The Planning Function of Management at Google Inc - Case Study Example

Running Head: WORKPLACE DIVERSITY Workplace Diversity Name Course Tutor’s Name Date Table of Contents Conclusion 8 Recommendations 9 Executive Summary This report analyses how different theories of management are applicable to the planning function of workforce diversity at Google Inc. (Google). The management by objectives approach and the strategic planning approach are identified as the two models most applicable to Google. Google is an international firm that owns the Google search engine. The company has a strong work diversity culture that is motivated by the firm’s desire to serve people in different geographical regions and cultures effectively. At Google, just like in many other firms, managers have a prerogative of managing workforce diversity in a manner that helps the company meet its strategic objectives. The main sources of information include the Google website, journal articles and books that have relevant theoretical material in planning and management. From the analysis, the main findings in this report indicate that Google has adequately planned its workforce diversity approaches, hence its success in implementing and sustaining a diverse workforce. Notably however, planning is a continuous process and as such, Google needs to engage in continuous planning it targets new markets, and this calls for the firm to use management by objective (MBO) or strategic planning among other planning management theories if at all it wants its diversity programmes to be relevant in the future Introduction This report identifies, discusses, and evaluates the management by objectives approach and strategic planning approaches and analyses how managers at Google Inc. can use the same to ensure that the diverse workforce in their organisation operates efficiently and effectively. As already indicated, the report is based on Google, an international organisation that owns and runs the Google search engine, and which is revered for its diversity management practices. Google serves people of different cultures, beliefs, socio-political inclinations, and from different geographical regions. For a workforce to be diverse, it has to be heterogeneous in terms of race, gender, age, ethnicity, and other characteristics that make people different. According to the Public Service Commissioner (2014), diversity refers to differences in the workforce as represented in different genders, sexual orientation, language, age, ethnicity, religious beliefs, cultural backgrounds, educational levels, socio-economic backgrounds, life and work experiences, marital status and family responsibilities. In other words, any point of difference among people working in an organisation is a source of diversity. Yet, in order for people from different social, political, cultural, and environmental backgrounds to work effectively and efficiently in one organisational setup, their diversity needs to be managed. Accommodating the diversity in the workplace means that managers need to manage people from different cultures and backgrounds and people who have different lifestyles, work styles and family needs among other differences. Workforce diversity at Google is said to be a source of competitive advantage since it helps in the customisation and proper delivery of Google products to different markets across the world (Google, 2013). This report will look at how the planning function of management at Google has contributed to workplace diversity. The scope of the report covers management planning and its relevance in workforce diversity. The report investigates how managers can utilise planning in order to manage a diverse workforce. It is organised into an introduction, a section that explains the planning function of management at the chosen organisation and its relevance to workforce diversity, a conclusion section and a recommendation section. The Planning Function of Management at Google Inc. Planning is identified as the first function of management, and as the basis on which other management functions (i.e. organising, directing, and controlling) are anchored (Allen, Dawson, Wheatley & White, 2004). As a basic management function, planning enables managers to serve their organisations better (Allen et al. 2004). In relation to workplace diversity, planning involves determining an organisation’s “current diversity status, determining where they want to be in future, and developing a route to get there” (Allen et al., 2004, p. 13). Workplace diversity is increasingly perceived by managers as a strategic issue that needs to be attained and maintained by companies. Most managers plan workplace diversity programmes based on goals which can either target individual business units or the entire organisation (Allen et al. 2004). Something worth noting however is that managers need to be sensitised about including specific, time-bound, and measurable goals in their diversity objectives and plans. Additionally, as indicated by Allen et al. (2004), managers need to plan ways through which they can hold their subordinates accountable for purposes of achieving the identified workplace diversity objectives. Google indicates that it is an equal opportunity employer and backs this policy by building a workplace culture that does not tolerate unlawful discrimination, bias, intimidation and harassment of any kind (Google, 2013). Through careful planning, which is strategically anchored on Google’s goal of attaining a globally diverse workforce in order to effectively serve its global markets, the organisation has come up with diversity and inclusion support groups, which it has effectively named Employee Resource Groups (ERGs). Combined, there are 18 ERGs at Google, which are shown in figure 1 below. Figure 1: The 18 ERGs supported by Google across the world Source: Google (2011). In literature, different management theories exist. However, not all are relevant to the planning function of management. The management by objective (MBO) is one approach that enables managers to plan depending on what the organisation wants to achieve. According to Thompson (1998), MBO requires managers to “set specific objectives to be achieved in the future and encourages them to continually ask what more can be done” to enhance vitality and creativity in an organisation (p. 1). Like other organisations, Google exists for a purpose; that purpose is captured in its goals and objectives. In relation to diversity, Google has a goal which it indicates as bringing “together a diversity of perspectives, ideas and cultures to create better products and services” that needs to be met (Google, 