Keeping Google “Googley” Case Study

Google’s widespread culture of entrepreneurship was revered all over the world. They had always
shared a cultured that revolved around innovation and a can-do attitude. They believed in hiring
individuals who were “A” individuals capable of carrying out their own work. The decision making
process of Google involved a consensus. The team of Sergey Brin, Larry Page believed in independence
more than anything and while most decisions were made collectively there were instances when
decisions were taken by one and informed to the others. Google’s structure embodied the culture of
“employee accountability” and that was prevalent throughout the organization. The question that kept
Scott awake was “As Google expands at a rapid pace how one ensures the same operating principles
throughout their expansions even though odds suggest otherwise”. In the year 2004 Google was based
out of Mountain View, California with around 3000 employees. By 2008 they had grown to a mammoth
17000 with more than 40% employees worldwide. With this expansion trend how we ensure that
Google maintains its Googleyness is the actual question. The answer is actually to effectively implement
a performance system with their inherent metrics that aide overall growth.

Flat Organization Structure

Google since its inception has maintained the Flat Organizational Structure. Taking an example the
AdSense division of the company had taken the decision keeping a small tightly knit team that would
ensure that the innovation never stops at Google. Scott’s nature when it came to hiring people was
described as “When others went with buckets Scott went with teacups”. The managers of AdSense felt
this way ensured that they were motivated to change legacy processes and use technology to automate
the processes. In its early days Google was considered “flat” with individual managers having as much as
50 direct reportees. Originally the opinion was that bulk hiring of managers would eventually stop
“innovation” but ultimately it was found out that with the right kind of hires the employees were more
motivated and challenged to innovate more. This in turn shaped the hiring process of Google wherein
Google ensured that each employee hired had curiosity and awareness but also had the quality to self-
govern as well as help their peers develop. Creativity and Innovation remained at the core of
“Googleyness” and every employee sought innovation continuously at each level of the organization.
Decisions were needed to be made at pace faster than waiting for finalizing amongst others. A benefit
that flat organization entailed major decision making was to be made by departmental managers.
Google wanted employee-involvement at every level of decision making process. Employees were
supported to put forth ideas and help in decision making, meetings, email communications. One major
benefit was that the upper management of Google did not have to burden themselves with all the
decisions and the fact that it promotes innovation. As discussed one of the biggest advantages of this
was the fact that employees felt their importance, and the accountability ensured every success of
Google was every one of their success as well.

Conclusion
The employees at Google didn’t have any issues with taking any risks and trying out new things which
enabled the company reach heights like no company before. The fact that “Not every idea is not a good
one” should not be suppress the process of generating ideas as that is of utmost importance. It was
believed that even a bad idea can be fixed with a little bit of shared insight provided it is voiced out.
With the huge growth of Google this process was made more difficult as people did not know who to
contact in other parts of the vast organization in order to voice their ideas. What Google needed was
ensuring a network that made sure that every employee in every part of the organization knew what
was going on. Which new ideas were currently being floated or pursued, which phase of process
development they were in; basically it was a means for employees to provide feedback and solutions
when they faced barriers during developmental phases. With Google’s penchant for technological
innovation this was made possible with a collaborate system, particularly benefitting when engineers
are at a standstill and require insights on processes that required a particular desired outcome. Having a
database with continuously updated project statuses made it a shared event throughout the vast
organization of Google. They can also discuss new ideas and receive feedback - even if this is restricted
to teams at first, it is always a good idea to share your concept since, given the diversity of Google
workers, there would be a lot of wonderful feedback and a range of recommendations and methods
that could only improve them. Google should establish a mechanism that allows for rapid and efficient
transitions in departments if one employee has a project proposal or is more experienced and can
contribute more to the table. Employees have a considerably higher chance of progressing, growing, and
succeeding if they are put with like-minded colleagues.