Building Career Advocates

Anita Brick: Hi, this is Anita Brick, and welcome to CareerCast at Chicago Booth. To help you advance in your career. Today, we're delighted to be speaking with Adam Grant, who's the youngest full professor at Wharton and author of Adam, an amazing book, Give and Take, a New York Times and Wall Street Journal bestseller. Adam earned his PhD in organizational psychology from the University of Michigan and has a BA from Harvard.

His more than 60 publications in leading management and psychology journals and his pioneering studies have increased performance and reduced burnout among individuals in a whole variety of fields. Adam, thank you so much for writing this book. I'm really excited that we're going to be able to talk about givers and takers and doormen, and had a lot of really great questions. Thanks for joining us today.

Adam Grant: Thrilled to be here. Thanks for having me, Anita.

Anita Brick: We know that people want to build advocates in your book. You talk about givers being at the bottom quartile and the top quartile in terms of success and happiness and so on. Given that building relationships can be time consuming and for a lot of people challenging, how can someone build a career advocate by being a giver that ends up in the top quartile.

Adam Grant: Most people who are motivated to help others are, on the one hand, very excited to try to contribute and make a difference. And on the other hand, slightly fearful that no good deed will go unpunished. And when you look at the difference between people who are very generous and become doormats and pushovers, and those who are productive but also make other people better off, you see basically that the ones who fail are those who try to help all the people all the time with all the requests, whereas successful givers are much more likely to be selective in who they help, as well as how and when they help.

So the first thing I do is I would actually spend some time screening the people in your environment, and if you encounter somebody who seems to be more of a taker, either by history or reputation, very selfish. You want to be more cautious with that person because it's harder to trust that they'll be a loyal advocate. Secondly, what I would try to do is actually focus on specializing rather than being a generalist.

And how you help. What you want to do is pick 1 or 2 ways of contributing to others that you enjoy and excel at. And that way when you do help, it's energizing. It's efficient, rather than being distracting and exhausting. The other advantage of specialization is that you start to develop a reputation as not just being a good person or somebody who likes to help, but is actually having unique expertise.

One of my favorite examples of this is Adam Rifkin, who's a serial entrepreneur who's been remarkably successful and also extremely generous in his career. Adam used to get bothered because he started several successful companies with requests for business plans, feedback and advice. Now Adam's a tech guy. He doesn't love helping people start their businesses and he found it very time consuming. Also didn't feel like he was very good at it, but he started doing it by shifting to one form of giving that he enjoys most, which is making introductions for a 12 year period every day. Adam made three introductions. You can deduce that to this day he was able to create a number of businesses where if you were a tech expert, he found you the business partner that you needed or vice versa.

He also accidentally set up a few marriages. But what was great about this practice of introducing people is he began to become known as somebody with a great network, and once he had that specialized reputation as somebody who gives connections, you wouldn't go to him for business plan advice. If you go to anybody for that, the most valuable thing that he can offer you is a connection to somebody and his network.

I think that the idea of specializing in one form of giving, that you can become known for, means that you get to be more proactive in how you help other people, and you get to choose what kind of giving you do. And the last thing is, you have to do that in ways, obviously, that protect your own time. I think that successful givers, if you look at the evidence, tend to have clear boundaries. They will carve out a lot of time for other people, but they also have windows where they don't get interrupted so they can get their own priorities accomplished.

Anita Brick: You know, it's interesting that you should talk about specializing. There was an evening student who said, I agree that each of us should add value to relationships. And how do I do this when I'm a newbie in general and most everyone has more knowledge, experience, and relationships than I do?

Adam Grant: This is a mistake that a lot of people make. They assume I've got to achieve success first before I can start giving back. And yet, one of the things that surprised me most in doing the research for Give and Take was that many of the most successful people that we met started giving first, long before it seemed that they had a lot to contribute.

Question is, how do they do that? And I think you could break it down into a number of different categories. One option is just to share knowledge. We're all able to find information that's useful to other people, that they either don't have the time to access, or the ability to access. And it might be as simple as just sharing an interesting article that might have some business relevance to some of your colleagues.

