What do you think?
Rate this book
Friend & Foe: When to Cooperate, When to Compete, and How to Succeed at Both
What does it take to succeed? This question has fueled a long-running debate. Some have argued that humans are fundamentally competitive, and that pursuing self-interest is the best way to get ahead. Others claim that humans are born to cooperate and that we are most successful when we collaborate with others.
In FRIEND AND FOE, researchers Galinsky and Schweitzer explain why this debate misses the mark. Rather than being hardwired to compete or cooperate, we have evolved to do both. In every relationship, from co-workers to friends to spouses to siblings we are both friends and foes. It is only by learning how to strike the right balance between these two forces that we can improve our long-term relationships and get more of what we want.
Here, Galinsky and Schweitzer draw on original, cutting edge research from their own labs and from across the social sciences as well as vivid real-world examples to show how to maximize success in work and in life by deftly navigating the tension between cooperation and competition. They offer insights and advice ranging from: how to gain power and keep it, how to build trust and repair trust once it’s broken, how to diffuse workplace conflict and bias, how to find the right comparisons to motivate us and make us happier, and how to succeed in negotiations – ensuring that we achieve our own goals and satisfy those of our counterparts.
Along the way, they pose and offer surprising answers to a number of perplexing puzzles: when does too much talent undermine success; why can acting less competently gain you status and authority, where do many gender differences in the workplace really come from, how can you use deception to build trust, and why do you want to go last on American Idol and in many interview situations, but make the first offer when negotiating the sale of a new car.
We perform at our very best when we hold cooperation and competition in the right balance. This book is a guide for navigating our social and professional worlds by learning when to cooperate as a friend and when to compete as a foe—and how to be better at both.
In FRIEND AND FOE, researchers Galinsky and Schweitzer explain why this debate misses the mark. Rather than being hardwired to compete or cooperate, we have evolved to do both. In every relationship, from co-workers to friends to spouses to siblings we are both friends and foes. It is only by learning how to strike the right balance between these two forces that we can improve our long-term relationships and get more of what we want.
Here, Galinsky and Schweitzer draw on original, cutting edge research from their own labs and from across the social sciences as well as vivid real-world examples to show how to maximize success in work and in life by deftly navigating the tension between cooperation and competition. They offer insights and advice ranging from: how to gain power and keep it, how to build trust and repair trust once it’s broken, how to diffuse workplace conflict and bias, how to find the right comparisons to motivate us and make us happier, and how to succeed in negotiations – ensuring that we achieve our own goals and satisfy those of our counterparts.
Along the way, they pose and offer surprising answers to a number of perplexing puzzles: when does too much talent undermine success; why can acting less competently gain you status and authority, where do many gender differences in the workplace really come from, how can you use deception to build trust, and why do you want to go last on American Idol and in many interview situations, but make the first offer when negotiating the sale of a new car.
We perform at our very best when we hold cooperation and competition in the right balance. This book is a guide for navigating our social and professional worlds by learning when to cooperate as a friend and when to compete as a foe—and how to be better at both.
320 pages, Hardcover
First published March 27, 2014
About the author
Adam Galinsky
2 books23 followersAdam Daniel Galinsky is an American social psychologist known for his research on leadership, power, negotiations, decision-making, diversity, and ethics. He is Vikram S. Pandit Professor of Business and Chair of Management Division at Columbia Business School
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 88 reviews
January 9, 2017
The beginning and the end are the most interesting parts of this one. Overall very interesting and a pleasure to read.
October 2, 2015
This is a brand new book with an intriguing title from two accomplished professors at highly respected institutions.
The title and recency might be leaning you in favor of purchasing this book. The third fact might not.
If you are worried that this book is stuffy or academic, fear not. Rather, the depth of knowledge of these authors and the expert use of both their research and the research of others makes this book interesting, readable and valuable.
While the book has just been released, I was sent, and read, an uncorrected proof, sent by the PR firm. Since I receive many of these, I seldom even read the enclosed cover letter, because, well, I’d rather read the book than read what a publicist has to say. This time, however, the cover letter does a great job of describing this book:
“[the authors] unpack the psychology of when and how to interact with people as our friends and foes, and how we can use this knowledge to get the best outcomes in life. Insights from this work help us in business (how to build trust, gain power, nail a job interview, and negotiate a raise) and in our personal lives (how to increase our motivation and our happiness, how to deal with deception, how to know what your best friend really wants, and how to deliver an effective apology.”
I like this book for the reasons I’ve already mentioned – it is readable and filled with interesting research to confirm the points being made. I also like it because it is practical, and really delivers on the promises of the publicist above!
The opening chapter sets the stage and context for the book, but beyond that, the chapters stand largely alone. While the book doesn’t offer an overriding framework or model, the ability to read the chapters almost as stand-alone treatises on their topics is actually a positive for me.
While every reader will have their own lessons to learn and interests raised by the book, to me the chapters on trust building and repairing are worth the full book on their own.
I believe this will be one of the most referenced books of the year; which is just one more reason to be on the front of the curve, get your copy now, and start reading!
- See more at: http://blog.kevineikenberry.com/perso...
The title and recency might be leaning you in favor of purchasing this book. The third fact might not.
If you are worried that this book is stuffy or academic, fear not. Rather, the depth of knowledge of these authors and the expert use of both their research and the research of others makes this book interesting, readable and valuable.
While the book has just been released, I was sent, and read, an uncorrected proof, sent by the PR firm. Since I receive many of these, I seldom even read the enclosed cover letter, because, well, I’d rather read the book than read what a publicist has to say. This time, however, the cover letter does a great job of describing this book:
“[the authors] unpack the psychology of when and how to interact with people as our friends and foes, and how we can use this knowledge to get the best outcomes in life. Insights from this work help us in business (how to build trust, gain power, nail a job interview, and negotiate a raise) and in our personal lives (how to increase our motivation and our happiness, how to deal with deception, how to know what your best friend really wants, and how to deliver an effective apology.”
