With pieces like this one, I cannot stress enough that it does not target anyone in particular. (Not even you).
The whole point of this slightly aggressive subtitle is twofold:
clickbait (if you are here, it worked).
addressing as honestly as possible the difficulty of living together with people you don’t know
Now that this is said, why not commit to more?
Ok. let’s dive in.
A (BUBBLE) MICROCOSM OF THE WORLD
The beauty (and challenge) of coliving is its diversity. Or so we tend to say.
The reality is a bit different. Only a certain kind of people tend to join colivings:
people who know about it
people who can afford it
people who are flexible enough to work from anywhere
people who can speak English and are comfortable traveling
…
However, we still have some diversity in colivings — diversity of gender, age, background, industry, nationalities, and, of course, personalities.
There are tons of tests to determine your personality type, from the last page of Cosmo to the more serious Meyer-Briggs.
What interests me here are only three types of people.
In the words of Adam Grant:
- Givers. Those who contribute without expecting in return;
- Takers. Those who seek gain and contribute as little as possible;
Matchers. Those who focus on fairness and reciprocated actions.
In his brilliant book, Grant tells us that takers tend to get “successful” faster, but in the long run, the givers outlast them and benefit society and organizations the most. That being said, givers are vulnerable to burnout and exploitation and must learn to set strict boundaries.
The ideal Coliving is a mix of of givers and matchers. But Coliving is like a box of chocolate; you never know what you're gonna get. There are the ones who are nuts, those with the alcohol, and all the flavors in between. And that’s also the beauty of it, because sometimes you discover one you never thought you’d love, and it changes everything.
BALANCE AND FLUIDITY
Hosting takers is okay. If we are honest with ourselves, we are all takers at times. We have all gone through moments in our lives during which we had to take a bit more than we gave.
What matters is whether people are intrinsically takers or momentarily takers, how fluid the shift is between taking and giving, and how it flows in the house.
Then, it is about balance and the size of your group.
If you have a large group, a few takers won’t hurt. If you are just 10 people, it can quickly become a real issue.
What are the options, then?
BEING THE BIGGER PERSON
Like pretty much everything else in coliving, a challenge is an opportunity for growth, learning, and self-development.
We can work on the following:
Acceptance—We can gossip all we want, be frustrated, complain, and whine, but it is also important for us to grow, let go, accept how things are, and look for solutions instead.
compassion & empathy - That person might be going through things and not be able to express them or not feel safe enough in the group to do so
understanding - It is an excellent opportunity to remind ourselves what is evident to us is not to others’
leadership skills: We can work on being proactive and ask that person directly to participate, assign tasks, and suggest activities for them to lead.
When all fails, at what point is it ok to feel like saying, “screw that, it’s on them,” though?
THE TAKER TAKES IT ALL
It gets toxic when one person constantly takes without acknowledging that they are in a taking phase, without thanking, apologizing, making a gesture, or ever giving anything in return—someone who takes the community for granted.
At first, people are new and in the observation phase.
No one really dares to say anything.
Slowly, habits are formed, and people’s personalities emerge.
Each gathering and group activity is an opportunity to understand the others better and confirm (or not) what we thought about that person.
Slowly but surely, everyone starts noticing the taker(s).
And then there are the rolling eyes, a snappy comment, and loud breathing… maybe someone actually mentions it.
What now?
Don’t let the taker TAKE your sense of Community.
WHEN TO PUT A STOP TO IT?
These situations are rough for the community manager.
What are they supposed to do?
Take sides?
Mediate? What if it does not work? What if nothing changes?
At what point do you say stop? Is that even possible?
Honestly, I wish I had more answers than questions.
I'm always struggling in these situations myself, too. I think a lot has to do with management expectations, having guidelines and clear values to fall back on when things go south, but regardless, those are tough conversations to have, and it takes practice, patience, and trial and error to get them right.
It is also important to remember that we can all be the ass*£$% of someone.
We all have our days, our weeks, our months.
We are all so different, and we don't all have to get along. But we should all try to talk about it—until we cannot anymore. And then maybe it’s time to let go, move on, and try another chocolate.
I would love to hear your own experiences as givers, takers, matchers, and coliving owners.
Pro tip: If you hit the heart at the bottom or top of this email, it will help others discover my work and make my day.
I m like a sponge if you are giver i ll be a giver but if you are a taker...