Google’s Project Oxygen:

Do Managers Matter?

Submitted to Prof. L Gandhi Submitted by: group 1

Harshini - 19021
Mena suresh - 19030
Ayesha Nehla - 19072
Sanketh - 19106
Trupthi MN - 19116
Abhishek nayak - 19122
 Introduction
• Google’s Project Oxygen questions about “Does Managers matter?” in an
organization
• This question arises when forming a initial set of research questions by PiLab
created by Three members of the people analytics group
• It says how to implement managerial knowledge to guide and communicate
effectively
• The case also speaks about 8 Behaviors of being a Great Managers
• Case also speaks about how managers impact on employees in their work
•
 About Google
• The company Google was founded by Sergey Brin and Larry Page on 4th september 1998
• Raised $26 million from investors within a year and turned their idea into company
• In 1999 Google moved its headquarters to mountain view, California
• Informal culture was designed to encourage collegiality and to break down barriers for
rapid development of ideas
• By late 2000 google made partnerships with leading websites such as AOL and Yahoo
• Introduced Keyword-Targeted advertising program called AdWords
• By early 2001 Eric Schmidt was hired as google CEO
• Company reached $440 million revenue and $100 million profit by the end of 2002
• In the year 2004 Google went public raising $2 billion
 Organization and Culture
• The company used to run a “triumvirate”
• By November 2012 the company headcount of employees grew from 3000 to 35,000 employees
• Schmidt organized employees in Three primary functional group which are,
• Engineering
• Global business organization (sales)
• General and Administrative (G&A)
• Google hiring was one of the rigorous hiring processes
• Google had a culture in which good ideas were celebrated
• Google offered generous compensation packages, including base salary, bonus, and extensive set
of benefits and perks
• Google compensation was considered among the highest in Silicon Valley
 People Operations

• Laszlo Bock was hired as head of “People operations” in the

year 2006
• Managing the performance review process which includes
regular feedback and annual 360-degree review
• In 2007 Prasad setty was hired to a group called “People
Analytics”
• Main Mission was “ All people decisions should be informed
by data and analytics”
• Three members of the people analytics group formed a small
team called People & Innovation Lab (PiLab) led by Kurkoski
• Main goal was to tackle questions related to the well-being and
productivity of Google employees
Project Oxygen
• PiLab and with a core team of Patel, Donovan and
Kurkoski, the project was code named Project Oxygen
• Project Oxygen’s co-founders and co-leads
• Michelle suggested the element oxygen

1) Research:
• Patel explained: Good managers do matter
• Google employees with higher-scoring managers had
consistently higher scores
• 8 behaviors to be great managers.
“Oxygen 8” Great Manager Behavior's
1. Is a good coach
2. Empowers the team and does not
micromanage
3. Expresses concern for team members
success & personal well-being
4. Is productive and result oriented
5. Is a good communicator – listens & shares
information
6. Helps with career development
7. Has a clear vision/ strategy for the team
8. Has key technical skills that help to advise
the team
2) Action Plan:

• Broader people management initiative

• Plan was to modify the annual UFS
• Mary Kate Stimmler, people analyst
• Planned to socialize
• Management best practices
Project Oxygen Implementation

Surveys Feedback Reports

Great Manager
Training
Award
 Project Oxygen Impact

Analyzing the impact of

project oxygen with Career development and How project oxygen dealt Managers saw the scores
aggregate data comparing coaching with. Question about in a sportive manner and
UFS and TMS surveys relationships between UFS were ready to correct
score and low performance
Training and OD UNFREE
ZE
Create right
Environment

Training &
OD
REFREE
ZE CHANGE
Support change
Reinforce to
to desired state
anchor change
NEED ANALYSIS
● Trigger: “Do Managers Matter?”

High-Scoring Manager< Low-Scoring Manager = Performance Gap (Turnover Rate)

● Input:
❏ Organizational Analysis: To evaluate the reasons why the employees left Google -
➢ Goal: To provide users with the most relevant, highest quality results based on user search queries.
➢ Objective: To organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful.
➢ Strategy: Differentiation Strategy
➢ Practices: Google keeps people Inspired; supports Flexibility; promotes diversity; Listens, Responds &
Adapts; creates a Culture of Empathy and offers Uniques Benefits.
NEED ANALYSIS (Contd.)
❏ Operational Analysis: Examination of the correlation in Googlegeist ratings and performance review scores.
❏ Person Analysis: “High-scoring” managers were those in the top 25% quartile on both measures and “low-
scoring” managers were in the bottom 25% quartile.
● Analysis Phase: Significant difference between high-scoring and low-scoring individuals which impacts the
job satisfaction, retention and performance.

High-Score Manager - Low-Score Manager = Performance Gap (Turnover Rates)

● Output: Plans to increase company-wide awareness of effective manager behaviour

❏ Training Needs: Coaching was provided to a low-scoring manager to improve the manager quality; “Start
Right” an introductory course for new people managers.
SYSTEMATIC ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
The Laboratory training system:
● In this case we can see that small group of managers were selected and the session was made interactive –
“Start Right”
● Various training methods were used like role play, setting a vision etc.
● Managers learned from their own actions & groups had an evolving dynamic.

Survey research and feedback system:

● The aim was to create a better manager & the team came up with a survey which captured 8 attributes.
● Every manager was rated on these attributes.
● The scores were displayed to the managers and appropriate training was provided.
● The survey was conducted on a regular basis and the scores were monitored regularly.
• Action Research Stem:

• All the functions required for the survey and feedback was done in a collaborative manner
• According to the team, all the employees were involved in the research and hence it had a Participant
Action Research.
• T-group training was also conducted in this case so that the managers could work on the feedback given

• Socio-Technical and Socio-Clinical Stem:

• Discussion Panels were created which consisted of high-scoring managers.

• Coaching classes were conducted which offered detailed information on how to deliver personalized,
balanced feedback.
• “Vision” classes used a series of images to encourage creativity.