google case study organizational culture

• Original Article
• Open access
• Published: 19 December 2017

GOOGLE: a reflection of culture, leader, and management

• Sang Kim Tran 1 , 2  

International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility volume  2 , Article number:  10 ( 2017 ) Cite this article

416k Accesses

12 Citations

4 Altmetric

Metrics details

This paper provides a viewpoint of the culture and subcultures at Google Inc., which is a famous global company, and has a huge engineering staff and many talented leaders. Through its history of development, it has had positive impacts on society; however; there have been management challenges. The Board of Directors (BoDs) developed and implemented a way to measure the abilities of their managers, which helped to identify problems. This paper will analyze the case study of Harvard Business Review, Oxygen Project, and clarify the management problem in Google’s organization. It will also compare Google with Zappos, a much smaller organization, and present how the BoDs of Zappos assesses its culture and subcultures. In this paper, we will recommend eight important points to building an organizational culture that is positive for stable growth of a company. We believe that much of what be learned could be useful to other business leaders, regardless of company scale.

Introduction

In a large society, each company is considered a miniature society (Mawere 2011 ). Similar to large societies with large cultures, small societies also need to build their own cultures. A culture is influenced by many factors and determines if it is a great culture. Corporate culture requires both the attention to the efficiency of production and business and to the relationship among people in the organization closely (Bhagat et al. 2012 ). Regardless if it is a large or a small organization, it must encounter issues of cooperation among individuals and groups. There are many factors leading to the success of business process re-engineering in higher education (BPR), the main four elements are culture, processes, structure, and technology. Culture is listed as number one (Ahmad et al. 2007 ). Hence, culture becomes the most important factor to the success of the development of a business. Organizational culture is the set of shared beliefs (Steiber and Alänge 2016 ), values, and norms that influence the way members think, feel, and behave. Culture is created by means of terminal and instrumental values, heroes, rites and rituals, and communication networks (Barman n.d. ). The primary methods of maintaining organizational culture are through the socialization process by which an individual learns the values, expected behaviors, and necessary social knowledge to assume their roles in the organization. In addition, (Gupta and Govindarajan 2000 ) and Fig.  1 in (Ismail Al-Alawi et al. 2007 ) illustrates that culture was established by six major factors, such as information systems, people, process, leadership, rewarding system, and organization structure. Therefore, there is a wide variety of combined and sophisticated cultures in the workplace, especially in big corporations like Google, Facebook, Proctor & Gamble, etc. Each organization tends to have a common goal, which is to create a culture that is different from other companies and to promote their teams to be creative in developing a distinctive culture (Stimpson and Farquharson 2014 ). Clearly, we can see that Google’s culture is different than others. What makes this company unique and different from others, as well as the dominant cultures and subcultures existing at this company? How do leadership behaviors impact the organizational culture? By operating a case study of a Harvard Business Review to analyze its organizational culture, subsequently, having compared it with Zappos’ culture, this paper will clarify the similarities and differences in managing organizational cultures between them and consider whether the solutions for the problems can be applied to other business models, and for tomorrow leaders or not?

Trends of using product by information searching

Company overview

This part shows how Google became famous in the world and its culture and subcultures made it a special case for others to take into consideration. Google is one of the few technology companies which continue to have one of the fastest growth rates in the world. It began by creating a search engine that combined PageRank system, developed by Larry Page (ranking the importance of websites based on external links), and Web search engine, created by Sergey Brin (accessing a website and recording its content), two co-founders of the company (Jarvis 2011 ; Downes 2007 ). Google’s achievements absolutely do not come from any luck. Google has made extra efforts in creating an index of a number of websites, which have been up to 25 billion websites. This also includes 17 million images and one billion messages to Usenet group (Downes 2007 ). Besides searching for websites, Google users are able to search for PDF files, PostScript, documents, as well as Microsoft, Lotus, PowerPoint and Shockwave files. Google processes nearly 50% of search queries all over the world. Moreover, it is the number one search option for web users and is one of the top five websites on the Internet, which have more than 380 million users and 28 billion visits every month, and more than 50% of access from countries outside the US (Desjardins 2017 ). Google’s technology is rather special: it can analyze millions of different variables of users and businesses who place advertisements. It then connects them with millions of potential advertisements and gives messages of advertisement, which is closest to objects in less than one second. Thus, Google has the higher rate of users clicking advertisements than its opponent Yahoo, from 50 to 100%, and it dominates over 70% market share of paid advertisements (Rosenberg 2016 ). Google’s self-stated mission: “to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful (Alves n.d. ).” Nowadays, it is believed that people in the world like “Google” with words “the useful-lively information storage”.

Predominant culture at Google

The dominant culture in the organization depends on the environment in which the company operates the organization’s objectives, the belief system of the employees, and the company’s management style. Therefore, there are many organizational cultures (Schein 2017 ). The Exhibit 3.1 at page 39 in (Schein 2009 ) provides what culture is about. For example, employee follows a standard procedure with a strict adherence to hierarchy and well-defined individual roles and responsibilities. Those in competitive environments, such as sales may forget strict hierarchies and follow a competitive culture where the focus is on maintaining strong relationships with external parties. In this instance, the strategy is to attain competitive advantages over the competition. The collaborative culture is yet another organizational way of life. This culture presents a decentralized workforce with integrated units working together to find solutions to problems or failure.

Why do many large companies buy its innovation? Because its dominant culture of 99% defect-free operational excellence squashes any attempts at innovation, just like a Sumo wrestler sitting on a small gymnast (Grossman-Kahn and Rosensweig 2012 ). They cannot accept failures. In fact, failure is a necessary part of innovation and Google took this change by Oxygen Project to measure the abilities of their multicultural managers. This means that Google itself possesses multiple different cultures (see Google’s clips). Like Zappos, Google had established a common, organizational culture for the whole offices that are distinctive from the others. The predominant culture aimed at Google is an open culture, where everybody and customer can freely contribute their ideas and opinions to create more comfortable and friendly working environment (Hsieh 2010a ).

The fig.  2 .1 in chapter two of (Schein 2009 ) and page 17 in part one of (Schein 2017 ) provide us three levels of culture which are Artifacts, Espoused values and Underlying assumptions helping us to understand the culture at Google. At page 84, in (Schein 2009 ), the “artifacts” are identified such as dress codes, level of formality in authority relationships, working hours, meeting (how often, how run, timing), how are decisions made, communication, social events, jargon, uniforms, identity symbols, rites and rituals, disagreements and conflicts, balance between work and family . It seems that Google is quite open in these artifacts by showing a respect for uniform and national culture of each staff individually and giving them the right to wear traditional clothes.

Ad Blocking Incidence

Working at Google, employees enjoy free food served throughout the day, a volleyball court, a swimming pool, a car wash, an oil change, a haircut, free health care, and many other benefits. The biggest benefit for the staff is to be picked up on the day of work. As assessed by many traffic experts, the system set up by Google is considered to be a great transport network. Tad Widby, a project manager and a traffic system researcher throughout the United States, said: “I have not seen any larger projects in the Bay Area as well as in urban areas across the country” (Helft 2007 ). Of course, it is impossible for Google to “cover up the sky”, so Yahoo also started implementing the bus project for employees in 2005. On peak days, Yahoo’s bus also took off. Pick up about 350 employees in San Francisco, as well as Berkeley, Oakland, etc. These buses run on biofuels and have Wi-Fi coverage. Yet, Danielle Bricker, the Yahoo bus coordinator of Yahoo, has also admitted that the program is “indirectly” inspired by Google’s initiative (Helft 2007 ). Along with that, eBay recently also piloted shuttle bus transfers at five points in San Francisco. Some other corporations are also emerging ideas for treatment of staff is equally unique. Facebook is an example, instead of facilitating employees far from the workplace; it helps people in the immediate neighborhood by offering an additional $10,000 for an employee to live close to the pillar within 10 miles, nearby the Palo Alto Department (Hall 2015 ).

When it comes to Google, people often ask what the formula for success is. The answer here is the employees of Google. They create their own unique workplace culture rules to create an effective work environment for their employees. And here are the most valuable things to learn from Google’s corporate culture (Scott 2008 ) that we should know:

Tolerate with mistakes and help staff correct

At Google, paying attention to how employees work and helping them correct mistakes is critical. Instead of pointing out the damage and blaming a person who caused the mistake, the company would be interested in what the cause of the problem was and how to fix it as quickly and efficiently as possible.

Also as its culture, we understand that if we want to make breakthroughs in the workplace, we need to have experimentation, failure and repeat the test. Therefore, mistakes and failures are not terrible there. We have the right to be wrong and have the opportunity to overcome failure in the support of our superiors and colleagues. Good ideas are always encouraged at Google. However, before it is accepted and put into use, there is a clear procedure to confirm whether it is a real new idea and practical or not?

Exponential thought

Google developed in the direction of a holding company - a company that does not directly produce products or provide services but simply invest in capital by buying back capital. In the company, the criteria for setting the ten exponential function in lieu of focusing only on the change in the general increase. This approach helps Google improve its technology and deliver great products to consumers continuously.

Of course, every company wants to hire talented people to work for them. However, being talented is an art in which there must be voluntary work and enthusiasm for the work of the devotees. At page 555 in (Saffold 1988 ) illustrated that distinctive cultures dramatically influencing performance do exist. Likewise, Google, Apple, Netflix, and Dell are 40% more productive than the average company which attracts top-tier employees and high performers (Vozza 2017 ). Recognizing this impact, Google created a distinctive corporate culture when the company attracted people from prestigious colleges around the world (West 2016 ; Lazear and Gibbs 2014 ).

Build a stimulating work environment

When it comes to the elements that create creativity and innovation, we can easily recognize that the working environment is one of the most important things. Google has succeeded in building an image of a creative working. Google offices are individually designed, not duplicated in any type of office. In fact, working environment at Google is so comfortable so that employees will not think of it as a working room, with a full area of ​​work, relaxation, exercise, reading, watching movies. Is the orientation of Google’s corporate culture to stimulate creativity and to show interest in the lives of employees so that volunteers contribute freely (Battelle 2011 )?

Subculture is also a culture, but for a smaller group or community in a big organization (Crosset and Beal 1997 ). Google, known as the global company with many more offices, so there are many subcultures created among groups of people who work together, from subcultures among work groups to subcultures among ethnic groups and nations, multi-national groups, as well as multiple occupations, functions, geographies, echelons in the hierarchy and product lines. For example, six years ago, when it bought 100 Huffys for employees to use around the sprawling campus, has since exploded into its own subculture. Google now has a seven-person staff of bicycle mechanics that maintains a fleet of about 1300 brightly-colored Google bikes. The company also encourages employees to cycle to work by providing locker rooms, showers and places to securely park bikes during working hours. And, for those who want to combine meetings with bike-riding, Googlers can use one of several seven-person (Crowley 2013 ).

Leadership influences on the culture at Google

From the definition of leadership and its influence on culture; so what does leader directly influence the culture existed? According to Schein, “culture and leadership are two sides of the same coin and one cannot understand one without the other”, page three in (Schein 2009 ). If one of us has never read the article “Google and the Quest to create a better boss” in the New York Times, it is listed in a priority reading. It breaks the notion that managers have no change. The manager really makes a difference (Axinn 1988 ; Carver 2011 ). In fact, a leader has a massive impact on the culture of the company, and Google is not an exception. The leaders of Google concerned more about the demands and abilities of each individual, the study of the nature of human being, an appreciation their employees as their customers. At Google, the founders thought they could create a company that people would want to work at when creating a home-like environment. It is real that they focus on the workplace brings the comfort to staff creatively and freely (Lebowitz 2013 ).

In my opinion, a successful business cannot be attributed solely from a single star; that needs the brightness of all employees. It depends very much on the capacity and ability to attract talented people. It is the way in which the leader manages these talents, is the cornerstone of corporate culture. One thing that no one can deny is that a good leader must be a creator of a corporate culture so that the employees can maximize capabilities themselves (Driscoll and McKee 2007 ; Kotter 2008 ).

To brief, through the view of Google’s culture, BoDs tended and designed to encourage loyalty and creativity, based on an unusual organizational culture because culture is not only able to create an environment, but it also adapts to diverse and changes circumstances (Bulygo 2013 ).

Company growth and its impact

“Rearrange information around the world, make them accessible everywhere and be useful.” This was one of the main purposes set by Larry Page and Sergey Brin when they first launched Google on September 4th, 1998, as a private company (Schmidt and Rosenberg 2014 ). Since then, Google has expanded its reach, stepped into the mobile operating system, provided mapping services and cloud computing applications, launched its own hardware, and prepared it to enter the wearable device market. However, no matter how varied and rich these products are, they are all about the one thing, the root of Google: online searching.

1998–2001: Focus on search

In its early years, Google.com was simply one with extreme iconic images: a colorful Google logo, a long text box in the middle of the screen, a button to execute. One button for searching and the other button are “I’m feeling lucky” to lead users to a random Google site. By May 2000, Google added ten additional languages to Google.com , including French, German, Italian, Swedish, Finnish, Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, Norwegian and Danish, etc. This is one of the milestones in Google’s journey into the world. Google.com is available in over 150 languages (Scott 2008 ; Lee 2017 ).

2001–2007: Interface card

A very important event with Google around this time was the sale of shares to the public (IPO). In October 2003, Microsoft heard news of the IPO, so it quickly approached Google to discuss a buyout or business deal. Nevertheless, that intention was not materialized. In 2004, it was also the time when Google held a market share of 84.7% globally through collaboration with major Internet companies, such as Yahoo, AOL, and CNN. By February 2004, Yahoo stopped working with Google and separately stood out for engine search. This has led Google to lose some market share, but it has shown the importance and distinctness of Google. Nowadays, the term “Google” has been used as a verb just by visiting Google.com and doing an online search (Smith 2010 ). Not stopping at the homepage search, Google’s interface tag began to be brought to Gmail and Calendar with the links at the top of the page. Google homepage itself continues to use this style.

In 2006, Google also made an important acquisition to buy YouTube for $1.65 billion (Burgess and Green 2013 ). However, the company decided to keep YouTube as a separate brand and not to include it in Google Video search. Thanks to the backing of an Internet industry giant, YouTube has grown to become the world’s largest online video sharing service (Cha et al. 2007 ).

2007–2012: Navigation bar, Google menu, Google now

Google began to deploy a new navigation bar located at the edge of the screen. It includes links to a place where to look for photos, videos, news, maps, as well as buttons to switch to Gmail, Calendar, and other services developed by the company. In the upper left corner, Google added a box displaying Google + notifications and user accounts’ image. Google Now not only appeared on Android and it’s also brought to Chrome on a computer as well as iOS. All have the same operating principle, and the interface card still appears as Android it is.

2013–2014: Simplified interface

Google has moved all of the icons that lead to its other applications and services to an App Drawer button in the upper right hand, at the corner of the screen. In addition, Google.com also supports better voice search through the Chrome browser. Google has experimented with other markets, such as radio and print publications, and in selling advertisements from its advertisers within offline newspapers and magazines. As of November 2014, Google operates over 70 offices over 40 countries (Jarvis 2011 ; Vise 2007 ).

2014–2017: Chrome development and facing challenges

In 2015, Google would turn HTTPS into the default. The better website is, the more users will trust search engine. In 2016, Google announced Android version 7, introduced a new VR platform called Daydream, and its new virtual assistant, Google Assistant.

Most of Google’s revenue comes from advertising (Rosenberg 2016 ). However, this “golden” business is entering a difficult period with many warning signs of its future. Google Search is the dominant strength of Google and bringing great revenue for the company. Nonetheless, when Amazon surpassed Google to become the world’s leading product in the search engine in last December, this advantage began to wobble. This is considered a fatal blow to Google when iOS devices account for 75% of their mobile advertising revenue (Rosenberg 2016 ).

By 2016, the number of people installing software to block ads on phones has increased 102% from 2015. Figure  1 illustrates that by the year’s end, about 16% of smart phone users around the world blocked their ads whilst surfing the web. These were also two groups having the most time on the Internet, high-earners and young people; however, these people have disliked ads (see Fig. 1 ).

Figure  2 shows the young people have the highest ad blocking rates. It is drawing a gloomy picture for the sustainable development of the online advertising industry in general and Google in particular. Therefore, in early 2017, Google has strategies to build an ad blocking tool, built into the Chrome browser. This tool allows users to access ads that have passed the “Coalition for Better Ads” filter so as to limit the sense of discomfort (see Fig. 2 ).

