Google Organization Analysis Essay Example

Google Chrome browser, Picasa for photo organization, and Google Talk for instant messaging. Additionally, as a significant player in mobile operating systems with Android, they are the owners of YouTube—the largest video-sharing site.

SWOT analysis

• Strengths
  • strong brand name
  • continuous innovation and growth
  • word-of-mouth publicity
  • broad target market
  • leader in more different markets
  • challenger in several markets
  • a chain of products
  • significant growth
• Weaknesses
  • dependent mostly on its search based marketing
  • data protection issues
  • size issues (grows very fast)
  • products and services integration is quite heterogeneous
• Opportunities
  • because of the broaden product range it is always possible to reach new groups/segments
  • new products
  • new innovations
  • new acquisitions
  • increase internet usage
• Threats
  • lost control over the giant organization
  • increasing level of competition in every market segment

Organizational structure
The founders of Google named the search engine they made "Google," this was meant as a play on words "googol," the mathematical term for a 1 followed by 100 zeros. The original idea was that it should reflect immense volume of information which they would create in Google. Looking at the organization structure of Google the name and meaning seems appropriate since it is so complex.

Google

is employing a functional organization structure where the market is unaware of the individuals responsible for the product. Though the top four or five individuals are not associated with any specific product, those lower in the hierarchy are not given due recognition and are more easily criticized by the market. The absence of prominent product champions, as seen in other start-ups, is likely hindering the success of Google products in the market. The public remains uninformed, perhaps prompting Google to consider restructuring its management on a product-centric basis and appointing a product organization leader accountable for the product's achievement.

The text emphasizes the significance of public presence in promoting, launching offensive actions, and defending products in the competitive market. One proposed solution is to establish subsidiary companies for different product categories. This approach fosters an entrepreneurial spirit among personnel associated with each company as their future and income rely on the success of their respective subsidiary. By doing so, it prevents reliance solely on Google's search success to mask failures in the marketplace. The main issue discussed in the selected article is that due to rapid expansion, the company has become rigid compared to Silicon Valley's fast-paced standards. The decision-making process is described as cumbersome and slow, which is particularly apparent in an industry where start-ups can outperform giants within months. Mr. [Page], as the chief executive, bears responsibility for addressing these challenges.

Google, an aging giant that once moved fast as a hot start-up, is currently facing various challenges. Despite still being immensely powerful and successful, Google is losing employees to newer and more popular start-ups. Additionally, it is being influenced by government regulators and competitors

such as Facebook, Apple, and Amazon, as they all strive to capture people’s online attention. Though Google has achieved success in areas like mobile and display advertising, it has encountered difficulties in expanding into other industries like television.

Changes within the organization have occurred due to internal events. The company has experienced rapid growth, resulting in a disorganized organizational system that is challenging to manage. This slowdown in the company's response time is unacceptable for an innovative organization operating in the fast-paced Internet world. To remain dynamic and adaptable to market changes, addressing this issue is crucial. Comparing the largest companies globally highlights Google as having the least organized system.

Google is being affected by various external influences, such as competition and concerns about consumer privacy protection. These factors have required the company to make a structural change in order to stay competitive. One major challenge for Google is the increasing competition from social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter. These platforms prevent search engines from accessing shared information, making them attractive spaces for advertising. Additionally, Microsoft's search engine, Bing, competes with Google but has a smaller market share (12.7% compared to Google's 62.6% in the United States). However, Bing's market share is growing while Google's is declining. Another important factor is Google's acquisition of Android, a software developer in 2005 that has strengthened its presence in the mobile phone market.

Although Microsoft launched its operating system, the company is now encountering heightened competition in this particular market. Additionally, it has received criticism concerning privacy and copyright matters, and is presently under investigation by European antitrust authorities for potential unfair practices directed towards competitors. As a result, it

is imperative for the company to establish a more robust and transparent organizational framework to tackle competition across diverse markets and effectively navigate future obstacles.

A mission and vision statement is essential as it provides employees with a distinct understanding of the organization's objectives. It also acts as a roadmap for decision-making and positioning the business in the market. Establishing this forward-thinking vision is crucial for effectively influencing the board of directors and inspiring employees to create a comprehensive strategic plan encompassing various tactical elements. Cultural analysis of markets.

Google has established numerous offices worldwide to emphasize the importance of specific market areas for their product/service. These offices serve as key locations for generating profits through advertising and maintaining strong consumer relations. It is worth mentioning that some of Google's largest offices, such as those in Zurich and Moscow, are situated in Europe.

Upon inspecting the map, it becomes clear that offices are primarily found on the East coast of the United States and in Europe. Europe has the highest level of linguistic and cultural diversity in the Western world. The objective of the project is to find a new organizational structure that will enhance the chances of achieving future goals optimally. Moving ahead, Google is closely observed, scrutinized, and reported on extensively online, with both major and minor competitors analyzing every action taken by Google.