2011, p. 7). A management by objectives approach would therefore ensure that the managers and the workforce at Google work together to ensure that workforce diversity is attained. Thompson (1998) also observes that although there are different approaches to MBO, the entire approach essentially helps managers to direct their attention towards results. That means that they actually plan for something they want achieved. In the Google context for example, planning is a strategic management function that ensures that a diverse workforce is employed. The process starts with forecasting what the future human resource needs would be, factoring in the need for diversity in the workforce, and planning recruitment exercises (usually handled by the human resource department) in a manner that ensures there is diversity in the workplace. Yet, planning (guided by the MBO approach) does not just end there; the need for successful co-existence of employees from different diversity groups would lead Google to plan for, and implement plans that ensure that people from different groups or representations are able to communicate, relate and work with others within the work environment without being victimised (or being looked down upon) because of their uniqueness. An example of some of the MBO’s related plans include the ERGs, which are arguably Google’s well-executed plans to ensure that it does not deny the existence of differences in the people who work for it; rather, the company’s management has taken a proactive approach of allowing workers to belong to ERGs where their similarities become a source of strength. Other elements of Google’s plan, which feed into the larger goal of bringing together diverse perspectives, cultures and ideas in order to create better products and services include: the creation of a workplace that accommodates everyone, changing how the technology industry is perceived, and empowering diverse online communities and businesses (Google, 2011). Apart from directing the managers’ focus towards results, an MBO approach can be used to persuade people in an organisation to commit themselves towards the attainment of specific results (Thompson, 1998). This too takes careful planning by the management since managers would need to know what exactly the company wants to achieve. Thompson (1998) further observes that an MBO approach facilitates the managers’ thinking towards future organisational needs, and by so doing, managers can set objectives that will facilitate the satisfaction of identified needs. The strategic planning concept is also applicable in Google’s context. According to Johnson, Scholes and Whittington (2008), strategic planning is the process that determines the direction and range that an organisation takes in the long-term, through a careful analysis of its resources and the changing environment in a manner that ensures that future stakeholder expectations are met. The resources that are critical to a strategic plan include the organisation’s customers, suppliers, employees, and investors (Johnson et al., 2008). On their part, Robbins et al. (2012) describe strategic plans as being applicable to an entire organisation, and “establish the organisation’s overall goals, and seek to position the organisation in terms of its environment” (p. 300). The environment is specifically relevant to strategic planning since such plans cover the long-term (i.e. more than seven years) and as such, need a lot of forecasting and foresight to be relevant. Google for example knows that with increasing globalisation, diversity is a necessity that cannot be wished away. As such, the company’s strategic plans include the need to diversify its human resource in readiness to serve a diverse customer market going forward. The exact definition of strategic planning indicates that it is “a systematic process of envisioning a desired future, translating this vision into broadly defined goals or objectives and a sequence of steps to achieve them” (Schmidt & Laycock, 2010). According to Dessler (2012), strategic planning is part of the larger strategic management framework, and constitutes the first five steps of strategic planning as shown in figure 2 below. Figure 2: Strategic planning steps Source: Dessler (2012). If Google was to use a strategic plan to enhance diversity in its workplace, it would arguably need to follow all the five steps. The first step is all about identifying where the company is currently in relation to diversity management. The second step on the other hand would involve identifying where the company wants to be in future in relation to diversity in the workplace. On their part, steps three, four and five relate to identifying how the organisation will get to its desired future state. As Schmidt and Laycock (2010) note however, the final step in the planning process needs to identify how an organisation will determine whether it has attained its objectives for the future. In other words, the plan needs to provide answers for the question ‘how will we know when we reach our desired future state?’ In Google’s context, Google (2014) indicates that the global ERG leadership summit that occurs annually and which lasts for two days is where all the strategic planning occurs. The two days are however not dedicated to strategic planning alone; other activities that occur within the two days include connecting with the diversity community in the organisation, sharing and collaborating (Google, 2014). Arguably, the interaction, collaboration and sharing that occurs during the two days is not completely irrelevant to planning; rather, it helps the organisation determine its current situation relative to where it wants to go in future in relation to diversity in the workplace. For strategic planning to be effective, Google would need to conduct a situational analysis (in order to determine its current workforce diversity situation). A situational analysis may include taking the organisational history and its progress so far; conducting an organisational audit in matters related to workforce diversity; documenting the organisational profile in order to understand current diversity programmes and their contributions to the organisation; indicating past and current diversity strategies; indicating its current financial situation and its ability (or lack thereof) to invest in new strategies; and indicating its governance structure with the view to establishing whether there is sufficient management support for a new strategic plan. A stakeholder analysis as suggested by Schmidt and Laycock (2009) would also be important in the planning phase since it would enable the managers to