For the company impact, the history shows that speedy development of Google creates both economic and social impacts to followers in a new way of people connection (Savitz 2013 ). In this modern world, it seems that people cannot spend a day without searching any information in Google (Chen et al. 2014 ; Fast and Campbell 2004 ), a tool serves human information seeking needs. Even though when addressing this paper, it is also in need the information from Google search and uses it as a supporting tool. Nobody can deny the convenience of Google as a fast and easy way to search (Schalkwyk et al. 2010 ; Jones 2001 ; Langville and Meyer 2011 ).

Research question and methodology

In order to get the most comprehensive data and information for this case analysis, a number of methods are used, including:

Research data and collect information were mostly from the Harvard Study (Project Oxygen), which has been selected because it is related to the purpose of our study.

Data collection and analysis has been taken from Google Scholar and various websites related researches. We look at the history of appearance, development, and recognize the impacts of this company, as well as the challenges and the way the Board of Directors measures the abilities of their manager when the problem is found.

Analyzing: It was begun by considering expectations from the Harvard Study. Subsequently, considering the smaller organization (Zappos) in comparison of how its cultures and subcultures are accessed as well. Since then, the paper has clarified the management problem that Google and Zappos confront and deal with it so as to help other businesses apply this theoretical practice and achieve its goal beyond expectations.

In our paper, we mainly use the inductive method approach by compiling and describing the other authors’ theories of corporate culture, especially Google and Zappos in merging and comparing, analyzing them and making our own results.

From the aspects of the research, the questions are suggested as below:

What is the most instrumental element found from the Harvard study?

Is there any difference and similarity between a huge company and a smaller enterprise in perspective of culture and subculture?

What makes Google different from others, the dominant cultures as well as subcultures existing? How do leadership behaviors impact on the organizational culture?

How organizational culture impacts on business achievements?

The Harvard study

Project oxygen summary.

This project began in 2009 known as “the manager project” with the People and Innovation Lab (PiLab) team researching questions, which helped the employee of Google become a better manager. The case study was conducted by Garvin (2013) about a behavior measurement to Google’s manager, why managers matter and what the best manager s do. In early days of Google, there are not many managers. In a flat structure, most employees are engineers and technical experts. In fact, in 2002 a few hundred engineers reported to only four managers. But over time and out of necessity, the number of managers increased. Then, in 2009, people and team culture at Google noticed a disturbing trend. Exit interview data cited low satisfaction with their manager as a reason for leaving Google. Because Google has accessed so much online data, Google’s statisticians are asked to analyze and identify the top attributes of a good manager mentioned with an unsolved question: “Do managers matter?” It always concerns all stakeholders at Google and requires a data-based survey project called Project Oxygen to clarify employees’ concern, to measure key management behaviors and cultivate staff through communication and training (Bryant 2011 ; Garvin et al. 2013 ). Research −1 Exit Interviews, ratings, and semiannual reviews. The purpose is to identify high-scoring managers and low-scoring managers resulted in the former, less turnover on their teams, and its connection (manager quality and employee’s happiness). As for “what the best managers do”, Research-2 is to interview high and low scoring managers and to review their performance. The findings with 8 key behaviors illustrated by the most effective managers.

The Oxygen Project mirrors the managers’ decision-making criteria, respects their needs for rigorous analysis, and makes it a priority to measure impact. In the case study, the findings prove that managers really have mattered. Google, initially, must figure out what the best manager is by asking high and low scoring managers such questions about communication, vision, etc. Its project identifies eight behaviors (Bulygo 2013 ; Garvin et al. 2013 ) of a good manager that considered as quite simple that the best manager at Google should have. In a case of management problem and solution, as well as discussing four- key theoretical concepts, they will be analyzed, including formal organizational training system, how culture influences behavior, the role of “flow” and building capacity for innovation, and the role of a leader and its difference from the manager.

Formal organizational training system to create a different culture: Ethical culture

If the organizational culture represents “how we do things around here,” the ethical culture represents “how we do things around here in relation to ethics and ethical behavior in the organization” (Key 1999 ). Alison Taylor (The Five Levels of an Ethical Culture, 2017) reported five levels of an ethical culture, from an individual, interpersonal, group, intergroup to inter-organizational (Taylor 2017 ). In (Nelson and Treviño 2004 ), ethical culture should be thought of in terms of a multi-system framework included formal and informal systems, which must be aligned to support ethical judgment and action. Leadership is essential to driving the ethical culture from a formal and informal perspective (Schwartz 2013 ; Trevino and Nelson 2011 ). Formally, a leader provides the resources to implement structures and programs that support ethics. More informally, through their own behaviors, leadership is a role model whose actions speak louder than their words, conveying “how we do things around here.” Other formal systems include selection systems, policies and codes, orientation and training programs, performance management systems, authority structures, and formal decision processes. On the informal side are the organization’s role models and heroes, the norms of daily behavior, organizational rituals that support or do not support ethical conduct, the stories people tell about the organization and their implications for conduct, and the language people use, etc. Is it okay to talk about ethics? Or is ethical fading the norm?

The formal and informal training is very important. The ethical context in organizations helps the organizational culture have a tendency to the positive or negative viewpoints (Treviño et al. 1998 ). The leader should focus on providing an understanding of the nature and reasons for the organization’s values and rules, on providing an opportunity for question and challenge values for sincerity/practicality, and on teaching ethical decision-making skills related to encountered issues commonly. The more specific and customized training, the more effective it is likely to be. Google seemed to apply this theory when addressed the Oxygen Project.

How culture influences behavior

Whenever we approach a new organization, there is no doubt that we will try to get more about the culture of that place, the way of thinking, working, as well as behavior. And it is likely that the more diverse culture of a place is, the more difficult for outsiders to assess its culture becomes (Mosakowski 2004 ).

Realizing culture in (Schein 2009 ) including artifacts, espoused valued and shared underlying assumptions. It is easier for outsiders to see the artifacts (visual objects) that a group uses as the symbol for a group; however, it does not express more about the espoused values, as well as tacit assumptions. In (Schein et al. 2010 ), the author stated: “For a culture assessment to be valuable, it must get to the assumptions level. If the client system does not get to assumptions, it cannot explain the discrepancies almost always surface between the espoused values and the observed behavioral artifacts” (Schein et al. 2010 ). Hence, in order to be able to assess other cultures well, it is necessary for us to learn each other’s languages, as well as adapt to a common language. Moreover, we also need to look at the context of working, the solution for shared problems because these will facilitate to understand the culture better.

According to the OCP (Organizational Culture Profile) framework (Saremi and Nejad 2013 ), an organization is with possessing the innovation of culture, flexible and adaptable with fresh ideas, which is figured by flat hierarchy and title. For instance, Gore-Tex is an innovative product of W. L. Gore & Associates Inc., considered as the company has the most impact on its innovative culture (Boudreau and Lakhani 2009 ). Looking at the examples of Fast Company, Genentech Inc., and Google, they also encourage their employees to take challenges or risks by allowing them to take 20% of their time to comprehend the projects of their own (Saremi and Nejad 2013 ). In (Aldrich n.d. ), it is recorded that 25%–55% of employees are fully encouraged and giving a maximum value.

The famous quote by Peter Drucker , “Culture eats strategy for Breakfast” at page 67 has created a lot of interest in (Manning and Bodine 2012 ; Coffman and Sorensen 2013 ; Bock 2015 ). Despite we all know how important culture is, we have successively failed to address it (O'Reilly et al. 1991 ). The organizational research change process from the view of Schein ( 2009 ); it is a fact that whenever an organization has the intention of changing the culture, it really takes time. As we all acknowledge, to build an organizational culture, both leader and subordinate spend most of their time on learning, relearning, experiencing, as well as considering the most appropriate features. Sometimes, some changes are inevitable in terms of economic, political, technological, legal and moral threats, as well as internal discomfort (Kavanagh and Ashkanasy 2006 ; Schein 1983 ). As the case in (Schein 2009 ), when a CEO would like to make an innovation which is proved no effective response, given that he did not get to know well about the tacit implications at the place he has just come. It is illustrated that whatsoever change should need time and a process to happen (Blog 2015 ; Makhlouk and Shevchuk 2008 ). In conclusion, a new culture can be learned (Schein 1984 ), but with an appropriate route and the profits for all stakeholders should be concerned by the change manager (Sathe 1983 ).

It is true that people’s behavior managed by their types of culture (Kollmuss and Agyeman 2002 ). All tacit assumptions of insiders are not easy for outsiders to grasp the meaning completely (Schein 2009 ). It is not also an exception at any organization. Google is an example of the multicultural organization coming from various regions of the world, and the national or regional cultures making this multicultural organization with an official culture for the whole company.

In this case, the organizational culture of Google has an influence on the behaviors of manager and employee. In addition, as for such a company specializes in information technology, all engineers prefer to work on everything with data-evidence to get them involved in the meaningful survey about manager (Davenport et al. 2010 ). Eventually, Google discovered 8 good behaviors of manager, which effect to the role of “flow” also (Bulygo 2013 ; Garvin et al. 2013 ).

The role of the “flow” and building capacity for innovation

More and more people are using the term of “patient flow”. This overview describes patient flow and links to theories about flow. Patient flow underpins many improvement tools and techniques. The term “flow” describes the progressive movement of products, information, and people through a sequence of the process. In simple terms, flow is about uninterrupted movement (Nave 2002 ), like driving steadily along the motorway without interruptions or being stuck in a traffic jam. In healthcare, flow is the movement of patients, information or equipment between departments, office groups or organizations as a part of a patient’s care pathway (Bessant and Maher 2009 ). In fact, flow plays a vital role in getting stakeholders involved in working creatively and innovatively (Adams 2005 ; Amabile 1997 ; Forest et al. 2011 ). An effective ethical leader must create flow in work before transfer it to employees for changing the best of their effort to maintain, keep and develop “flow” in an engineering job, which job be easier to get stress. Definitely, Google gets it done very well.

Acknowledgements

Thanks to the knowledge from my Master course, a credit of managing culture which helps me to write this paper. The author also gratefully acknowledges the helpful comments and suggestions of the reviewers and Associate Professor Khuong- Ho Van, who provided general technical help that all have improved the article.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Center for Predoctoral Training, Vietnam National University–HCMC, Quarter 6, Linh Trung Ward, Thu Duc District, Ho Chi Minh, HCMC, Vietnam

Sang Kim Tran

Department of Research, Galaxy, 4/62 Nguyen Thi Minh Khai, Hoa Lan 1, Thuan Giao Ward, Binh Duong, 820000, Viet Nam

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

The completed paper is solely written by the corresponding author.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sang Kim Tran .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

I obviously inform that there is not any competing interest to this paper.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Tran, S.K. GOOGLE: a reflection of culture, leader, and management. Int J Corporate Soc Responsibility 2 , 10 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40991-017-0021-0

Download citation

Received : 16 May 2017

Accepted : 15 November 2017

Published : 19 December 2017

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s40991-017-0021-0

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Organizational culture
• Management style
• Oxygen project

MBA Knowledge Base

Business • Management • Technology

Home » Management Case Studies » Case Study: Analysis of Organizational Culture at Google

Case Study: Analysis of Organizational Culture at Google

Google Inc came to life with the two brilliant people as the founder of the company. Those two were Larry Page and Sergey Brin . Both of them are a PhDs holder in computer science in Stanford University California. In their research project, they came out with a plan to make a search engine that ranked websites according to the number of other websites that linked to that site. Before Google was established, search engines had ranked site simply by the number of times the search term searched for appeared on the webpage. By the brilliant mind of Larry and Sergey, they develop the technology called PageRank algorithm . PageRank is a link analysis algorithm that assigns a numerical weighting to each element of a hyperlinked set of document, such as the World Wide Web, with the purpose of measuring its relative importance within the set. All this in-depth research leads to a glorious day which is on September 15, 1997 where Google.com domain was registered. Soon after that, on September 4, 1998, they formally incorporated their company, Google Inc, at a friend’s garage in Menlo Park California. The name Google originates from “Googol” which refers to the mathematical equivalent of the number one followed by a hundred zeros. In March 1999, the company moved into offices at 165 University Avenue in Palo Alto. After that, the company leased a complex of buildings in Mountain View. Ever since then, the location of the headquarter remain unchanged.

Google’s core business is to provide a search engine for the cyber user who would like to go to their desire site. The Google search engine attracted a number of internet users by its sleek and simple design but result in amazing search result. After the initial stage of Google establishing itself in the world, it began selling advertisements associated with the search keywords. The advertisements were text-based in order to maximize the page loading speed. Most of the Google Inc revenue relies on the advertisement and they had been successfully with the help of AdWords and AdSense in their system. After having some experience in the industry, Google itself launched its own free web-based email service, known as Gmail in 2004. This service is established to meet the need of the cyber user in order to store and send their document through online. In the same year, one of the most captivating technologies that Google had launched is the Google Earth. Google Earth is an amazing creation that is a map of the earth based on the satellite image. It requires you to type the desire location that you want to view and it will process the image for you. Furthermore, Google Inc made a new partnership with NASA with even enhances the Google technologies. Google also had its own Google Video which allows user to search the internet for videos. One of the most important things in the Google Inc is that they have a strong organizational culture which brings them closer and stronger compare with other firms. The values that they emphasis on are creativity, simplicity and innovation in order to gain competitive advantage against their competitor.

The Google Culture

Google is well known for their organizational cultures distinctiveness and uniqueness compared to their immediate competitors. On the Google corporate website, they have listed down 10 core principles that guide the actions of the entire organization. These are the values and assumptions shared within the organization. These values are also termed as ‘espoused values’, where it is not necessarily what the organization actually values even though the top executives of the company embrace them.

In Google, the daily organizational life is distinctive and is one that thrives on informal culture. The rituals that portray the organization’s culture as unique and possesses a small-company feel are portrayed daily at lunchtime, where almost all employees eat together at the many various office cafes while at the same time having an open, relaxed conversations with fellow Googlers that come from different teams. Also, because one of the Google culture’s main pillars are the pillar of innovation, every Googler are very comfortable at sharing ideas, thoughts, and opinions with one another in a very informal working environment. Every employee is a hands-on contributor and everyone wears several hats. Sergey and Brin also plays a big part of laying the foundation on what the Google culture is and the founders have continued to maintain the Google Way by organizing a weekly all-hands “TGIF” meetings for employees to pose questions directly at them.

Here are some of a few of their core principles which will provide a look into Google’s management philosophy and the type of culture they want to possess:

In Google, the motivated employees who ‘live’ the Google brand and are aligned to the company call themselves ‘Googlers’. Even former employees of Google have a name which they refer to themselves as ‘Xooglers’. This shows that in Google, their employees are so involved in the organization that they have their own symbolic name that mirrors the organization’s name and image, which is a sure sign of existing strong cultural values that are present within the company.

After tremendous growth in Google, the organization moved from a humble office building in Palo Alto, California back in its early days to its current office complex bought over from Silicon Graphics. The complex is popularly known as the Googleplex, which is a blend of the word ‘Google’ and ‘complex’. Googleplex is the result of a careful selection that serves to establish Google’s unique and individualistic culture in the eyes of the employees and the public. The corporate campus is built to provide a very fun, relaxed and colorful environment both inside and outside. Innovative design decisions provides Google employees 2000 car lots underground so that open spaces above and surrounding the building are filled with unique and interesting architectures that includes an on-site organic garden that supplies produces for Google’s various cafes, a bronze casting of a dinosaur fossil, a sand volleyball court, heated “endless pools” and also electric scooters along with hundreds of bikes scattered throughout the complex for Googlers to get to meetings across campuses. Googleplex is a significant departure from typical corporate campuses, challenging conventional thinking about private and public space. This also points out the alignment of values that are present in Google’s culture such as innovation, fun, laid-back, creativity and uniqueness that clearly shows that their organizational culture is truly unique and different from that of their competitors and other organizations.

