the case against Competition

Competition  is becoming a state religion

It is false to assume that setting goals and standards for ourselves means competing with others.

Trying to do well, and trying to beat others are two different things!

Healthy competition is a contradiction in terms.

Without cooperation of all members society cannot survive.

Competition also precludes the more efficient use of resources that co operation allows

Why we lose in our race to win

Life has become an endless series of contests. 

We are trying to outdo others at work, at school and play - the common denominator of life.  We can’t see it because we are immersed in it.

There are two types of competition

(a)            Structural Competition - situational

(b)            Intentional Competition - an attitude

Structural Competition has to do with WIN/LOSE, Intentional competition is internal - the desire to be number one.

There is also Mutually Exclusive Goal Attainment  (M E G A)    My success depends on your failure.  One must lose, our fates are linked together when two or more are trying to achieve a goal that cannot be achieved by all of them.

But some competition allows more than one winner.  I.e., students competing to enter a college.  The admission of one does not affect the admission of another.  Success of one does not rule out success of another.

With structural, only one can win, and it is the rules that make this so.  Hence the rules create artificial scarcity.  However, in the admission example above all can win!

Goals can be achieved competitively i.e. work against one another - or co-operatively - work together.  Or we can be Independent i.e. working without regard to others.

Cooperation is hardly considered and so our thinking is hazy about it.  It is not altruism - it means helping others in order to help ourselves.  Not, help others instead of ourselves.

We generally do not consider alternatives to competition and there are many myths about it.  ie “Part of Life”

“Motivates to do best”

“Builds character”

“Good for self confidence”

Our very society is based on individual cooperation.  Civilisation is based on people working together in a broad sense, not fighting each other.  Even animals cooperate to survive in nature, cooperation is natural and competition only occurs during exceptional periods.  Natural selection does not depend on competition.  Nature teaches cooperation.

Competition is a learned behaviour and unfortunately our education system is based on competition and has been for 200 years.

Superior performance almost never requires competition but seems to require its absence.  Studies have proven this conclusively.

Superior performance almost never requires competition but seems to require its absence.  Studies have proven this consistently.  Tests done in school children,  undergraduates and college students have shown that cooperation proved  significantly more productive than competition.

 Studies done by David and Roger Johnson and published in 1981, found that in 122 studies reviewed from 1924 to 1980,  65 studies found that cooperation promotes higher achievement,   8 studies the reverse  and 36 no significant difference.

Cooperation promoted a higher achievement than independence in 108 studies, while only 6 found  the reverse, and 42 found no difference. - this for all age groups and subject areas.

 Psychology at UNI  of Minnesota - David W Johnson "Effects of cooperation, competition and individualist goal structures a meta analysis”.

Robert C Helmreich of the University of Texas, investigated the relationship between achievement on one hand, and traits such as orientation towards work mastery (preference for challenging tasks) and competitiveness on the other.   He found in a sample of 103 male PhD scientists, that most citations were obtained by those high on work and mastery but low on competitiveness.  (With achievement defined as number of times their work was cited by colleagues.)  He did more studies with male businessmen and 1300 male and female undergraduates and in both cases found negative correlation between competitiveness and achievement.  

Robert L Helmreich  Making it in Academic Psychology - Demographic and Personality correlates of Attainment pp897, 902.  Achievement Motivation and Scientific Attainment p224

A group co operation is more successful because the group is greater than the sum of its parts.  Most often, but not all of course, problems are more likely to be solved quickly if more people pool their resources rather than compete against one another.  A competitive environment makes people suspicious of each other and hostile.

If we consider what is best for the group or enterprise as a whole, then we go against the very essence of competition, but it still benefits us individually since we are part of the group.

There is a false assumption that when each person endeavours to further their own self interest at any expense, then each person gains.  Since this only focuses on the individual, we can only gain at the expense of the rest of the group, and therefore this fails to consider the group as a whole.    Also, we have been conditioned to believe that the better I do, the worse you must do and as a result tend to measure our personal gains by others losses.

In business, the aim of competition is to win the market not produce better goods.  A classic example is, Beta video is accepted as being technically superior, but VHS won the competitive battle through aggressive marketing.

Competition did not deliver the better product.

The above was taken from a book by Alfie Kohn published by HOUGHTON MIFFLIN

Return to John's page