I like this book for the reasons I’ve already mentioned – it is readable and filled with interesting research to confirm the points being made. I also like it because it is practical, and really delivers on the promises of the publicist above!
The opening chapter sets the stage and context for the book, but beyond that, the chapters stand largely alone. While the book doesn’t offer an overriding framework or model, the ability to read the chapters almost as stand-alone treatises on their topics is actually a positive for me.
While every reader will have their own lessons to learn and interests raised by the book, to me the chapters on trust building and repairing are worth the full book on their own.
I believe this will be one of the most referenced books of the year; which is just one more reason to be on the front of the curve, get your copy now, and start reading!
- See more at: http://blog.kevineikenberry.com/perso...
September 28, 2015
Imagine going to to an orchestra performance. You are really looking forward to this occasion, as you have heard great things about the performers and the music they will be performing. But as the first notes start playing, you realise something is off. The music is discordant, uncoordinated even, and the whole audience is in a state of confusion. Disgruntled and frustrated, you leave the performance at half-time, having learned no more than before you got there.
For anyone wanting to learn about when to cooperate, and when to compete —a fundamental element of personal and career success — this is the state of academia confronting them. Although a great deal of research has been done, and a great many insights gathered, the field is difficult to access for experts and lay people alike.
Until now, that is. Profs. Galinsky and Schweitzer, in their roles as conductors of the orchestra, are able to weave together individual instruments and tones into a comprehensible melody. And their contribution does not end at the role of conductor: this dream-team of researchers and writers have also been crucial in the development of some instruments and playing techniques in the orchestra metaphor, having written over 250 scientific articles on this very topic.
Galinsky and Schweitzer achieve a sheer genius feat, being able to provide the interested reader/listener with the latest knowledge in cooperation and competition, tied together with personal stories and anecdotes that touch both the heart and the brain. The line of outstanding social science writers, like Steven Pinker, Malcom Gladwell, Daniel Gilbert and Daniel Kahneman, must now also count Adam Galinsky and Maurice Schweitzer amongst themselves. Bravo!
For anyone wanting to learn about when to cooperate, and when to compete —a fundamental element of personal and career success — this is the state of academia confronting them. Although a great deal of research has been done, and a great many insights gathered, the field is difficult to access for experts and lay people alike.
Until now, that is. Profs. Galinsky and Schweitzer, in their roles as conductors of the orchestra, are able to weave together individual instruments and tones into a comprehensible melody. And their contribution does not end at the role of conductor: this dream-team of researchers and writers have also been crucial in the development of some instruments and playing techniques in the orchestra metaphor, having written over 250 scientific articles on this very topic.
Galinsky and Schweitzer achieve a sheer genius feat, being able to provide the interested reader/listener with the latest knowledge in cooperation and competition, tied together with personal stories and anecdotes that touch both the heart and the brain. The line of outstanding social science writers, like Steven Pinker, Malcom Gladwell, Daniel Gilbert and Daniel Kahneman, must now also count Adam Galinsky and Maurice Schweitzer amongst themselves. Bravo!
August 17, 2017
I went to school with Adam.
So I recognized his John Lennon glasses under the title of the book, which did not make it to the cover but are quite prominent under the words “Friend and Foe” once you’ve opened the book.
And I recognized Adam in the book: it’s smart, but there’s an undertone of “I’m smarter than you” to it, which is how I remember the author. While probably true, it can grate.
Also, often it isn’t all that terribly smart. Example: George W Bush is credited with the skill of making people feel warm toward him by giving them apposite nicknames. “Ali” and “Frazier” is what he called the two feisty female Californian senators of his day, for example. That would truly be awesome if one of them was not called… Barbara Boxer. Under the light of this additional info, the nicknames are, if anything, infantile and facile, no? Come on, Adam, you can’t hold that type of thing back, you will get found!
Also, the theme of the book really is imposed ex-post. If the whole thing was about “Friend and Foe” then tons of it went over my head. So when the advice is dispensed on whether to take the first or last appointment when you’re interviewing for a job, who’s the friend and who’s the foe?
On the other hand, the book is a fun listing of all sorts of stuff the authors have done extensive research on and it reads effortlessly. If you want a book that you can pick up from the middle or from the end or from the beginning with zero loss of continuity, if you want a book you can read while waiting at the airport, “Friend and Foe” will prove a good companion.
A lot of the advice dispensed here boils down to “if you go the extra step to be fair or generous or sympathetic, you will find other humans will most of the time respond in a way that makes it worth your while to do so.” This is explained through specific examples and backed up by years of psychological experiments that were conducted by the authors “in the lab” so to speak. It’s good fun to read, if not intense fun.
Finally, there is always a trap you can fall into when you write this sort of book, and it’s that you could end up writing a “self-help” book. The authors never cross that line, this remains academic, if perhaps a bit dumbed-down.
As it turns out, I met a good friend at Terminal 2 yesterday (he was flying through London) and he was 90 minutes delayed. “Friend and Foe,” with all its faults, kept me good company!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SPOILER ALERT: SUMMARY OF ADVICE OFFERED IN THIS BOOK:
Cooperating while competing: Alberto Fujimori negotiated with the MRTA who had taken over the Japanese embassy, but was simultaneously planning an attack and built an identical house for the special forces to train on.
Starting position is important: Robert Kennedy had aspirations for the Presidency, but was happy to first work for his older brother Jack. Conversely, David Miliband never recovered from the attack of his younger brother Ed and exited politics altogether.