Within the Googleplex, a truly attractive, fun and extraordinary workplace environment exists for Google employees. The interior of the headquarters is furnished with items like lava lamps and giant rubber balls while sofas, Google color coded chairs, and pool tables can be found at lounges and bar counters to express Google’s laid-back working atmosphere. The lobby contains a grand piano and a projection of current live Google search queries. The employees’ various needs are also taken care of by facilities such as the 19 cafes on campus which serves a variety of food choices for their diverse workforce, a gym, massage parlor, laundromats, and even micro kitchens, which provides snacks for employees who want a quick bite. This ensures that employees can be more productive and happy without ever leaving the workplace. A manifestation of Google’s creative and innovative culture is shown by the unconventional building design with high ceilings to let natural light in, durable floors made of tiny quartz stones, working British phone booths splashed in Google colors, and lounges that also serve as DIY libraries with cleverly placed low-reach book racks adorned with colorful Lego sets and cubes. All these innovative, creative and colorful designs are symbols of Google’s unique organizational culture that emphasizes on continuous innovation.

Google engages their employees by applying adaptive culture in the organization. From their core competency in search engine technology, Google has responded to customers change in needs by expanding onto the mobile market. The employees analyze, anticipate and seek out the opportunities to improve the organization’s performance by being proactive and quick in coming out with new technologies and solutions for mobile services. It aims to help people all over the world to do more tasks on their phone, not to mention the several different ways to access their Google search engine on a mobile phone. In addition, Google recently entered the smartphone market by launching the Google Nexus One smartphone in response to customer’s increasing need for smartphones, which is gaining ground on popularity because everyone is going mobile in the Information Age. This is the result of Google employees’ common mental model that the organization’s success depends on continuous change to support the stakeholders and also that they are solely responsible for the organization’s performance. The employees also believe that by entering into other markets beyond their core competency, the change is necessary and inevitable to keep pace with an ever changing and volatile technological market.

Google’s organizational culture places a huge importance of trust and transparency by having an informal corporate motto namely “Don’t be evil”. This slogan has become a central pillar to their identity and a part of their self-proclaimed core principles. It also forms the ethical codes of the organization where Google establishes a foundation for honest decision-making that disassociates Google from any and all cheating. Its ethical principles means that Google sets guiding principles for their advertising programs and practices, which is where most of their revenues come from. Google doesn’t breach the trust of its users so it doesn’t accept pop-up advertising, which is a disruptive form of advertisement that hinders with the user’s ability to see the content that they searched. And because they don’t manipulate rankings to put any of their partners higher in their search results or allow anyone to buy their way up the PageRank, the integrity of their search results are not compromised. This way, users trust Google’s objectivity and their ethical principles is one of the reasons why Google’s ad business had become so successful. The founders of Google believe strongly that ‘in the long term we will be better served, as shareholders and in all other ways, by a company that does good things for the world even if we forgo some short term gains.’

Analysis of Google Culture

Satisfied employees not only increase productivity and reduce turnover, but also enhance creativity and commitment. Google is already having a playful variation culture in the organization for the employees. This can enable the employees to have an enjoyment environment and this will be able enhance the relationship between the employees and strengthen their bond to work as a team. An enjoyment environment definitely can let the employees to feel satisfied and subsequently will increase productivity. Apart from that, this will shape a convenient work process for the employees that will smoothen the decision making process for the management team. Google already identified the employees are the organization’s internal customers and this is the reason why it has been constantly giving employees a sense of purpose, enhancing their self-esteem and sense of belonging for being a part of the organization. The company was reorganized into small teams that attacked hundreds of projects all at once. The founders give the employees great latitude, and they take the same latitude for themselves. Eric Schmidt says that Google merely appears to be disorganized. “We say we run the company chaotically. We run it at the edge. This can adapt the culture Google and therefore they can individually to generate the ideas on their own.

On the other hand, Google hires employees that have good academic results but without practical experience and this will be a threat to Google in terms of their organization’s operation. Google is a results-driven organization and if employees with only creative ideas but lacking of skills to realize the ideas they have initially planned, this will absolutely reduce the productivity of the organizations. Google had been public listed on year 2004 and therefore Google had to take the shareholders’ views into consideration before making any decision. The shareholders had been strongly emphasizing on reducing the employee benefits due to the high cost invested on it. This leads to the organizational culture would be degraded and the employees would feel less satisfied and affect their produced results. Employees are very important asset the Google while the shareholders also the contributor of funds for Google. The management team has to weight the importance of both of the stakeholders for the Google as this will create a different organizational culture .

Related posts:

• Case Study: Organizational Structure and Culture of Virgin Group
• Case Study: Google’s Competitive Advantage
• Case Study: Google’s Acquisition of Motorola Mobility
• Case Study: Google’s Quest for Competitive Advantage
• Case Study of Johnson & Johnson: Creating the Right Fit between Corporate Communication and Organizational Culture
• Case Study: Google’s Recruitment and Selection Process
• Case Study: Success Story of Google Search Engine
• Case Study of Starbucks: Creating a New Coffee Culture
• Case Study of Procter and Gamble (P&G): Structure and Culture
• Case Study: Henry Ford’s Contributions to Organizational Behavior and Leadership

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

• Harvard Business School →
• Faculty & Research →
• March 2020 (Revised August 2020)
• HBS Case Collection

Culture at Google

• Format: Print
• | Language: English
• | Pages: 34

About The Author

Nien-he Hsieh

Related work.

• Faculty Research
• Culture at Google  By: Nien-hê Hsieh, Amy Klopfenstein and Sarah Mehta

• About / Contact
• Privacy Policy
• Alphabetical List of Companies
• Business Analysis Topics

Google’s (Alphabet’s) Organizational Structure & Culture – An Analysis

Google’s (Alphabet’s) success depicts the effectiveness of its organizational structure and organizational culture in supporting excellence in innovation. A company’s organizational or corporate structure is the arrangement of organizational components and resources based on its organizational design. Google’s organizational structure is not conventional because of its emphasis on flatness. On the other hand, a company’s organizational or corporate culture is the set of beliefs, values, behavioral tendencies, and expectations among employees. Google’s organizational culture emphasizes change and direct social links within the firm, in support of the organizational structure’s flatness. Theoretically, such an alignment between the technology company’s corporate structure and corporate culture contributes to higher chances of success. This success manifests in Google’s profitability and stability. The company remains a major influence in the global information technology, consumer electronics, and Internet services market. Google’s dominant position is attributable to the synergistic benefits of its organizational structure and organizational culture in supporting industry leadership.

Google’s organizational structure and company culture align to maximize innovation. Innovation contributes to the brand image, which is an essential strength identified in the SWOT analysis of Google (Alphabet) . The alignment between the work culture and corporate structure helps develop the company’s competitive advantages to address strategic challenges linked to multinational competitors, like the consumer electronics and online services of Apple , Amazon , Microsoft , Sony , and Samsung ; the Internet advertising services of Facebook , eBay , and other companies; the movie streaming services of Netflix and Disney ; and the Internet connectivity services of Verizon . Google is an example of aligning and effectively using corporate structure and corporate culture to achieve strategic objectives in developing competencies for business growth. This structure-culture alignment promotes human resource competencies that are essential to business development toward the fulfillment of the mission and vision of Google (Alphabet) .

Google’s Structure

Google has a cross-functional organizational structure , which is technically a matrix company structure with a considerable degree of flatness. This flatness is a defining structural feature that supports the growth and competitiveness of Alphabet’s technology business. The main characteristics of Google’s corporate structure are as follows:

• Function-based definition
• Product-based definition

Google’s corporate structure uses business functions as a basis for grouping employees. For example, the company has a Marketing group. The business also uses product type as a basis for grouping employees, i.e., human resource groups for developing Pixel devices. In addition, Google’s business structure has considerable flatness. The flat organizational structure means that Alphabet limits the degree of hierarchy in its organizational design and facilitates productive vertical communications that connect managers with employees, teams, or groups. Because of the flatness of the corporate structure, Google’s employees can efficiently meet and share information among teams.

Google’s Culture

Google’s organizational culture is not typical among large businesses, partly because of the effects of the company’s organizational structure. The corporate structure interacts with the company culture to influence the organizational capabilities and human resource characteristics of Alphabet’s technology business. Google’s corporate culture has the following primary characteristics:

• Smart, with emphasis on excellence
• Supports small-company-family rapport

Openness involves sharing information to improve Google’s business processes. This cultural characteristic is achieved through the matrix organizational structure. With this corporate structure and in the context of Google’s organizational culture, employees feel free to share their ideas and opinions, such as in communications during meetings with managers. Also, innovation is at the heart of the technology business. Every employee is encouraged to contribute innovative ideas, which are essential to supporting Google’s (Alphabet’s) generic strategy for competitive advantage and strategies for intensive growth . In addition, this corporate culture pushes for smartness, with the aim of motivating workers to strive for excellence, such as in developing new designs for consumer electronics and online services. In relation, Google supports employees’ hands-on involvement in projects and experiments, which are implemented for testing new ideas.

Google’s organizational culture creates a warm social ambiance. Warmth is a factor that facilitates information sharing and employee satisfaction in working for the multinational technology business. The organizational culture maintains a small-company-family ambiance, where people can easily share ideas with each other, including Google and Alphabet executives like Larry Page. Thus, Google’s business culture supports excellence in innovation through the sharing of ideas and the capability to effectively respond to the global market for information technology, cloud computing and Internet services, digital content distribution, and consumer electronics.

• Alphabet Inc. – Form 10-K .
• Artsidakis, S., Thalassinos, Y., Petropoulos, T., & Liapis, K. (2022). Optimum structure of corporate groups. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 15 (2), 88.
• Fu, Q., Abdul Rahman, A. A., Jiang, H., Abbas, J., & Comite, U. (2022). Sustainable supply chain and business performance: The impact of strategy, network design, information systems, and organizational structure. Sustainability, 14 (3), 1080.
• Gonzalez, R. V. D. (2022). Innovative performance of project teams: The role of organizational structure and knowledge-based dynamic capability. Journal of Knowledge Management, 26 (5), 1164-1186.
• Google Careers – Teams .
• Google Products .
• Kasperson, J. X., & Kasperson, R. E. (2022). Corporate culture and technology transfer. In The Social Contours of Risk (pp. 118-143). Routledge.
• Shamsudin, S., & Velmurugan, V. P. (2023). A study on the drivers of corporate culture impacting employee performance in IT industry. International Journal of Professional Business Review, 8 (2), 13.
• U.S. Department of Commerce – International Trade Administration – Software and Information Technology Industry .
• Copyright by Panmore Institute - All rights reserved.
• This article may not be reproduced, distributed, or mirrored without written permission from Panmore Institute and its author/s.
• Educators, Researchers, and Students: You are permitted to quote or paraphrase parts of this article (not the entire article) for educational or research purposes, as long as the article is properly cited and referenced together with its URL/link.

About Stanford GSB

• The Leadership
• Dean’s Updates
• School News & History
• Commencement
• Business, Government & Society
• Centers & Institutes
• Center for Entrepreneurial Studies
• Center for Social Innovation
• Stanford Seed

About the Experience

• Learning at Stanford GSB
• Experiential Learning
• Guest Speakers
• Entrepreneurship
• Social Innovation
• Communication
• Life at Stanford GSB
• Collaborative Environment
• Activities & Organizations
• Student Services
• Housing Options
• International Students

Full-Time Degree Programs

• Why Stanford MBA
• Academic Experience
• Financial Aid
• Why Stanford MSx
• Research Fellows Program
• See All Programs

Non-Degree & Certificate Programs

• Executive Education
• Stanford Executive Program
• Programs for Organizations
• The Difference
• Online Programs
• Stanford LEAD
• Seed Transformation Program
• Aspire Program
• Seed Spark Program
• Faculty Profiles
• Academic Areas
• Awards & Honors
• Conferences

Faculty Research

• Publications
• Working Papers
• Case Studies

Research Hub

• Research Labs & Initiatives
• Business Library
• Data, Analytics & Research Computing
• Behavioral Lab

Research Labs

• Cities, Housing & Society Lab
• Golub Capital Social Impact Lab

Research Initiatives

• Corporate Governance Research Initiative
• Corporations and Society Initiative
• Policy and Innovation Initiative
• Rapid Decarbonization Initiative
• Stanford Latino Entrepreneurship Initiative
• Value Chain Innovation Initiative
• Venture Capital Initiative
• Career & Success
• Climate & Sustainability
• Corporate Governance
• Culture & Society
• Finance & Investing
• Government & Politics
• Leadership & Management
• Markets and Trade
• Operations & Logistics
• Opportunity & Access
• Technology & AI
• Opinion & Analysis
• Email Newsletter

Welcome, Alumni

• Communities
• Digital Communities & Tools
• Regional Chapters
• Women’s Programs
• Identity Chapters
• Find Your Reunion
• Career Resources
• Job Search Resources
• Career & Life Transitions
• Programs & Services
• Career Video Library
• Alumni Education
• Research Resources
• Volunteering
• Alumni News
• Class Notes
• Alumni Voices
• Contact Alumni Relations
• Upcoming Events

Admission Events & Information Sessions

• MBA Program
• MSx Program
• PhD Program
• Alumni Events
• All Other Events
• Operations, Information & Technology
• Organizational Behavior
• Political Economy
• Classical Liberalism
• The Eddie Lunch
• Accounting Summer Camp
• Videos, Code & Data
• California Econometrics Conference
• California Quantitative Marketing PhD Conference
• California School Conference
• China India Insights Conference
• Homo economicus, Evolving
• Political Economics (2023–24)
• Scaling Geologic Storage of CO2 (2023–24)
• A Resilient Pacific: Building Connections, Envisioning Solutions
• Adaptation and Innovation
• Changing Climate
• Civil Society
• Climate Impact Summit
• Climate Science
• Corporate Carbon Disclosures
• Earth’s Seafloor
• Environmental Justice
• Operations and Information Technology
• Organizations
• Sustainability Reporting and Control
• Taking the Pulse of the Planet
• Urban Infrastructure
• Watershed Restoration
• Junior Faculty Workshop on Financial Regulation and Banking
• Ken Singleton Celebration
• Marketing Camp
• Quantitative Marketing PhD Alumni Conference
• Presentations
• Theory and Inference in Accounting Research
• Stanford Closer Look Series
• Quick Guides
• Core Concepts
• Journal Articles
• Glossary of Terms
• Faculty & Staff
• Researchers & Students
• Research Approach
• Charitable Giving
• Financial Health
• Government Services
• Workers & Careers
• Short Course
• Adaptive & Iterative Experimentation
• Incentive Design
• Social Sciences & Behavioral Nudges
• Bandit Experiment Application
• Conferences & Events
• Get Involved
• Reading Materials
• Teaching & Curriculum
• Energy Entrepreneurship
• Faculty & Affiliates
• SOLE Report
• Responsible Supply Chains
• Current Study Usage
• Pre-Registration Information
• Participate in a Study

Google’s Global Business Organization: Managing Innovation at Scale

Learning objective.