Second option is to actually figure out how your naivete or your novice perspective may bring value in and of itself. I've worked with organizations like Google for a while, where one of the things that happens when you first join an onboarding program there is you're asking for feedback on the culture and try to improve it and figure out before you're like a fish in water where you know, you can't really even remember what it was like to work elsewhere.

You can bring suggestions from your past experience, or from an alternative perspective that allows the company to continue growing and improving. We can all do that because by definition, everyone has a unique perspective. The last thing that I would think about a little bit is just trying to pay for the help that you've received. So initially in your career, it might be that you have a mentor in your organization who's coaching you and giving you advice.

I would look for people who are younger than you who could benefit from that advice and try to share it along with them. And what's nice about that, of course, is that you're helping the next generation. But the other benefit is you're helping your mentor scale his or her impact so that the return on investment is greater because the knowledge they're sharing isn't just benefiting you, it's also being really given to other people.

Anita Brick: That's a really great point, because there's so much information out there that can be helpful, and it really helps others scale their own knowledge, which makes them feel good about you. Because now you've given me something I didn't know that I can leverage, I can use in some way that can be helpful for everybody. I love that, that's great.

There are actually a few questions that were all about that. And like, how do you start when you're new? The other thing that I thought was kind of interesting and that goes along these lines, people were a little concerned about having their own needs met. And one MBA student said, I don't think of myself as someone who needs to receive in order to give, but how do I make sure that I get what I need?

Adam Grant: I think this is something we all struggle with. The first place to go with that is to recognize that it's okay to be ambitious and have your own goals, along with wanting to help other people. The question is, how do you integrate those? One option is to try to make whatever request you're making, or whatever help you hope to receive, not just about you.

And concretely, that means asking when you're actually going to use whatever help you receive to benefit other people. Let me give a couple examples here. So one of my favorites is from Jacob Molden. How are Salazar? He's a senior vice president of HR at Starbucks. In a previous job he joined, and he was looking for ways to essentially allow his employees to receive more support from him.

And he wanted to give it to them. But he also needed to make sure that he got what he needed. So he had about 90 direct reports. He invited them into his office, and one by one he asked them, you know, what's something you're excited about or interested in that you'd like to get involved in around here? I want to give you the autonomy and the latitude to do that, but it has to be a project that at least one other person would be excited about.

All of a sudden, the people who make this request are much more likely to do it because they say, okay, well, you know, I'm not being selfish and just asking for me. This request now is going to make work at this company better, and it's going to be useful to other people, too. I see this all the time.

There's really nice evidence on this from Hannah Riley Bowles and her colleagues, that people are often very timid when asking or lobbying on behalf of themselves. But if you're lobbying on behalf of a friend or a mentee, it's much easier to ask because you feel like you're not just being selfish.

Anita Brick: Well, what if people don't respond? There was another executive MBA student that said, I don't want to appear selfish or naive, but when I reach out to professionals in the VC world, I can't even get them to respond to me, let alone be an advocate for me. How does a person get past the noise and be heard in such a competitive environment?

Adam Grant: This is not an easy question to answer, in part because I think a lot of it is situational. Yeah, I'd like to know what the nature of the request is. Who are you asking? How are you communicating it? I wrote a blog post over the summer last year. I called Six Ways to Get Me to Email You Back.

It was a commentary on the several thousand emails I got after the New York Times did a story on give and take and people just came out of the woodwork asking me for things, and I noticed there were some emails that I responded quickly and enthusiastically to, and there were others that seemed much more like a burden. I think if you boil down the differences, they're not rocket science, but there are things that we often overlook.

So one thing is, I think it's important to make the request small. Bob Cialdini, one of my favorite psychologists, has written for years about the foot in the door effect where if you make a small request, people are much more likely to say yes. And then after investing a little bit of time with you, they're more likely to come back again because they feel like it was time well spent.

Or, you know, it's just consistent with the initial commitment that they made. So many of these requests that people make are way too big. I wouldn't necessarily reach out to some influential person in your industry and say, I'd really like to meet up with you for an hour over coffee because guess what? They're probably thousands of other people who aren't that too.

