The paper "Evaluation of Leadership at Google" is a good example of a management case study. Google is a company that has a high orientation toward innovation and creativity. As such, the company only recruits only the best talent to avoid mediocrity. Engineers are allowed to operate with the highest possible autonomy. Sergey Brin Larry Page Eric Schmidt Planning and budgeting As the president of technology it is paramount he oversees that marketing initiatives are effectively done Whereas he oversees the success of the company he oversees that things are done in a timely manner and effectively. Dubbed as a master of strategy, Schmidt is thought t have been brought to the company given his prowess in operating the company.
Simply put he offers guidance to Page and Bin on overwhelming issues Organizing and staffing Through his skill set. Page oversees that the staff are well placed in addressing all organizational functions as he is involved in overseeing the completion of the products life cycle Controlling and problem-solving Schmidt is thought to be the master of strategy in offering guidance to Page and Brin gave his novel expertise garnered through a year of work. Question 2 Sergey Brin Larry Page Eric Schmidt Setting a direction for the organization Is well placed in establishing a highly-skilled workforce; where he advocates the hiring of class A talent individuals.
He asserts that hiring class B individuals creates room for mediocrity; an aspect considers as the corner to failure. Through his conventional wisdom, he balances both Page and Bin’ s communication to the outside world. Aligning the people to the specified direction of communication Oversees that Page and Bin behave themselves as they are required. Contrariwise, he offers direction and on workday aspects where the company’ s founders do not take a keen interest. Motivating People to Action Schmidt showcases his spirit in maintaining the company’ s image by offering the required advice on top management. Question 3 All employees are however required to follow a 702010 model of work performance.
In the model, each employee is expected to devote 70% of working time to search and advertising; the company’ s core businesses, 20% to of the budget projects relevant to the core businesses and 10% to other innovative ideas (How Google Manages Continuous Innovation in a Rapidly Changing World, 2014). As Eric Schmidt put it in a press conference, a company should be run by its culture as opposed to top-level management.
As such, Google employees a downward up management approach hence managers and top-level executives are only inspirational and support instruments for other workers. Google provides a working environment where employees, as mentioned earlier herein, are autonomous; generating ideas from lower levels and pushing them up for the management to implement. By doing so, the company eliminates all sorts of bureaucracy and coercion to work. Operating under the motto ‘ don’ t be evil’ means that the employees are only held accountable to themselves and less accountable for the managers.
Employees are encouraged to work in direct teams with each other, as opposed to some formal channels. The company does not set goals or objectives for the employees; the employees set their own goals and objectives while the company only offers the necessary resources, inspiration and motivation for achieving such objectives (Google Inc, 2015). Similarly, metrics used to measure employee performance emanate from the employees themselves, with managerial input being mere suggestions and support. The supervisors play the role of managers to ensure such individual objectives are met, working under the benchmarks set by the respective employee.
In essence, employees are allowed to be their own leaders, to perform individual performance evaluations and deduce better job performance techniques. Corporate transparency also serves as a method for employees to contribute to the function of leadership (Hauck, 2015). All employees are able to access every managerial meeting so as to contribute to the company’ s projects and responsibilities. In addition to perks inclusive of bonuses and flexible work time, Google’ s cross-functional structure of leadership contributes to employee satisfaction (Veith, 2015).
It can, therefore, be deduced that Google followership is comprised of active, independent and critically thinking employees. Active because the employees are actively involved in setting up goals, contributing to leadership, evaluating their own performance and proposing better techniques for better results. They are independent since they are allowed to do whatever they want so long as they stick to organizational culture, objectives and the 702010 models. They are also critical thinkers based on the fact that the company is oriented towards innovation and operates on a bottom-up approach.
This way, employees are allowed to be creative and innovative, hence critical thinking. Question 4 Google guarantees the satisfaction of employee safety and physiological needs, so as to ensure there are minimal distractions to work. Employees are provided with person-tailored compensation packages in the form of equity components, bonuses and competitive salaries alongside opportunities for further financial rewards and bonuses (Geier, 2015). According to Eric Schmidt, the company strives to eliminate all the distractions that pose barriers for working.
The company provides various fringe benefits alongside commuter buses, dry cleaning, car washes, haircuts, subsidized massages, laundry rooms, gyms and free meals among others. For health and wellness, the company provides accident insurance, business travel insurance, disability insurance, life insurance, vision insurance, dental insurance and medical insurance. Retirements and saving are catered for using the Google 401(k) Plan (Google Inc, 2014). The employees are offered 15 days of vacation during the first year of working at the company up to 25 days during the sixth year. Maternity benefits of up to twelve weeks and 100% salaries are also offered; with additional time for long time employees.
Adler, N. J. (2012). The Arts & Leadership: Now that we can do anything, what will we do?.
Academy of Management Learning & Education, 5(4), 486-499.
Geier, B.(2015). This is Google’s secret to making work less awful. Fortune. Retrieved from
Google Inc.(2014). Google Inc. Form 10-K, 2014. Retrieved from
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1288776/000128877615000008/goog2014123110-k.htm Google Inc.(2015). People operations – Google Careers. Retrieved from
Hauck, R. (2015). FTC v. Google: The Enforcement of Antitrust Law in Online Markets. In
Competition on the Internet (pp. 53-61). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
How Google Manages Continuous Innovation in a Rapidly Changing World - Strategos –
Strategy and Innovation Consulting Firm. (2014). Retrieved January 27, 2016, from http://www.strategos.com/google-model-managing-continuous-innovation-rapidly-changing-world/
Mims, C.(2015). At Google, the Science of Working Better. Retrieved from
Roberge, J., & Melançon, L. (2015). Being the King Kong of algorithmic culture is a tough job
after all Google’s regimes of justification and the meanings of Glass. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 1354856515592506.
Veith, A. A. (2015). " Don't be evil": Google's labor, technology, and the limits of corporate
good (Doctoral dissertation, San Francisco State University).