Give and Take: Post #9--Smart Givers

Giving Smartly   Some givers light up; others fizzle out. The most successful givers are both otherish-oriented and self-oriented. Less successful givers were mostly selfless, other-oriented. In fact, being too other-oriented can be a form of “pathological altruism.” Teachers often give too much—being overly selfless burns them out. Burnout leads to a host of physical and mental issues. Seeing that they make a difference is an antidote to burnout for teachers.

Give and Take: Post #8--Effective Powerless Communication

Power of Powerless Communication   The two ways to influence are dominance (by showing power) and prestige (by giving and earning respect).  Takers veer toward dominance language (forceful and self-centered); Givers, toward prestige (humility). Dominance is a zero sum game—if I have a lot, that means you have less. Prestige has no limits—no limit to the amount of respect and admiration you can give others.  Areas for using powerless communication to establish prestige: Presenting (be self-deprecating); Selling (ask, don’t sell); Negotiation (seek advice and take perspective); Persuasion (use powerless, deferential talk).
9

Give and Take: Post #7--Practice

 Interest and Talent   Many of us think talent came first, then interest. Quite the reverse. Eric Anders’ research shows it takes 10,000 hours of practice to become an expert. But the inciting element is usually a boss or teacher who is caring, kind and patient.

Give and Take: Post #6--Bloomers

Bloomers and Bias   Harvard psychologist Robert Rosenthal identified 20% of children in a San Francisco school (kindergarten to fifth grade) whom he labeled as “intellectual bloomers.” However, such bloomers were randomly chosen and identified as intellectual bloomers to their teachers. The results: Bloomers outperformed their peers and showed gains after two years—all because teachers believed in them, crafting a self-fulfilling prophecy. Teachers became more supportive and encouraging of these bloomers. Apply the bloomers study to the workplace and watch productivity soar.

Give and Take: Post #5--Perspective

The Perspective Gap  When we are not experiencing an intense situation (either psychologically or physically), it’s difficult to guess how we might feel in a given situation. For example, physicians can’t estimate accurately how people feel unless they listen intently to the patient. Takers rarely have this kind of give-and-take dialogue. We need to become empathic to get a sense of others—step into their shoes (get their perspective).

Give and Take: Post #4--Safety

Safe Environments  We need to provide a safe place for creativity to occur. Harvard researchers show that a psychologically safe environment makes a huge difference for people creating, learning, and innovating. It all boils down to whether people believe that you care for them and, thus, if they then trust you.

Give and Take: Post #3--Responsibility Bias

Responsibility Bias  This bias makes us overestimate our contribution to any project or effort. And “information discrepancy” leads to responsibility bias because we know what we did but cannot accurately know how much others contributed. Takers are especially prone to responsibility bias. Entrepreneurs, investors, and partners often break up over not getting proper credit for all their efforts.

Give and Take: Post #2--Giving and Taking

Giving and Taking  Giver values (helpfulness, responsibility, social justice and compassion) were those endorsed by most people in most countries, instead of taker values (wealth, power, pleasure, and winning).  However, whenever we feel exploited, we revert to a taker mentality and style. One of history’s big takers was Ken Lay (formerly of Enron infamy), despite his charitable corporate donations and glad-handing.

Give and Take: Post #1--Overview

Overview  There are three styles of social interaction concerning reciprocity:  Takers, who take more than they give in life; matchers who give tit for tat; and givers, who give to help others. When it comes to who wins and who loses in life, researcher and author Adam Grant concludes that givers do both—win and lose. A Wharton professor, Grant makes some powerful observations to support his descriptions and analysis of all three types; ultimately, he concludes that “otherish” givers (generous but sensible) come out on top every time. Losing givers (overly selfless givers) were those who gave too much to others at their own expense,  earned 14% less, were twice as likely to be victims, and were 22 percent less powerful than either matchers or takers. In the book, Grant describes the difference between these two types of givers: The champs and the chumps!

Give and Take: A Revolutionary Approach to Success (Viking/Penguin Group, 2013) by Adam Grant, reviewed by Steve Gladis, PhD, August 2013.

Innovation Myths--Post #10--Simple Plan

Simple Innovation Plan: Here’s the author’s solution for getting innovative: 1) Pick a project and start doing something (pick a small one at first); 2) Forget innovation and focus on being good (great innovators start trying to get better at solving a problem); 3) If you work with others, you need leadership and trust (keep out people you can’t trust); 4) Make the team smaller if it’s not working; 5) Be happy about interesting mistakes (they often create a path toward solution).

Innovation Myths: Post #9--Problem Finding vs Problem Sovling

Problem Solving vs. Problem Finding: People try to solve problems too quickly before deciding if they’re the right ones to solve. Great inventors discover unidentified problems (by asking questions), then answer them. Framing problems helps find them and solve them, like Edison: How do you get power into homes to charge a light bulb?