• Priorities for the GSB's Future
• See the Current DEI Report
• Supporting Data
• Research & Insights
• Share Your Thoughts
• Search Fund Primer
• Affiliated Faculty
• Faculty Advisors
• Louis W. Foster Resource Center
• Defining Social Innovation
• Impact Compass
• Global Health Innovation Insights
• Faculty Affiliates
• Student Awards & Certificates
• Changemakers
• Dean Jonathan Levin
• Dean Garth Saloner
• Dean Robert Joss
• Dean Michael Spence
• Dean Robert Jaedicke
• Dean Rene McPherson
• Dean Arjay Miller
• Dean Ernest Arbuckle
• Dean Jacob Hugh Jackson
• Dean Willard Hotchkiss
• Faculty in Memoriam
• Stanford GSB Firsts
• Certificate & Award Recipients
• Teaching Approach
• Analysis and Measurement of Impact
• The Corporate Entrepreneur: Startup in a Grown-Up Enterprise
• Data-Driven Impact
• Designing Experiments for Impact
• Digital Business Transformation
• The Founder’s Right Hand
• Marketing for Measurable Change
• Product Management
• Public Policy Lab: Financial Challenges Facing US Cities
• Public Policy Lab: Homelessness in California
• Lab Features
• Curricular Integration
• View From The Top
• Formation of New Ventures
• Managing Growing Enterprises
• Startup Garage
• Explore Beyond the Classroom
• Stanford Venture Studio
• Summer Program
• Workshops & Events
• The Five Lenses of Entrepreneurship
• Leadership Labs
• Executive Challenge
• Arbuckle Leadership Fellows Program
• Selection Process
• Training Schedule
• Time Commitment
• Learning Expectations
• Post-Training Opportunities
• Who Should Apply
• Introductory T-Groups
• Leadership for Society Program
• Certificate
• 2023 Awardees
• 2022 Awardees
• 2021 Awardees
• 2020 Awardees
• 2019 Awardees
• 2018 Awardees
• Social Management Immersion Fund
• Stanford Impact Founder Fellowships and Prizes
• Stanford Impact Leader Prizes
• Social Entrepreneurship
• Stanford GSB Impact Fund
• Economic Development
• Energy & Environment
• Stanford GSB Residences
• Environmental Leadership
• Stanford GSB Artwork
• A Closer Look
• California & the Bay Area
• Voices of Stanford GSB
• Business & Beneficial Technology
• Business & Sustainability
• Business & Free Markets
• Business, Government, and Society Forum
• Second Year
• Global Experiences
• JD/MBA Joint Degree
• MA Education/MBA Joint Degree
• MD/MBA Dual Degree
• MPP/MBA Joint Degree
• MS Computer Science/MBA Joint Degree
• MS Electrical Engineering/MBA Joint Degree
• MS Environment and Resources (E-IPER)/MBA Joint Degree
• Academic Calendar
• Clubs & Activities
• LGBTQ+ Students
• Military Veterans
• Minorities & People of Color
• Partners & Families
• Students with Disabilities
• Student Support
• Residential Life
• Student Voices
• MBA Alumni Voices
• A Week in the Life
• Career Support
• Employment Outcomes
• Cost of Attendance
• Knight-Hennessy Scholars Program
• Yellow Ribbon Program
• BOLD Fellows Fund
• Application Process
• Loan Forgiveness
• Contact the Financial Aid Office
• Evaluation Criteria
• GMAT & GRE
• English Language Proficiency
• Personal Information, Activities & Awards
• Professional Experience
• Letters of Recommendation
• Optional Short Answer Questions
• Application Fee
• Reapplication
• Deferred Enrollment
• Joint & Dual Degrees
• Entering Class Profile
• Event Schedule
• Ambassadors
• New & Noteworthy
• Ask a Question
• See Why Stanford MSx
• Is MSx Right for You?
• MSx Stories
• Leadership Development
• Career Advancement
• Career Change
• How You Will Learn
• Admission Events
• Personal Information
• Information for Recommenders
• GMAT, GRE & EA
• English Proficiency Tests
• After You’re Admitted
• Daycare, Schools & Camps
• U.S. Citizens and Permanent Residents
• Requirements
• Requirements: Behavioral
• Requirements: Quantitative
• Requirements: Macro
• Requirements: Micro
• Annual Evaluations
• Field Examination
• Research Activities
• Research Papers
• Dissertation
• Oral Examination
• Current Students
• Education & CV
• International Applicants
• Statement of Purpose
• Reapplicants
• Application Fee Waiver
• Deadline & Decisions
• Job Market Candidates
• Academic Placements
• Stay in Touch
• Faculty Mentors
• Current Fellows
• Standard Track
• Fellowship & Benefits
• Group Enrollment
• Program Formats
• Developing a Program
• Diversity & Inclusion
• Strategic Transformation
• Program Experience
• Contact Client Services
• Campus Experience
• Live Online Experience
• Silicon Valley & Bay Area
• Digital Credentials
• Faculty Spotlights
• Participant Spotlights
• Eligibility
• International Participants
• Stanford Ignite
• Frequently Asked Questions
• Founding Donors
• Location Information
• Participant Profile
• Network Membership
• Program Impact
• Collaborators
• Entrepreneur Profiles
• Company Spotlights
• Seed Transformation Network
• Responsibilities
• Current Coaches
• How to Apply
• Meet the Consultants
• Meet the Interns
• Intern Profiles
• Collaborate
• Research Library
• News & Insights
• Program Contacts
• Databases & Datasets
• Research Guides
• Consultations
• Research Workshops
• Career Research
• Research Data Services
• Course Reserves
• Course Research Guides
• Material Loan Periods
• Fines & Other Charges
• Document Delivery
• Interlibrary Loan
• Equipment Checkout
• Print & Scan
• MBA & MSx Students
• PhD Students
• Other Stanford Students
• Faculty Assistants
• Research Assistants
• Stanford GSB Alumni
• Telling Our Story
• Staff Directory
• Site Registration
• Alumni Directory
• Alumni Email
• Privacy Settings & My Profile
• Success Stories
• The Story of Circles
• Support Women’s Circles
• Stanford Women on Boards Initiative
• Alumnae Spotlights
• Insights & Research
• Industry & Professional
• Entrepreneurial Commitment Group
• Recent Alumni
• Half-Century Club
• Fall Reunions
• Spring Reunions
• MBA 25th Reunion
• Half-Century Club Reunion
• Faculty Lectures
• Ernest C. Arbuckle Award
• Alison Elliott Exceptional Achievement Award
• ENCORE Award
• Excellence in Leadership Award
• John W. Gardner Volunteer Leadership Award
• Robert K. Jaedicke Faculty Award
• Jack McDonald Military Service Appreciation Award
• Jerry I. Porras Latino Leadership Award
• Tapestry Award
• Student & Alumni Events
• Executive Recruiters
• Interviewing
• Land the Perfect Job with LinkedIn
• Negotiating
• Elevator Pitch
• Email Best Practices
• Resumes & Cover Letters
• Self-Assessment
• Whitney Birdwell Ball
• Margaret Brooks
• Bryn Panee Burkhart
• Margaret Chan
• Ricki Frankel
• Peter Gandolfo
• Cindy W. Greig
• Natalie Guillen
• Carly Janson
• Sloan Klein
• Sherri Appel Lassila
• Stuart Meyer
• Tanisha Parrish
• Virginia Roberson
• Philippe Taieb
• Michael Takagawa
• Terra Winston
• Johanna Wise
• Debbie Wolter
• Rebecca Zucker
• Complimentary Coaching
• Changing Careers
• Work-Life Integration
• Career Breaks
• Flexible Work
• Encore Careers
• Join a Board
• D&B Hoovers
• Data Axle (ReferenceUSA)
• EBSCO Business Source
• Global Newsstream
• Market Share Reporter
• ProQuest One Business
• Student Clubs
• Entrepreneurial Students
• Stanford GSB Trust
• Alumni Community
• How to Volunteer
• Springboard Sessions
• Consulting Projects
• 2020 – 2029
• 2010 – 2019
• 2000 – 2009
• 1990 – 1999
• 1980 – 1989
• 1970 – 1979
• 1960 – 1969
• 1950 – 1959
• 1940 – 1949
• Service Areas
• ACT History
• ACT Awards Celebration
• ACT Governance Structure
• Building Leadership for ACT
• Individual Leadership Positions
• Leadership Role Overview
• Purpose of the ACT Management Board
• Contact ACT
• Business & Nonprofit Communities
• Reunion Volunteers
• Ways to Give
• Fiscal Year Report
• Business School Fund Leadership Council
• Planned Giving Options
• Planned Giving Benefits
• Planned Gifts and Reunions
• Legacy Partners
• Giving News & Stories
• Giving Deadlines
• Development Staff
• Submit Class Notes
• Class Secretaries
• Board of Directors
• Health Care
• Sustainability
• Class Takeaways
• All Else Equal: Making Better Decisions
• If/Then: Business, Leadership, Society
• Grit & Growth
• Think Fast, Talk Smart
• Spring 2022
• Spring 2021
• Autumn 2020
• Summer 2020
• Winter 2020
• In the Media
• For Journalists
• DCI Fellows
• Other Auditors
• Academic Calendar & Deadlines
• Course Materials
• Entrepreneurial Resources
• Campus Drive Grove
• Campus Drive Lawn
• CEMEX Auditorium
• King Community Court
• Seawell Family Boardroom
• Stanford GSB Bowl
• Stanford Investors Common
• Town Square
• Vidalakis Courtyard
• Vidalakis Dining Hall
• Catering Services
• Policies & Guidelines
• Reservations
• Contact Faculty Recruiting
• Lecturer Positions
• Postdoctoral Positions
• Accommodations
• CMC-Managed Interviews
• Recruiter-Managed Interviews
• Virtual Interviews
• Campus & Virtual
• Search for Candidates
• Think Globally
• Recruiting Calendar
• Recruiting Policies
• Full-Time Employment
• Summer Employment
• Entrepreneurial Summer Program
• Global Management Immersion Experience
• Social-Purpose Summer Internships
• Process Overview
• Project Types
• Client Eligibility Criteria
• Client Screening
• ACT Leadership
• Social Innovation & Nonprofit Management Resources
• Develop Your Organization’s Talent
• Centers & Initiatives
• Student Fellowships

• school Campus Bookshelves
• menu_book Bookshelves
• perm_media Learning Objects
• login Login
• how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
• hub Instructor Commons

Margin Size

• Download Page (PDF)
• Download Full Book (PDF)
• Periodic Table
• Physics Constants
• Scientific Calculator
• Reference & Cite
• Tools expand_more
• Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

8.2: Case in Point: Google Creates Unique Culture

• Last updated
• Save as PDF
• Page ID 24439

\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\)

\( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\)

\( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\)

\( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorA}[1]{\vec{#1}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorAt}[1]{\vec{\text{#1}}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorB}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorC}[1]{\textbf{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorD}[1]{\overrightarrow{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorDt}[1]{\overrightarrow{\text{#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectE}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash{\mathbf {#1}}}} \)

Google (NASDAQ: GOOG) is one of the best-known and most admired companies around the world, so much so that “googling” is the term many use to refer to searching information on the Web. What started out as a student project by two Stanford University graduates—Larry Page and Sergey Brin—in 1996, Google became the most frequently used Web search engine on the Internet with 1 billion searches per day in 2009, as well as other innovative applications such as Gmail, Google Earth, Google Maps, and Picasa. Google grew from 10 employees working in a garage in Palo Alto to 10,000 employees operating around the world by 2009. What is the formula behind this success?

Google strives to operate based on solid principles that may be traced back to its founders. In a world crowded with search engines, they were probably the first company that put users first. Their mission statement summarizes their commitment to end-user needs: “To organize the world’s information and to make it universally accessible and useful.” While other companies were focused on marketing their sites and increasing advertising revenues, Google stripped the search page of all distractions and presented users with a blank page consisting only of a company logo and a search box. Google resisted pop-up advertising, because the company felt that it was annoying to end-users. They insisted that all their advertisements would be clearly marked as “sponsored links.” This emphasis on improving user experience and always putting it before making more money in the short term seems to have been critical to their success.

Keeping their employees happy is also a value they take to heart. Google created a unique work environment that attracts, motivates, and retains the best players in the field. Google was ranked as the number 1 “Best Place to Work For” by Fortune magazine in 2007 and number 4 in 2010. This is not surprising if one looks closer to how Google treats employees. On their Mountain View, California, campus called the “Googleplex,” employees are treated to free gourmet food options including sushi bars and espresso stations. In fact, many employees complain that once they started working for Google, they tend to gain 10 to 15 pounds! Employees have access to gyms, shower facilities, video games, on-site child care, and doctors. Google provides 4 months of paternal leave with 75% of full pay and offers $500 for take-out meals for families with a newborn. These perks create a place where employees feel that they are treated well and their needs are taken care of. Moreover, they contribute to the feeling that they are working at a unique and cool place that is different from everywhere else they may have worked.

In addition, Google encourages employee risk taking and innovation. How is this done? When a vice president in charge of the company’s advertising system made a mistake costing the company millions of dollars and apologized for the mistake, she was commended by Larry Page, who congratulated her for making the mistake and noting that he would rather run a company where they are moving quickly and doing too much, as opposed to being too cautious and doing too little. This attitude toward acting fast and accepting the cost of resulting mistakes as a natural consequence of working on the cutting edge may explain why the company is performing much ahead of competitors such as Microsoft and Yahoo! One of the current challenges for Google is to expand to new fields outside of their Web search engine business. To promote new ideas, Google encourages all engineers to spend 20% of their time working on their own ideas.

Google’s culture is reflected in their decision making as well. Decisions at Google are made in teams. Even the company management is in the hands of a triad: Larry Page and Sergey Brin hired Eric Schmidt to act as the CEO of the company, and they are reportedly leading the company by consensus. In other words, this is not a company where decisions are made by the senior person in charge and then implemented top down. It is common for several small teams to attack each problem and for employees to try to influence each other using rational persuasion and data. Gut feeling has little impact on how decisions are made. In some meetings, people reportedly are not allowed to say “I think…” but instead must say “the data suggest….” To facilitate teamwork, employees work in open office environments where private offices are assigned only to a select few. Even Kai-Fu Lee, the famous employee whose defection from Microsoft was the target of a lawsuit, did not get his own office and shared a cubicle with two other employees.

How do they maintain these unique values? In a company emphasizing hiring the smartest people, it is very likely that they will attract big egos that may be difficult to work with. Google realizes that its strength comes from its “small company” values that emphasize risk taking, agility, and cooperation. Therefore, they take their hiring process very seriously. Hiring is extremely competitive and getting to work at Google is not unlike applying to a college. Candidates may be asked to write essays about how they will perform their future jobs. Recently, they targeted potential new employees using billboards featuring brain teasers directing potential candidates to a Web site where they were subjected to more brain teasers. Each candidate may be interviewed by as many as eight people on several occasions. Through this scrutiny, they are trying to select “Googley” employees who will share the company’s values, perform at high levels, and be liked by others within the company.

Will this culture survive in the long run? It may be too early to tell, given that the company was only founded in 1998. The founders emphasized that their initial public offering (IPO) would not change their culture and they would not introduce more rules or change the way things are done in Google to please Wall Street. But can a public corporation really act like a start-up? Can a global giant facing scrutiny on issues including privacy, copyright, and censorship maintain its culture rooted in its days in a Palo Alto garage? Larry Page is quoted as saying, “We have a mantra: don’t be evil, which is to do the best things we know how for our users, for our customers, for everyone. So I think if we were known for that, it would be a wonderful thing.”

Case written by information from Elgin, B., Hof, R. D., & Greene, J. (2005, August 8). Revenge of the nerds—again. BusinessWeek . Retrieved April 30, 2010, from http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/jul2005/tc20050728_5127_tc024.htm ;

Hardy, Q. (2005, November 14). Google thinks small. Forbes, 176 (10); Lashinky, A. (2006, October 2). Chaos by design. Fortune , 154 (7); Mangalindan, M. (2004, March 29).

The grownup at Google: How Eric Schmidt imposed better management tactics but didn’t stifle search giant. Wall Street Journal , p. B1; Lohr, S. (2005, December 5). At Google, cube culture has new rules. New York Times . Retrieved April 30, 2010, from www.nytimes.com/2005/12/05/technology/05google.html;

Schoeneman, D. (2006, December 31). Can Google come out to play? New York Times . Retrieved April 30, 2010, from http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/31/fashion/31google.html ; Warner, M. (2004, June). What your company can learn from Google. Business 2.0, 5 (5).

Discussion Questions

• Culture is an essential element of organizing in the P-O-L-C framework. Do you think Google has a strong culture? What would it take to make changes in that culture, for better or for worse?
• Do you think Google’s unique culture will help or hurt Google in the long run?
• What are the factors responsible for the specific culture that exists in Google?
• What type of decision-making approach has Google taken? Do you think this will remain the same over time? Why or why not?
• Do you see any challenges Google may face in the future because of its emphasis on having a risk-taking culture?

Culture Development

Google’s company culture: unveiling organizational values.

• April 16, 2024

In the fast-paced world of technology, Google has managed to stand out not only for its innovative products and services but also for its unique company culture. Understanding the importance of fostering a positive work environment , Google has unveiled a set of organizational values that have become the cornerstone of its success. This article delves into the various aspects of Google’s company culture, exploring how it influences its employees, drives innovation, promotes transparency and openness, and sets the standard for the tech industry.

Understanding Google’s Company Culture

Google’s company culture goes beyond the traditional norms of a corporate setting. It encompasses a wide range of practices and beliefs that shape the way employees think, collaborate, and approach their work. At the core of Google’s culture is the belief that a happy and engaged workforce drives results.

Google’s commitment to fostering a positive and inclusive company culture has been instrumental in its success. By prioritizing the well-being and satisfaction of its employees, Google has managed to attract and retain top talent, leading to increased productivity and overall business performance.

The Importance of Culture in Google’s Success

Google understands that a strong company culture is the foundation on which success is built. By nurturing an environment where employees feel valued, supported, and empowered, Google has created a workplace that fosters creativity, collaboration, and innovation. Research has shown that a positive company culture leads to increased employee satisfaction, productivity, and overall business performance.

