Case Study Analysis Google Inc. in China - Term Paper Example

?Case Study Analysis Template1 Analyst’s ¶ ¶ Case Study ¶ Google, Inc. in China I. The Pre-Analysis: A. Perspective Describe the perspective2 of the author(s) of the case study and the possible biases3 that might result from that perspective: ¶ The author’s perspective is one in which disdain for the Chinese government and its level of control over Internet content is clear. Bias is present in the stringent and rather negative assessment of appropriateness of government intervention for filtering Web content which dominates most language within the case study. When making comparisons to Western policies associated with free Internet content, the author’s bias is reflected against the Chinese government and Internet police allocated throughout the country with an emphasis on these actions being tasteless and unfortunate for business relationship and profit development. 2. My perspective4 as the analyst: ¶ Compliance to Chinese law conflicts the process of conducting a successful business model for companies such as Google. When attempting to circumvent various government-sanctioned filters, consumer freedoms are at risk from authorities charged with Web surveillance. Concurrently, defying sanctions that are not aligned or considered appropriate for Western nations such as the United States can lead to significant business disruption if (or when) the government demands complete deconstruction of Internet services such as Google. Thus, personally speaking, the regulatory environment in China creates a conflict of interest within the business model as it pertains to providing excellence in service and maintaining a filtered Web presence that does not sustain revenue growth or even brand reputation. B. State what you are bracketing:5 ¶ Personal values associated with a firm belief in the democratic process and consumer independence must be removed to avoid bias when analyzing the case study. The socialist doctrine that has replaced long-standing communist values would, according to various theories, be associated with promoting liberties for consumers and giving them more ownership over business and personal lifestyle. An enduring and genuine distaste for oppressive regimes must be bracketed to avoid incorporation of personal values associated with analysis of the case study. II. The Situation6: A. List the facts7 relevant to the issue(s) identified: ¶ Deciding whether to defy regulatory authorities to provide a richer and more liberal Internet experience is conflicted by the high volume of policing officials dispersed throughout China. The sophistication of Chinese filtering poses many risks to a business model that is designed to extend breadth of knowledge to consumers, having built this capacity in a free nation where such issues are not a business risk. From human capital to technologies, non-compliance to regulatory demands is going to be noticed by government regulatory forces and, thus, businesses providing Internet content cannot avoid these filtering obligations if the business is to remain sustainable in a foreign nation. B. List the facts that comprise the historical context relevant to the issue(s) identified: ¶ The physical structure of the Internet in China that was developed since allowing Internet services in 1999 provides ample opportunities for enforcement of laws associated with content sanctions. Furthermore, recruitment of private citizens in the enforcement and reporting processes seriously conflict attempting to avoid establishing government-mandated controls and filtrations and expanded the reach of enforcement against these laws. The totalitarian regime in China is long-standing, developed under previous communist-oriented government frameworks. The Chinese government also was not forthcoming in establishing clear and concise frameworks to define compliance to Internet censoring. Lack of clear language made the process of complying with laws, while also attempting to improve profitability in China, created a need for innovation at Google to satisfy all stakeholders associated with the business model. C. Provide quotations by the author(s) of the case study that may indicate bias8 and could possibly influence the reader apart from the simple statement of facts. State why the quotations seem to indicate bias. Do not provide more than four instances. ¶ “China remained entrenched in a system of brutality that enforced rules and regulations through its totalitarian regime”. This particular quote from page six of the case study illustrates bias against oppressive governments. This bias creates a perception in the reader that despite a government-supported promise to provide more freedoms and liberations under a more democratic/socialist national model, the environment is not conducive to promoting liberties. This is not necessarily supported by sourced evidence. “Instead of using their power and creativity to bring openness and free speech to China, they have caved into Beijing’s outrageous but predictable demands, simply or the sake of profit…they enthusiastically volunteered for the Chinese censorship brigade”. This quote from page 15 of the case study illustrates bias from Representative Tom Lantos as it relates to comparisons between a liberal government model (The United States) and what he deems oppressive Chinese government authorities. This bias tends to illustrate that he believes corporations are not making adequate or relevant decisions that express personal liberty and independence in business and, instead, are bowing to regulatory forces. This bias is associated with Western beliefs in business ethics while also sustaining and securing business profitability which is a common set of values and principles in American government. This bias could illustrate to the reader that businesses operating abroad are simply profit machines that do not consider the long-term needs of foreign consumers. III. The Analysis: A. Situational Analysis 1. Who are the key principal parties involved in the case study? Briefly identify them. ¶ The parties involved in the case study include consumer stakeholders in China. They are the primary revenue-building drivers for Google (and many other competitors such as Microsoft). Securing their allowed liberties and also guaranteeing their safety from regulatory oppressive forces makes them highly involved in Google’s business model. Another stakeholder group is the Chinese government that has interests to protect for issues of national security, regardless of whether American businesses support these practices. Yet another principal party is the leadership at Google, conflicted between profit maximization goals and compliance to foreign laws. 2. What are the key processes used by the principal parties to resolve the conflict(s) described in the case study? Describe the processes used.9 ¶ The main conflict in this case study is how to comply with regulatory forces without limiting profitability opportunities and brand development. Google strikes a quality balance to reduce conflict and risk from the business model by adapting Google.cn with appropriate notifications about filtering technologies and regulatory forces. Notifications reduce the intensity of regulatory forces in China that are against free content distribution while also securing the longevity of the business in this nation. Conflict is also reduced by establishing more privacy for Google mail users, in this case Gmail, which was being operated outside of the Chinese environment. Keeping true to the company mission to not be evil also extends to consumer protectionism. In this way, consumer satisfaction and loyalty can be maintained while also not supporting further conflict with the Chinese government that might demand personal information be disseminated to the government in an effort to prevent government subversion. 