Competition is said to have a positive impact on an individual’s performance, while cooperation is believed to enhances chances for success far more in comparison with the former. I tend to think both competition and cooperation induce/yield a good performance depending on the context/situation.
There are a number of contributing factors why some believe that competition is more effective than cooperation. First of all, competition arouses striving for success more effectively than cooperation does, but it also evokes the feeling of fear from failure. As we know, a person participating in competition is driven by the idea that he should be superior to his opponent and to achieve it, he has to make every effort, leading him to success. Similarly, the fear of failure yields the prospect of outperforming peers and victory. Another point to make in terms of competition is that it triggers self-improvement. For instance, by competing, we start monitoring one another’s skills and techniques, as a result we learn how to improve our own.
On the contrary, cooperation is a good thing for common-goal achievement in team-centered contexts. By working together, some skills can be developed/acquired/built. To be precise, in a teamwork, people learn effective communication skills, friendly attitude, and a sense of mutuality/solidarity. Thus, acquiring such features can enhance performance, resulting in better and faster achievements. In addition, by cooperating, a common goal can be achieved on a larger scale. If governments worldwide agreed on addressing a problem with global warming, for example, and joined forces in resolving this problem, it would be tackled/dealt globally.
In conclusion, I am inclined to think that both competition and cooperation are essential/fundamental in society, and applying one of them should depend on the context to achieve/attain prospective outcomes.