Power corrupts: The E and the inverted E on the forehead reveals where you are on the power rankings. Gotta feel power to look good in interviews and get others to give you more power. But the moment you overstep you’re over. Like when Alexander Haig said “I’m in charge” after the John Hinkley attack or when Mark Hurd was caught hitting on the woman he’d first seen on television.
Hierarchy is vital when there is a need for coordination. You’d rather play the coordination game with your boss than with your friend! You can’t have two Alpha males on a basketball court: who you pass the ball to when it’s vital you score has to be automatic. You can’t have ambivalence on the battlefield. Hierarchy loses when it’s vital that you draw the input from guys lower down in the structure, on the other hand. “Rigid structures limit the opportunity for low-power individuals to contribute wisdom and creative insights.”
Men aren’t from Mars and Women aren’t from Venus. Cheating on your partner is a power thing. Men cheat more because they are more powerful, not because they are different. Cheating inequality correlates perfectly with earnings inequality. However, women must face both descriptive and prescriptive stereotypes. Men only face descriptive stereotypes. So a man who asks for a raise is bold, a woman who asks for a raise is pushy. Queen Bees are women who keep other women “in their place” because they specifically fear other women.
The weak and powerless put more emphasis on titles than everybody else. So you cannot use the n-word unless it could be used to describe you. And women or minorities are likelier to put their title on their business card than white men. Similarly, professors at a top institution are less likely to want to be addressed by their title than professors at lesser institutions.
Saying sorry is an example of opening up to others and is thus a very powerful way to get your way. It could be an empty apology. Generally speaking, you get a lot out of others if you show vulnerability, including irrelevant vulnerability. You can apologize about the weather and you can drop coffee on yourself at the end of a successful interview or you can go the full hog and apologize to the patient after a medical error, opening yourself up to the risk of malpractice litigation. In most cases, research shows you are very likely to come up ahead because making yourself vulnerable makes people trust you more.
Raise your guard and trust less when you observe one of the following:
• Inappropriate behavior
• Running for the exit
• Overcompensating
• Mismatch between words and body language
Apology will go a long way to build other people’s trust if the breach of trust was non-core. So when Martha Stewart, who knows how to decorate a house tastefully, was caught trading on a tip, that was not a core breach of trust. When Arthur Andersen were caught looking the other way as Enron were cooking their books, that was a core breach of trust and they could not possibly recover from it.
Sympathizing with others, without actually empathizing, is how you beat them in competition. You’ve got to be able to get into their heads to anticipate their next move, but you need to stop short from seeing things their way. And you can gain others’ trust if you imitate their expressions, for example. People like to see their face and their expressions in others. It’s why people buy dogs that look like them. It works the other way round too. Couples end up looking like each other because they love each other and this affinity leads them to adopting each other’s facial expressions, leading to their getting similar wrinkles.
When going for an interview or for a parole hearing, you need to identify two things: 1. The default (e.g. rejection) and 2. the time when the judge / interviewer will be least tired, which will be the time the default is least likely to be adopted. So early in the morning or straight after lunch the judges will be likeliest to actually pay attention to the merits of the case.
When going in front of a bunch of judges (or, again, a job interview) another dynamic enters: judges might be saving some of their best grades for later in the competition and are less likely to give a perfect ten right off the bat. Also, judges on all types of competitions and job interviews are most likely to remember the last contestants the most. The last contestants have a tremendous record of winning contests on television, for example.
If your name is going to appear on a ballot, make sure it appears first.
When you are about to show a bid on a house or a car, if you know everything there is to know about the sale, go first, in order to gain from the anchoring effect. If you don’t know anything, do what you can to delay the time when offers are made, to find out where it is the other side sees the value. And if you end up gleaning no information, then let the other side show their price first, because this will have valuable informational content.
So I recognized his John Lennon glasses under the title of the book, which did not make it to the cover but are quite prominent under the words “Friend and Foe” once you’ve opened the book.
And I recognized Adam in the book: it’s smart, but there’s an undertone of “I’m smarter than you” to it, which is how I remember the author. While probably true, it can grate.
Also, often it isn’t all that terribly smart. Example: George W Bush is credited with the skill of making people feel warm toward him by giving them apposite nicknames. “Ali” and “Frazier” is what he called the two feisty female Californian senators of his day, for example. That would truly be awesome if one of them was not called… Barbara Boxer. Under the light of this additional info, the nicknames are, if anything, infantile and facile, no? Come on, Adam, you can’t hold that type of thing back, you will get found!
Also, the theme of the book really is imposed ex-post. If the whole thing was about “Friend and Foe” then tons of it went over my head. So when the advice is dispensed on whether to take the first or last appointment when you’re interviewing for a job, who’s the friend and who’s the foe?
On the other hand, the book is a fun listing of all sorts of stuff the authors have done extensive research on and it reads effortlessly. If you want a book that you can pick up from the middle or from the end or from the beginning with zero loss of continuity, if you want a book you can read while waiting at the airport, “Friend and Foe” will prove a good companion.
A lot of the advice dispensed here boils down to “if you go the extra step to be fair or generous or sympathetic, you will find other humans will most of the time respond in a way that makes it worth your while to do so.” This is explained through specific examples and backed up by years of psychological experiments that were conducted by the authors “in the lab” so to speak. It’s good fun to read, if not intense fun.
Finally, there is always a trap you can fall into when you write this sort of book, and it’s that you could end up writing a “self-help” book. The authors never cross that line, this remains academic, if perhaps a bit dumbed-down.