One of the key reasons behind Google’s success is its ability to create a culture that aligns with its core values and mission. The company’s commitment to its employees goes beyond providing competitive salaries and benefits. Google recognizes the importance of creating a work environment that encourages personal growth, learning, and a sense of purpose.

Google’s company culture is built on the belief that happy and engaged employees are more likely to go above and beyond in their work. By prioritizing employee well-being and satisfaction, Google has created a workplace where individuals feel motivated and inspired to give their best.

Key Elements of Google’s Company Culture

Google’s company culture is characterized by several key elements:

• Flat Hierarchy: Google maintains a relatively flat organizational structure, allowing for open communication and collaboration across teams and levels. This fosters a sense of ownership and empowerment among employees. It encourages individuals to take initiative, share ideas, and contribute to the company’s success.
• Flexibility and Autonomy: Google recognizes that individuals have unique working styles and preferences. Employees are given the freedom to structure their workday and the autonomy to make decisions. This flexibility allows employees to find a balance between their personal and professional lives, leading to increased job satisfaction and overall well-being.
• Innovation and Experimentation: Google encourages a culture of innovation and risk-taking. Employees are empowered to think creatively, challenge the status quo, and experiment with new ideas. This fosters a sense of excitement and curiosity, driving the company’s continuous growth and evolution.
• Continuous Learning: Google places a strong emphasis on continuous learning and development. Employees are provided with ample opportunities to expand their skills and knowledge through training programs, workshops, and conferences. This commitment to learning not only benefits individual employees but also contributes to the company’s ability to stay at the forefront of technological advancements.
• Work-Life Balance: Google understands the importance of work-life balance in maintaining employee well-being. Flexible working hours, on-site amenities, and programs promoting physical and mental wellness contribute to a healthy work-life blend. By prioritizing work-life balance, Google ensures that its employees can thrive both personally and professionally.
• Diversity and Inclusion: Google is committed to creating a diverse and inclusive workplace. The company recognizes that diversity brings different perspectives and ideas, leading to better problem-solving and innovation. Google actively promotes diversity through recruitment practices, employee resource groups, and inclusive policies.
• Transparency and Communication: Google values transparency and open communication. Regular town hall meetings, feedback channels, and an accessible leadership team ensure that employees feel heard and valued. This fosters trust and collaboration, enabling teams to work together effectively towards common goals.

These key elements of Google’s company culture work together to create an environment where employees feel motivated, supported, and empowered. By prioritizing the well-being and satisfaction of its employees, Google has built a culture that not only attracts top talent but also drives innovation and success.

The Role of Innovation in Google’s Culture

Innovation is deeply ingrained in Google’s company culture. The company recognizes that embracing new ideas and approaches is crucial for staying ahead in the rapidly evolving tech industry. Google’s culture fosters an environment where creativity flourishes and risk-taking is encouraged.

But what exactly does it mean for innovation to be deeply ingrained in Google’s culture? It means that every aspect of the company’s operations is geared towards fostering a spirit of innovation. From the way teams collaborate to the physical layout of the office spaces, everything is designed to inspire and support innovative thinking.

Encouraging Creativity and Risk-Taking

Google actively nurtures a creative mindset among its employees. Teams are encouraged to think outside the box, challenge conventional thinking, and experiment with novel solutions. The company believes that fostering a culture of curiosity and exploration leads to breakthrough innovations.

One way Google encourages creativity is through its famous “20% Time” policy. This policy allows employees to spend 20% of their working time on projects of their choosing. This freedom to pursue personal interests and passions has resulted in groundbreaking products and features. It allows employees to explore new ideas and take risks without the fear of failure.

Moreover, Google provides its employees with the necessary resources and support to turn their innovative ideas into reality. The company has dedicated innovation labs and research teams that work closely with employees to develop and refine their ideas. This collaborative approach ensures that innovative ideas are not only generated but also implemented effectively.

Google’s Approach to Innovation

Google’s approach to innovation is centered around three core principles:

• Fail Fast, Learn Fast: Google embraces the concept of failing fast and learning from mistakes. This mindset encourages employees to take calculated risks, learn from failures, and iterate quickly. It is through this iterative process that Google can continuously improve its products and services.
• 20% Time: As mentioned earlier, Google famously implemented the practice of allowing employees to spend 20% of their working time on projects of their choosing. This freedom not only fuels creativity but also empowers employees to take ownership of their work and pursue their passions.
• User-Centric Design: Google prioritizes understanding user needs and designing products and services that deliver exceptional experiences. This user-centric approach ensures that Google is constantly innovating to meet evolving customer expectations. By putting the user at the center of the design process, Google can create products that truly resonate with its target audience.

In addition to these core principles, Google also actively seeks out external sources of innovation. The company collaborates with startups, universities, and research institutions to tap into fresh perspectives and cutting-edge technologies. This open approach to innovation allows Google to stay at the forefront of technological advancements.

In conclusion, innovation is not just a buzzword at Google. It is a fundamental part of the company’s DNA. From fostering a culture of creativity and risk-taking to embracing core principles of innovation, Google is constantly pushing the boundaries of what is possible. This commitment to innovation has not only propelled Google to the top of the tech industry but also revolutionized the way we live, work, and connect with the world.

Transparency and Openness: Core Values of Google

Transparency and openness are deeply ingrained in Google’s company culture. From decision-making processes to internal communication, Google believes that transparency leads to trust, collaboration, and better outcomes.

At Google, transparency is not just a buzzword; it is a fundamental principle that guides every aspect of the company’s operations. By being transparent, Google aims to foster a culture of trust and accountability among its employees.

One way Google promotes transparency is through its open-door policy. This policy encourages employees to share their ideas, concerns, and feedback with their managers and colleagues. By creating an environment where everyone’s voice is heard, Google ensures that decisions are made with the input and perspectives of those who will be affected by them.

The Impact of Transparency on Employee Engagement

Google understands that when employees have access to information and can see the bigger picture, they feel more engaged and invested in the company’s success. Transparent communication helps employees understand the rationale behind decisions, feel valued, and contribute effectively.

Moreover, transparency at Google goes beyond just sharing information. The company actively encourages open dialogue and discussion among employees. This fosters a sense of ownership and empowerment, as employees feel that their opinions matter and are taken into consideration.

Transparency also plays a crucial role in fostering innovation and creativity within Google. By openly sharing ideas and knowledge, employees can build upon each other’s work, leading to the development of groundbreaking products and services.

Openness in Decision-Making Processes

Google strives to involve employees in decision-making processes whenever possible. By soliciting input from diverse perspectives and fostering a culture of inclusivity, Google ensures that decisions are well-informed and representative of the entire organization.

One way Google achieves this is through its regular town hall meetings, where employees have the opportunity to ask questions, provide feedback, and engage in discussions with senior leaders. These meetings not only promote transparency but also create a sense of community and shared purpose among employees.

Additionally, Google utilizes various online platforms and tools to facilitate open communication and collaboration. Through these platforms, employees can share their ideas, collaborate on projects, and provide feedback in real time, regardless of their physical location.

By embracing transparency and openness, Google has created a work environment where employees feel valued, empowered, and motivated to contribute their best. This commitment to transparency not only benefits the employees but also drives the company’s success in an ever-changing and competitive industry.

Google’s Emphasis on Employee Well-being

Google recognizes that employee well-being is essential for maintaining a healthy and productive workforce. The company goes above and beyond to support its employees’ physical, mental, and emotional health.

Work-Life Balance in Google’s Culture

Google understands that employees perform at their best when they have a healthy work-life balance. From flexible working hours to on-site amenities such as gyms, restaurants, and nap pods, Google provides an environment that supports work-life integration.

Employee Benefits and Perks at Google

Google is renowned for its employee benefits and perks. From competitive compensation packages to comprehensive health and wellness programs, Google continuously invests in its employees’ well-being. This includes perks such as free meals, on-site childcare, paid parental leave, and generous vacation policies.

The Influence of Google’s Culture on the Tech Industry

Google’s company culture has left an indelible mark on the tech industry as a whole. It has set the standard for what employees expect from a modern workplace and has influenced other companies to adopt similar approaches.

Setting the Standard for Tech Company Cultures

Google’s unique company culture has become a benchmark for tech companies worldwide. Its emphasis on employee happiness, innovation, transparency, and well-being has reshaped the way organizations in the industry operate and attract talent.

Google’s Culture as a Competitive Advantage

Google’s company culture serves as a competitive advantage. It not only attracts top talent but also enables the company to retain its employees and drive innovation. Google’s culture has become synonymous with success, making it a key differentiator in the highly competitive tech landscape.

In conclusion, Google’s company culture stands as a testament to the power of organizational values. By prioritizing employee happiness, innovation, transparency, and well-being, Google has created an environment that fosters collaboration, drives innovation, and sets the standard for the tech industry. As other companies strive to emulate Google’s success, it is clear that organizational culture plays a pivotal role in shaping a company’s trajectory and long-term prosperity.

Related Stories

• May 23, 2024

Software for Company Culture

Edgar schein models on organizational culture, best culture consulting firms, what can we help you find.

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

11.1 Decision-Making Culture: The Case of Google

Figure 11.1

Wikimedia Commons – public domain.

Google (NASDAQ: GOOG) is one of the best-known and most admired companies around the world, so much so that “googling” is the term many use to refer to searching information on the Web. What started out as a student project by two Stanford University graduates—Larry Page and Sergey Brin—in 1996, Google became the most frequently used Web search engine on the Internet with 1 billion searches per day in 2009, as well as other innovative applications such as Gmail, Google Earth, Google Maps, and Picasa. Google grew from 10 employees working in a garage in Palo Alto to 10,000 employees operating around the world by 2009. What is the formula behind this success?

Google strives to operate based on solid principles that may be traced back to its founders. In a world crowded with search engines, they were probably the first company that put users first. Their mission statement summarizes their commitment to end-user needs: “To organize the world’s information and to make it universally accessible and useful.” While other companies were focused on marketing their sites and increasing advertising revenues, Google stripped the search page of all distractions and presented users with a blank page consisting only of a company logo and a search box. Google resisted pop-up advertising, because the company felt that it was annoying to end-users. They insisted that all their advertisements would be clearly marked as “sponsored links.” This emphasis on improving user experience and always putting it before making more money in the short term seems to have been critical to their success.

Keeping their employees happy is also a value they take to heart. Google created a unique work environment that attracts, motivates, and retains the best players in the field. Google was ranked as the number 1 “Best Place to Work For” by Fortune magazine in 2007 and number 4 in 2010. This is not surprising if one looks closer to how Google treats employees. On their Mountain View, California, campus called the “Googleplex,” employees are treated to free gourmet food options including sushi bars and espresso stations. In fact, many employees complain that once they started working for Google, they tend to gain 10 to 15 pounds! Employees have access to gyms, shower facilities, video games, on-site child care, and doctors. Google provides 4 months of paternal leave with 75% of full pay and offers $500 for take-out meals for families with a newborn. These perks create a place where employees feel that they are treated well and their needs are taken care of. Moreover, they contribute to the feeling that they are working at a unique and cool place that is different from everywhere else they may have worked.

In addition, Google encourages employee risk taking and innovation. How is this done? When a vice president in charge of the company’s advertising system made a mistake costing the company millions of dollars and apologized for the mistake, she was commended by Larry Page, who congratulated her for making the mistake and noting that he would rather run a company where they are moving quickly and doing too much, as opposed to being too cautious and doing too little. This attitude toward acting fast and accepting the cost of resulting mistakes as a natural consequence of working on the cutting edge may explain why the company is performing much ahead of competitors such as Microsoft and Yahoo! One of the current challenges for Google is to expand to new fields outside of their Web search engine business. To promote new ideas, Google encourages all engineers to spend 20% of their time working on their own ideas.

Google’s culture is reflected in their decision making as well. Decisions at Google are made in teams. Even the company management is in the hands of a triad: Larry Page and Sergey Brin hired Eric Schmidt to act as the CEO of the company, and they are reportedly leading the company by consensus. In other words, this is not a company where decisions are made by the senior person in charge and then implemented top down. It is common for several small teams to attack each problem and for employees to try to influence each other using rational persuasion and data. Gut feeling has little impact on how decisions are made. In some meetings, people reportedly are not allowed to say “I think…” but instead must say “the data suggest….” To facilitate teamwork, employees work in open office environments where private offices are assigned only to a select few. Even Kai-Fu Lee, the famous employee whose defection from Microsoft was the target of a lawsuit, did not get his own office and shared a cubicle with two other employees.

How do they maintain these unique values? In a company emphasizing hiring the smartest people, it is very likely that they will attract big egos that may be difficult to work with. Google realizes that its strength comes from its “small company” values that emphasize risk taking, agility, and cooperation. Therefore, they take their hiring process very seriously. Hiring is extremely competitive and getting to work at Google is not unlike applying to a college. Candidates may be asked to write essays about how they will perform their future jobs. Recently, they targeted potential new employees using billboards featuring brain teasers directing potential candidates to a Web site where they were subjected to more brain teasers. Each candidate may be interviewed by as many as eight people on several occasions. Through this scrutiny, they are trying to select “Googley” employees who will share the company’s values, perform at high levels, and be liked by others within the company.

Will this culture survive in the long run? It may be too early to tell, given that the company was only founded in 1998. The founders emphasized that their initial public offering (IPO) would not change their culture and they would not introduce more rules or change the way things are done in Google to please Wall Street. But can a public corporation really act like a start-up? Can a global giant facing scrutiny on issues including privacy, copyright, and censorship maintain its culture rooted in its days in a Palo Alto garage? Larry Page is quoted as saying, “We have a mantra: don’t be evil, which is to do the best things we know how for our users, for our customers, for everyone. So I think if we were known for that, it would be a wonderful thing.”

Based on information from Elgin, B., Hof, R. D., & Greene, J. (2005, August 8). Revenge of the nerds—again. BusinessWeek . Retrieved April 30, 2010, from http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/jul2005/tc20050728 _5127_tc024.htm ; Hardy, Q. (2005, November 14). Google thinks small. Forbes, 176 (10); Lashinky, A. (2006, October 2). Chaos by design. Fortune , 154 (7); Mangalindan, M. (2004, March 29). The grownup at Google: How Eric Schmidt imposed better management tactics but didn’t stifle search giant. Wall Street Journal , p. B1; Lohr, S. (2005, December 5). At Google, cube culture has new rules. New York Times . Retrieved April 30, 2010, from http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/05/technology/05google.html ; Schoeneman, D. (2006, December 31). Can Google come out to play? New York Times . Retrieved April 30, 2010, from http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/31/fashion/31google.html ; Warner, M. (2004, June). What your company can learn from Google. Business 2.0, 5 (5).

Discussion Questions

• Do you think Google’s decision-making culture will help or hurt Google in the long run?
• What are the factors responsible for the specific culture that exists in Google?
• What type of decision-making approach has Google taken? Do you think this will remain the same over time? Why or why not?
• Do you see any challenges Google may face in the future because of its emphasis on risk taking?

Organizational Behavior Copyright © 2017 by University of Minnesota is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Growing A Culture Of Innovation: 5 Lessons From Google

• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to Linkedin

Organizations are facing unprecedented change and challenges stemming from a confluence of natural and artificial conditions. These forces are driving many to rethink the tools and technologies they use, and the places they need to be, to grow and to innovate. Below, Vinton G. Cerf, Vice President and Chief Internet Evangelist at Google, shares five lessons on growing a culture of innovation.

Culture is always a work in progress.

1. Sustained competitive advantage cannot be achieved with technology alone.

To create a more innovative business, you must rethink how people, structures, and processes interact every day—we refer to this as organizational culture. The teams you rely on to build must have systems and processes that keep them engaged, amplify their ability to produce, and keep them consistently forward-looking.

At Google, we’ve spent years thinking about how to maintain and improve a culture that fosters transformation and innovation. This has led to alignment around certain core principles that have informed our approach and supported Google’s culture for two decades. 

2. Measure, make decisions, and be transparent in that process.

Measurement is at the heart of everything we do at Google. We measure everything—from how our systems are running, to how productive we are, to how people are feeling. All the data we gather is extremely valuable, because it exposes problems faster than if we simply scratched our heads and wondered. Once we gather that data, we still need to spend some time interpreting it, but at least we have a basis for judging how well our organizational structure is working. 

It’s important to recognize that a feedback system only works when people believe changes will be made as a result of their feedback.