determine the right stakeholders to include in strategic planning based on their interests and potential contributions. Strategy development is also a part of the planning process, especially since it would provide the ‘route map’ to achieving optimal diversity in the workplace. Finally, planning for monitoring and evaluation should be part of the strategic planning since it would enable managers to measure results and determine their performance relative to the set goals and objectives. Just like planning, monitoring is an ongoing process that analyses whether an organisation is attaining its planned results. If not, managers are able to take corrective action in a timely manner (Schimdt & Laycock, 2009). Conclusion Bothe MBO and strategic planning offer Google enviable ways of planning for workforce diversity. MBO would enable the firm to base its future plans on set objectives, and hence work backwards to indicate ways in which such objectives can be attained. Strategic planning on the other hand is for the long-term, and features determining whether the organisation is current, where it would want to be in the future, determining how to get to its desired future status, and how to know (or determine) if indeed it has reached there. Everything that Google is doing today falls within its current status category. The foregoing includes ERGs and all other diversity programmes that the firm has in place. Notably, however, the changing global environment requires the firm to change, and this means that it needs to have a desired future stage, which it can only attain based on its ability to plan for the future. As a management function, planning is an ongoing process, and as such, Google has no choice but to constantly keep updating its plans. One of the biggest strategic mistakes the firm can commit is mistaking its current success in workforce diversity management as an end to planning. That would mean that the company would fail to recognise and appreciate future diversity management opportunities that would enhance its opportunities for serving diverse markets in the future. Recommendations i. Engage in continuous management planning in order to determine the workforce diversity initiatives to take going forward. As Reagans and Zuckerman (2001) indicate, planning as a management function is a continuous process, mainly because it forms the basis for organising, directing, and controlling resources owned by an organisation. At Google, uncontrollable external factors such as pressure from competitors may require the organisation to plan for different approaches to workforce diversity. The same may happen if the goals and objectives of the company change (e.g. if the company chooses to target the niche markets in future. Google can use any the above discussed planning strategies (i.e. MBO or strategic planning). The plan of action for MBO would for the organisation to use its workforce diversity objectives as the basis for its plans, while strategic planning would require the organisation to determine it current position relative to where it wants to be in the future, determine how to achieve a desired future plan, and put in place good strategic plans to get there. ii. Rodriguez (2006) notes that in most companies, the biggest driver of workforce diversity is whether the management has the potential to tap the cultural, communicative and creative skills that employees from diverse cultures have. Such skills are then used to improve customer experiences and company and product/service policies. Google is no different and as such, it is recommended that managers devise ways through which they can tap into the employees’ communicative, cultural and creative skills. The ideal way to do the foregoing is by using strategic planning, since a stakeholder analysis (usually carried out during the strategic planning phase) would reveal the skills held by different stakeholders in a manner that would help Google utilise the strong aspects of its employees in enhancing its workforce diversity in the future. iii. Encourage its managers to draw workforce diversity inventories in order to understand the exact diversity needs in the organisation. This is especially critical at a time when Google is expanding to more international markets. iv. Reconsider the ERGs and the conceptual meaning they have to individual workers and collective groups. For example, the company needs to consider whether ERGs are perceived as a means of enhancing cultural diversity, or a means of collectively identifying worker groups along marked margins (e.g. on gender line, racial affiliations etc). v. Encourage its managers to avoid the likelihood of perceiving and using workforce diversity planning as a tool to plan diversity; rather, and as indicated herein, workforce diversity planning should be an organised approach to setting diversity policies and approaches, which will benefit the company going forward, especially considering possible competitive pressure and potential new markets. References Allen, R., Dawson, G., Wheatley, K., & White, C. (2004). Diversity practices: Learning responses for modern organizations. Development and Learning in Organisations, 18(6), 13-15. Dessler, G. (2012). Human resource management. NJ: Prentice Hall. Google. (2011). Diversity and inclusion: Annual report. Retrieved from http://static.googleusercontent.com/media/www.google.com/en//diversity/pdf/Google-Diversity-and-Inclusion-2011-Annual-Report.pdf Google. (2014). Diversity & inclusion in our culture. Retrieved from https://www.google.com/diversity/culture.html Johnson, G., Scholes, K. & Whittington, R. (2008). Exploring corporate strategy. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Financial Times Prentice Hall. Public Service Commissioner. (2014). Archive: Guidelines on workplace diversity. Australian Public Service Commission. Retrieved May 6, 2014, from http://www.apsc.gov.au/publications-and-media/archive/publications-archive/workplace-diversity-guidelines Reagans, R., & Zuckerman, W. (2001). Networks, diversity and productivity. The social capital of corporate R&D teams. Organisational Science, 12, 502-517. Robbins et al. (2012). Management. 6th edition. Sydney: Pearson Australia. Rodriguez, R. (2006). Diversity finds it place. HR Magazine, 51, 56-61. Schmidt, J., & Laycock, M. (2009). Theories of strategic planning: understanding the theory and process of strategy development. Retrieved May 18, 2014, from http://www.healthknowledge.org.uk/public-health-textbook/organisation-management/5d-theory-process-strategy-development/strategic-planning. Thompson, T.M. (1998). Management by objectives. Santa Ana, CA: Pfeiffer. Read More