It's better to give than to receive. Or is it?
Givers are others-focused and do not expect anything in return for their generosity. Givers freely offer their time, energy, resources and connections.
Takers see their needs as more important than others' and the world as competitive. Takers will help others, but they do so strategically, to ensure that they reap the greatest benefit.
Matchers value fairness and work toward an equality of giving and taking. They operate with a "you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours" mentality.
In ministry, many of us pride ourselves on being givers. We claim we are called to give, citing the Bible: "Do unto others" and "From whom much is given, much is expected." We take courses in seminary on how to give pastoral care and give a good sermon. Ministry is about giving, right?
Givers often sacrifice themselves to make their organizations better. Grant writes that the more often people are helping, teaching, sharing and mentoring, the better their organizations do in every measurable metric. This sounds like the narrative we tell ourselves in pursuit of "success" in ministry. We call it "sacrifice for the greater good."
But before you classify yourself in what sounds like the category of champions, you might be surprised to learn that across a vast span of occupations, givers themselves consistently rank among the least successful people. On average, givers earn less money, are less powerful and are more likely to be victims of crime.
So what does this say for those of us who feel called to give of ourselves for the sake of others?
