Adam Grant’s Give and Take challenges conventional notions deeply embedded in American schools and workplaces. Grant’s argument centers around the idea that individuals who exhibit the characteristics of “givers”—those who offer their support and resources without any immediate expectation of reciprocation—can, in fact, be highly successful and effective in professional environments. This concept presents a stark contrast to the prevailing ideology found in many American educational institutions and workplaces, which typically prioritize “taker” attributes. To understand this contrast, it is crucial to explore the ideological context of American schools and workplaces and how they function as zero-sum environments.

American schools and workplaces often operate within the framework of zero-sum thinking. In a zero-sum environment, people view success as a finite resource, with one person’s gain equating to another’s loss. In schools, for example, students may compete for limited opportunities, such as scholarships, recognition, or admission to prestigious universities. Similarly, in workplaces, there is often a sense of competition for promotions, pay raises, or job security, where one employee’s success is perceived as coming at the expense of another.

This zero-sum thinking deeply influences the values and behaviors that American schools and workplaces encourage. In such environments, qualities associated with “takers” are typically rewarded.