A culture of measurement results in a collection of anecdotal information as well as quantitative data. Both are necessary to inform change. We perform a number of different measurements—for example, encouraging everyone to participate in an anonymous employee satisfaction survey every year. That data and that feedback loop facilitate our decisions to change how we’re doing things, as needed.

Once we’ve gathered the data and made a decision, it’s time to actually put those changes into motion. It’s important to recognize that a feedback system only works when people believe changes will be made as a result of their feedback. So the trick is to ask the questions and then actually do something with the result. 

Transparency is another important part of Google culture. It’s important that we be transparent about the feedback we heard, and how we went about addressing it. Being transparent as a company increases customer trust on one hand, and employee trust on the other. It’s important that people understand why we prioritized the changes we made. That’s core to the company’s DNA.

3. Don’t be afraid of failure.

Sometimes science learns more from failure than it does from success. If you ask why something didn’t work, you often learn more than you would have if it actually did work. And so, even at Google, we try a lot of things out that don’t work—and we learn from them and refine our practices. And eventually, we hope, we get to the point where the things that we want to work actually do work. Science is a lot like that. Google is a lot like that as well.

You have to have the willingness to allow failure. I’m not suggesting we should fail all of the time—that would be a problem! I’m talking about the freedom to try things out without absolute certainty of success. This is the fundamental difference between engineering and research. 

With research, you don’t start off knowing the answer. With engineering, you think you know the answer, and you just have to build it. But what can happen with engineering is that you build it and then it doesn’t work. These two disciplines interact in the most wonderful ways. The engineer says, “I built it and it didn’t work.” The researcher says, “Why not?” And the engineer says, “I don’t know, can you help?” Together, they discover there’s a fundamental reason why this particular path for implementation didn’t work—and they learn from that. And then you get to develop a new design that takes this into account. 

At Google, we’ll go down a number of different paths as we explore new capabilities in the system, and we often encourage people to go down these paths, even if they might end up at a dead end. And we share, blamelessly, with others the fact that there was a dead end, so everyone learns. That’s how we advance everybody’s ability to carry out their work.

4. Don’t forget that culture is always a work in progress.

Over time, as the mix of people joining the company changes and as the scale of the company gets bigger, we have to remind people about the cultural norms that we would like to maintain. 

You have to periodically refresh the cultural elements that matter.

For example, one of the things that Google tries to accomplish is to give people the freedom to try things out, which resulted in a policy of allowing engineers to spend 20% of their time doing things that they weren’t originally assigned to do. People use 20% time to learn outside of their assigned duties and it actually acts as a stabilizing component of employee satisfaction.

The idea of 20% diminished for a while as we grew, until we reminded everybody that that 20% was fundamental to Google and was a cultural element that we wanted to maintain. It’s important to remember that you have to periodically refresh the cultural elements that matter.

5. Stay open.

If I were trying to give advice to an enterprise CIO, one of the things I would say is this: Don’t think that you have all the answers. In fact, the probability is very high that you don’t have very many of them at all. Take advantage of opportunities to share knowledge with your colleagues, your friends, even your competitors to better understand what others have learned in order to solve the same problems you have. Openness is your friend. The same thing is true when it comes to not taking all the credit. It’s important to acknowledge other people’s contributions because it gives them the incentive to continue contributing. And so this kind of openness of spirit is just as important as openness of ideas.

Technology alone does not guarantee success. You need a culture that supports change and acceleration—which paves the way for innovation. People have always powered technology, and today that’s especially true as teammates must collaborate and solve big problems together, even if they’re not in the same room. Fostering a culture of innovation helps lead to identification of new opportunities, and quick action to create new ideas and get ahead of the competition.

Keep reading: Discover three steps any organization can take to quickly adapt and achieve positive results with tighter resources. Get the guide .

• Editorial Standards
• Reprints & Permissions

7.1 Decision-Making Culture: The Case of Google

Wikimedia Commons – public domain.

Google (NASDAQ: GOOG) is one of the best-known and most admired companies around the world, so much so that “googling” is the term many use to refer to searching information on the Web. What started out as a student project by two Stanford University graduates—Larry Page and Sergey Brin—in 1996, Google became the most frequently used Web search engine on the Internet with 1 billion searches per day in 2009, as well as other innovative applications such as Gmail, Google Earth, Google Maps, and Picasa. What is the formula behind this success?

Google strives to operate based on solid principles that may be traced back to its founders. In a world crowded with search engines, they were probably the first company that put users first. Their mission statement summarizes their commitment to end-user needs: “To organize the world’s information and to make it universally accessible and useful.” While other companies were focused on marketing their sites and increasing advertising revenues, Google stripped the search page of all distractions and presented users with a blank page consisting only of a company logo and a search box. Google resisted pop-up advertising, because the company felt that it was annoying to end-users. They insisted that all their advertisements would be clearly marked as “sponsored links.” This emphasis on improving user experience and always putting it before making more money in the short term seems to have been critical to their success.

Keeping their employees happy is also a value they take to heart. Google created a unique work environment that attracts, motivates, and retains the best players in the field. On their Mountain View, California, campus called the “Googleplex,” employees are treated to free gourmet food options including sushi bars and espresso stations. In fact, many employees complain that once they started working for Google, they tend to gain 10 to 15 pounds! Employees have access to gyms, shower facilities, video games, on-site child care, and doctors. These perks create a place where employees feel that they are treated well and their needs are taken care of. Moreover, they contribute to the feeling that they are working at a unique and cool place that is different from everywhere else they may have worked.

In addition, Google encourages employee risk taking and innovation. How is this done? When a vice president in charge of the company’s advertising system made a mistake costing the company millions of dollars and apologized for the mistake, she was commended by Larry Page, who congratulated her for making the mistake and noting that he would rather run a company where they are moving quickly and doing too much, as opposed to being too cautious and doing too little. This attitude toward acting fast and accepting the cost of resulting mistakes as a natural consequence of working on the cutting edge may explain why the company is performing much ahead of competitors such as Microsoft and Yahoo! One of the current challenges for Google is to expand to new fields outside of their Web search engine business. To promote new ideas, Google encourages all engineers to spend 20% of their time working on their own ideas.

Google’s culture is reflected in their decision making as well. Decisions at Google are made in teams. It is common for several small teams to attack each problem and for employees to try to influence each other using rational persuasion and data. Gut feeling has little impact on how decisions are made. In some meetings, people reportedly are not allowed to say “I think…” but instead must say “the data suggest….” To facilitate teamwork, employees work in open office environments where private offices are assigned only to a select few.

How do they maintain these unique values? In a company emphasizing hiring the smartest people, it is very likely that they will attract big egos that may be difficult to work with. Google realizes that its strength comes from its “small company” values that emphasize risk taking, agility, and cooperation. Therefore, they take their hiring process very seriously. Hiring is extremely competitive and getting to work at Google is not unlike applying to a college. Candidates may be asked to write essays about how they will perform their future jobs. Recently, they targeted potential new employees using billboards featuring brain teasers directing potential candidates to a Web site where they were subjected to more brain teasers. Each candidate may be interviewed by as many as eight people on several occasions. Through this scrutiny, they are trying to select “Googley” employees who will share the company’s values, perform at high levels, and be liked by others within the company.

Based on information from Elgin, B., Hof, R. D., & Greene, J. (2005, August 8). Revenge of the nerds—again. BusinessWeek . Retrieved April 30, 2010, from http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/jul2005/tc20050728 _5127_tc024.htm ; Hardy, Q. (2005, November 14). Google thinks small. Forbes, 176 (10); Lashinky, A. (2006, October 2). Chaos by design. Fortune , 154 (7); Mangalindan, M. (2004, March 29). The grownup at Google: How Eric Schmidt imposed better management tactics but didn’t stifle search giant. Wall Street Journal , p. B1; Lohr, S. (2005, December 5). At Google, cube culture has new rules. New York Times . Retrieved April 30, 2010, from http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/05/technology/05google.html ; Schoeneman, D. (2006, December 31). Can Google come out to play? New York Times . Retrieved April 30, 2010, from http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/31/fashion/31google.html ; Warner, M. (2004, June). What your company can learn from Google. Business 2.0, 5 (5).

Discussion Questions

• What are the benefits to involving all employees in decision-making? What are some of the potential drawbacks?
• How might you strike a balance — that is, harness the benefits of employee empowerment while also avoiding some of the pitfalls?

Share This Book

• Increase Font Size

Home — Essay Samples — Business — Google — Google Case Study: Organization Culture And Project Management

Google Case Study: Organization Culture and Project Management

• Categories: Google Organizational Culture Project Management

About this sample

Words: 1916 |

10 min read

Published: Dec 3, 2020

Words: 1916 | Pages: 4 | 10 min read

• Is a good coach.
• Empowers the team and does no micromanage.
• Expresses interest in and concern for team members' success and personal well-being.
• Is productive and results-oriented.
• Is a good communicator-listens and shares information.
• Helps with career development.
• Has a clear vision and strategy for the team.
• Has key technical skills that help him or her advise the team.

Works Cited

• Baer, Drake. “13 qualities Google looks for in job candidates.” Business Insider, Business Insider, 27 Apr. 2015, www.businessinsider.com/what-google-looks-for-in-employees-2015-4.
• Garvin, David. A. 'Google's Project Oxygen: Do Managers Matter?'. Harvard Business Review. 15 Oct 2013. Web. 30 Jan 2018.
• Smithson, Nathaniel. “Google's Organizational Structure & Organizational Culture.” Panmore Institute, 28 Jan. 2017, panmore.com/google-organizational-structure-organizational-culture.
• Thompson, Andrew. “Google's Generic Strategy & Intensive Growth Strategies.” Panmore Institute, 28 Jan. 2017, panmore.com/google-generic-strategy-intensive-growth-strategies.

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Prof. Kifaru

Verified writer

• Expert in: Business

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

2 pages / 714 words

1 pages / 656 words

4 pages / 1685 words

2 pages / 1123 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Google

Google is a highly influential and innovative technology company that has significantly impacted the way businesses operate in the digital age. One of the key factors contributing to Google's success is its team-based [...]

Porter, M. E. (2008). The five competitive forces that shape strategy. Harvard Business Review.Hill, T., & Westbrook, R. (1997). SWOT analysis: It's time for a product recall. Long Range Planning.Google Investor Relations. [...]

Google has been a dominant force in the global technology industry, with a significant presence in various countries, including Russia. However, Google's dominance in the Russian market has been challenged by an antitrust [...]

Google is one of the most prominent and innovative companies in the world, known for its groundbreaking products, services, and work culture. With a focus on attracting and retaining top talent, Google has developed a [...]

Google was founded by Larry Page and Sergey Brin in 1998 while both if they were pursuing Ph.D. at Stanford University, California. Google is an American Multinational company that focuses in Internet-related services and [...]

Google Chrome is a freeware web browser developed by Google. Released in September 2008, for Microsoft Windows, and was later ported to Linux, macOS, iOS and Android. Google Chrome is also the main component of Chrome OS, where [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

The New Analytics of Culture

• Matthew Corritore,
• Amir Goldberg,
• Sameer B. Srivastava

Culture is easy to sense but hard to measure. The workhorses of culture research—employee surveys and questionnaires—are often unreliable.

Studying the language that employees use in electronic communication has opened a new window into organizational culture. New research analyzing email, Slack messages, and Glassdoor postings are challenging prevailing wisdom about culture.

Some of the findings are (1) cultural fit is important, but what predicts success most is the rate at which employees adapt as organizational culture changes over time, (2) cognitive diversity helps teams during ideation but hinders execution, and (3) the best cultures encourage diversity to drive innovation but are anchored by shared core beliefs.

What email, Slack, and Glassdoor reveal about your organization

Idea in Brief

The problem.

Culture is easy to sense but difficult to measure. The workhorses of culture research—employee surveys and questionnaires—are often unreliable.

A New Approach

Studying the language that employees use in electronic communication has opened a new window into organizational culture. Research analyzing email, Slack messages, and Glassdoor postings is challenging prevailing wisdom about culture.

The Findings

• Cultural fit is important, but what predicts success most is the rate at which employees adapt as organizational culture changes over time.
• Cognitive diversity helps teams during ideation but hinders execution.
• The best cultures encourage diversity to drive innovation but are anchored by shared core beliefs.

A business’s culture can catalyze or undermine success. Yet the tools available for measuring it—namely, employee surveys and questionnaires—have significant shortcomings. Employee self-reports are often unreliable. The values and beliefs that people say are important to them, for example, are often not reflected in how they actually behave. Moreover, surveys provide static, or at best episodic, snapshots of organizations that are constantly evolving. And they’re limited by researchers’ tendency to assume that distinctive and idiosyncratic cultures can be neatly categorized into a few common types.

• MC Matthew Corritore is an assistant professor of strategy and organization at McGill’s Desautels Faculty of Management.
• AG Amir Goldberg is an associate professor of organizational behavior at Stanford’s Graduate School of Business. He and Sameer B. Srivastava codirect the Berkeley-Stanford Computational Culture Lab.
• SS Sameer B. Srivastava is an associate professor and the Harold Furst Chair in Management Philosophy and Values at the University of California, Berkeley’s Haas School of Business. He and Amir Goldberg codirect the Berkeley-Stanford Computational Culture Lab.

Partner Center

The Leading Source of Insights On Business Model Strategy & Tech Business Models

Google Organizational Culture

• Google has an organizational culture built around the pillars of innovation and a superior employee experience.

Table of Contents

Understanding Google’s organizational culture

Google’s superior organizational culture is well publicized, and for good reason.

The company won 9 separate awards from Comparably in 2022 alone, including Best Engineering Team, Best Marketing Team, Best Global Culture, and Best Company Outlook.

Google also occupied the number one position above 49 similar companies in the Forbes Best Company Culture list of 2020.

Google’s organizational culture is successful because it avoids the mundane aspects of a typical corporation. Instead, the company focuses on creating a workplace environment conducive to the generation of innovative ideas.

Happy employees are creative employees, at the end of the day.

To promote this culture, Google offers many perks. Employees can bring their pets to work, catch up on sleep in a nap pod, or receive a haircut from an on-site hairdresser.

More important, however, is the way Google has encouraged employees to learn and knowledge-share from the early days of the company.

Google takes this ethos very seriously. While learning is the right of every employee, teaching is the responsibility of the entire company.

This is exemplified by the Googler to Googler (G2G) network which handles around 80% of all employee training and is comprised of around 6,000 individuals.

Backed by a robust, collaborative environment, employees can learn various professional skills such as public speaking or negotiation and provide one-on-one mentorship.

Interesting aspects of Google’s organizational culture

How else is innovation and employee well-being furthered at Google? Let’s take a look a just a few of the measures in place.

Think 10x 

Google has a long and proven track record of successful innovations from Google Maps to Android, YouTube, and Gmail.

Within Google Search itself there are also countless features such as autocomplete, translations, and universal search.

The company follows the “Think 10x” rule which means it focuses on making a product ten times better than anything else on the market.

According to former CEO Larry Page, this enables employees to pursue big ideas and helps them avoid the mindset of doing just enough to beat the competition.

Exhaustive recruitment process

According to CNBC, Google receives around 3 million applications each year with an acceptance rate of just 0.2%.

The company could be forgiven for rushing its recruitment strategy to process the large volume of applications, but instead, it is incredibly meticulous.

In addition to a candidate’s intellect and technical qualifications, Google evaluates their creative thought process and whether they can think on their feet with obscure questions like “ How many golf balls could a school bus hold?” 

Employees are also required to attend numerous phone and on-site interviews and their credentials are evaluated by a job-specific hiring committee made up of directors and senior managers.

Ultimately, Google’s exhaustive hiring process enables it to secure the most articulate and creative talent who represent the best cultural fit.

Data-based HR

Google’s People Operations department uses data analytics to create a positive culture for employees and solve problems.

Specific algorithms are used to identify those employees most at risk of leaving the company and Google has even performed studies on the optimal shape of tables in its cafeteria.

In one instance, Google observed that it had a retention problem with female staff who were leaving at twice the rate of their male counterparts.

HR then identified that the cause of the problem was a lack of maternity leave, so the company increased it from 12 weeks to 5 months.

The company’s scientific, data-based approach to HR may seem cold and calculated when dealing with people. But in reality, Google is committed to rectifying nuanced problems and creating an ideal corporate culture.

