Scan barcode
dinibharadwaj's review against another edition
informative
inspiring
reflective
4.0
Thought-provoking read that proves that giving is the human superpower.
therealkathryn's review against another edition
3.0
Honestly at times I thought this was 2 stars. There may be people who might adjust their giver style after reading this, or shift to being more of a giver. There are also plenty of takers who have been perfectly successful, I can't imagine them changing.
The section on negotiating as if it were for someone else, if you have trouble asking for yourself, was worthwhile.
Only recommended if you really are extremely interested in the subject.
The section on negotiating as if it were for someone else, if you have trouble asking for yourself, was worthwhile.
Only recommended if you really are extremely interested in the subject.
josiezx's review against another edition
5.0
I'm fairly skeptical about personal development books like these, but this one was a solid two-hundred-something pages of worthy content.
This book made me realize the differences in the way that I approached my ballroom career and my design career; I was a giver in one and a taker in the other. It also allows me to see my career in a whole new way and be mindful, in a different manner, of how I can advance my career. I think the biggest impact for me was the concept of increasing the size of the pie and seeing colleagues not as competition.
Definitely a book worth rereading.
--
A few points that stood out:
Pay it forward with the givers but not the takers.
It's important to be otherish givers but not selfless givers.
Giving expands the pie. Taking is a zero-sum game.
When asking for help, ask what someone would do in that position, rather than what their advice would be.
Some quotes I noted as I read:
It turns out that motivation is the reason that people develop talent in the first place. p104.
The perception of impact serves as a buffer against stress, enabling employees to avoid burnout and maintain their motivation and performance. p166.
By asking people questions about their plans and intentions, we increase the likelihood that they actually act on these plans and intentions. p142.
If you spend the money on yourself, your happiness doesn't change. But if you spend the money on others, you actually report becoming significantly happier. p183.
At the end of the day, even if he was trashing their work, they knew he cared about them as people. It's as if you just handed him a baby, and it's his responsibility to tell you if your baby is sick. He really cares about great writing--and about you. p86.
Most of the jobs you get are more or less through word of mouth or a recommendation. It's not a zero sum game. So if you hear that somebody got a pilot picked up or one of their shows went to series, in a way that's really good because comedy is doing better. p91.
By shifting her giving to a novel domain, she was able to recharge her energy. p169.
When everyone contributes, the pie is larger, and givers are no longer stuck contributing far more than they get.
The more strongly we affiliate with a group, the greater our risk of losing our sense of uniqueness. The more we work to distinguish ourselves from others, the greater our risk of losing our sense of belongingness. p233.
In one study, when others could see their results, takers contributed a large number of ideas during brainstorming. But when their results were hidden, takers added less value. p245.
Those who wrote about themselves as givers donated an average of 2.5x less money than those who wrote about themselves with neutral words. p247.
Participants in direct exchange will be less inclined to identify with the grouo because they will less likely to derive the emotional experience of group membership. p227.
This book made me realize the differences in the way that I approached my ballroom career and my design career; I was a giver in one and a taker in the other. It also allows me to see my career in a whole new way and be mindful, in a different manner, of how I can advance my career. I think the biggest impact for me was the concept of increasing the size of the pie and seeing colleagues not as competition.
Definitely a book worth rereading.
--
A few points that stood out:
Pay it forward with the givers but not the takers.
It's important to be otherish givers but not selfless givers.
Giving expands the pie. Taking is a zero-sum game.
When asking for help, ask what someone would do in that position, rather than what their advice would be.
Some quotes I noted as I read:
It turns out that motivation is the reason that people develop talent in the first place. p104.
The perception of impact serves as a buffer against stress, enabling employees to avoid burnout and maintain their motivation and performance. p166.
By asking people questions about their plans and intentions, we increase the likelihood that they actually act on these plans and intentions. p142.
If you spend the money on yourself, your happiness doesn't change. But if you spend the money on others, you actually report becoming significantly happier. p183.
At the end of the day, even if he was trashing their work, they knew he cared about them as people. It's as if you just handed him a baby, and it's his responsibility to tell you if your baby is sick. He really cares about great writing--and about you. p86.
Most of the jobs you get are more or less through word of mouth or a recommendation. It's not a zero sum game. So if you hear that somebody got a pilot picked up or one of their shows went to series, in a way that's really good because comedy is doing better. p91.
By shifting her giving to a novel domain, she was able to recharge her energy. p169.
When everyone contributes, the pie is larger, and givers are no longer stuck contributing far more than they get.
The more strongly we affiliate with a group, the greater our risk of losing our sense of uniqueness. The more we work to distinguish ourselves from others, the greater our risk of losing our sense of belongingness. p233.
In one study, when others could see their results, takers contributed a large number of ideas during brainstorming. But when their results were hidden, takers added less value. p245.
Those who wrote about themselves as givers donated an average of 2.5x less money than those who wrote about themselves with neutral words. p247.
Participants in direct exchange will be less inclined to identify with the grouo because they will less likely to derive the emotional experience of group membership. p227.
kaiorosa1's review against another edition
informative
lighthearted
medium-paced
3.0
It’s good to have some information about the good parts of being a giver but I don’t think this book does anything different and it could’ve been shorter!
acousticdefacto's review against another edition
adventurous
hopeful
informative
inspiring
lighthearted
reflective
relaxing
fast-paced
5.0
the_fat_penguin's review against another edition
3.0
givers, takers, matchers...givers are at the top and bottom of the success ladder
alexandrabjarg's review against another edition
Hætti að lesa um miðja bók, ágætar pælingar en allt of langdregin. Hefði átt að vera bloggpóstur.
tcmoritz's review against another edition
hopeful
informative
inspiring
lighthearted
medium-paced
3.0
lgmaxwell722's review against another edition
3.0
How much do you give? How much do you take? In this book, Grant bases success on givers, takers, and matchers within an organization. Each personality has their strengths, but he argues it is givers who offer the most even as they are at risk of burn-out. Using research and science to back up his claims, Grant provides recommendations on how givers can prevent burn-out and takers be more like gives to benefit others. This book is good for leaders who who want to focus on the diverse talents of their team and understand how our styles influence productivity and drive.