As it turns out, I met a good friend at Terminal 2 yesterday (he was flying through London) and he was 90 minutes delayed. “Friend and Foe,” with all its faults, kept me good company!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SPOILER ALERT: SUMMARY OF ADVICE OFFERED IN THIS BOOK:
Cooperating while competing: Alberto Fujimori negotiated with the MRTA who had taken over the Japanese embassy, but was simultaneously planning an attack and built an identical house for the special forces to train on.
Starting position is important: Robert Kennedy had aspirations for the Presidency, but was happy to first work for his older brother Jack. Conversely, David Miliband never recovered from the attack of his younger brother Ed and exited politics altogether.
Power corrupts: The E and the inverted E on the forehead reveals where you are on the power rankings. Gotta feel power to look good in interviews and get others to give you more power. But the moment you overstep you’re over. Like when Alexander Haig said “I’m in charge” after the John Hinkley attack or when Mark Hurd was caught hitting on the woman he’d first seen on television.
Hierarchy is vital when there is a need for coordination. You’d rather play the coordination game with your boss than with your friend! You can’t have two Alpha males on a basketball court: who you pass the ball to when it’s vital you score has to be automatic. You can’t have ambivalence on the battlefield. Hierarchy loses when it’s vital that you draw the input from guys lower down in the structure, on the other hand. “Rigid structures limit the opportunity for low-power individuals to contribute wisdom and creative insights.”
Men aren’t from Mars and Women aren’t from Venus. Cheating on your partner is a power thing. Men cheat more because they are more powerful, not because they are different. Cheating inequality correlates perfectly with earnings inequality. However, women must face both descriptive and prescriptive stereotypes. Men only face descriptive stereotypes. So a man who asks for a raise is bold, a woman who asks for a raise is pushy. Queen Bees are women who keep other women “in their place” because they specifically fear other women.
The weak and powerless put more emphasis on titles than everybody else. So you cannot use the n-word unless it could be used to describe you. And women or minorities are likelier to put their title on their business card than white men. Similarly, professors at a top institution are less likely to want to be addressed by their title than professors at lesser institutions.
Saying sorry is an example of opening up to others and is thus a very powerful way to get your way. It could be an empty apology. Generally speaking, you get a lot out of others if you show vulnerability, including irrelevant vulnerability. You can apologize about the weather and you can drop coffee on yourself at the end of a successful interview or you can go the full hog and apologize to the patient after a medical error, opening yourself up to the risk of malpractice litigation. In most cases, research shows you are very likely to come up ahead because making yourself vulnerable makes people trust you more.
Raise your guard and trust less when you observe one of the following:
• Inappropriate behavior
• Running for the exit
• Overcompensating
• Mismatch between words and body language
Apology will go a long way to build other people’s trust if the breach of trust was non-core. So when Martha Stewart, who knows how to decorate a house tastefully, was caught trading on a tip, that was not a core breach of trust. When Arthur Andersen were caught looking the other way as Enron were cooking their books, that was a core breach of trust and they could not possibly recover from it.
Sympathizing with others, without actually empathizing, is how you beat them in competition. You’ve got to be able to get into their heads to anticipate their next move, but you need to stop short from seeing things their way. And you can gain others’ trust if you imitate their expressions, for example. People like to see their face and their expressions in others. It’s why people buy dogs that look like them. It works the other way round too. Couples end up looking like each other because they love each other and this affinity leads them to adopting each other’s facial expressions, leading to their getting similar wrinkles.
When going for an interview or for a parole hearing, you need to identify two things: 1. The default (e.g. rejection) and 2. the time when the judge / interviewer will be least tired, which will be the time the default is least likely to be adopted. So early in the morning or straight after lunch the judges will be likeliest to actually pay attention to the merits of the case.
When going in front of a bunch of judges (or, again, a job interview) another dynamic enters: judges might be saving some of their best grades for later in the competition and are less likely to give a perfect ten right off the bat. Also, judges on all types of competitions and job interviews are most likely to remember the last contestants the most. The last contestants have a tremendous record of winning contests on television, for example.
If your name is going to appear on a ballot, make sure it appears first.
When you are about to show a bid on a house or a car, if you know everything there is to know about the sale, go first, in order to gain from the anchoring effect. If you don’t know anything, do what you can to delay the time when offers are made, to find out where it is the other side sees the value. And if you end up gleaning no information, then let the other side show their price first, because this will have valuable informational content.
October 10, 2015
There were a lot of points in this book and statistics that I felt were really interesting. I actually learned a good amount. The one problem I had was that it felt a bit repetitive like there was more book than there was info. But definitely an interesting read and good break book from YA.
Read
December 8, 2015Started with promise but I found the real world comparisons that were constantly referred to distracting and un related. I understood the premises being initiated by the writers and felt frustrated that each one had to be accompanied by an explanation that was suited to a child.
December 26, 2015
Outstanding review of the psychology of power, powerlessness, competition, and cooperation. Engaging, fast, and written by two of THE experts on the psychology of power.
May 4, 2018
Przeczytanie tej książki nie jest niezbędne, by zrozumieć, że granice pomiędzy przyjaźnią a rywalizacją są wyjątkowo nietrwałe. Każdy z nas zna to z własnego doświadczenia - o konflikt łatwo w pracy, w związkach i w rodzinie, nawet (zdawałoby się) najbardziej zżytych i dobrze funkcjonujących, odpowiednio zhierarchizowanych grupach. Ta książka to doskonały - poparty masą znakomitych przykładów, analiz, statystyk i wyników badań - poradnik, który pozwoli Wam lepiej zrozumieć, jakie zachowania mogą prowadzić do konfliktów, rozpadów związków, degeneracji przyjaźni, osłabienia wydajności w grupach, oraz nieszczęść wypływających ze ścisłego przestrzegania (tak, przestrzegania!) hierarchii i nieprawidłowego przewodnictwa, a wyniesiona stąd i dobrze spożytkowana wiedza pomoże Wam w porę zgasić żagiew problemów w przyszłości.
