In the world of accounting, net is a reduction word. Something “net” has been reduced by the combination of positive and negative amounts of somethings.

A client of mine recently used the “net” term in another way. He referred to his employees as either net-giving or net-taking. He observes that most people fit into one or the other category. Either they offer themselves or they consume. They characteristically give or they characteristically take. The terms captured my interest and I want to explore the idea of net-living.

To start, I want to establish a few presuppositions.

1. We are made each uniquely, having a design to be offered in our specific life context. This is the offering, our offering.

2. Then, since we each have unique gifts to offer, others will often have differing gifts to offer. This presents an opportunity to consume the unique gifts others have to offer.

3. Finally, our interactions with one another consist of the back-and-forth exchange between or among us of the offering of our gifts and the consumption of the gifts of others, as they also offer their gifts and consume ours.

I am calling this back and forth exchange net-living. Living reduced to combining the difference between giving and taking.

I propose that the greatest net-living value is zero, meaning that I give and I take, fairly equally. I don’t only give. I don’t only take. I don’t mostly give. I don’t mostly take. I give and I take. I offer myself and I accept the offering of others. Our gifts work together in a back-and-forth exchange. Net-Zero Living. Giving – Taking = 0.

My client observes, however, that people, rather than living in this back-and-forth exchange, live in either one or the other of these places. They mostly offer or they mostly consume. The exchange is skewed.

I have a sign on my wall that reads, “Where there is no challenge there is no change.”

The back and forth exchange of offering and consuming requires some challenging things from us. Things like respect of others who run with a different mode of operation. Things like belief in ourselves, that we have something to offer. Things like empathy. And energy. And faith – or more powerfully: relinquishing of control.

At its very core, this back and forth exchange changes us, continually.

I wonder, then, if we can make the presupposition that most people ditch the exchange and fall into either the giver or taker role, can we also make the presupposition that most people resist change. And perhaps leadership is less specific to gifting and is more determined by the choice to engage what is hard and to change. Or to put it another way, to grow as we faithfully offer ourselves and allow others to do the same.

The hard thing for the net-giver may be letting go of control to allow the influence of others into the picture. The hard thing for the net-taker may be believing they have something worth offering. The hard thing for both may be having faith to take the risk that feels like the greatest exposure.

For Jesus followers, the choice to engage involves entrusting our souls to a faithful Creator, living by faith, not by sight. Believing that while it may feel exposing, we are really making the choice to turn our lives over to the One who controls all things. Who holds us by our right hand and will not let us fall. A reduction of ourselves so His design in each of us is put on display, exposing Him, putting Him on display to His watching world.

In the world of accounting, net is a reduction word. I wonder how our organizations, families, relationships change when we accept the net challenge, choosing to be reduced ourselves. Choosing Net-Zero Living.

Content