The Cookie Jar Principle

July 6, 2009  | 

cookie300Give more than you take. It’s as simple as that. If we embrace this one powerful principal in our lives, individually we will enjoy meaningful, vibrant relationships and collectively create a culture of abundance. If we can’t, we end up with an empty jar.

We can all point to a friend or colleague who breaks the rule repeatedly. They call only when they need something and they only show up or participate when it benefits them. They forget that the act of taking from the jar implies that they will one day put back more than what they took. In many ways selfishness is failing to recognize that when you chose to benefit from the effort or contributions of another, you become part of a self-sustaining cycle of give and take, and that your actions alter the system’s balance. In the fog of self-absorption we can loose sight of the truth and reality of the circumstances of both others and ourselves. When we take more than we give, everyone that depends on the contents of the jar loses.

Remember that every one of your relationships has its own jar. We fill them with our time, energy and love. Sharing, participating, and giving before we take signal our good faith – they are small promises that when it is our turn to take, we have not forgotten our responsibility to keep filling the jar. What we do take, we should always strive to return with interest. This simple principal is as true for individual relationships as it is for groups, families and communities of any size. When we agree to be a part of the group, whether the group is 2 or 2 million,  we accept an equal and shared responsibility for the jar.

Bookmark and Share


  • The principle is very similar to Chris Brogan's piece of levelling up. Putting a cookie in the cookie jar is another game theory metaphor. The reward / achievement process of almost forcing a dopamine release is a very good motivator.
  • Good call. I really enjoyed Chris' piece on leveling. (I have two brothers
    that are gamers, so the metaphor rang true).
  • Between understanding the dopamine reward system and its quirks, as well as the concept of game theory it should be possible to motivate ourselves to do just about anything. What I'm trying to reconcile is being able to do that, while working a 9 to 5 to pay the bills!
  • @Steffan & @Fraser
    This should be true for anything we do in our lives right?

    The amount of effort that we put into any task will directly reflect the benefit (joy, money, knowledge) that we get out of it.

    However, I do think that there are some cookie jars that produce more cookies than others. That is to say that if you put in 1X effort to one cookie jar you may get out 1X of benefit, but if you put in 1X effort to another cookie jar you may get 2X or 3X of benefit. The hardest part is figuring out which cookie jars or task to allocate your time and effort towards in order to maximize your benefit.

    I want to find the second cookie jar! Thoughts?
  • You know what Ryan, I've come to expect these kinds of keen insights from you. I didn't think about this and I think you're on to something. Since our time and energy is always limited, it makes sense that we should focus on activities with maximum impact and make sure our contributions are as valuable and valuED as possible - on an individual level as well as on a group/community level. Great point.
  • Not too long back a friend launched in the twitterworld the same idea in form of a question: How many of us are we guiding after the statement "give more than receive"? Then and now i answer with.. this not means actually to weight your 'giving' or 'receiving'? The simple act of giving should be exempt by expectations of receiving something . At the same time the act of receiving should not give us the pressure that we HAVE to give something in return.

    This reminds me of the "stroke economy" concept developed by Claude Steiner who talks about few simple rules of giving and receiving (btw stroke means a unit of human recognition):
    1. give the strokes you want to give
    2. accept the strokes you want
    3. ask for strokes you want to receive
    4. reject the strokes you don't want
    5. give yourself strokes

    I think following these principles gives you the possibility to develop harmonious and healthy relationships without counting pluses and minuses.

    More about stroke economy here http://www.emotional-literacy.com/economy.htm
    And don't miss to read "A warm fuzzy tale" (also by Claude) http://www.emotional-literacy.com/fuzzy.htm
    (you will recognize a jar at some point :) )

    Warm fuzzies,
    Ruxandra
  • Ruxandra - Thanks for such a detailed and insightful addition to the discussion. I'll be sure to check out the links you included here as well. I'll have to spend some time with Claude's writing before I respond fully. From what you've written here, it seems that he's sharing good ideas. I'll be sure to continue this discussion after reading some of his stuff. Thanks again. As always, you add value. :)
  • This is such a great lesson Steffan, and it applies beyond our relationships with each other, it's just as important when examining how we treat the earth. Too often we are only taking, and not giving back in a nurturing fashion - like that old saying when visiting nature - leave the place better than when you found it.
  • kevinmurphy
    makes sense. it's sometimes hard to determine if the taker is knowingly taking or just plain ignorant of the whole concept of give and take, and the mutual rewards that should be derived from the mutual sharing.
  • Absolutely, Kevin. My point is that if it's not clear, it is likely better
    for our own emotional condition to give the person the benefit of the doubt.
    Assuming malicious intent makes selfish acts feel like personal attacks and
    opens you up to a whole host of negative feelings etc. How you should deal
    with making the offender aware of how you feel about the situation (and
    what's going on between you) is not so easy and should be handled on a
    situation-by-situation basis.
  • I agree with this advice. And yet I think it's a pill that I can't swallow personally! I'm internalizing it and getting rubbed the wrong way. However, when I stop to think deeply about the situation, I do not think that it's malicious.
  • That's a natural human response though. The second you've swallowed the pill, tension builds until some sort of pressure is released or recourse is sought. Bottling never works. You've got to recognize what's happening quickly, know it'll build if you don't do something to make them aware of it and then act. Waiting around for things to get better when repeated behavior doesn't change will kill any relationship. Someone has to take initiative to address what's happening.
  • What a simple way to think about a fundamental truth in all of our relationships.