W książce Schweitzera i Galinsky'ego znajdziecie ponadto wiele zaskakujących spostrzeżeń dotyczących psychologii społecznej (choć znalazło się kilka dobrze znanych "evergreenów" z tej dziedziny, które powtarzają się w podobnych publikacjach) i kilka zabawnych anegdotek w znakomity sposób ilustrujących omawiane zagadnienia. Polecam wszystkim, którzy pragną poprawić swoje relacje z bliskimi, jak i dalszymi znajomymi, kolegami, szefostwem (i vice versa - tym ostatnim polecam rozdział, który dosadnie wyjaśnia, jak brutalnie odbić się mogą na nich nadużycie i złe wykorzystanie władzy) i rodziną. A także tym, którzy chcą bardziej efektywnie i bezstresowo współpracować w zespołach, wszelkiego rodzaju grupach, pracy i, oczywiście, w rodzinie. Polecam!
W książce Schweitzera i Galinsky'ego znajdziecie ponadto wiele zaskakujących spostrzeżeń dotyczących psychologii społecznej (choć znalazło się kilka dobrze znanych "evergreenów" z tej dziedziny, które powtarzają się w podobnych publikacjach) i kilka zabawnych anegdotek w znakomity sposób ilustrujących omawiane zagadnienia. Polecam wszystkim, którzy pragną poprawić swoje relacje z bliskimi, jak i dalszymi znajomymi, kolegami, szefostwem (i vice versa - tym ostatnim polecam rozdział, który dosadnie wyjaśnia, jak brutalnie odbić się mogą na nich nadużycie i złe wykorzystanie władzy) i rodziną. A także tym, którzy chcą bardziej efektywnie i bezstresowo współpracować w zespołach, wszelkiego rodzaju grupach, pracy i, oczywiście, w rodzinie. Polecam!
October 1, 2015
This book applies cutting-edge science to real-life situations faced by people pursuing their careers and their dreams. If you’ve ever felt like you don’t understand when or how to push for what you want, this book is for you. And if you’ve ever been told you don’t work well with others, this book is for you.
It has something for everyone because it sees through a false dichotomy: that only those who crush others will really achieve their dreams, or that the way to happiness is to make sure that everyone around us is happy before turning to our own goals. Galinsky and Schweitzer’s insight is that it’s wrong to pick only one of these approaches. The key is to know when and how to pursue your own interests, and when and how to help others achieve theirs. This was a pleasure to read, and I am already incorporating some of the new tools and information I gained from it into my work and personal life.
The book draws from a wide array of scientific fields, and the information in each chapter is brought to life with vibrant examples and case studies. The real mastery of the authors shows through in their ability to write without watering down, to describe deep and important research in a way that illuminates its importance for our lives in a way that makes sense. Highly recommended.
It has something for everyone because it sees through a false dichotomy: that only those who crush others will really achieve their dreams, or that the way to happiness is to make sure that everyone around us is happy before turning to our own goals. Galinsky and Schweitzer’s insight is that it’s wrong to pick only one of these approaches. The key is to know when and how to pursue your own interests, and when and how to help others achieve theirs. This was a pleasure to read, and I am already incorporating some of the new tools and information I gained from it into my work and personal life.
The book draws from a wide array of scientific fields, and the information in each chapter is brought to life with vibrant examples and case studies. The real mastery of the authors shows through in their ability to write without watering down, to describe deep and important research in a way that illuminates its importance for our lives in a way that makes sense. Highly recommended.
October 8, 2015
Outstanding book! Galinsky and Schweitzer examine the cooperative and competitive aspects of such topics as social comparison, gender, hierarchy, trust, perspective-taking, order effects, etc. The book draws heavily on up-to-date research in management and psychology; I recognized many articles that were published in JPSP in 2014-15 here. Book is written in a colloquial style for the non-expert, but the book is completely evidence-based, and never dumbs anything down (like other books in this genre sometimes do). Though I was already familiar with many of the ideas and topics, I learned many new cool things, especially when it came to descriptions of order effects and negotiation strategies. Highly recommended book for the lay reader as well as for academics.
June 27, 2021
One of the books that's useful but takes too much space to explain its concept. 50 pages would be more than enough.
May 16, 2019
Many important topics discussed in a friendly way. Loved it!
The name is important: interesting aspect of how to embrace nick names and turn the meaning in our favor! Good!
The name is important: interesting aspect of how to embrace nick names and turn the meaning in our favor! Good!
November 3, 2015
This is a solid book, with practical tips on how cooperation and competition alternate in our lives. In fact, they show how we alternate between these modes in each of our relationships. And more importantly they show what triggers us to adopt one posture or the other.
It covers things like how to apologize, whether to make the first offer in a negotiation, why our peers are most upset by our success, and why making mistakes and being competent is the best combo.
Warning: these guys have no problem encouraging unethical behavior if it works. They cited studies that said people like you more when you lie to them, for example. I deeply disagree with their conclusion. So if you can read this book as a cynic's guide to relationships then I'd recommend it.
It covers things like how to apologize, whether to make the first offer in a negotiation, why our peers are most upset by our success, and why making mistakes and being competent is the best combo.
Warning: these guys have no problem encouraging unethical behavior if it works. They cited studies that said people like you more when you lie to them, for example. I deeply disagree with their conclusion. So if you can read this book as a cynic's guide to relationships then I'd recommend it.