What I would do instead is ask a simple question by email in a sentence or two that's thoughtful, that they have unique expertise to share, and then when you get their answer, follow up and, you know, maybe ask them another simple question or ask them for a ten minute phone conversation, it makes it easier to say yes. It also shows that you're respectful of their time.

It's also amazing how many people don't express gratitude who you know, just reach out and ask and expect or feel entitled to a meaningful response. I know that I'm always more motivated to help when the person seems to appreciate it and gather some data. Just showing that when one person has thanked you for help, you provided you're about 55% more likely to help.

The next person. Studies that Francesca, Gino, and I did a couple years ago and I think everybody knows it. A little thanks can go a long way, but maybe we underestimate just how far it goes and how much it matters.

Anita Brick: Well, that's a great point. I presented a program back in November. I asked the group how many people received a thank you email or phone call or handwritten note, whatever form it happened to take when they responded to someone and no one. I was shocked. No one raised their hand. And then this one man, Andrew, raised his hand. I said, oh, did someone respond to you? He goes, no, it's really a pet peeve of mine. If someone would, I would go the extra mile for them. So it could be a point of leverage because the gratitude piece, as corny as it may sound, has enormous impact. It really does.

Adam Grant: That certainly resonates with my experience and the evidence that we've gathered.

Anita Brick: There were some questions around, again, concerns about getting taken advantage of by a taker. So no one said I hesitate making introductions in LinkedIn because I'm worried that someone will be a taker and compromise my relationships. What are some signs that a person might be a taker? Let's take that question in two parts. We can talk about the signs I think we should also talk about, though, you know, what are the right conditions to make an introduction. And how do you do that in a way that's self-protective? Okay, great.

Adam Grant: As far as the signs, there are a couple of distinctive patterns that the takers tend to follow. One is kissing up and kicking down. Most takers are good takers when dealing with powerful people because after all, you want the people with influence to think that you're generous. But if you've never tried, it turns out to be an awful lot of work to pretend to care about.

Every person you interact with. Most takers then let their guard down, and that means that peers and subordinates get to see more of their true colors. If you're in a position of power influence and somebody is asking you for something, I wouldn't trust their perceived generosity because they know that that's instrumental to getting the help they want from you.

Instead, I would try to gather some information about how they've treated other people who maybe can do them no good. A second telltale sign of a taker is, you know, claiming personal credit for collective accomplishments. There's a lot of evidence that, on the flip side, takers are unwilling to admit responsibility for mistakes and failures, but they tend to blame those on others in conversation and interaction with folks.

So you can sometimes learn something just by asking them, you know, what's the biggest mistake you made in your career? You know, oftentimes takers will respond with mistakes that other people made that unfortunately they got dragged into as opposed to, yeah, I made this error. Here's what I learned from it, and here's how I fixed it so that I won't let other people down in the future.

A third way that takers often reveal themselves. Typically this is what I think is hard to catch at the moment, but a lot of people see it in retrospect. Takers actually are more charming on first impressions than the rest of us. Again, because, you know, they know that they need to flatter other people or they want to put their best foot forward.

And anytime you know you have an immediate, positive vibe about someone, there are two possible explanations. One is that you know your intuition is right on target, and the other is that they're very good at creating exactly the impression that they want. It's worth following the old dictum of trust, but verify. That means usually gathering reputational information or trying to build up some history with the person first before you actually say yes to whatever the request is.

Anita Brick: So now let's talk about the second part. So okay, so I am making a request of you. I know that you're not a taker. Maybe I've done some research around you and I feel like, yeah, I'd really like to connect with Adam. How do I connect with you in a way that you are going to respond to me? I know we talked about asking for something very small, but beyond that, when people are getting so many things, are there any other things that could be done to reach out and not appear as a taker?

Adam Grant: Oh yeah. More often than not, the first step is explaining why what you're asking matters. You know, either that means what is the significance to you and why are you coming to that person as opposed to everybody else you could be bothering? Or how are you basically asking on behalf of other people? And who else is going to benefit from this request?