Key takeaways:

• Google’s organizational culture is successful because it avoids the mundane aspects of a typical corporation. The company instead focuses on creating a workplace environment conducive to the generation of innovative ideas.
• Google’s organizational culture is also supported by an exhaustive recruitment process, a data-based approach to human resources, and the Think 10x rule for innovative ideas.

Key Highlights:

• Innovation and Employee Experience: Google’s organizational culture is centered on innovation and providing employees with a superior experience.
• Awards and Recognition: Google’s exceptional culture has earned it several awards and recognitions, including being ranked first in Forbes’ Best Company Culture list and receiving multiple awards from Comparably.
• Workplace Environment: Google creates a workplace environment that fosters innovation and creativity. The company offers perks such as pet-friendly policies, nap pods, and on-site services like haircuts.
• Learning and Knowledge-Sharing: Google promotes learning and knowledge-sharing among employees through the Googler to Googler (G2G) network, which handles around 80% of employee training.
• Think 10x: Google follows the “Think 10x” rule, aiming to make products ten times better than the competition. This approach encourages big ideas and innovation .
• Exhaustive Recruitment Process: Google’s recruitment process is meticulous, evaluating candidates’ intellect, technical qualifications, creative thinking, and problem-solving abilities.
• Data-Based HR: Google’s People Operations department uses data analytics to create a positive employee culture and address specific issues. The company’s scientific approach ensures a thorough understanding of employee needs.
• Retention Solutions: Google uses data analytics to identify retention problems and develop solutions, such as increasing maternity leave to address gender-related attrition.

Read Also: Organizational Structure

Related To Google

Who Owns Google

How Does Google Make Money

• Google Business Model

Google Other Bets

Google Cloud Business

How Big Is Google?

Google Traffic Acquisition Costs

YouTube Business Model

Google vs. Bing

Google Profits

Google Revenue Breakdown

Google Advertising Revenue

Apple vs. Google

Google Employees Number

Google Revenue Per Employee

YouTube Ad Revenue

Main Free Guides:

• Business Models
• Business Competition
• Business Strategy
• Business Development
• Digital Business Models
• Distribution Channels
• Marketing Strategy
• Organizational Structure
• Platform Business Models
• Revenue Models
• Tech Business Models
• Blockchain Business Models Framework
• How Does Facebook Make Money?
• How Does DuckDuckGo Make Money?
• Amazon Business Model
• Netflix Business Model
• Spotify Business Model

Types of Organizational Structures

Siloed Organizational Structures

Open Organizational Structures

Connected Business Frameworks

Portfolio Management

Kotter’s 8-Step Change Model

Nadler-Tushman Congruence Model

McKinsey’s Seven Degrees of Freedom

Mintzberg’s 5Ps

COSO Framework

TOWS Matrix

Lewin’s Change Management

Organizational Structure Case Studies

Airbnb Organizational Structure

eBay Organizational Structure

IBM Organizational Structure

Sony Organizational Structure

Facebook Organizational Structure

Google Organizational Structure

Tesla Organizational Structure

McDonald’s Organizational Structure

Walmart Organizational Structure

Microsoft Organizational Structure

More Resources

About The Author

Gennaro Cuofano

Discover more from fourweekmba.

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Type your email…

Continue reading

• 70+ Business Models
• Airbnb Business Model
• Apple Business Model
• Facebook [Meta] Business Model
• Microsoft Business Model
• Uber Business Model

An Insider’s Look: Google’s Organizational Culture and What Companies Can Learn from It

January 11, 2023

Many case studies and whitepapers touch on the complexity and simplicity of Google’s organizational culture. While Microsoft has a more formal organizational culture and believes in keeping old school work styles, Google experiments with new elements that constantly redefine its work culture. Each company should have its own culture, but it doesn’t mean organizations cannot follow the lead of most intuitive tech giants like Google.

The secret behind Google’s heightened creativity, productivity, and increased employee engagement comes down to having a happier and stress-free work environment. Google tends to empower its employees rather than assume control or micromanage their activities.

Make your company’s work environment more exciting and fun with CWJ’s  Nitro Cold Brew !

Google’s Unique Organizational Culture

The world-renowned company has been an active player in developing new tech services and solutions. Google has over a dozen awards, including the Best Organization for Women , Best CEO , and Best Organizational Culture .

But if you don't measure the value of a company based on awards – take the word of their previous employees, and you’ll learn the level of fun and excitement Google creates in its work environment. Google understands that all work and no play can make any workplace dull.

Google consistently brings out new elements into its work environment to create more excitement, productivity, and innovation among its employees. While “how” Google’s HR operates is not clear –it seems that the company rewards its employees far more than market-competitive salaries and benefits.

A top-tier tech giant like Google features dedicated video game stations and nap pods and provides free food to its employees. If you’ve ever had the chance to visit  Googleplex , you’ll notice that it is designed as a bright and open space where employees can feel safe and comfortable.  

Google’s workplace culture is based on evolved organizational, philosophical, and technological values. In fact, these values continue to help Google secure long-term success. Many reasons make Google’s organizational culture vibrant and encourage talented people from all over the world to be part of it.

CWJ’s  Nitro Cold Brew  – the answer to employee engagement, satisfaction, and empowerment! 

Organizations often wonder what makes Google’s organizational culture so unique. But when they find the answer – it becomes hard to grasp that driving innovation and empowering employees can lead to such drastic improvements.

Google continues to roll out more progressive initiatives that can cater to the needs of millennial and Gen Z employees. Even Google’s internship program is iconic and encourages participants from all over the United States.

Here are the core elements that make Google’s organizational culture unique in 2023:

A Socially Active Workplace

Google is a fun place to work – it doesn’t believe in boring cubicles that create a claustrophobic feeling. Google’s employees thrive in open and vast spaces. In this workspace, employees can work long hours and enjoy every single moment of it.

Google leads with innovation and data, and it uses the same formula to design its open and expanse workplaces. Sure, a lot of companies have dedicated socialization areas where employees can relax, dine, and have fun. But Google takes this initiative to the next level. The company offers its employees a wide range of added services that save their valuable time and energy.

Whether you want to get a professional haircut, dive into a swimming pool, or get a massage, Google’s got its employees covered. In-house services available within the Google headquarters mean employees don’t have to go outdoors for even dry cleaning. Employees can also avail in-house dental and health checkups.

On top of lunches/dinners and snacks – Google has developed a state-of-the-art gym and has built space to encourage employees to play football, table tennis, and other sports. But the perks vary and depend on which Google office you’re working at.

Data-driven Business Decisions

As a premier search engine company, Google understands the value of taking calculated, logical, and analytical decisions based on data. In the age of big data, Google simplifies data to streamline operations, improve employee engagement, maintain direct communications, etc.

At Google, data is the Holy Grail that can optimize decisions around a task or project. Google sees past optimal processes and interprets data to find new opportunities. From automating processes to creating meaningful dialogue, Google never lets an opportunity slip and believes in proactive employee engagement to build effective teams.

Open Communication

Google believes in the science of happiness, which means having open communication guidelines. Like most tech-driven companies, Google uses similar communication tools to share messages with teams. But it prioritizes direct and open communication to avoid misunderstandings. It is an effective way to push the best opinions and ideas to the top.

From CEO to the floor managers – communication revolves around an open-door policy. While there’s no extra incentive for employees who provide feedback, open communication encourages employees to speak up their minds and be honest about new ideas and concepts. Google is a highly innovative company, and it actively hires people who want to share new ideas and believe in collaboration.

Highly Creative Employees

There’s a creative workforce, and then there are Google’s highly innovative employees. But unlike many companies, Google has realized that there are many ways to encourage creativity in the workplace. And the happier the employees are – the more creative and productive they can be in their workspace.

Google’s organizational culture gives mental and physical space to employees to do their thing. Besides, Google understands that productivity has to be meaningful – not mindless. Google employees get the opportunity to work in an environment that makes them comfortable and joyful. While Google doesn’t have cubicle restrictions – young employees don’t find conventional ways of working exciting.

The onboarding process of Google is unique – it prioritizes its employees' creativity over how productive they can be. If a potential candidate doesn’t have a lot of experience but has the passion and curiosity for learning – Google follows through with the hiring. Google hires its employees based on skills, character, and willingness to learn.

Nitro Cold Brew  – Take risks like Google to reshape the work environment of your organization.

It is one of the main reasons Google always manages to build highly innovative and competent teams. Google values self-starting, team-centric, innovative, self-reflective, and fun people. You can learn coding and design skills, but it takes character to make work exciting for you and your colleagues.

Professional Development and Training

Professional career development often becomes too complex, and skilled individuals struggle to take up a specific position. Google allows employees to make career changes within the company and provides advanced training.

Of course, Google doesn’t compromise on the quality of work and skills, but it gives employees the option to switch careers and provides required training to make a seamless transition. It is one of the most effective ways to retain talented employees and cut back on recruitment and onboarding costs.  

Solid Core Values 

From company leadership to the CEO, everyone follows Google’s values of innovation and empowerment. During the onboarding, Google communicates its core values. Some of the most famous values of Google’s culture include “great isn’t good enough,” information transcends borders,” “there’s no need to be at a disk to be productive and answer questions,” fast is always better than being slow,” etc.

Having solid and clear core values allows Google to target people who hold the same values. Working at Google means employees can expect top-notch financial and emotional support. Google hires like-minded individuals to foster more innovation and collaboration at the company.

Think differently like Google and foster more innovation and productivity via CWJ’s Nitro  Cold Brew . 

What Companies Can Learn from Google’s Unique Work Culture

In the end, Google perfectly reflects its management, leadership, and culture. Even if you’re not a tech firm – you can still take away many lessons from Google’s unique work culture. Focus on Google values to make your workplace culture successful.

In the last decade, Google has become a prestigious company to work at. But it’s more than just about high salary benefits and compensation – it’s the added flexibility that gives employees room to grow. Google fosters intellectual employees that want to transform how workflows are optimized.

Final Thoughts

Google treats its employees with dignity and respect to cut out stress and drive more innovation in the workplace. Google wants its employees to prosper and uses direct communication to share and test ideas. Ultimately, Google has created a work environment where employees can feel comfortable and share new ideas without repercussions.

On the surface, Google’s approach may seem counter-productive, but the company risks finding new ways to get the work done and keep its employees happy and innovative. There is no insider secret that Google makes its internal operations and work processes more complex. It simply empowers its employees to communicate and cultivate camaraderie to take care of tasks and build a lively culture.

Like Google, you can make your work environment more fun by adding CWJ’s  Nitro Cold Brew .

By: Brandi Marcene

Commonwealth Joe

• Attract & Retain Talent /
• Office Perks & Amenities /
• Workplace Culture /
• Workplace Productivity

Leave a comment

Sign Up and Save 50%

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.

Age verification

By clicking enter you are verifying that you are old enough to consume alcohol.

Your cart is currently empty.

• Free Case Studies
• Business Essays

Write My Case Study

Buy Case Study

Case Study Help

• Case Study For Sale
• Case Study Service
• Hire Writer

Case Study of Organisation Culture: Google

Case study of organization culture: Google Google, one of the world’s wealthiest and fastest growing companies, is often presented as a model of a ‘progressive’ organization. What lessons can other businesses learn? The white paper on work in 2020, released by the Australian Human Resources Institute (AIR) last month, contained a summary of aspects of Google’s culture, and drew some conclusions about its implications for other organizations.

Established in 1998, Google now employs more than 20,000 people, has been adding Taft at the rate of around 6000 per year, and receives around 7000 unsolicited Job applications per day.

We Will Write a Custom Case Study Specifically For You For Only $13.90/page!

Core culture statements Google has three core culture statements: 1. People are the most important asset. 2. You can be serious without wearing a suit. 3. You can make money without doing evil.

Built-in ‘Innovation time’ Google provides ‘Innovation time off, that Is, one work day out of every five Is allocated to solving problems. All business ‘problems’ are circulated to all staff for ‘solution sessions’.

Work environment Amenities and benefits at Google’s US Head Office Include 19 restaurants, free dental care, a health centre, haircuts, massages, a creche, gymnasiums, a hotel, laundry, car wash and community bus. The restaurant tables are oval-shaped, on the assumption that social Interactions stimulate knowledge and learning breakthroughs. The alma Is for people to Interact with each other while they are eating, and the underlying cultural assumption Is that work and other life should be merged as much as possible. Google wants Its employees to spend as much time as possible there.

But It’s not for everyone The AIR white paper points out that one of the potential drawbacks of this Favor Is life’ culture Is that If things go wrong at work, they are likely to go wrong In other aspects of your life as well. It Is therefore Important to mammalian connections with people In your life outside employment. Genuine work-life balance Implies that everyone needs to be part of something else outside the workplace ? not all the core family, friends and relationships should reside or be nurtured wealth the workplace.

By razzmatazz Built-in ‘innovation time’ Google provides ‘innovation time off, that is, one work day out of every five is Amenities and benefits at Google’s US Head Office include 19 restaurants, free dental care, a health centre, haircuts, massages, a cry©chew, gymnasiums, a hotel, laundry, car The restaurant tables are oval-shaped, on the assumption that social interactions stimulate knowledge and learning breakthroughs. The aim is for people to interact with each other while they are eating, and the underlying cultural assumption is that org and other life should be merged as much as possible.

Google wants its But it’s not for everyone The AIR white paper points out that one of the potential drawbacks of this Work is life’ culture is that if things go wrong at work, they are likely to go wrong in other aspects of your life as well.

It is therefore important to maintain connections with people in your life outside employment. Genuine work-life balance implies that everyone needs to be part of something else reside or be nurtured within the workplace.

Related posts:

• Executive Summary Google Inc. Case Study
• Google Inc. Case Study
• Case Study on Google
• Google Case Study
• Google Marketing Case Study
• Idea Google Case study
• Google’s objectivity Case Study

Quick Links

Privacy Policy

Terms and Conditions

Testimonials

Our Services

Case Study Writing Service

Case Studies For Sale

Our Company

Welcome to the world of case studies that can bring you high grades! Here, at ACaseStudy.com, we deliver professionally written papers, and the best grades for you from your professors are guaranteed!

[email protected] 804-506-0782 350 5th Ave, New York, NY 10118, USA

Acasestudy.com © 2007-2019 All rights reserved.

Hi! I'm Anna

Would you like to get a custom case study? How about receiving a customized one?

Haven't Found The Case Study You Want?

For Only $13.90/page

Fostering a Thriving Virtual Organizational Culture: The Development of Metrics for Ten Soft Skills in the Case of XSEDE

• Original Research
• Published: 04 June 2024
• Volume 5 , article number  615 , ( 2024 )

Cite this article

• Kerk Kee 1   na1 ,
• Harmony Jankowski   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-7774-1435 2   na1 ,
• Richard Knepper 3   na1 ,
• Winona Snapp-Childs 2   na1 &
• Rhett Brady 1  

The purpose of this study is to propose a framework through which an organization could identify, describe, and measure ten factors categorized as soft skills shown to undergird the thriving culture of XSEDE, NSF’s largest cyberinfrastructure project during 2011–2022. We conducted 54 interviews of XSEDE collaborators; these interviews proceeded in two phases, with the second functioning as member checks to ensure our findings accorded with respondents’ experiences. Based on a grounded theory analysis of these 54 semi-structured interviews with a range of XSEDE stakeholders, we identified 10 social and cultural factors contributing to XSEDE’s success: (1) communicating intentionally, (2) maintaining relationships, (3) helping colleagues and users, (4) trusting colleagues, (5) having thick skin, (6) assuming the best in others, (7) respecting colleagues, (8) remaining open-minded, (9) practicing transparency, and (10) showing appreciation. We believe these ten factors can be used to create a methodology for developing soft skills metrics for virtual organizations and cyberinfrastructure projects similar to XSEDE. This would allow stakeholders to proactively measure engagement in behaviors, practices, and mindsets conducive to generating a thriving culture for virtual collaborations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Availability of Data and Materials

Not applicable.

Code Availability

Home—XSEDE. https://web.archive.org/web/20220820060934/https://www.xsede.org/ . Accessed 15 Sept 2023.

Knepper R, Börner K. Comparing the consumption of CPU hours with scientific output for the extreme science and engineering discovery environment (XSEDE). PLoS One. 2016;11(6):0157628.

