-takers favour independence over interdependence

-givers favour interdependence over independence

-expedition behaviour; showing equal concern for others as you do yourself

-Exceptionally Gifted Individuals Often Elicit Envy, Posing the Danger of Dislike, Resentment, Isolation, and Subversion. But if they are also givers, they no longer have a target on their backs

-since many people think like matchers, it’s very common for them to keep track of each members credits and debits

-getting a reputation as someone who cares more about others can happen as a giver, and others may be more willing to help

-matchers in collaboration grant bonuses to givers, impose a tax on takers

-not feeling the need to take credit is important; takers are obsessed with that, and by taking credit and not giving credit, they end up hurting themselves in the long run

-takers are always “busy” and show no respect to inferiors, but a ton or perhaps over the top respect to superiors

-the responsibility bias; in 3 out of 4 marriages, both parties believe they do more work than they actually do. We remember our own work and contributions more than others

-takers claim credit for success and blame others for failures

-givers accept failures and give credit for successes

-psychological safety; you can take a risk without being penalized or punished

-takers cut people down openly and intentionally and thrive in doing so

-takers do not ask about other people and have no interest in others

Chapter 4 – Unearthing the Hidden Gem

-givers succeed by recognizing the potential in others

-self-fulfilling prophecies start even in the classroom. So, start out positive right from the beginning

-givers have higher trust and expectations for others

-takers have low trust for others and low expectations

-matchers like to wait for others to make the first move. Givers go straight for it, and believe in others as bloomers

-givers believe everyone could be a diamond in the rough

-motivation is the reason that people develop talent in the first place, not the other way around. Positive influences in those fields leads to more effort in those fields

-givers resist searching by talent first; passion and perseverance instead

-givers may invest too much to people where it doesn’t pay off. Once things are apparent to not go anywhere (and it’s apparent rather quickly), you need to cut bait quickly. Life is too short to be wasting time in negative situations

-however, givers are actually the least likely to be over-investing in the wrong people

-multiple will chase after bad due to sunk cost fallacy

-takers more likely to fall prey to sunk cost fallacy, because it keeps the cost of failure hidden or delayed, like failed marriages

-people make better decisions when for others than themselves

-takers have huge pride and won’t delegate, especially in response to negative criticism; they kill the messenger and are surrounded with yes men

-because of their dedication to others, givers are willing to work longer and harder. Those with work ethic have love towards that direction

-givers are open to outside advice, takers are not

-psychological analysis; one’s selflessness, desire to succeed, willingness to persevere, receptiveness to feedback, dedication

Chapter 5 – The Influence of Powerless Communication: Embracing Modesty to Impact Others

-in influence there is dominance and prestige. Takers look to influence through dominance, aggression, loud voices, projecting confidence, larger than life personality. However, in skepticism, dominance leads to greater resistance. Dominance is zero-sum

-givers use prestige, which is powerless communication, absolutely positive. Speaking humbly, conveying weaknesses, disclaimers, talking tentatively, asking questions over offering answers. Resistance cannot be met with more dominance.

-takers worry about showing weakness and vulnerability, always trying to be tough. Givers don’t do that

-pratfall effect; if you are an expert, showing weakness makes you liked more, as it makes you seem relatable and actually human. However, if you are average or mediocre, showing weakness makes you liked even less, since it’s just all negative

-Skillful Trial Attorneys Strive to Blend Expertise and Approachability

-givers are the top sellers as they ask appropriate questions; powerless communication, people love to talk about themselves. Starting with and asking questions allows the other person to come to the conclusion themselves

-being a taker only works in one shot situations, as it loses respect of others

-those that ask for advice and help are rated more favourably than those who don’t ask for advice

-asking others for their opinions is a good way to make friends; must be done legitimately and spontaneously however

-the most successful people, successful givers, have higher self-interest and other-interest than the average person

-Takers Display High Self-Interest and Limited Concern for Others

-givers have high other interest, but vary in self-interest

-Altruism Without Boundaries: The Complexity of Selfless Giving. It’s usually fake. Leads to depression, anxiety, burnout, resentment

-people low on self-interest and other-interest are apathetic

-takers care most about benefiting personally, do often to be the highest paid person. Givers on the other hand care more about if others benefit