By and large, when people go to do this, they're in a position where they're so clear on why they're asking that it doesn't even occur to them that the person on the receiving end hasn't been inside their head. And hasn't, you know, been really close to the rationale and just giving a little bit more information about the why, the purpose and the why I chose you as opposed to everyone else is probably the first step.

And then as the receiver of one of those requests, introductions are tricky because you are putting your reputation and your relationships on the line a little bit. There are a couple of practices that are worth following. What I think Mark says there calls it the mutual opt-in or the double after introduction. So when a person asks you to make an introduction to someone else, the first thing you do is reach out to that person and say, here's the request that I got.

Here's the context for how I know that person. Would you be comfortable with me making the introduction? If not, no worries, as I've done that more, I found that oftentimes people will say yes, but occasionally they'll say, you know, I need more information. Or, you know, I'm really busy or this doesn't sound like somebody that I want to connect with.

And then I feel perfectly justified in going back to the original person and saying, I don't want to be a Robin Hood giver who takes from one person to give to another. I see the great harm that Ken Chester coined. So to avoid that, I've reached out to this person first. And, you know, unfortunately, I'm not in a position where I can make that introduction.

If there are other ways that I can be helpful, I'm happy to try. You know, the other thing to do is to follow up on how the introductions went. So if both people do opt in, then you want to check in after a few weeks or a month or so and figure out what is this, a mutually beneficial interaction?

Did both people walk away with a positive image to the other side that's useful for knowing? Is this someone I want to make an introduction for or to? Again, it's also just useful for learning, you know, how are my instincts when I do make an introduction? There's a wonderful tool that's been created. It is easy. It's called introducing interests here.

Robin Scott and Alex LaBelle Troy created it. And what it allows you to do is just blind carbon. Copy an email address whenever you send an introduction, and then the two people are prompted to give some feedback about whether it was effective and what you could have done better in the future. And I think that's a great way to learn. How are my introductions actually working out?

Anita Brick: That's really a great way to look at it. I love the double opt in, opt out thing, because I like to give people the out without making them feel bad. So let's say you went ahead and you did your homework and kind of laid the groundwork. And when you made the introduction, you had sort of the guidelines and parameters, and the person who requested the introduction didn't follow that. And actually everything blew up. How do you then recover that relationship where you made that introduction in the first place?

Adam Grant: I had that happen actually about a year and a half ago. It was the most egregious or visible example of this that I can remember, where I had a former student reach out and was trying to network to get a job in a different industry. I made a list of people who I thought could be helpful and sent the list along, and he identified the people he was most excited to talk to.

I introduced him to one of the people and I heard back from her after they talked. She sent me a long email actually, that said she normally enjoys talking with, you know, recent graduates and helping people find jobs, but she walked away feeling used from this interaction like he wasn't interested in making a meaningful connection. He just was hoping that she would give him a job.

I was mortified, I was really impressed with this student. I thought actually he might be someone that you want to hire. It could not have gone worse from what I was expecting. Then I was in a difficult position and my first instinct was to say he needs to get this feedback, because if you've made this impression on her, I wonder how many other bridges he's burning to.

I wrote back and I first apologized profusely and offered to jump on the phone and talk a little bit more about it if that would be helpful, since we are in different parts of the country. And then said, part of what I want to do is make this a learning opportunity. I've obviously learned something from this to be more cautious in the introductions that I make, but I'd also like to make sure this former student really gains the lesson of experience.

Are you comfortable with me sharing anything? And she said, you're welcome to share the entire email if you want. So I forwarded it to him. He felt awful. And, you know, I think had just been very stressed about his job search and gave off the wrong impression. They didn't stay connected in any way, shape or form, but I think he's been much more careful moving forward and it worked out very well for him.

And meanwhile, I don't make many introductions to her anymore because I feel bad that I wasted her time at some level. I also know that, you know, I did the best that I could to try to repair it and allowed me to avoid that situation more often in the future. So I learned a lesson.

