It’s a statistically proven fact that givers will appear as both the best and worst performing employees. Yes. I also said “worst." Where you end-up has a lot to do with how and when you give. All things considered, it’s better to be a giver.
Adam Grant is Wharton’s highest-rated professor. In his book “Give and and Take," he explains how giving can go well beyond the emotional rewards which are so often taught to us in our childhood. He’s developed three categories of people; “givers”, “takers” and “matchers." Where the first two are self-explanatory, and the third represents those who show a preference for reciprocity and are careful not to wander into habits of unchecked giving or taking.
“Across occupations, if you examine the link between reciprocity styles and success, the givers are more likely to become champs—not only chumps”-Adam Grant“ Give and Take," and Take," Pg. 7Givers come in all types and sometimes are hard to distinguish from organizations or individuals who are simply exploiting a situation for personal gain. Let’s keep things simple and assume that we’re only referring to givers who do not have ulterior motives. When giving is an activity for civic-minded volunteers, the employee may be presented with some choices.
volunteer programs vary in scope and participation. An example could robotics program, which ties the culture the
the they success commitment
achieve absenteeism company.