Competition is an integral part of daily life in the United States--indeed, it is so commonplace that most of us do not consider how pervasive competition has become. Small children compete for their parents' attention, and, in some cases, even their love. Schoolchildren compete for the best grades, or the best performance in sports. High school students compete for the best SAT scores and college students for the best scores for graduate school. Student athletes compete to play on the best teams, and ideally learn how to be gracious both in victory and defeat. In the workplace, employees vie for top salesman, or best performer, or employee of the month. Companies compete for the highest short-term revenue, or even the most employees. The entertainment industry is rife with awards for the best actor, best make-up artist, best song, and so forth. As Americans, we are taught that competition is good, that it provides an "edge," that it leads to increased productivity and performance. According to Alfie Kohn, these perceptions are incorrect. According to Kohn, competition causes severe psychological damage, leads to less than optimum productivity, and is inefficient. This research considers Kohn's ideas as presented in No Contest: The Case Against Competition, and considers the implications for total quality management.
Kohn suggests nothing less than the seemingly counter intuitive argument that competition is bad. He argues that it is not human nature to compete; indeed, that it is not even animal nature to compete, and that Americans have taken competition to an extreme level that permeates our school, our work and our play. Kohn believes that competition in these areas results in less than optimum productivity, and in long term inefficiencies in the economic and social system. In taking this approach, Kohn argues against conventional wisdom, which maintains that competition brings out the best possible performance.