-you can be both self-interested and other-interested at the same time

-instead, know when, where, how and whom to give to

-givers burn out if they don’t see a good response to their giving

-chunking giving into one day is better than sprinkling it across several days

-sweet spot is 2 hours of volunteering per week. More has substantial diminishing effect. 100-hour rule of volunteering

-giving however, has an energizing effect if it is enjoyable, a meaningful choice, rather than out of obligation or duty

-a lack of social support is linked to burnout. When people are stressed or in negative place is when they are more likely to reach out to others. “Misery loves company”

-giving is like a muscle, you cannot overdo it

-givers make everyone around them better, takers make everyone around them worse

-giving virtuous cycle; give more, motivating people to work harder and earn more money. Givers tend to be happier. Which is why having a family does well for life satisfaction

-happiness levels can account for 10% differences in performance

-Balancing Benevolence: Otherish Givers and the Altruism Spectrum, but with no burnout, end up giving more, and do better themselves

Chapter 7 – chump change

-overcoming the doormat effect

-becoming a doormat is a givers worst nightmare

-givers often in dealing with other people are too trusting, too empathetic, too timid

-givers see the best in others, so they tend to be scammed by takers

-it’s not so easy to identify givers and takers, even though our snap judgments of other things such as a passionate person, a married couple in contempt are accurate

-we tend to assume agreeable people as givers, disagreeable people as takers. This is not true at all. There are four combinations, agreeable or disagreeable takers, and same for givers

-the most difficult to tell are the agreeable takers, these people take the most

-givers are the best at reading people compared to takers and matchers, since they pay more attention to others to begin with. When most guys have no idea, it’s because they are takers. So as a giver, you must use your fine-tuned intuition and not ignore it. Have a filtering list.

-the danger for givers is to end up with agreeable takers, where the giver is already loyal to a taker

-avoid empathy traps

-appeal to other people’s interest, not reason or emotions. That’s how you separate from a taker, without direct confrontation/retribution

-Trust: A Precious Build, An Easily Broken Bond. So, it’s good to start out as a giver, and move toward being a matcher once you find out someone is a taker.

-A Shift in Nature: Allocating Less Time to Takers, More to Value

-generous tit-for-tat

Assertiveness and the advocacy paradox – how givers can be assertive

-in negotiation as a giver, imagine you are negotiating on behalf of others so as to not get shafted. Presents a positive tone for others too

-in zero-sum situations, or people who view life as zero-sum, it’s not wise to give. But, most of life is win-win so it’s fine to there. In fact, one should only seek win-win situations

-otherish givers create value and thus can give and take more. Plus, they have a high concern for others and own interests

-ask others to chip in or refer to others

Chapter 8 – the Scrooge shift

-in one-to-one situations, givers must practise sincerity screening and acting as matchers with takers (which means, nothing happens with takers). Group settings get takers to be like givers with social pressure by getting others to give too

-empathy, a sense of oneness leads to helping

-takers and matchers give when they believe they can get a benefit too

-how to be an effective giver; the five-minute favour. Only give a little, especially in the beginning; remember boundaries. We should not run other peoples lives for them

-uncommon commonalities make people closer even more than common commonalities, as those are superficial by nature

-reciprocation; monkey see monkey do. People will copy others regardless of the action

-people underestimate how many givers there are

-asking for help is more successful than you think

-takers will contribute a lot more in public settings to help maintain their reputations which they are obsessed with

Chapter 9 – out of the shadows

-when takers reputations are ruined, that is when they stop being “most ruthless” in negotiations and instead start “changing”

-takers tend to dominate the spotlight

-looking around, plenty of givers achieve the success I aspire to

-most people believe givers end up least successful, followed by matchers then takers. However, the ones most successful are actually givers

Actions for impact

-test your giver quotient; see if others feedback is giver, matcher, or taker

-run a reciprocity ring; in your organization that is. There has to be a higher goal

-help other people craft their jobs, or craft yours to incorporate more giving

-the five-minute favour

-powerless communication, being an advocate

-join a community of giver

Www.freecycle.org, www.servicespace.org

Disclaimer

This is not Financial Advice. This article is meant only for educational and perhaps entertainment purposes.