July 7, 2021
Power dynamics and social hierarchies run our lives, and it’s a delicate dance to navigate personal and professional relationships due to these factors. When reading a book on trust, I learned about this book and the work of Adam Galinksy, and I knew I had to give it a read. Galinksy and Schweitzer have done an immense amount of research into when it’s best to cooperate or compete, and it’s really interesting. While I believe the target audience for this book is mainly for business professionals who are trying to work their way up the corporate ladder and negotiators, everyone can benefit from this book. It provides an awesome look into human nature and how we interact with one another, which can be beneficial in so many aspects of everyday life.
October 16, 2016
Many only know how to cooperate or compete, I thought this book helped me look at the way I was so competitive but rarely cooperative and helped me notice I can be both, and it's better to have a shifting dynamic rather than be set on competition. It illustrates this concept with how scarcity alters social relationships in a dynamic and unstable reality and how to navigate this challenging topography in a lot of situations successfully.
My main takeaway: Navigation of a social landscape whereby scarce resources are competed for that's extremely unstable and dynamic is achieved by counterbalancing on two extremes of human interaction to achieve the best outcome.
My main takeaway: Navigation of a social landscape whereby scarce resources are competed for that's extremely unstable and dynamic is achieved by counterbalancing on two extremes of human interaction to achieve the best outcome.
February 8, 2017
Very interesting examination of the power dynamics behind a range of interactions and when to use competitive vs. cooperative tactics to optimize outcomes. Topics include hierarchies, gender, titles, apologies and vulnerability, trust, and the importance of rank/order of presentation of contenders in competitions and elections. Adam Galinsky strikes a good balance of presenting academic research and offering practical, actionable tips.
March 26, 2019
This is a great book about social psychology and why we choose to cooperate sometimes and compete others. Each chapter has great examples, fascinating studies, and concludes with advice on how to find the sweet spot between competition and cooperation.
The book covers things such as trust and cheating, hierarchies and power, mimicry, negotiations, the power of names, the double bind that powerful women face, and how to ask for what you want.
Highly recommended.
The book covers things such as trust and cheating, hierarchies and power, mimicry, negotiations, the power of names, the double bind that powerful women face, and how to ask for what you want.
Highly recommended.
October 8, 2015
This book grabbed my attention from page one and never let go. Galinsky and Schweitzer's compelling insights and captivating writing truly brought the research to life. Fascinating takeaways and techniques are packed throughout and are thankfully delivered in innovative and exciting ways. I would absolutely recommend Friend and Foe to all readers.
September 1, 2015
Very helpful book. A must read and bedside keeper. I love it and will recommend it to every one of my friends. Book won courtesy of Goodreads Giveaway.
September 11, 2015
My review will appear in the Jan/Feb 2016 issue of Global Business and Organizational a Excellence
March 17, 2016
Convoluted compilation of various studies loosely related to the topics of competition or collaboration.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
December 14, 2017
Every useful book to improve the way we handle human interaction. Easy and fun to read. Don't remember who recommended me, but thanks.
January 12, 2019
A decent read on the various scenarios where it makes sense to negotiate, and when it may not, as well as everything in between. The stuff in between includes ways to successfully cooperate given assumptions of information, predisposition, scenario etc. Unfortunately, I found a lot of the material to be forgettable or obvious, making it less useful for someone who wants to up their game in real life business negotiations.
The book is not technical at all, and approaches the subject via case analysis, breaking down each cooperation/non-cooperation possibility as a "type", then delving into the type in a lot of detail. The text also discusses notions of power. For example on how power disparity between two parties can explain why a person's sex could impede cooperation or competition, applying this observation to the concrete example of salary negotiation for women.
A few minor details mentioned in this book were shown to be fallacious post factum on publication. Including the so-called "power stance", a dubious claim stating that doing a certain pose, prior to negotiating, or doing a speech, could increase the person's "potency" and could lead to better results in bargaining. I don't know if these were shown to be spurious correlations, or if the original study was just underpowered statistically, but the individuals who were prominently doing the dog and pony show on that topic on all the major outlets have since stopped stating their claim is science.
Of all the subjects discussed in the book, I found the subject of whether face to face meetings was always better for negotiations, or if physical distance between opposing negotiators, was sometimes more advantageous most interesting. Also, when empathy is, and is not, insightful for negotiating. The book also spent some time discussing how one could craft a better organization, one that is conducive to cooperation, and what type of cooperation (centralized/decentralized) is appropriate given the nature of the group you are attempting to bind together (e.g. The Marine Corp vs the Manhatten Project).
Not much, if anything on when it's appropriate to engage in treachery or subterfuge, which is where most of the difficulty in cooperation lies, as all parties are actively on guard against this tactic. Yet, if international relations, corporate competition, or warfare are any account, subterfuge or treachery do yield dividends when applied in the appropriate condition, during an appropriate time.
A conditional recommend for someone specifically looking for a review, or basic intro, to the art of (mostly business) negotiations.
The book is not technical at all, and approaches the subject via case analysis, breaking down each cooperation/non-cooperation possibility as a "type", then delving into the type in a lot of detail. The text also discusses notions of power. For example on how power disparity between two parties can explain why a person's sex could impede cooperation or competition, applying this observation to the concrete example of salary negotiation for women.
A few minor details mentioned in this book were shown to be fallacious post factum on publication. Including the so-called "power stance", a dubious claim stating that doing a certain pose, prior to negotiating, or doing a speech, could increase the person's "potency" and could lead to better results in bargaining. I don't know if these were shown to be spurious correlations, or if the original study was just underpowered statistically, but the individuals who were prominently doing the dog and pony show on that topic on all the major outlets have since stopped stating their claim is science.