3. What are the constraints10 upon decision-making regarding the issue(s). How do the constraints impact the decisions made? Describe the constraints for the primary corporation(s) discussed in the case study. ¶ The Chinese government maintains the human capital and technologies necessary to achieve successful enforcement of Internet controls and regulations. Google attempting to circumvent some of these restrictions could easily be conflicted by flexibility and know-how in the government and deplete relationship development between the government and Google. Constraints in this case include adaptability, breadth of enforcement officials both public and private, and more costly systems maintained out of the host country to ensure more consumer protectionism and privacy. Constraints are also present with American Congressional authority as it relates to regulating or supporting foreign business function. The U.S. government is working politically to attempt to strengthen trade relationships with China for national profit-seeking opportunities. If businesses representative of American interests is involved with disputes or other conflicts with foreign business, it can conflict the process of attempting to establish diplomatic relationships. Therefore, Congress is authorized to demand answers and explanations for why operations on foreign soil are leading to government/business conflicts. Congress, itself, serves as a restraint for companies that want independence in providing a foreign-oriented business model of operations. 4. What role, if any, did chance events beyond the firm’s control (in the sense of fortune or fate) play in the decisions made by the primary corporation discussed in the case study and in the outcomes of those decisions as a result? ¶ It is clear that there is a disparity between Chinese publicized values and actual government practices. It is absolutely beyond the control of Google (and competition) to attempt, as a long-term strategy, complete circumvention of filtration systems or other content-controlling efforts. The government is not, anytime soon, going to abandon the more oppressive and sanctioning efforts related to consumer Internet content allowances. Because of this, compliance becomes a critical issue that must occur, regardless of the methodology by which the business decides to incorporate compliance into its business model. Google simply had to comply or face complete dejection from the country that would significantly impact future profitability. 5. Contrast the differing values11 among the key principal parties as they affect the decision-making process. ¶ These are easily recognized in the case study. American business leaders and government have a very clear dislike for non-democratic government regimes. At the same time, Chinese government strongly applauds and provides resources to ensure that totalitarian values are reflected in the business regulatory environment. Some dimension of inflexibility stemming from U.S. business leaders and government in regards to sustaining strong national values and superiority associated with democracy affects decision-making. Google needs to satisfy key stakeholders in the home country of operations, holding onto an ethical and moral system of business and seems, based on the case study, disturbed by the difficulty in finding a common ground that will drive a successful Chinese business model. Microsoft, as another example, seems to have a belief in the integrity and power of its own Internet services when making decisions that differs from the values of other competition. Microsoft simply builds compliance measures into the environment, claiming that their presence being removed from China would have serious implications for the consumer segments. This creates a situation where the government would get used to compliance from competition, maintaining negative attitudes towards companies that do not simply defer to regulatory authorities. The long-term implications for Google is clear when companies like Microsoft use their strong ethnocentrism or over-reliance on business integrity to avoid trying to apply pressure on Chinese government officials to remove some restrictions and content controls. Google has a more liberal and ethical business stance about its own relevancy, a rather humble stance, that strikes a quality balance between submission and dominance needed to change values with government authorities. 6. What biases or cognitive errors12may have influenced the decision-making by the leadership of the principal corporation? Use only those biases and cognitive errors based upon scientific research and/or discussed in class. Explain the bias or cognitive error that you have identified as it occurs in the case. ¶ There is only one faulty assumption representing a cognitive error in the Google business model. Google trusted in advisors that believed once a freedom door was opened, it cannot be closed. Google allowed national pride in American systems to drive a new non-compliant attitude that did not lead to effective results. 7. What were the impacts of the decisions being made on building a sustainable organization (as this term is defined in the course)? In your response, discuss whether the decisions being made increased or decreased the achievement of long-term objectives and why and how that relates to building a sustainable organization? ¶ Moral leadership is the primary element of sustainability in Google’s model that is recognized by business theory. The business concurrently provides for operations-quality leadership by establishing a balance between consumer service provision and compliance measures. Maintaining its moral and ethical stand will, in the long-term, provide more value to government/business relationship development and embed an appropriate and accepted business model to satisfy regulatory forces in China. Moral leadership and operations-quality focus greatly increase achievement of long-term strategies. 