Anita Brick: Absolutely, because even with the best intentions, sometimes, like you said, he was stressed and he took it too far. There were a couple questions around how do you take relationships to the next step? There are two very different levels. So let's start with our relationship. That is just at the infancy stage. An exit can be a student said. What are the best ways to build lasting relationships where people will help you? When you meet a lot of people in a short period of time, say at a networking event at Booth?

Adam Grant: Oh, I don't think there are any easy answers to this question. I would say from looking at the evidence, one of the things we know is that people struggle to make connections in these settings that aren't transactional. The best advice that I could offer comes from Kiefer Ozzie, you know, in the wake of Never Eat Alone, he's had a lot of conversations and practice around networking.

One of my favorite tips from him when you go to a networking event is to realize that unless there is just a natural chemistry or you are truly gifted at this, the odds that you're going to make a personal, meaningful connection, you know, in this setting where everybody's trying to just meet as many people as they can are pretty low key.

This advice is helpful to a lot of our executive MBA and undergraduate students is to approach, you know, the people that you're most excited to connect with and let them know that you know this isn't the best forum for it. But there is a specific question that you would love to ask them, or a perspective that you think they have that you'd like to hear more about.

Would they be open to just chatting with you for five minutes offline? It's remarkable how much you stand out when you do that, because so many people are jockeying for your attention. If you're on the receiving end here in these situations, by having the the thoughtfulness and the decency to say, I don't want to be another stalker here, but, you know, I'd really love to talk to you about topic X, then it's much easier to open the door than for a conversation later. I know of no better strategy than that.

Anita Brick: That's a good one. That's a good one. I love both of his books, Never Eat Alone and Then Who's Got Your Back? So at the other end of the spectrum is someone who has an ongoing relationship. He said, I give a lot, and I build trusted and credible relationships with people, both as an individual and with my company. I know it takes time, I can move to deal with being closed, but what if I need something now? How can I communicate my sense of urgency without destroying the relationship?

Adam Grant: Ooh, another tricky question.

Anita Brick: I know I asked a lot of tricky questions.

Adam Grant: Time certainly speaks well for Chicago, less so for me. It's hard to avoid that honesty is the best policy response here. I think, though, that the honest way that this gets communicated needs to be couched in some kind of clarification that this is not how I normally operate. So I would personally start that out by apologizing and saying, you know, I'm really sorry.

Normally, you know, I wouldn't ask under these circumstances or, you know, with this level of time crunch, you know, here's the pressure I'm under again, I think you're uniquely qualified to help out for the following reasons. And I would be really grateful if you'd be willing to consider this. If not, do I completely understand what it is?

Wayne Gretzky said if you miss every shot you don't take. I thought this was really worth a shot. I've been on both ends of that, and I think most people have. And if the person does it in a way that shows, you know, this is not their M.O., I don't think it's uncommon that people will be understanding. I think that's a situation that nobody looks forward to, and I wish I had a better answer to it.

Anita Brick: No, I like your answer, though, because if you're honest about it, I think maybe the other piece of it is what you said before. You give them a way to very graciously and very comfortably back away if they don't feel comfortable, so that it doesn't compromise the relationship, you've made it easy for them to either say, yes, let's accelerate where we are or no, let's stay where we are, giving them a way of comfortably opting out and then just continuing.

But yeah, if you don't ask, you're not going to know. I think it goes a lot to the bigger picture. Like you said, if you always do this, if everything is urgent, everything's a big drama. Everything is about you. The likelihood of getting a positive response approaches zero. However, if they truly know how you've kind of nurtured and it's been an exchange of information and other things and resources, etc., etc. and now you're asking if your reputation precedes you.

If you proceed in a negative way, forget it. If it precedes you in a positive way, people may take that extra step faster. So that's why how you view yourself and how others view is so important in this whole process. Everything you do adds to that reputation, and you've got to be careful. And and again, it goes back to the whole gratitude piece.

Adam Grant: Exactly right. From my perspective. And you know that at a very basic level, people always talk about the need to be needed and how, you know, if you can make people feel needed, then they will appreciate you. I have no interest whatsoever in being needed, and most people feel the same way. It turns out when you look at the data, because being needed means that you have to drive everything for everyone who asks whenever they have a request.