Of all the subjects discussed in the book, I found the subject of whether face to face meetings was always better for negotiations, or if physical distance between opposing negotiators, was sometimes more advantageous most interesting. Also, when empathy is, and is not, insightful for negotiating. The book also spent some time discussing how one could craft a better organization, one that is conducive to cooperation, and what type of cooperation (centralized/decentralized) is appropriate given the nature of the group you are attempting to bind together (e.g. The Marine Corp vs the Manhatten Project).
Not much, if anything on when it's appropriate to engage in treachery or subterfuge, which is where most of the difficulty in cooperation lies, as all parties are actively on guard against this tactic. Yet, if international relations, corporate competition, or warfare are any account, subterfuge or treachery do yield dividends when applied in the appropriate condition, during an appropriate time.
A conditional recommend for someone specifically looking for a review, or basic intro, to the art of (mostly business) negotiations.
June 9, 2022
อ่านสนุกมากๆ ท้าทายความคิดความเชื่อตลอดเล่ม แย้งสิ่งที่ตัวเองบอกมาแล้วก่อนหน้านี้กันไปมาไม่หยุด มีเหตุผลสนับสนุน วิจัยกันเพียบไม่มีกั๊ก สำหรับคนชอบจิตวิทยาแบบเรายิ่งสนุกมาก น้ำเสียงที่ใช้เล่ามันสนุกดีอะ เหมือนจะร้ายๆนิดๆแต่ก็เปล่าเป็นแบบคนเข้าใจโลก (ที่ลึกซึ้งไปถึงทางจิตวิทยา) ได้มุมมองใหม่เยอะเลยจากสิ่งเดิมๆ ที่เคยมองอีกแบบ หรือยังไม่เข้าใจแจ่มแจ้ง เรื่องแน่น ตัวอย่างแน่น เอ้อปัง
สรุปทุกอย่างมันต้องหาตรงกลางแหละ ความจริง ความเป็นไปได้ที่จะออกมาของการกระทำแต่ละรูปแบบก็มีสารพัดอย่าง ถ้าเราจะหลุดจากกรอบความคิดเดิม และมองเห็นกว้างขึ้น เราก็จะสามารถคิดหาทางออกใหม่ๆ ได้ที่คาดไม่ถึงมาก่อน
เข้าใจผู้คนแต่ไม่ได้ถูกเอารัดเอาเปรียบ แข่งขันแต่ไม่ได้ทำร้าย แยกแยะอารมณ์และสาเหตุสิ่งต่างๆ ได้ ไม่เอาไปลงที่คนอื่น ความรู้สึกตอนจบที่กำหนดเหตุการณ์ก่อนหน้าทั้งหมดว่าดีไม่ดี ลำดับที่ทำให้ได้หรือเสียเปรียบ คนชอบคนที่เป็นมิตรเพราะมันคือการแสดงออกว่าใส่ใจผู้อื่น คนที่มีความสามารถแต่ต้องจับต้องได้ การนินทาที่สร้างระบบเรตติ้งขึ้นมา
ไม่มีอะไรขาวดำร้ายดีไปทุกด้าน ทุกอย่างล้วนมีด้านดีและด้านเสียในตัวของมันเองแค่เราหาจุดสมดุลให้เจอ จุดที่จะใช้มันได้เป็นประโยชน์ที่สุดกับตัวเองและคนอื่น ขอโทษเป็น ยอมรับผิด และลงมือแก้ไข ดีกว่าเสียเวลาแก้ตัวเพื่อทำลายความสัมพันธ์ เราเปลี่ยนความหมายของคำด่าให้กลายเป็นคำที่เราภาคภูมิใจได้ การขอคำแนะนำเป็นเรื่องที่ดีสุดๆ การเปรียบเทียบเป็นธรรมดาของโลก ความเครียดและความกดดันเช่นกัน แค่ยอมรับมันแล้วก็เลือกใช้แต่ละอย่างในชีวิตตามหน้าที่ของมัน ให้เป็นประโยชน์ตามที่เราต้องการ ฯลฯ เรื่องเยอะ หลากหลายมากๆ ไม่มีหยุดพัก สนุกๆๆๆ
ชอบชื่อหนังสือภาษาอังกฤษมาก รู้สึกโครตเท่ห์
สรุปทุกอย่างมันต้องหาตรงกลางแหละ ความจริง ความเป็นไปได้ที่จะออกมาของการกระทำแต่ละรูปแบบก็มีสารพัดอย่าง ถ้าเราจะหลุดจากกรอบความคิดเดิม และมองเห็นกว้างขึ้น เราก็จะสามารถคิดหาทางออกใหม่ๆ ได้ที่คาดไม่ถึงมาก่อน
เข้าใจผู้คนแต่ไม่ได้ถูกเอารัดเอาเปรียบ แข่งขันแต่ไม่ได้ทำร้าย แยกแยะอารมณ์และสาเหตุสิ่งต่างๆ ได้ ไม่เอาไปลงที่คนอื่น ความรู้สึกตอนจบที่กำหนดเหตุการณ์ก่อนหน้าทั้งหมดว่าดีไม่ดี ลำดับที่ทำให้ได้หรือเสียเปรียบ คนชอบคนที่เป็นมิตรเพราะมันคือการแสดงออกว่าใส่ใจผู้อื่น คนที่มีความสามารถแต่ต้องจับต้องได้ การนินทาที่สร้างระบบเรตติ้งขึ้นมา
ไม่มีอะไรขาวดำร้ายดีไปทุกด้าน ทุกอย่างล้วนมีด้านดีและด้านเสียในตัวของมันเองแค่เราหาจุดสมดุลให้เจอ จุดที่จะใช้มันได้เป็นประโยชน์ที่สุดกับตัวเองและคนอื่น ขอโทษเป็น ยอมรับผิด และลงมือแก้ไข ดีกว่าเสียเวลาแก้ตัวเพื่อทำลายความสัมพันธ์ เราเปลี่ยนความหมายของคำด่าให้กลายเป็นคำที่เราภาคภูมิใจได้ การขอคำแนะนำเป็นเรื่องที่ดีสุดๆ การเปรียบเทียบเป็นธรรมดาของโลก ความเครียดและความกดดันเช่นกัน แค่ยอมรับมันแล้วก็เลือกใช้แต่ละอย่างในชีวิตตามหน้าที่ของมัน ให้เป็นประโยชน์ตามที่เราต้องการ ฯลฯ เรื่องเยอะ หลากหลายมากๆ ไม่มีหยุดพัก สนุกๆๆๆ
ชอบชื่อหนังสือภาษาอังกฤษมาก รู้สึกโครตเท่ห์
April 6, 2020
There’re two ways to make a deal. First, Tit for Tat strategy: you start out cooperating, and stay cooperative unless your counterpart competes. When your counterpart competes, you match the behaviour by competing too. But It has a "fatal flaw; It is not forgiving enough to stomach the occasional mishap.” says Harvard matimatical biologist Martin Nowak. So he recommends Generous Tit for Tat instead. In generous tit for tat, the rule is “never forget a good turn, but occasionally forgive a bad one." You start out cooperating till your counterpart competes. When they compete, instead of always responding competitively, generous Tit for Tat usually means competing two thirds of the time, acting cooperatively in response to one of every three defections. You start out cooperating till your counterpart competes. When they compete, instead of always responding competitively, generous TitforTat usually means competing two thirds of the time, acting cooperatively in response to one of every three defections. Generous Tit for Tat encourages cooperation: Givers can choose Tit for Tat when dealing with Takers, But one out of every three times, it may be wise to shift back into giver mode, granting so-called takers the opportunity to redeem themselves.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
