HR Strategies, Policies & Practices in Google Inc - Essay Example

ASB 4002 – Human Resource Management Management Report HR Strategies, Policies & Practices in Google Inc. A critical evaluation and audit of Human Resourcing Strategies, Policies and Practices CONTENTS PAGE PAGE 1. Introduction........................................................................................................................... 2 1.1 Terms of reference: ................................................................................................ 2 1.2 Overview of HRM: .................................................................................................. 2 1.3 Background: BDS .................................................................................................. 4 1.4 Organizational Goal and Vision ................................................................. ........ 5 2. Methods................................ ................................ ................................................................ 6 2.1 Data collection methods................................ ................................ ........................ 6 2.2 Issues and challenges................................ ................................ ........................... 8 2.3 Analysis................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 8 3. Results................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ 9 3.1 Overview of HR strategies & practices................................ ................................ 9 3.2 Overview of specific HR activities................................ ........................................ 10 3.2.1 Recruitment & Selection (R&S) ................................ ....................................... 11 3.2.2 Training & Development (T&D) ................................ ..................................... 11 3.2.3 Performance Management & Reward (PM&R) ................................ .............. 12 3.2.4 Employee Involvement................................ ................................ ...................... 12 4. Conclusions & Recommendations................................ ................................ .................... 13 4.1. Conclusions................................ ................................ ........................................ 13 4.2 Recommendations................................ ................................ ................................ 13 References................................ ................................ ............................................................... 15 Appendixes............................................................................................................................... 18 A – organisational chart ......................................................................................................... 18 B –SWOT analysis.................................................................................................................... 18 D – PEST analysis.................................................................................................................... 19 1. Introduction 1.1 Terms of Reference Google Inc. is a nine-year-old technology service provider based in Mountain View, California. It has been voted the number one “Best Company to Work for in America” consecutively for two years by its employees. This report is being presented to critically evaluate Google’s Human Resource strategies and practices with appropriate recommendations. In doing so, we would be looking at available information about its HR department in the light of the success of its HR policies in terms of vertical and horizontal integration and the degree to which these policies are enacted and put into practice. The limitations of this report would be the non-availability of the minute details of Google’s HR policies on account of sensitivity of the information. Our research, thus, would purely be based on available information. Let us begin by gathering a basic understanding about Human Resource Management (HRM). 1.2 Overview of HRM “The field of HRM is not one that exists in isolation. Rather, its part of a larger field of management. Reinforcing many new philosophies like that of work force diversity, downsizing, reengineering, total quality management (TQM), outsourcing and supporting this effort has made HRM an even more vital component of the management team. Similarly, the strategic nature of HRM continues to gain acceptance as more organizations look to ensure that they have the right number of the right people at the right time and in the right place.” (Sadarrudin, 2001) Role and Contribution of HR Human Resource Planning Organisational Discipline Recruitment of employees Safety and Health of Employees Training and Development Performance Appraisal Provide Compensation and Benefits Payroll Management Maintain Data Base of Employees Formulation of HR policies Models of HR Five theoretical models of HRM that seek to define the salient features of HRM: (a) Fombrun, Tichy and Devanna model of HRM (b) Harvard model of HRM (c) Guest model of HRM (d) Warwick model of HRM (e) Storey model of HRM “The review of the HRM models emphasizes a number of differences between the ‘new’ HRM and traditional personnel management. These include: strategic planning, focus on the psychological contract, importance of learning in the workplace, focus on the individual (unitarism), importance of leadership and proactiveness, a focus on line managers and an attention to measuring HR performance outcomes.” (Bratton and Gold, 2003) The Three-Dimensional Model of People Strategy (Gratton and Truss, 2003) Vertical Alignment: the alignment between the business goals and the people strategy. Horizontal Alignment: the internal alignment between the set of HR policies making up the people strategy. Action: the degree to which HR policies are enacted or put into practice, as judged by employee experience and management behavior and values. 