Today we complete the review of the book "Give and Take". We discussed the two categories within the givers. Today we discuss Chump Change and the Scrooge shift. Negotiations is an area where such roles demonstrated differences very well. Givers are uncomfortable being assertive and advocating their own interests. Takers on the other hand are focused on claiming value and they see then negotiations as zero-sum win-lose contests and didn't trust their opponents. They bargain aggressively overlooking the understanding of their counterpart's interests. The selfless givers made too many concessions. Dutch psychologist Carsten De Dreu showed that successful negotiators are not selfless givers or takers but those that operate in the 'otherish' manner described earlier.
They had high concern for their interests and high concern for their counterpart's interests. They are able to think in more complex ways and expanding the pie. They find win-win solutions that both takers and selfless givers miss.
Successful givers realize their everyday choice shape the results they achieve in competitive confrontational situations. Although they start from trusting others' intentions, they are careful to scan the environment for potential takers, always ready to shift from feeling a takers emotions to analyzing a takers' thoughts and flex from giving unconditionally to a more generous tit for tat. And when they feel inclined to back down, successful givers are prepared to draw reserves of assertiveness from their commitments to the people who matter to them.
A question may be asked that when the world operates as a flea market, could it function on giving instead of matching ? Deron Beal created a website called Freecycle to connect people with goods to people who need them. Although takers and matchers joined it to get something, Beal noticed that they used the same website to give back when they didn't the goods any longer. For example, parents who wanted products for their babies, passed it on after use. People who joined with the intention of taking ended up giving.
Finally the author concludes this discussion of roles and their definitions of success with an acknowledgement that there is a fine line between giving and clever matching that often gets blurred where the reciprocity styles are governed by actions themselves, the motives behind them or some combination of the two. On the one hand even if motives are mixed, helping behaviors often add value to others, increasing the total amount of giving in a social system. Because efforts that are not authentic have their own peril, would-be matchers are best served by giving in ways that they find enjoyable to recipients whose well being matters to them. This way matchers will operate in a givers mindset, leading their motives to appear and become more pure.
They had high concern for their interests and high concern for their counterpart's interests. They are able to think in more complex ways and expanding the pie. They find win-win solutions that both takers and selfless givers miss.
Successful givers realize their everyday choice shape the results they achieve in competitive confrontational situations. Although they start from trusting others' intentions, they are careful to scan the environment for potential takers, always ready to shift from feeling a takers emotions to analyzing a takers' thoughts and flex from giving unconditionally to a more generous tit for tat. And when they feel inclined to back down, successful givers are prepared to draw reserves of assertiveness from their commitments to the people who matter to them.
A question may be asked that when the world operates as a flea market, could it function on giving instead of matching ? Deron Beal created a website called Freecycle to connect people with goods to people who need them. Although takers and matchers joined it to get something, Beal noticed that they used the same website to give back when they didn't the goods any longer. For example, parents who wanted products for their babies, passed it on after use. People who joined with the intention of taking ended up giving.
Finally the author concludes this discussion of roles and their definitions of success with an acknowledgement that there is a fine line between giving and clever matching that often gets blurred where the reciprocity styles are governed by actions themselves, the motives behind them or some combination of the two. On the one hand even if motives are mixed, helping behaviors often add value to others, increasing the total amount of giving in a social system. Because efforts that are not authentic have their own peril, would-be matchers are best served by giving in ways that they find enjoyable to recipients whose well being matters to them. This way matchers will operate in a givers mindset, leading their motives to appear and become more pure.
No comments:
Post a Comment