September 12, 2021
I can’t pinpoint where I lost it with this book, but it started out interesting and slowly lost steam. I gave out around 60% through.
There’s one great psychological takeaway in here: for happiness you need to compare yourself to those worse off than you; for success you need to compare yourself with those with greater achievements. Get the balance wrong and you’ll be unhappy or without drive.
I think the authors attempted to ape the Gladwell style of lots of stories that elucidate a point, but every second paragraph is about Geoff did this in high school, or Mary was a corporate this and learned this lesson. It’s too hokey. It really lost me when they discussed lawyers who knew a man did not commit a murder (because their client admitted it to them), but they didn’t reveal this fact for 26 years (until their client died). They justify this behaviour, which I can legally understand, but it’s done in such a flippant manner as to be vacuous.
It read more like a self-help book than a genuine non-fiction, but maybe that was the intention.
There’s one great psychological takeaway in here: for happiness you need to compare yourself to those worse off than you; for success you need to compare yourself with those with greater achievements. Get the balance wrong and you’ll be unhappy or without drive.
I think the authors attempted to ape the Gladwell style of lots of stories that elucidate a point, but every second paragraph is about Geoff did this in high school, or Mary was a corporate this and learned this lesson. It’s too hokey. It really lost me when they discussed lawyers who knew a man did not commit a murder (because their client admitted it to them), but they didn’t reveal this fact for 26 years (until their client died). They justify this behaviour, which I can legally understand, but it’s done in such a flippant manner as to be vacuous.
It read more like a self-help book than a genuine non-fiction, but maybe that was the intention.
February 8, 2017
This is a fascinating book about how humans have evolved to be both friend and foe. That is why there is brotherly love but yet also sibling rivalry. We could have friends that support us in need but they could also be the reasons why we strive to earn more, buy more, or do more - as we compete to outdo our friends. The book provides research and guidance on balancing these two forces. There are also interesting examples of friend/foe relationships. For example, star athletes on a team are competing against each other for power, which undermines the team's objective of winning the game. Sometimes having only one star athlete on a team is better than having two star athletes. There is also a useful chapter on detecting deception, understanding how core trust can be broken, and rebuilding trust in a relationship (unless it was a core trust that was broken).
July 26, 2021
How we interact with one another isn't as simple as choosing to be competitive and constantly on our guard, or always open and trusting. Realistically we often have to find middle-ground where we create a balance (and even a mix) between the two. This book describes why that is and how we can pursue that balance. Presenting relevant research it discusses interesting questions like when we should (or shouldn't) compare ourselves to others, the benefits and risks of power, when we hierarchy is and isn't helpful, and more. Ended up with tons of notes from this one. While slightly more thought-provoking than strictly practical, definitely think it would of interest for those who want a more balanced perspective on our complicated interactions with other people.
November 22, 2020
This book is more about two valued orientations like Good and Bad, Friend and Foe, Trust and Cheat...
It is quite interesting because it has discussed the research of most of the Economic Behaviour.
It will be a casual read if you have read many books on Behavioural Economics. But still you are never going to get disappointed
I loved it because it refreshes my memory on such analyses.
The interesting thing is the placement of chapters like "It's good to be a King...until it isn't" and ending when negotiating "ending must".
You take away loads of advice and suggestions to deal with the present economic situation and understand why someone wins and you lose.
.Superb Book!
It is quite interesting because it has discussed the research of most of the Economic Behaviour.
It will be a casual read if you have read many books on Behavioural Economics. But still you are never going to get disappointed
I loved it because it refreshes my memory on such analyses.
The interesting thing is the placement of chapters like "It's good to be a King...until it isn't" and ending when negotiating "ending must".
You take away loads of advice and suggestions to deal with the present economic situation and understand why someone wins and you lose.
.Superb Book!
Displaying 1 - 30 of 88 reviews