sciencetech-blog

comments

It's long been thought that in order to succeed in life you need to think only of yourself and ignore the needs of others.

New research, however, suggests the exact opposite is true and being nice to others actually stands you in greater stead to be successful.

The scientists found that 'givers' were more likely to share knowledge, and in turn gain more information themselves.

Researchers in Germany found that people who shared knowledge (stock image shown) were more likely to be successful. They asked participants to decide whether to share money or keep it. Those that shared it would double their money - but only if others did

Researchers at the University of Tübingen in Germany divided participants into three groups based on a personality test: givers, takers and matchers. 

In a social dilemma task, participants were allotted a fictitious endowment of the equivalent of £240 ($400). They were then asked to decide how much of their money they would give to a shared group pool.

They were told that the money in the pool would be doubled and divided equally among all group members.

Thus, it would be more beneficial to the group as a whole if everyone contributed their individual endowments.

However, it would be more beneficial at the individual level if everyone else from the group contributed, while the individual kept his or her own endowment.

The researchers used this strategic information sharing task to examine how much and which pieces of information participants shared: the less important and already known information or the really important information only known by the individual.

The results showed that givers are less self-oriented and narcissistic than takers. 

They found there was a clear distinction between 'givers' and 'takers'. And the results showed being nice means you share information more. This means that givers are more likely to gain knowledge than takers and thus be more successful (stock image shown)

Moreover, compared to the traditional classification of prosocials, individualists and competitors, this new classification of givers, matchers and takers was better at predicting behaviours measured two weeks later.

Givers shared not only more money with the group, but they also shared important information.

Takers on the other hand kept both the money as well as different types of information.

The findings suggest that it may not be enough to simply provide knowledge management tools in order to optimise knowledge exchange in a group of people.

It may be necessary for leaders and managers to keep in mind the personality and interaction styles of their employees.

Specifically, they should be wary that takers may keep the important information for themselves.