I want to be valued, and that means when somebody reaches out to me, even if it's urgent, I want to hear, not I need your help, which you know, conveys a sense of pressure and obligation and duty. What I want to hear is I would really value and appreciate your help. And then I just feel much more intrinsically motivated to do it. The good news is we have about a decade of evidence now that most people follow that same response pattern. Oftentimes, people who feel that level of urgency end up imposing on others in a way that makes them less interested in helping out.

Anita Brick: I love that I value your help, your assistance versus needing it. That's great. Do you have time for a couple more questions? Of course. Okay, so let's switch gears. I know I've heard this concept before, but you did such a great job of exploring it in the book. I really want to talk about it. And Alan asked the question, there are people I haven't talked to in a long time, and I know that they can help me and I could possibly help them.

You say in the book that dormant contacts are actually easier to revitalize and start new ones, and that the value that can be gained is fairly significant. That said, I still feel uncomfortable. Tell me, how can I reach out to a dormant contact to make sure that it's worthwhile for both parties?

Adam Grant: This is one of my favorite topics. Let's start with the why and then turn to the how from chapter two and give and take. I cover these studies by Daniel Levin and his colleagues, where they ask executives to ask for advice or help on a current project that they're working on. They're randomly assigned either to reach out to a current contact of theirs or a dormant contact, somebody they used to know but lost touch with over the past few years or more.

Could be, you know, somebody who grew up across the street from or a college roommate or, you know, somebody you worked with in a prior job, the executives actually get more useful advice from the people they used to know than the ones that they currently know. Part of that is because of the novel information that Dorman contacts provide.

You know, you reach out to somebody that you're in touch with. They tend to travel in the same circles. They know a lot of the same people and information that you do, so they give you redundant knowledge. Whereas when you reach out to somebody that you've lost contact with those dormant ties, they've been meeting different people and learning different things.

And so they give you a fresh perspective and more efficient access to new insights and ideas and opportunities. But a lot of people, well, when Levin and his colleagues give this assignment, they groan. They have no interest in, you know, going through the legwork to reconnect. And they'll say, well, some ties are dormant for a reason. I don't think that's true at most times.

Yeah. There are times when, you know, a relationship got fractured or we chose not to stay connected, but most of the time we got busy or we moved or we changed jobs. So that means there's probably a mutual interest in reconnecting or at least an openness, a receptivity. And then the question is how do you do that effectively?

There are a couple of favorite strategies that come out when you pull different groups of executives and managers. One, of course, is to wait till you're going to a given city and look up who you know there, and it's just so easy to reach out and say, hey, I'm going to be in town. It's been a long time since we interacted.

I'd love to catch you up. It's so much easier to rekindle that connection when there's an excuse to meet face to face and really connect a second strategy that I like a lot is just to be a little bit more direct and candid than most people are, which is to say, you know, something to the effect of when it's true.

You know, I've been reflecting on my relationships and you're somebody who had a big impact on my identity in my life. I miss our interactions, and it would be really great to get back in touch. And then a third approach that I've seen, which I find quite interesting, is for people that actually think about a dormant time, not as an opportunity to get, but rather as a chance to get.

And there it's something to the effect of I'm working on giving back more and contributing more to the people who matter to me. And as I was reflecting on who those people are, I thought of the fact that we've lost touch. I would love to contribute more to the people who are important to me, and you're one of them. So you know that set up a time to chat. I'd be curious to find out what you're working on, what's going on in your life, and if there are ways I can be helpful. Gosh, is that refreshing? Because it's so the opposite of what usually happens when dormant ties get in touch.

Anita Brick: Very good point. And it doesn't have to be scary. And some people aren't going to respond. But for the most part they haven't been in touch with you either. So sometimes they're afraid to reach out to you in the way you've outlined. It makes it easy for you to reach out and for them to, you know, say no.

