Altruism in a corporation
In previous papers we have discussed the topic of cooperation. Building on these findings we will now focus on altruistic behaviors in a group or corporation based on research from D. Caina, J. Danab and G. Newman from Yale University. The ongoing scientific debate shows that we still have much to learn about the causes and motivations of altruistic behavior but many interesting learnings are available for managers to consider.
Altruism is commonly defined as behavior where the agent carries some sort of cost in order to help an external entity. In other words, the receiver benefits at the expense of the giver.
From an individuals point of view, it’s biologically and economically irrational to be altruistic. However, we seem to see many behaviors in our societies that look altruistic. Why do we behave like this? Is it truly non-selfish behavior? And finally, can we influence a group to be more altruistic?
Our species evolved mostly in small tribal societies, where we would interact with the same members on many occasions and our reputation was well known in the group. Hence by helping another member we were making a long term investment, planning ahead for a future favor we might need, or working on our reputation in case we need support from the group. We lived in a hostile environment where it was essential to have each other’s back. From an evolutionary point of view, altruism makes a lot of sense as an inherent trait as it will benefit the group, even if it’s at the cost of the individual.
Often this behavior feels like it’s not about a future investment or a reputation issue; sometimes it just feels right. This gut feeling is a result of a heuristic or rule of thumb that we developed through the years, as in most of the cases it was the smart thing to do. However, by relying on this heuristic, we fail to consider if being altruistic will benefit us under certain contexts. For the benefit of our kin, and of our gene pool, our brain has evolved to incentivize this behavior in several ways. We have developed basic inherent morals, we expect reciprocity and we pay a lot of attention to our self-image. More so, studies show that reward centers in the brain are activated by altruistic behaviors when one feels that they contributed directly to a positive result.
As a conclusion, although we are helping out because ultimately it’s in the interest of our species or in our own interest, in some occasions we are unaware of this fact, turning the action into an altruistic behaviour, at least at the conscious level.
Giving and Giving In #
Researches from Yale introduced the concepts of giving and giving in in order to categorize altruism in two families. In the first case, a member is willingly acting to help the receiver. In the other, giving in is when the behavior is not caused by any benefit of helping a third party, but rather to avoid the cost of saying no to a call for help. Those that give in will help if they are asked to but they also have ways to avoid that situation. Either not opening an email from a colleague that we know is asking for a favor or by not showing the other member that we could help out in order to avoid having him ask or expect the favor.
This categorization is very useful to those wanting to promote altruistic behaviors. Studies have shown that about 50% of what appears to be a case of giving is truly giving in. It’s a largely shared trait among us, and it’s extremely malleable as it depends on the context setting. If one can avoid the situation of being asked for help or can avoid knowing about the call for help it will result in a less prosocial organization.
In a group there are usually a few members that won’t be willing to help no matter what, or those that will be happy to do so under any circumstances, but the vast majority will often be in between. They will sometimes avoid the situation of being asked for help, and if it’s the case, give in and help out.
This changes our management and recruiting focus from the utopic task of hiring exclusively altruistic people to benefiting from a necessarily diverse pool and focusing on creating the conditions that turn the majority into helpers by nudging them to give in more often.
In Practice #
- Help people ask for help. Encourage them to do so. Studies show that we underestimate how likely it is that the helper will accept to do so.
- Make the skills and resources of the group as transparent as possible to easily identify who can help. This point and the previous one can be easily done through a shared tool—such as talentedtribe.com.
- Show the consequences of helping vs. not helping the other member of the group.
- Trigger a few situations of altruistic behavior. It will have a domino effect due to our sense of reciprocity and if a critical mass is achieved it will lead to a true cultural change.
Finally, most of Axelrod’s recommendations to foster cooperation also apply to foster altruism:
- Enlarge the shadow of the future, foster the perception of social or cultural relatedness, create an environment that improves recognition abilities and avoids anonymity, and share success stories to teach reciprocity and the benefits of tit-for-tat.
You want more prosocial and altruistic members in a group? It’s not about the individuals, it’s the environment you are creating for them.
Author: C. Criado-Pérez #
References #
- Daylian M. Cain, Jason Dana & George E. Newman (2014), Giving Versus Giving In
- Robert Axelrod, The Evolution of Cooperation