1.3 Background Industry: Media and Internet Services Headquarters: Mountain View, California CEO: Dr. Eric Schmidt Founded: 1998 Training: 120 hours/ week Voluntary Turnover: 4.3 % “Co-founders Larry Page, president of Products, and Sergey Brin, president of Technology, brought Google to life in September 1998. Since then, the company has grown to more than 10,000 employees worldwide, with a management team that represents some of the most experienced technology professionals in the industry. Eric Schmidt joined Google as chairman and chief executive officer in 2001.” (Google, 2009) Founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin named the search engine they built "Google," a play on the word "googol," the mathematical term for a 1 followed by 100 zeros. (Page and Brin, 1998). The name reflects the immense volume of information that exists, and the scope of Googles mission: to organize the worlds information and make it universally accessible and useful. Every employee is a hands-on contributor, and everyone wears several hats. Because Google believes that each Googler is an equally important part of our success, no one hesitates to pose questions directly to Larry or Sergey in our weekly all-hands ("TGIF") meetings – or spike volleyball across the net at a corporate officer. “About three years ago an article published that Google has the best office on Earth, which their employees get the first class service in their office. Where they’re getting the free massages, gourmet meals, and professional haircuts at their beautiful campus in California. According to the result of some Google searches, the salary of a Google employee is as follows: Google Programmer in Phoenix – $174,000/year Google Programmer in California – $197,000/year Google Programmer in Chicago – $222,000/year Google Programmer in New York – $242,000/year (Smartborneo, 2008) Organisational Chart of Google Inc: Figure: Organisational Chart of Google Inc. Source: http://www.theofficialboard.com/org-chart/google “Google is a brand that is built upon a culture that is high on trust, low on politics, great at sharing resources and wealth, and full of meaning and significance. However, besides the usual and much publicised remuneration package and plush offices, deeper and more thoughtful set of factors have been identified and acknowledged by consulting firms and employees alike on why it is such an attractive organisation to work for.” (Gupta, 2009) 1.4 Organizational Goal and Vision “Larry Page and Sergey Brin, wanted to establish Google as a company that was to be seen as a company run by the geeks. The HR Department, in its alignment with the business strategy of trying to attract the best minds across the globe to work for Google, has since always aimed to become the strategic partner to the business operations. ” (Gupta, 2009) 2. Methods 2.1 Data collection methods Google is world’s foremost internet search engine company and hence a lot of information and data is available for this study. There are two types of data: primary data and secondary data. Primary data is that which we collect through methods such as questionnaires, surveys, tests and observations. Secondary data is the data which has already been recorded by someone else and is freely available to us for further research and analysis and interpretation. The examples of secondary sources are books, articles, journals, published research papers, etc. (Creswell and Plano Clark, 2003). Throughout our study on HRM practices in Google, we have used only secondary data. Though the two most common research methods constitute collecting primary data (quantitative and qualitative) are surveys and questionnaires used for the quantitative research methodology (Yin, 2002). Our work is focused on secondary data gathered through various sources. Due to physical distance and time constraints, it was not feasible or possible to collect the primary data which would have been done through various techniques such as interviews, focus group interviews, questionnaires, surveys and scales and measurements. Throughout our research we have focussed on secondary data which was already available through various published and unpublished resources in the books and on the internet. The most information and data was gathered from books published on the topics of human resource management, journals, periodicals, online books, company financial reports and statistics, etc. Our study is driven by secondary data collection. The secondary data has been assembled from the following sources: 1. Company’s information. 2. Company reports. 3. Human resource journals. 4. Internet resources. Use of secondary data in two ways: 1. It has been used in the original format and the way it was collected without modifications. 2. Then at some places the data has been modified to be made suitable for use in our study. We have identified following sources from where we have collected our secondary data: 1. Paper based resources: Books, articles, research papers, published journals, company reports, financial reports, etc. 2. Online resources: internet publications, online research papers; e.g. Human Resource Management Journal, Company databases, etc. Reasons for using secondary data 1. It is unobtrusive in nature. 