Maybe. But more likely than not, they're going to say yes. And the whole idea of reconnecting with dormant ties, I think, is highly undervalued. Thank you for emphasizing that. I haven't seen that emphasized very much anywhere. So it's a great addition to how people reach out and build relationships.

Adam Grant: At a very simple level. The evidence is overwhelming that most of us, when we reach out, we reach out to our strongest ties. The people we know we'll see regularly and really trust. And guess what? Those are the people who tell us what we already know and validate our existing ideas and opinions, as opposed to saying, here's a different way of looking at things, or here's something you haven't considered before.

Anita Brick: I love it. I think it's easier to reconnect with a dormant tie because you already have some credibility. Hopefully you have a good reputation with that person. It's easier to get back to the exchange of lots of things rather than with someone new, where you have to prove yourself, maybe for quite a while.

Adam Grant: That's right, you have this shared history, you know, some common base of experience that you can build on, and it's much easier to get back in touch than it is to create a relationship from scratch. The challenge, of course, is to actually move forward and not just reminisce about the past and make it a relationship solely driven by nostalgia in some way to pick up where you left off, but also start a new chapter in the relationship. That's something that a lot of people struggle with when they reconnect. It is difficult when, especially if you haven't seen someone in 15 or 20 years to, you know, not just go back to the way that you were the last time you saw them.

Anita Brick: Very good point. Very good point. I can't believe that we're almost out of time, but I would like to ask one more question. If that's okay.

Adam Grant: Go for it.

Anita Brick: Okay, good. So you've given us lots of information. Love the book. Really recommend it. It's a really great book on relationship building and building advocates. So if you were thinking and you were going to summarize and give us the top three things, you would advise someone who wants to develop enduring career relationships are really career advocates, people who can help you, who ultimately you're going to help too.

Adam Grant: Well, first of all, I really appreciate your enthusiasm about the book, especially because no taker ever likes these ideas unless they become a recipe for becoming a better faker. If I were going to make three recommendations, the first one would be to become smarter and more thoughtful about how we give. This is something that I always struggle with.

It goes back to the point about being selective in who, how, and when you help. I think it adds a piece, which is you want to give in ways that have a unique impact, and that means aligning in the way that you try to support other people with your knowledge, your skills, your interests. That means when you do give it, it adds more value and you also appreciate it more yourself.

The second recommendation would be to do more of what Adam Rifkin, the entrepreneur I mentioned earlier, calls a five minute flavor where you just look for ways to add a lot of value to other people's lives at a low personal cost. That is part of the appeal of making introductions. Yeah, they just take a few minutes, but they can be life changing when they work out and yeah, I think there are all kinds of five minute favorites that we overlook.

When we think about giving. We think about it as, you know, well, I have to be Mother Teresa or Gandhi in order to earn an advocate. What you need to do is just find ways to support other people and contribute to them. And one of the best things you can do, actually, is go out of your way to recognize and thank givers so that they get drawn out of the shadows, and they get credit for the time and energy they devote to other people, and also that they do know they're appreciated and they're motivated to continue helping out.

And that brings me to my third point, which is, I think the best thing that you can do is just surround yourself with. One of my mentors, James Dutton, would call a micro community of givers. Identify other people who are motivated to help, who are passionate about contributing to others, and, you know, sharing their knowledge and their networks and build a community where the norm is anybody in this network can ask for help anytime.

And everybody is willing and able to get the power of that is that if everybody thinks and operates with that mentality of, you know, I'm going to help with no strings attached, when you need help, you can actually go to the best expert or the most connected person, as opposed to just going to the few people that you've traded favors with or have a tie with.

I think that they're creating a small community with those kinds of norms. It's been one of the most exciting results of the book. Seeing people step up and do that. It's one of the best ways you can not only get more advocates, but also help more people find advocates from your network.

Anita Brick: It's great. It's great. I love this approach. I think it is so needed. It is a real contrast in the way a lot of people operate. Please keep at it and if there are new updates, please let us know.

Adam Grant: Thank you Anita.

Anita Brick: Thanks so much and thank you all for listening. This is Anita Brick with CareerCast at Chicago Booth. Keep advancing.