Our attitude toward life determines life's attitude towards us. -- John N. Mitchell

I recently attended a broadcasting conference where all the national players were invited, except one, who happened to be not only the number one in the market, but also the only business entity run by a non national mother company.

I thought that was odd.

After all the slapping on our own shoulder speeches were finished and the floor was opened to questions, one person did ask why that player wasn't there.

And the answer from one of the market players was going on about what had happened in the past and how that had brought about the current situation and how it was all about reciprocity.

So what he said basically came down to: you didn't invite me, so I'm not gonna invite you.

I admit I was troubled by that.

I also admit I have been reading Seth Godin's book "Linchpin" and that that might be one of the reasons why I was troubled.

In his book, Seth defines art as “the intentional act of using your humanity to create a change in another person” (p. 99) and acknowledges that when we give to others, the law of reciprocity kicks in and they will feel indebted to return our favor.

But he goes on to say that when we give to others and don't expect anything in return, that attitude of unconditional generosity changes us. It creates abundance in our lives and in the lives of those we connect with at work and in our communities.

The ideal situation of course, is that a returned favor is about equivalent to the favor you performed. This is indirect reciprocity because there is time and a lack of obligation between the favors.

Most people define reciprocity like this: “I did this for you, now I expect you to do this for me” or the other way around. It is not put directly in words, but the common understanding is that a favor is to be returned.

Direct reciprocity is more transactional and usually comes with an obligation. You do a favor and then ask the other person to return that favor. Reciprocity becomes conditional. The motivation is clear: you want something from me and you are only willing to do something nice for me if I do you this favor. Which is almost like directly paying for the service, isn't it?

And such a 'payment' transaction is definite and final, it does not create a bond of any sort. It might even create a negative feeling because I will probably not ask you for a favor again since I know it comes with a price tag - which cancels out the 'favor' part.

What Godin advocates is that great generosity with people will be recognized and, when it is needed, reciprocity will be on a voluntary basis and plentiful.

Anything less – favors with an obligation – is part of a disconnected transactional context that is best left to bullies, cartels and gangs - which is precisely why I felt troubled by the speaker's attitude at the conference.

So why is it that we feel obliged to bring flowers and a bottle of wine when we are invited for dinner? Why do we think it strange when people, whom we have invited for dinner don't reciprocate the 'favor'? Was the invitation for dinner not a gift?

I have decided to test run this. I will try to give from now on. Gifts, favors, advice, help etc. Without any expectation in return.

And let's see what abundance that brings me :-)