2. Its collection is convenient, fast and inexpensive. 3. It eliminates the need for primary data collection which is not possible under constraints of time. 4. It provides us the benchmarks for doing comparisons. E.g. Document Analysis We will analyse one document named “The Google Story” we have used in our study. We propose to cover the following aspects of document analysis: 1. Who wrote this document? Where? When? Why? This document has been written by David Vise, Mark Malseed and Bantam Dell. It has been written in the Journal of Strategic Direction with the title: “The Google Story”. It was written in 2007. The purpose behind writing this document is to provide an insight into strategy of Google and how it became a successful company. 2. Kind of document The document is a book review. 3. Author’s point of view, biases, or credibility In this document, the author has described the various facets of Google as it has been presented in the book. He has given his personal review of book covering the various stages of development of Google as a company. It also talks about business principles and organization strategy development. His views are positive and there are no signs of any bias towards the literature. The document is credible as it is published in one of the leading journals; The Journal of Strategic Direction for Emerald. 4. Purpose of document Its sole purpose is to present a logical and precise review of a book and it succeeds in presenting the critical analysis in a simple manner. 5. Audience addressed by the document Basically students and researchers 6. Main argument Its main argument is that Google has a remarkable story of development in the world of technology and that the company has been successful in implementing effective business strategies. 7. Conclusion and evidence The main conclusion that can be drawn from this review document is that Google has been a revolutionary company in the field of technology and this can be attributed to several factors such as: influence of the founder’s families on work ethics, operation, ownership, and strategic development of the enterprise, sound business and HR strategies, environment of innovation and a conducive organizational culture. 2.2 Issues and challenges “Ethical” means in accordance with principles of conduct that are considered correct specially those of a given profession or group; Collins dictionary; (1979:502). The ethical issues related to a researcher are avoiding bias, provision or deprivation of a treatment, using inappropriate methodology, incorrect reporting, inappropriate use of the information (Kumar, 2005). It is important to release the details of the research with the study design so that readers can determine for themselves the credibility of the study (Neuman, 2000). While collecting the information, there are certain issues in accessing the data. We have adhered to Bruckman’s guidelines while doing online research. The issues relevant to our study are as following: Information has been quoted freely where it is archived publicly and officially by the company itself. All the internet research has been done in a specific social context and hence it should be subjected to a broader social context. Online community has been treated with equal respect and given equal importance as would have been the case for offline community. Limited data is available in several areas of human resource management at Google. 2.3 Analysis We have analysed the secondary information, which we gathered from various sources available online and in books, articles, and journals. We have used the following model for the analysis of qualitative secondary data. We have slightly adapted from descriptions of Strauss and Corbin, 1990, Spiggle 1994, Miles and Huberman, 1994 to suit our needs to analyse the data. The Qualitative Analytical Process (Adapted from descriptions of Strauss and Corbin, 1990, Spiggle 1994, Miles and Huberman, 1994) 3. Results 3.1 Overview of HR strategies & practices Google Inc. with 9-year age in technology and internet service provider, based in Mountain View, California, was voted the Best corporation to work for in the United State for two years by its employees. According to Gupta (2009), Google is the largest brand in the whole world today; a brand name which is set up upon a culture that is low on politics, great at sharing resources and sharing wealth, and full of meaning and significance, and high on trust. On the other hand, besides plush offices and much publicized payment package, more thoughtful set and deeper factors have been acknowledged and identified by consulting employees and firms alike on why Google is an attractive company to work for (Arrington 2009). 