8. Identify unexamined presuppositions13 regarding the decisions made by the key firm and, if you wish, other key parties. State how the unexamined presuppositions may have compromised the company’s or other key parties’ welfare. ¶ Consumers, in 1989, attempted to rebel against a totalitarian regime. They were not successful. Google is making decisions with the assumption that there is a widespread consumer need to combat oppression and sanctioning by the government. By continuing to come up with innovative methods to circumvent sanctions and controls by the government, Google jeopardizes the welfare of citizens that could be corralled by prosecuting bodies if the business is forced to supply important private information about consumers using the Internet. B. Organizational Analysis: The questions in this section are about the effects of the decisions made upon the primary business organization discussed in the case study.14 1. Effectiveness, Efficiency, and Efficacy15: a. Were the actions under analysis necessary to the effectiveness, efficiency, and/or efficacy of the primary corporation discussed? If the answer is “yes,” Why? If “no,” why not? ¶ Yes, absolutely, the actions improved effectiveness of Google in China, improved efficiency in working with Chinese regulatory forces as it pertains to relationship development necessary to longevity in the country, and also efficacy by giving leadership experiential knowledge about working with an oppressive government so as to create self-sustainable business operations in the model. Efficiency is also witnessed by establishing a technological infrastructure that provides more consumer safety, without imposing significant operational problems in the business. b. Did the actions taken increase or decrease the effectiveness, efficiency, and/or the efficacy of the primary business organization discussed? Was the result achieved the one intended? Explain. ¶ All actions increased all three dimensions. Certain areas of the business model tested non-compliance and found effective security provisions for consumers in the process while also satisfying the business needs. Operations and quality go hand in hand for effectiveness and efficiency and Google was able to establish an appropriate balance of compliance and non-compliance that prevented backlash against the business. Efficacy is improved by testing these scenarios and allowing more autonomy for establishing relevant and viable business practices. 2. Risk16: a. Was risk at an optimal level for the primary business organization discussed at the time of the actions under analysis? ¶ Risk was not anywhere near an optimal level. The presence of regulatory forces and threats associated with non-compliance could have served to conflict nearly all aspects of the business. Threats from the external market, namely government, were largely out of the control of Google leadership, but imposed considerable costs and labor requirements in order to sustain a cohesive business strategy. Risk avoidance in this case was quite difficult and not combatable using existing resources. b. Was risk at an optimal level for the primary business organization discussed following the actions under analysis? ¶ No, there is no impact to risk as the Chinese government is highly inflexible and demands further sanctioning and control over Internet content. Google was able to satisfy Congress and other American business leaders, and also sustain profitability, however all efforts did not undermine the risks imposed by an oppressive government regime. 3. Operations-Quality Leadership, Stakeholder Management, Moral Leadership, and Environmental Leadership:17 a. At the time of the event(s) related in the case study, was the primary business discussed effectively practicing operations-quality leadership, stakeholder management, moral leadership, and/or environmental leadership? As part of your response, characterize the extent to which the primary business organization had implemented these approaches to management. ¶ Yes, absolutely Google was ensuring sustainability from the start. Quality and operations were directed at consumer audiences to determine how best to serve their needs. Moral leadership was present in the company’s vision and was shared by a very dedicated and cohesive organizational culture. Staying true to these moral values engaged primary stakeholders more effectively and drove nearly all decision-making. b. What is the evidence for your judgment? ¶ The constant reinforcement of moral values under the “don’t be evil” mission and philosophy illustrates an approach to building sustainability. Stakeholder management included satisfying regulatory forces and also working consistently to provide consumers with the level of content they would require and efficiency of service delivery. Honesty, by using notifications about filtering and compliance, reinforced this moral integrity. C. Societal Analysis. What were the effects upon differing parts of society (or societies) of the decisions made?18 ¶ Chinese government did not seem to appreciate the efforts of Google to attempt to circumvent its sanctions and controls. This damaged key relationships that are required when operating in a foreign country that can provide incentives and advantages once these relationships are established. There was clearly a great deal of power distance created by radically-conflicted Western versus Communist-style values that impeded business developments. IV. What are the questions expressing the key issues19 in this case study that are relevant to this class in Business Environment? ¶ The key question relevant to business is how to develop a viable and efficient business model when external market forces impose threats and risk. In the United States, a highly individualistic culture, innovation in strategy development and operations represent willingness to accept risk to attain long-term goals. When working with non-Western government and cultures, a business must be prepared to be highly flexible as external market forces, mostly political and social, can severely conflict the process of simply transferring an existing business model to save costs. The adaptability required in foreign operating environments demands that companies such as Google be ready to radically revamp existing business strategies. V. The Analyst’s Position: As the analyst, state and argue for your own viewpoint regarding the issue(s) identified. Include within your argument, the evidence20 that supports the viewpoint you have taken. ¶ The case study clearly illustrates that Google was constantly thinking and innovating methods of ensuring non-compliance without damaging relationships with the Chinese government. Establishing offshore hosting capabilities for consumer privacy and security is one example of where flexibility and cost reallocations are necessary to achieve business goals while also striking a balance with other stakeholders having diverse needs. Read More