Give and Take: A Revolutionary Approach to Success

Adam Grant’s Give and Take challenges conventional notions deeply embedded in American schools and workplaces. Grant’s argument centers around the idea that individuals who exhibit the characteristics of “givers”—those who offer their support and resources without any immediate expectation of reciprocation—can, in fact, be highly successful and effective in professional environments. This concept presents a stark contrast to the prevailing ideology found in many American educational institutions and workplaces, which typically prioritize “taker” attributes. To understand this contrast, it is crucial to explore the ideological context of American schools and workplaces and how they function as zero-sum environments.

American schools and workplaces often operate within the framework of zero-sum thinking. In a zero-sum environment, people view success as a finite resource, with one person’s gain equating to another’s loss. In schools, for example, students may compete for limited opportunities, such as scholarships, recognition, or admission to prestigious universities. Similarly, in workplaces, there is often a sense of competition for promotions, pay raises, or job security, where one employee’s success is perceived as coming at the expense of another.

This zero-sum thinking deeply influences the values and behaviors that American schools and workplaces encourage. In such environments, qualities associated with “takers” are typically rewarded. Takers are individuals who prioritize personal success and are driven by the idea that their prosperity is attainable at the expense of others. They are more likely to employ competitive tactics, assert their dominance, and focus on advancing their interests, sometimes at the cost of colleagues or peers.

In American schools, this ideology often translates into an emphasis on individual achievement, standardized testing, and a grading system that ranks students in terms of academic performance. This system tends to promote a culture of comparison and competition. Students are evaluated based on their ability to outperform their peers, which can create a zero-sum mindset, as one student’s high grades may be seen as directly detracting from another’s chances of success.

Likewise, in American workplaces, zero-sum thinking is evident in performance reviews, salary negotiations, and promotional opportunities. Employees might perceive that their success is limited by the advancement of their coworkers, fostering a mindset in which taking more and giving less is seen as essential to career growth. In such an environment, competition for limited resources often leads to a cutthroat culture, where collaboration and supportiveness take a back seat to self-promotion.

This prevalent zero-sum ideology in American institutions creates an environment where givers, who prioritize helping others without immediate self-interest, are often perceived as naïve or inefficient. This sentiment emerges from the belief that any effort or resource spent assisting others is lost in the zero-sum game, potentially limiting personal success. Therefore, givers who genuinely care about the well-being of their colleagues, classmates, or coworkers may struggle to succeed within the established framework.

Grant’s book challenges this prevailing ideology. Grant argues that givers can indeed thrive in American schools and workplaces, and he provides extensive evidence and anecdotes to support his claims. He suggests that by fostering a culture of giving, where individuals prioritize the success of their peers, organizations can create a more supportive and productive environment. Grant’s research reveals that givers can harness the power of reciprocity, building networks and earning the trust and respect of those around them. In the long term, this results in success and fulfillment.