3.2 Overview of specific HR activities Google Inc. desires its workers to be as committed to services and technology solutions as the founders themselves were exactly when they were busy observing this vision at Stanford University during their student days. From given that everything, which the workers need for Google departments to focus on innovation and creativity, to helping these workers have the right resources and the right information for their work, Google Inc. has always focused on human resources and the human capital creation which is strongly reflected in Google organization’s vision statement. At this time known as they call it ‘the ten things’ for the reason that Google Inc strategy management was able to imagine, and more importantly, deliver this idea (Gupta 2009). Vance and Paik (2006) point out that Google Inc. is a leader in creation and innovation. It is breaking tradition and is being specialised in its strategy to make sure the availability of top human talents to meet job demands. “These values at Google Inc. has served as the operating guidelines for the Human Resources Department there in a very board and yet amicable manner. It is clear from this philosophy that Google, when formed, was aimed at creating innovative and unique solutions which would uphold the brand equity and reputation of the company not by who its employees were, and how did they dress and behave, but rather from whether the product they launched in the market could deliver what it promised or not. However, the way the HR functions and policies have aligned themselves with business model and vision makes Google the most exciting young technology company to work for and to do business with.” Gupta (2009) According to Gupta (2009), the management difficulty becomes even harder when considered, which are challenges. Google as a company has long prided itself as an untraditional workplace, almost devoid of middle management, which is obvious in the relationship and work environment in the organization. Google encourages engineers to spend one day every week after pet projects, no matter how crazy or extremely wild. Even back in 2002, while Google passed over 500 employees, its execs struggled with how to adapt this flexible managerial structure to a fast-growing organization (Gupta 2009). These days, this challenge is bigger than ever. The growth of Google was faster than any time in the company history, employs 3.6 people per day in 2008, against 1.1 in 2002. Now at over 2,200 employees, it will be hard-pressed to keep creative, lively, and, also, efficient. While Brin and Page have no experience managing an organization through such an essential stage, they have not yet passed over the operations wheel to more expert people. 3.2.1 Recruitment & Selection (R&S) According to Gupta (2009), recruitment at Google Inc. is the first and leading step on the whole human resource process. With the promise and reputation, which Google holds for a big number of technology professionals who believe that Google is their second home, more than 1300 requests are received every day by Google. The key HR philosophy at Google is hiring the right people and the median age of workers at Google is 27 years, creating a strong workforce, which is the youngest across the industry (Gupta 2009). On the other hand, the turnover data, and retention rate at Google, shows that “the organisation has been successfully able to motivate, retain, and attract the most difficult crop of employees—the Y generation cyber-generation professionals—who are prone to changing their affiliations quicker than they change their clothes”. Google hosts a lot of external events every year that reflect a mixture of their exceptional recruiting practices and their awareness of the home culture they want to keep. They are clearly seeking to attract the types of individuals to the organization who will be successful in their collaborative, open culture. 3.2.2 Training & Development (T&D) The training of employees, especially the new ones, is one of the most important challenges for the HR managers in modern organizations; the training process usually lasts up to a year (Kerzner, 2009, 178); however, different arrangements can be made in accordance with the organizational structure and the market demands. Through the training process “employees become familiar with the functioning of their organization’s departments,” (Kerzner, 2009, 178) but it is possible that training focuses on the personal development of employees, i.e. the increase of their skills in relation with the development of specific tasks—referring to the tasks delegated to them in the context of their position in a particular organization. The decision on the necessity of training of a particular employee belongs to the HR managers; the latter can use the ‘person analysis’ technique in order to decide whether training needs to be provided to each one of their firm’s employees (Bohlander et al., 2009, 314). At a next level, the Training Needs Assessment can be used “in order to determine what training employees need” (York, 2009, 202). In Google, there are many benefits provided to the employees—as will be analyzed in the section that follows; however, training is not particularly promoted in the specific organization; rather, employees are expected to be top-skilled—those graduated from top universities are preferred for the organization’s various positions (Griffin et al., 2009, 219). Training in Google is likely to be provided only regarding the firm’s new products and aim to prepare them in order to effectively present these products to the customers (Girard, 2009, 137); Choosing the most talented individuals seems to be the priority for the firm’s HR managers (Lawler, 2008, 72); the above fact leads to another outcome: the firm’s employees may not need training but instead they may easily exit the firm if a position in another firm becomes available—hiring employees less skilled would possibly lead to the need for training but loyalty of employees would be higher. 