    I've been trying to come to terms with an old friend who seems to be taking more than they give. In the span of the friendship it's a relatively new development but given life circumstances it may be a new trend that will persist.

    It's not clear to me how I should deal with it.

    Any wise thoughts?
  • Dealing with offenders is tough, because (often) it's a shock that they are offending in the first place. The balance-give-and-take rule is so obvious to the self-aware that it feels like a purposeful, calculated infraction on the part of the rule breaker, and it's hard not to take personally. I'd offer that it's helpful to assume the attitude that the person either A) does not realize that they are rule breaking (most likely) or B) realizes they are rule breaking and feels guilty about it (but has not mustered the courage to take action to bring balance back to the equation). In either case, assuming this attitude (which you can control) helps alleviate the pain that's associated with "taking it personally" or the burden of "seeking justice". If you assume the other person's awareness of what's going on, AND assume that they are callous, the entire sitch feels horrible. We chose to go down that path and burden ourselves with the associated feelings, so if there's doubt or ambiguity surrounding the situation, give the person the benefit of the doubt - it'll help you manage your emotions. In most cases I find that people who are being self absorbed and selfish are generally unaware of how they are affecting their relationships - which is good news (if it's true) because it erases the anger we feel that's associated with calculated intent. My advice is to work on what's going on inside you and give the person the benefit of the doubt if you can, and when you come to a decision on what your attitude will be, then decide how to proceed - and when you do so, be direct. Make sense?
  • Woah. Seriously great advice.

    I don't think it's cold, callous or calculated. Rather, I think it's an individual who is happily oblivious to how out of balance the give-and-take is.

    So if I don't take it personal, what's the best way of addressing the issue?
  • I couldn't tell you how to deal with it without knowing what your relationship with the offender is - obviously, the appropriate approach is going to have to be tailored to the person and the situation. I'm a huge proponent of a calm, direct approach - the important thing is to not "wait it out" - then you're increasing the chances of intensifying your focus on the issue and you risk lasting resentment. Nip it in the bud. Approach the offender with the assumption that they are "happily oblivious" and tailor your response that way. Know it's going to blind-side them and immediately make them feel guilty. If you make it clear that it's not a big deal to you now, but it might be if it continues, it'll instill a feeling of agency on their part - it'll effectively feel like an "alert" that allowed them to "head-off" a situation whether they MIGHT have hurt you, rather than a situation where they've already injured you and are seeking forgiveness - two very different positions to a friend who is hearing about it for the first time. Put them in a position where they feel aware and have the ability to change their behavior BEFORE they hurt your feelings (perception is everything) and then you'll change the trajectory of the argument and put a positive spin on the whole thing. Give abusive friends an opportunity to make right without making them feel like they've already gone past the point of no return usually has a positive effect without injuring your relationship. Does that explanation resonate with you?
  • Resonates loudly. Thanks Dr Antonas!
  • For the record, I'm no doctor. Please see the "legal" page of this blog. lol.
  • These are awesome things to keep in mind. This principle in regards to web interaction is definitely applicable to any social interaction.
  • Ryan,

    You're right. It's applicable to any interaction - offline or on. The
    foundation for human relationships is the same regardless of the medium.
  • Great post Steffan - this is true not only in personal lives, but especially in business. How many times have people seen colleagues who all of the sudden 'friend' them on LinkedIn when they are out of a job?

    I also think you've hit upon one of the key components of communities of any kind - you can lurk and take from the jar while not contributing, but your credibility will be zero if you then have to ask for a favor - it's better to contribute even a little to show some good will.
  • Guy,

    Well said. I think that this principal is certainly fundamental to the sustainability of any community or (micro) gift economy.
blog comments powered by Disqus