Back to Stories

如何才能做到慷慨大方

在西方文化中,许多人将成功狭隘地定义为金钱和权力。在她的励志著作《蓬勃发展》(Thrive )中,阿里安娜·赫芬顿指出,这种定义就像坐在一个只有两条腿的凳子上,如果我们不增加第三条腿,凳子就会倾倒。她以科学为依据,热情洋溢地论证了​​拓展我们对成功定义的必要性。她提出的新衡量标准之一是“付出”:真正有意义的人生包含着为他人做出贡献和关爱他人。

我非常喜欢这个信息。它有力地呼吁我们变得更加慷慨和富有同情心。然而不幸的是,当人们响应这一呼吁时,他们却牺牲了自己的成功。为了帮助他人而夜以继日,他们忽略了自己的责任,最终精疲力竭。他们伸出援手帮助他人向上攀升,却往往被踩在脚下——有时甚至被压垮。

经过过去十年对这些动态的研究,我发现希望犹存。在《付出与收获》一书中,我发现尽管许多人付出时会牺牲自身利益,但仍有一部分人能够做到既慷慨又富有成效。他们是如何在不损害自身福祉、不落入传统成功标准的情况下做到付出的呢?他们摒弃了关于付出的三种常见观念。作为领导者,我们有责任消除这些误解。

1. 付出并非仅仅意味着友善。大多数人会将慷慨与友善混淆,但研究表明,它们是两种不同的品质。友善体现在礼貌上:你待人友善、彬彬有礼、和蔼可亲、乐于助人。当人们认为付出就必须表现得友善时,他们就无法设定界限, 很少说“不” ,最终沦为任人践踏的“老好人”

乐于助人的人会着眼于他人的长远利益,即便这并非令人愉悦。他们有勇气给出我们不愿听却又不得不听的批评意见。他们以严厉的爱来对待我们,因为他们知道我们或许会因此对他们产生反感,但最终我们会更加信任和尊重他们。

2. 这并非关乎利他主义。在许多人看来,只有完全无私的付出才算数。然而,事实上,完全无私的付出难以持续。例如,研究表明,那些完全出于利他主义——不顾自身利益——而付出的人更容易精疲力竭,甚至抑郁。讽刺的是,随着时间的推移,他们也更难坚持帮助他人参与志愿活动,因为他们已经筋疲力尽,无力继续付出。

成功的付出者在帮助他人之前,会先确保自己有足够的氧气面罩。尽管他们的动机可能并非完全出于利他主义,但他们的行为却更体现出利他精神,因为他们付出更多。正如心理学家马克·斯奈德所写:“具有讽刺意味的是……那些最初动机最自私的志愿者,最终可能反而为他人带来最大的益处。” 这并不意味着他们期望从受助者那里得到任何回报。这仅仅意味着,当他们付出时,他们会将自身利益放在一边。富有成效的慷慨者会选择以充满活力而非令人疲惫的方式来帮助他人。

3. 这并非意味着拒绝他人的帮助。成功给予者和失败给予者之间最明显的区别在于他们是否愿意寻求和接受帮助。当人们专注于付出时,他们往往会害怕开口求助。他们不想给别人添麻烦——他们想成为付出者,而不是索取者。可悲的是,这最终会让他们感到痛苦,因为他们缺乏他人的支持。

真正慷慨的人懂得索取和接受的区别。索取是指利用他人谋取私利。接受是指在需要时接受帮助,并始终保持回报或传递这份恩情的意愿。

“给予和接受都源于同一自由而慷慨的源泉,”阿丽亚娜的妹妹阿加皮·斯塔西诺普洛斯在她感人至深的著作《解开心扉》中写道。“我们有权提出请求,但我们必须给予被请求者选择其回应方式的权利——我们必须始终敞开这扇门。”如果我们从未接受过,我们给予的能力也就受到了限制。

通往繁荣之路

与其宣扬关于捐赠的种种迷思,领导者不如教导员工那些真正慷慨的人所懂得的道理:

1. 好人可能最后才到,但好人会第一。

2. 无私的人付出直到伤害到自己,自私的人只在对自己有利时才付出,而持续慷慨的人在帮助他人时付出,但不会伤害他人。

3. 接受是给予的必要条件——如果你从不索取,你就剥夺了你生命中的人享受给予的快乐。

除了给予之外, 《茁壮成长》还探讨了成功人生的另外三大支柱:幸福、智慧和惊奇。所有这些支柱都可以成为有效给予的副产品。有效的帮助能够通过加强人际关系、赋予生活意义来提升我们的幸福感,使我们焕发活力而非精疲力竭。它能让我们变得更睿智,从而在不成为殉道者的情况下促进共同福祉。它还能让我们腾出时间去惊叹于周围的奇妙。“如果我们的人生旅程是为了不断进化,”阿里安娜写道,“那么没有比给予更快的途径了。”

Share this story:

COMMUNITY REFLECTIONS

4 PAST RESPONSES

User avatar
ANANTHARAMAN Apr 25, 2014
INSPIRING ARTICLE. After my graduation I had gone through a career guidance programme with the psychology dept of the University and the Prof had expressed concern stating that while everything was fine, there was one major issue that of a total lack of drive and ambition. To a question whether it was in the context of success and money, he replied in the affirmative. When asked whether life was not about making it interesting, living life fully and loving the life which you want to live and whether success and money were not incidental to what you do in life, he smiled and said that , as long as you have no issue about it, it is perfectly OK. Over the past 45 years I have led a very interesting life and have done whatever you can imagine. Most of the life we (incl my wife) have been more in the service space than in the commercial space, encouraging and supporting DOING. WHILE WE HAVE NEVER DRIVEN, NOR BEEN DRIVEN, WE HAVE ALWAYS MOVED AND BEEN MOVED BY LOVE, and the approach ... [View Full Comment]
User avatar
BARBARA Apr 24, 2014
I HAVE FOR MOST OF MY LIFE, PROFESSED THAT I AM " A SERVANT OF THE HEART!" I SPREAD COMPASSION, GENEROSITY, UNCONDITIONAL LOVE, NON-JUDGMENTAL ACCEPTANCE, WARMEST OF HUGS, TOLERANCE, SMILES AND OFFER OF FRIENDSHIP! I AM BLESSED WITH MANY CARING AND LOVING FRIENDS! ALSO MY SONS, ESPECIALLY MY OLDEST SON JOE WHO IS MY FULL TIME CAREGIVER! WHEN WE CAN GIVE SOMEONE THE TIME THEY NEED, WE GIVE IT IF ABLE! WE GIVE OF OUR MATERIAL ITEMS GENEROUSLY !( FOR THEY ARE JUST THINGS) THINGS CAN BE REPLACED, PEOPLE CAN NOT! AND IF A LOST ITEM CAN NOT BE REPLACED, IT STILL WAS A "THING", THANK GOD NOT A PERSON!I HAVE MADE CERTAIN THROUGHOUT BOTH OF MY SON'S LIFE, THEY UNDERSTOOD THE VALUE OF ITEMS/THINGS, COMPARED TO THE VALUE OF A LIFE! THERE WAS A TIME I COULD BE MORE HELPFUL AND MORE GENEROUS, IN MANY WAYS! BACK THEN I WAS NOT POORER LIKE NOW AND I WAS HEALTHY THEN! MY FAMILY TEASED ME ABOUT HOW DETERMINED I WAS BACK THEN, TO HUG THE WORLD AND SERVE THE HEARTS, THAT NEEDED SERVED! NOW, I GIVE WHAT ... [View Full Comment]
User avatar
vic smyth Apr 24, 2014

You can't be good to others if you are not good to yourself.

User avatar
Jasmin Cori Apr 24, 2014

Helpful, well-written article. It's always the both-and that trips us up: that we're not either a giver or receiver, but both.Thank you for your work.