3.2.3 Performance Management & Reward (PM&R) During the years 2007 and 2008, many of the employees of Google left the firm in order to work for other companies. The main reason for this fact is identified with the ‘executive compensation’ (Griffin et al., 2009, 219). As the value of the firm’s stocks was increased, the exit for the firm was considered by employees—especially those working at high levels of the organizational hierarchy—to be a good way in order to gain significant profits. The above fact could be interpreted both positively and negatively; from positive side it is assumed that Google rewards its employees fairly; however, it can be also assumed that there is no employee loyalty in the particular organization—despite the high rewards and benefits (Scott, 2008, 53). Google offers its employees a series of benefits at such a level that many of them have become millionaires (Lawler, 2008, 72). Indicative benefits are the following: on-site doctors, excellent food service, financial support for children, extra benefits in accordance with the firm’s performance, and even weekly parties (Lawler, 2008, 72). As for the performance of each employee, this can be easily measured since the firm’s workforce is divided into small teams—in this way it is easy for the firm’s HR managers to identify the weaknesses and the strengths of each employee and take the necessary measures (Girard, 2009, 109). Employees in Google are well rewarded, but their performance is under continuous monitoring—mistakes could easily lead to the exit of an employee from the organization. 3.2.4 Employee Involvement In Google the participation of employees in the organizational activities is strongly supported by the firm’s managers; however, limits may exist—especially if taking into consideration the fact that employees in Google work in small teams and it would be difficult to imagine that the member of one team would involve in tasks delegated to the member of another team —apart from the case that he would be asked to intervene (Girard, 2009, 109). Regarding this issue it is noted by Daft (2007, 623) that “at Google people are motivated by an idealistic goal of providing ‘automated universal transference’—an activity that is related with the transfer of data around the world deleting the potential language barriers.” The co-founder of Google, Larry Page, supports that “the goal of every worker who comes through the door was creating the perfect search engine for the Internet” (Colan, 2008, 20). There is no reference to the psychological bond between the employees and the firm—no reference to employees’ loyalty to the firm—if combined by the fact that the supportive statements of employees in Google for their firm are just few (even those could be criticized as of their credibility since it would be impossible for a firm’s current employees to express their complaints for their employer) the above statement can lead to the assumption that performance and profits are the firm’s priorities—employees are treated with respect at the level that they can keep the firm’s productivity high. The need of the firm to focus on the creativity of its employees rather to their ability to work fast is also emphasized by Weber (2008, 15). Towards this direction, employees would be free to be involved in all activities related with their duties—current structure of the firm’s workforce prohibits such initiatives—in the context described above. 4. Conclusions & Recommendations 4.1. Conclusions This report shows the importance of the human resource management, which is playing vital role in success of the corporation running Google Corporation. HRM in Google has strategy of attracting the young, talented, creative, and ambitious people, and it is planning the human resource management taking into its account the company needs in the current and the future changes. Google is doing a lot of efforts in recruiting and selecting the best human resources around the world such as contributing in the world expos and events. Training is one of the big challenges, which is facing human resource management in Google, as there is need of new high skill of technical people. Training and development aspect is highly respected by Google that it is working hard to give the employees the right information to do the job in the best way, and to send some of them to university to develop their performance, Managing and rewarding performance is one of the best practises for HRM in Google, which is offering high salary rates comparing with other IT companies, but at the same time, employees can be out of the company if he did some mistakes. One of the HRM practices in Google is avoiding the middle stage management in order to cut the cost and to allow the employees from doing their jobs in effective and comfortable way. Google offers health and safe environment for its work offices, which enables the employees to do the job perfectly. Also, a lot of the facilities from which they can benefit, Google works hard to build very good relations with employees and among the employees, too, dividing them into small groups. Participations are well supported by the company mangers and high rewards come to those with good suggestions. Employees are treated with respect at the level that they can keep the firm’s productivity and loyalty high. In this short period of the firm’s life, HRM proved the success of its strategy, and it did their practices in very effective and efficient way. 4.2 Recommendations 1. Google has hard battles with its competitors (such as Microsoft Inc.) in attracting the most talented and creative people in the world especially when they finish training and become experts, so Google has to do strict contracts with employees and at the same time trying to increase the loyalty of the employees. 