Article   Google Scholar  

Stewart CA, Costa CM, Wernert JA, Snapp-Childs W, Bland M, Blood P, Campbell T, Couvares P, Fischer J, Hancock DY, Hart DL, Jankowski H, Knepper R, McMullen DF, Mehringer S, Pierce M, Rogers G, Sinkovits RS, Towns J. Use of accounting concepts to study research: return on investment in XSEDE, a US cyberinfrastructure service. Scientometrics. 2023;128(6):3225–55.

Wernert J, Miles T, Chityala P, DeStefano L. 2022 XSEDE staff climate study annual report. 2022.

Love HB, Fosdick BK, Cross JE, Suter M, Egan D, Tofany E, Fisher ER. Towards understanding the characteristics of successful and unsuccessful collaborations: a case-based team science study. Human Soc Sci Commun. 2022;9(1):1–11.

Google Scholar  

Touloumakos AK. Expanded yet restricted: a mini review of the soft skills literature. Front Psychol. 2020;11:2207.

Kee KF, Le B, Jitkajornwanich K. If you build it, promote it, and they trust you, then they will come: diffusion strategies for science gateways and cyberinfrastructure adoption to harness big data in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) community. Concurr Comput. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpe.6192 .

Gesing S, Lawrence K, Dahan M, Pierce ME, Wilkins-Diehr N, Zentner M. Science gateways: sustainability via on-campus teams. Future Gener Comput Syst. 2019;94:97–102.

Katz DS, Proctor D. A framework for discussing e-research infrastructure sustainability. J Open Res Softw. 2014;2(1):13.

Kee KF, Schrock AR. Best social and organizational practices of successful science gateways and cyberinfrastructure projects. Future Gener Comput Syst. 2019;94:795–801.

Baxter LA, Babbie ER. The basics of communication research. Belmont: Cengage Learning; 2003.

Otter voice meeting notes. https://otter.ai/home . Accessed 23 May 2023.

Nvivo. https://info.lumivero.com/nvivo14launch-2023-ps.html . Accessed 23 May 2023 (2019).

Corbin J, Strauss A. Basics of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2015.

Lindlof TR, Taylor BC. Qualitative communication research methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 2017.

IBM SPSS Statistics. Accessed 23 May 2023.

Boddy CR. Sample size for qualitative research. Qual Market Rese Int J. 2016;19(4):426–32.

Marshall B, Cardon P, Poddar A, Fontenot R. Does sample size matter in qualitative research?: a review of qualitative interviews in is research. J Comput Inf Syst. 2013;54(1):11–22.

Yin RK. Qualitative research from start to finish. New York: Guilford Publications; 2015.

DeVellis RF. Scale development: theory and applications. development: theory and applications: Sage Publications; 2012.

Leech NL, Barrett KC, Morgan GA. IBM SPSS for intermediate statistics: use and interpretation. 5th ed. London: Routledge; 2014.

Book   Google Scholar  

Scott C, Lewis L. The international encyclopedia of organizational communication, 4 volume set. Hoboken: Wiley; 2017.

Miller VD, Poole M, editors. Handbook of organizational communication theory and research. Berlin: DeGruyter; 2024.

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank the many XSEDE respondents who contributed their insights to the study, Samuel Lonnberg and Chaitra Kulkarni for assistance with interviewing and transcription, Ariana Medina for preliminary scale development, and Craig Stewart for the kernel of the project.

This work is funded by the National Science Foundation award #2140226.

Author information

Kerk Kee, Harmony Jankowski, Richard Knepper, and Winona Snapp-Childs contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

College of Media and Communication, Texas Tech University, 2500 Broadway, Lubbock, TX, 79409, USA

Kerk Kee & Rhett Brady

Pervasive Technology Institute, Indiana University, 2709 E Tenth Street, Bloomington, IN, 47408, USA

Harmony Jankowski & Winona Snapp-Childs

Center for Advanced Computing, Cornell University, Rhodes Hall, Ithaca, NY, 14853, USA

Richard Knepper

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization: Kee, Jankowski, Knepper, Snapp-Childs; Data Curation: all authors; Formal Analysis: Kee, Brady; Funding acquisition: Snapp-Childs, Knepper, Kee; Investigation: all authors; Methodology: all authors; Project administration: Snapp-Childs; Resources: Snapp-Childs, Knepper, Kee; Supervision: Snapp-Childs, Knepper; Validation: all; Writing: all, review & editing: all.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kerk Kee .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

Dr. Winona Snapp-Childs and Dr. Richard Knepper were partially funded by the XSEDE project during part of the study (until XSEDE ended in August 2022).

Ethical approval

This study was approved by the Cornell University Institutional Review Board (#1803007842).

Consent to participate

All respondents consented to participate (please see informed consent statement in Appendix A).

Consent for publication

Included in informed consent statement (in Appendix A).

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix A: Informed Consent

Informed Consent—CORNELL University Institutional Review Board Protocol 1803007842

You are invited to participate in a survey and interview conducted by principal investigators of the National Science Foundation-funded study EAGER: An Actor-Network Investigation of the XSEDE Project. We ask that you read this statement and ask any questions you may have before agreeing to take part in the survey or interview.

PURPOSE This survey and interview asks respondents to consider the factors that have motivated their participation in XSEDE. It will ask them to describe and discuss the specific methods XSEDE uses to balance cooperation, collaboration, and competition, and how XSEDE has encouraged interactions across divisions, creating a single, coherent organization. Information collected through the interview will be used to inform project insights regarding the design and governance for future organizations supporting cyberinfrastructure in the United States. Importantly, this research will provide insight about how best to organize large-scale collaborative projects and services. As a result, the study will increase the extent to which structure, leadership, and management of large cyberinfrastructure projects may be based on sound sociological science. These results, anonymized and aggregated, may be used in publications and presentations.

Procedures for the Study If you agree to participate, you will complete an online survey and an interview, for which there is no compensation. If you have received a link to this survey, you have consented to being interviewed. The survey should not take more than 3 min to complete. The interview will take 15–60 min, and will be recorded and transcribed for accuracy.

Confidentiality Every effort will be made to keep any personal information that you inadvertently disclose, as well as project data used to identify population members, confidential. All survey results will be reported in the aggregate and your identity will be held in confidence in reports in which the survey results may be published and/or in databases in which results are stored. Should the resulting data set be made public, it will be redacted of all identifying information. Archived data will be redacted of all identifying information and stored on secure Cornell University systems. However, we cannot guarantee absolute confidentiality. Your personal information may be disclosed if required by law. Organizations that may inspect and/or copy survey records for quality assurance and data analysis include groups such as the study investigator and his/her research associates, the Cornell University Institutional Review Board or its designees, and (as allowed by law) state or federal agencies, specifically the Institutional Review Board for Human respondent Research (IRBHP) office.

Contacts for Questions or Problems Please direct questions about the survey and interview to Dr. Richard Knepper ([email protected]). For questions about your rights as a respondent or to discuss problems, complaints, or concerns about the assessment; to obtain information, or to offer input, please contact the Cornell IRBHP office at (607) 255-6812 or by email at [email protected].

Voluntary Nature of Study Taking part in this survey and subsequent interview is voluntary. You may choose not to participate, to skip any questions you do not wish to answer, and/or to cease participation at any time. Doing so will not result in any penalty. Your decision whether or not to participate in this assessment will not affect your current or future relations with XSEDE, any institution involved in this study, or the National Science Foundation. This study was approved by the Cornell University Institutional Review Board on November 10, 2021. Please reference protocol #1803007842.

Do you agree to participate?

Appendix B: Round 1 Interview Questions

For how long have you been a participant in XSEDE? In what capacity/capacities?

If you changed positions during your time with XSEDE, why and how did those changes happen?

Describe how you work with other XSEDE collaborators.

What kinds of results (positive and negative outcomes) have come out of that work?

In what kinds of interactions do you participate with your XSEDE team(s)? (How do you get stuff done?)

How do these activities and interactions give rise to XSEDE’s broader culture?

Considering the tools you use for collaboration, why do you use those particular tools?

What’s the intention between it/them? How do you use tools sequentially or concurrently to accomplish some goals?

How do you use different combinations and sequences of tools with different members of the same group?

How have interactions between collaborators (and not directly with users) worked in terms of serving end-user needs?

How do interactions between collaborators help meet XSEDE’s goals? Specifically, how have these interactions helped offer access to different resources, create integrated services, and a coordinated environment?

Collaborators in XSEDE shared the same goal; how do you think this came to be?

Who is responsible for promoting a sense of coherence in XSEDE? How does the virtual organization execute projects that require multiple authorities to collaborate on specific items?

Have there been interactions during your participation with XSEDE that have been particularly satisfying?

Can you describe how those collaborations worked?

To what extent, in your estimation, is this type of collaboration consistent across varying roles in the organization?

Have you noticed any particular breakdowns in collaboration?

Can you describe any factors that seem to be behind these breakdowns?

In our preliminary analysis, we noted that participants told us about breakdowns due to timing issues, technological issues, communication from simply being human, and balancing between the virtual and the local.

How do you think it is best to address these breakdowns?

To what extent are you funded as a collaborator within XSEDE?

Have you received any benefits (tangible or intangible) via working with XSEDE? Can you describe them?

Describe how you balance your local and XSEDE commitments, and those of your multiple projects.

Did you work as part of TeraGrid? What are the contrasting experiences between TeraGrid and XSEDE? How did the staff climate improve from TeraGrid to XSEDE?

Many collaborators in XSEDE feel overcommitted at work. Overcommitment may increase in ACCESS. How can participants better manage overcommitment in ACCESS?

How does XSEDE membership help collaborators build soft skills/interpersonal skills that make them effective members of the collaborative virtual organization?

Did you go through a process to bring you “up to speed” with XSEDE? If yes, what did this process entail?

What behaviors does XSEDE membership require members to adapt in order to thrive in the collaborative virtual organization?

How does XSEDE work to cultivate these behaviors within and among members?

With which Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) areas are you associated?

How would you describe the style (or styles) of interaction within each area?

Have you observed any differences in interactions across the virtual organization?

Given anticipated changes in XSEDE, what do you see in your future?

Do you intend to stay engaged in the national community or will you turn your focus more toward your home institution?

How can ACCESS maintain what worked in XSEDE and implement new strategies to overcome the limitations of XSEDE?

What are the facets of the hierarchical structure of XSEDE that are not reflected in the flatter structure of ACCESS?

What is one thing you noticed that you think others in XSEDE might not already know?

Appendix C: Round 2 Interview Questions

In this round, respondents were asked about the degree to which they agreed with each item on the following scale: 5 = Strongly Agree, 4 = Agree, 3 = Neither, 2 = Disagree, 1 = Strongly Disagree. They were then asked an open-ended follow-up question.

To what extent do you agree that the following activities/interactions helped create XSEDE’s broader culture?

Creating an intentional structure for cooperation across partner sites

Developing a “all-for-one” mindset

Talking about strategies during meetings

Engaging in responsive communication

Participating in socialization activities to get to know others in XSEDE

Taking care of your staff and/or colleagues, so they can take care of users

How can XSEDE further cultivate a productive culture?

Based on your experience, to what extent do you agree that the following issues contributed to collaboration breakdowns in XSEDE?

Normal communication breakdown; simply being human

Timing issues, collaborators were late to deadlines, etc.

Technological issues, and/or when transitioning to new technologies

Balancing between local (i.e., home institution) and virtual (i.e., XSEDE)

How can collaboration breakdowns be reduced further?

To what extent did the following factors make working with XSEDE satisfying?

Focusing on mission and solving problems for users

Friendly users help us grow

People from work becoming friends, leading to a sense of belonging

Seeing a variety of research get done

Broadening access to advanced computing (i.e., MSIs)

Recognizing XSEDE’s visibility in target communities

How can job satisfaction be increased even more in XSEDE/ACCESS?

To what extent do you agree that the following behaviors help collaborators thrive in a virtual organization like XSEDE?

Being a nice person; being helpful to colleagues and users

Communicating intentionally, clearly, effectively, and responsively

Being willing to trust that colleagues will come through and being trusted for the same

Always assuming the best in other people

Being open minded to new ideas and critiques

Having thick skin, putting ego aside, and reducing drama

Having the ability to change and/or pivot quickly based on users and situations

Being transparent

Being respectful

What else can help collaborators thrive in a virtual organization?

To what extent do you agree with the following recommendations to ACCESS?

Develop a more systematic onboarding process

Create a better balance between local and virtual commitments

Further cultivate trust in a virtual organization

What other recommendations would you offer to ACCESS?

What else would you like to tell us?

Appendix D: A Composite Scale for Soft Skills

Communicating Intentionally

Proactive Communication: XSEDE members communicated proactively with each other.

Clear Communication: In general, I would say that XSEDE members communicated clearly while working with each other.

Responsive Communication: I could count on XSEDE members to be responsive in their communication with each other.

Maintaining Relationships

Frequent Check-ins: XSEDE members made a conscious effort to check in with each other on a regular basis for relationship building.

Relationship Opportunities: XSEDE provided many opportunities for cultivating relationships among members and collaborators.

External Collaborations: Many XSEDE members also collaborated on other projects (past and/or current) outside of the XSEDE project.

Non-work Interactions: During virtual and in-person opportunities, XSEDE members shared respectful non-work/personal conversations.

Helping Colleagues and Users

Being Helpful—Collaborators: XSEDE members were often helpful to each other during collaborations.

Being Helpful—Users: XSEDE members were often helpful to XSEDE users during collaborations.

Remove Barriers: Intentionally being helpful to other XSEDE members helped remove barriers between organizations and institutions.

Uniting XSEDE: Making a conscious effort to be helpful to each other helped members create a sense of XSEDE as a united entity.

Trusting Colleagues

Trusting: XSEDE members often showed a healthy level of trust to each other during collaborations.

Being Trusted: XSEDE members made an intentional effort to earn trust from each other during collaborations.

Growing Trust: The level of trust in XSEDE grew over time as members worked together on project tasks.

Bigger Together: XSEDE members had to learn to trust each other in order to achieve greater outcomes than they could have individually.

Having Thick Skin

Take Things Well: XSEDE members were able to take constructive criticism from each other without taking things personally.

Respectful Feedback: XSEDE members often offered feedback in a respectful fashion.

Socialization: New members to XSEDE were actively socialized into a healthy culture of feedback and criticism.

Thick Skin: When an argument occurred, XSEDE members were able to have “thick skin” during the interaction.

Assuming the Best in Others

Assume the Best: XSEDE members consciously assumed the best in other people during collaborations.

No Ill Principle: XSEDE successfully cultivated the principle of “assuming no ill intention” among its members.

Resolve Misunderstanding: Members were able to resolve misunderstandings appropriately when they arose.

Respecting Colleagues

Feel Valued: XSEDE members felt that their skills and/or contributions were valued by others.

Respectful Interactions: Everyone interacted in a respectful manner with each other as XSEDE collaborators.

Neutral Mediator: When a disagreement emerged, neutral members were able to jump in to help mediate and moderate towards a resolution.

Remaining Open-Minded

Open-Minded: XSEDE members were generally open-minded when working with each other.

Open to Feedback: XSEDE members took feedback from each other in a positive way most of the time.

Couched in Metrics: XSEDE members tended to comment on each other’s work based on objective metrics and data-driven targets.

New Ways: XSEDE members were open to doing things in a new way, as long as the new way improved things.

Practicing Transparency

Consensus: XSEDE leadership was often able to reach consensus during decision making.

Sharing Transparently: XSEDE leadership shared decisions in a transparent fashion with members and stakeholders.

Honest Leadership: XSEDE leadership was able to explain honestly what they could or couldn’t do when explaining decisions to members and stakeholders.

Listening: XSEDE leadership listened to its members and stakeholders.

Showing Appreciation

Showing Appreciation: XSEDE members often showed appreciation to each other.

Spirits Lifted: XSEDE members felt that their spirits were lifted when others showed appreciation for their work.

Willing Grunt Work: XSEDE members were willing to do the “grunt work” because they felt appreciated for their work.

Leadership Appreciation: XSEDE leadership expressed appreciation for members’ and collaborators’ work.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Kee, K., Jankowski, H., Knepper, R. et al. Fostering a Thriving Virtual Organizational Culture: The Development of Metrics for Ten Soft Skills in the Case of XSEDE. SN COMPUT. SCI. 5 , 615 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42979-024-02980-5

Download citation

Received : 05 October 2023

Accepted : 20 May 2024

Published : 04 June 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s42979-024-02980-5

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Virtual organizations
• Cyberinfrastructure projects
• Thriving culture
• Soft skills

Advertisement

• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research