Reciprocity…

This post is also available in: Español (Spanish)

Have you ever heard that human beings have three types of reciprocity styles? I recently finished reading a great book called Give and Take by Adam Grant, and he has a very interesting way of explaining how we all have a reciprocity style that sets the tone for our professional success. Grant does a spectacular job defining the three styles and supporting his conclusions with lots of real evidence and studies.

 

When it comes to reciprocity styles, we can be givers, takers, or matchers. Givers are those who always give without any intention of receiving anything back. Takers, on the other hand, always take as much as they can from others without any intention of giving anything back. Matchers give only when they know they will get something in exchange. Of course, all of us are capable of mixing the three styles, but we have a primary style that defines us. Think for few minutes and be honest with yourself. What style defines you best?

 

When I read the definitions for the first time, I placed myself in the matchers group. I wasn’t surprised when I read that that particular style is the most common in terms of people’s professional lives. The book centers on reciprocity within our careers, professions, or jobs, and the author explains that we tend to act more as givers within our families or closer relationships. While I believe that statement is often true, I have also seen people using the three styles within their personal relationships.

 

After I finished reading the book, I thought about how to share what I’d learned with all of you here. As I have mentioned before, the book focuses on reciprocity styles inside the professional world, so I needed to find a way to adapt the concept to make it work with personal relationships. I’ll do my best to explain my point of view, and hopefully you’ll get something from it, but I still totally recommend you read the book.

 

When I was married, I acted as a giver and as a matcher. I don’t consider myself a taker because that’s against my values and principles. I’m not saying that being a taker is completely wrong. If you are a taker and you are happy being that way, I respect that. But being a taker doesn’t make me happy. Giving fulfills me way more than taking. My ex-husband, on the other hand, describes himself as a taker in the romantic/familiar relationship context.

 

Let me clarify something before I continue. When I talk about giving or taking in the romantic/familiar context, I’m not referring to material things. I’m talking about attention, feelings, energy, time, and support. You may act as a Santa figure and surround your significant other with lots of material gifts and still be a complete taker. In my opinion, reciprocity inside a romantic relationship should be measured by non-material things. My ex-husband used to be great at giving material things, but he wasn’t good at giving attention at the same level he demanded it.

 

For instance, when we went to Italy, we planned to visit my brother. It was a wonderful blessing that my nephew Diego was born right before we got there, and I was very excited to share some time with my brother, my sister-in-law Teresa, and my cute little Diego. We stayed at my brother’s apartment, but my brother and his family stayed with Teresa’s family, since they were helping her with the baby. We were only there for few days because we were also visiting other places, so I wanted to enjoy my nephew as much as possible. My ex-husband didn’t much understand my excitement. He wanted to enjoy the trip by going to as many places as possible. I agreed to go places, but I asked him to let me see the baby in the mornings and afternoons. One morning we were on our way to see the baby, and he asked me to look for a place to eat breakfast. I told him to go and grab my family first, and then we could all go together to eat breakfast. He didn’t take that very well. He got really upset and told me I was destroying our vacations. What? I know! I was in shock. But that was him being him. He wanted my attention only for himself. He was being a complete taker.

 

I can share more than a thousand situations like that, but I believe you get the point. Many of us get into our marriages thinking that it should be a 50/50 kind of deal. We tend to act as matchers when it comes to romantic relationships, (i.e., “I’ll give you love if I receive the same amount of love from you,” or “I’ll give you attention if you give me your time.”)

 

At this point in my life, I completely believe we should give without expectations, but please understand that I don’t mean we should stay with someone who doesn’t care about us. What I mean by ‘giving without expectations’ is that we should love as much as we feel without expecting the other person to love us the same way. We should enter every relationship with a complete giver mentality. We should commit to give our best because our hearts are filled with love for that other person. Love because you feel that love within yourself, not because you expect the other person to make you feel loved. It’s a paradox, but the more you give love without the intention of receiving it, the more love you will receive.

 

At the end, the book provided a link to take a quiz to see what my reciprocity style was. Even though I thought I was a matcher, it turns out I am 80% giver and 20% matcher, my friends. After reading the results and taking a moment to analyze more deeply the way I interact with others, I am confident I am a giver, and I LOVE being that way. What about you?

 

Love,

 

Irene