2. In order to recruit and select the right people with the right qualification to the right place, Google can open its own training and educational institution to give the people that it needs. 3. Google, during its global networking, has the opportunity to have online human recourse management for all the branches around the world, which enables the firm to manage the teams to work effectively and easily and it helps to reduce the costs. References Arrington, M. (2009) Why Google Employees Quit. (online). Techcrunch Available from: http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/01/18/why-google-employees-quit/(Accessed at 1 December 2009). “Best Places to Work” (2009), Available from: http://www.glassdoor.com/Best-Places-to-Work-LST_KQ0,19.htm, (Accessed on: 3rd Dec. 2009). Bohlander, G. (2009). Managing Human Resources. Cengage Learning Bratton, J and Gold, J. (2003) Student Zone Chapter 1: Human Resource Management Phenomenon (online). Palgrave. Available from: http://www.palgrave.com/business/brattonandgold/students/docs/Chapter%201%20Student%20Zone.doc (Accessed at 1 December 2009). Colan, L. (2008). Engaging the Hearts and Minds of All Your Employees: How to Ignite Passionate Performance for Better Business Results. McGraw-Hill Professional Cressel, John W. (2003). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method approaches. SAGE Publications Daft, R. (2007). New era of management. Cengage Learning EMEA David M. Berry (2004), “Internet research: privacy, ethics and alienation: an open source approach”, Internet Research (online), Volume: 14. Issue: 4. Page: 323 – 332, Available from: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/10662240410555333 (Accessed 1st Dec. 2009) Florkowski, G.W., & Schuler, R.S. (1994). Auditing human resources in the global environment. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 5, 827–851 Girard, B. (2009). The Google Way: How One Company Is Revolutionizing Management as We Know It. No Starch Press. “Google Reviews” (2009), Available from: http://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Google-Reviews-E9079.htm, (Accessed on: 3rd Dec. 2009). Google (2009). Corporate Information (online). Corport Information at Google. Available from: http://www.google.com/corporate/execs.html (accessed at 2 December 2009) Gratton, L and Truss, C. (2003) The three-dimensional people strategy: Putting human resources policies into action (online). Truss Academy of Management Executive, 2003, Vol. 17, No. 3. Available from: http://www.bus.tu.ac.th/usr/sab/Articles_pdf/Research_Articles/SHRM_Lynda_web.pdf (Accessed at 1 December 2009). Griffin, R., Moorhead, G. (2009) Organizational Behavior: Managing People and Organizations Cengage Learning. Gupta, A. (2009) Strategic HR Planning at Google Inc (online). Scribd. Available from: http://www.scrib.com/doc/13286610/Strategic-HR-Planning-at-Google-Inc (Accessed at 2 December 2009) James, M. H. and B. Amy (2005). Using empirical data to reason about internet research ethics. Proceedings of the ninth conference on European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. Paris, France, Springer-Verlag New York, Inc. J. Michael Geringer, Colette A. Frayne, and John F. Milliman (2002), “In Search of “Best Practices” in International Human Resource management: Research Design and Methodology,” Spring 2002, Vol. 41, No. 1, Pp. 5–30 Kerzner, H. (2009). Project Management: A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling, and Controlling. John Wiley and Sons Kumar, Ranjit. (2005). Research methodology: a step-by-step guide for beginners. SAGE Publications Lawler, E. (2008). Talent: Making People Your Competitive Advantage. John Wiley and Sons PAGE, L and BRIN, S. (1998) Co-founders of Google (online). Entrepreneur. Available from: http://www.entrepreneur.com/growyourbusiness/radicalsandvisionaries/article197848.html (Accessed at 1 December 2009) Sadarrudin, A. (2001). Strategic Human Resource Management (online). Suite 101. Available from: http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/strategic_resource_management/59683 (Accessed at 1 December 2009). Scott, V. (2008). Google. Greenwood Publishing Group SmartBorneo (2008). How much a Google employee is making per year? (Online). Available from: http://smartborneo.com/2008/04/11/google-employees-salary-statistics-how-much-a-google-employee-is-making-per-year/#respond (Accessed at 1 December 2009). Tashakkori, Abbas and Teddlie, Charles. (2003). Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research. SAGE Publications The Official Board (2009). Organisational Chart of Google Inc. (Online). Available from: http://www.theofficialboard.com/org-chart/google (Accessed at 2 December 2009) Vance, C and Paik, Y. (2006) Managing a Global Workforce: Challenges and Opportunities in International Human Resource Management Vise. David (2007), “The Google Story”, Journal of Strategic Direction. Volume: 23. Issue: 10 Weber, S. (2008). Organizational Behaviour - Google Corporate Culture in Perspective. GRIN Verlag Yin, R.K. (1984). Case study research: Design and methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage York, K. (2009). Applied Human Resource Management: Strategic Issues and Experiential Exercises. SAGE Publications Appendices A – organisational chart B –SWOT analysis D – PEST analysis Read More