Google's rapid growth into various sectors and constant acquisitions has positioned it strongly to dominate multiple aspects of the Internet. However, it is important to remember that not all Google ventures are successful, such as the failure of Google Answers and the demotion of Froogle. Expect numerous announcements from Google in the future.

Leavitt's Diamond model illustrates the independence of each element in an organization – people, tasks, structure, and technology.

The text states that any changes made to one element of an organization will have an impact on the entire system. For example, altering the organization's structure will affect communication patterns and introducing new technology may require new goals to be formulated. The objective is to restructure Google's organization in a less complex manner, while considering the existing culture and minimizing disruption for employees. This change strategy aims to transform the diverse business into a more suitable one.

If the composition, planning, and structuring of the change is done well, the resistance from employees, which is common when changes occur in businesses, will be minimal. By going through the change circle as shown below, employees will adapt to the change, making the restructuring process easier for Google. This could also result in additional necessary changes within the organization.

However, as a first priority, restructuring the organization would be necessary. According to McGregor, managers use two different approaches to manage their employees, which are based on two contrasting views of human nature: negative ("Theory X") and positive ("Theory Y"). By analyzing the relationship between managers and staff members, McGregor realized that managers' perception of individuals' nature is influenced by different assumptions, as shown in the table below.

Theory X is an authoritarian view that results in direct regulation and strict control of all the variables of organizational behavior. This theory assumes that people largely require coercion, supervision, and motivation through punishment or fear of punishment. In Maslow's framework, managers who adhere to Theory X believe that people need to be controlled at

the lower levels. According to McGregor's theory, this is the most prevalent approach. In our case, Google management is utilizing the Y model.

In this company, the preference is to flatten the hierarchy in order to give more value to geek talent. According to Merrill, the tech ladder is more valued than the management ladder. Performance management is open and transparent across the entire company, with everything being a 360-degree public discussion. A distributed, public performance management system automates the complete process, requiring discussion and providing data and calibration. The theory of higher Y is supported by employees and promotes broad participation by all members of the organization in decision-making, granting them greater responsibility and opportunity to take risks. It also emphasizes the importance of optimal group relations in individual motivation. McGregor's theory received widespread recognition and criticism for its simplified approach. Kurt Lewin's 3 Phases Change Management Model, developed by the American social psychologist, is still widely used in practice management organizations.

In an organization, there are two groups of factors that interact to maintain balance and stability or provoke change. The process of change can involve strengthening or weakening constraints, or a combination of factors that leads to an imbalance. Managers should focus on reducing the impact of limiting factors more than encouraging strength, as this would result in increased resistance.

Lewin postulated that the process of change undergoes three stages. Firstly, in the "Unfreeze" stage, individuals within the organization are enlightened about the actual situation to stimulate their realization of the need for change and exploration of alternative solutions. Moreover, this phase should furnish information regarding novel techniques and their potential outcomes. Secondly, during the

"Transition" phase, the management should manage all modifications and actions, establishing new behaviors and values. Lastly, in the "Freeze" stage, all new alterations are solidified and incorporated.

It is crucial for employees to verify the effectiveness of new methods and integrate them into their routines. The importance of this hidden aspect should not be overlooked, with the only concern being to determine the extent of the "freezing" process. In his 1995 book "Leading Change," John Kotter introduced an eight-step change process that assists organizations in successfully managing changes, improving their comprehension of change management, and offering direction on the required steps and desired outcome.

Step One: To create urgency, analyze the market situation, assess the company's competitive position, and identify any existing or potential crises and opportunities.
Step Two: Form a powerful coalition by bringing together influential members and encouraging participants to form teams and work collectively towards reform.
Step Three: Create a shared vision for change.

Steps Four through Seven are crucial in increasing employee engagement and devising plans to accomplish the desired future. Sharing the vision can be achieved by employing accessibility statements, metaphors, analogies, and showcasing instances of successful team conduct. Eliminating obstacles entails modifying existing structures and responsibilities that oppose the new vision, while simultaneously fostering creativity and encouraging calculated risks. Ultimately, generating short-term victories aids in reinforcing and commemorating advancements made towards realizing the fresh perspective.

Plan and achieve the immediate outcomes (mandatory planning of first steps, rewarding and promoting early success) Step Seven: Build on the Change Attach to achieve and enhance the transformation (creating an atmosphere of trust in new approaches, changing staff and disseminating successful experiences throughout the whole organization)

Step Eight: Anchor the Changes in Corporate Culture by formalizing the rules of conduct, building a relationship between performance and rewards, and creating conditions for the development of new qualities of employees). Evaluation

Google has a unique organizational structure compared to other companies. It consists of multiple shareholders, branches, and categories, making it challenging to maintain a defined organizational structure. The company's culture emphasizes informality, equality, involvement, and empowerment while avoiding bureaucracy. By minimizing bureaucracy, Google aims to foster prompt development of innovative ideas by its engineers. However, it is important to establish a foundation and clear structure for employees, including engineers, to ensure alignment with the larger goals.

Thus, Google can address its issues by dividing its organization into distinct categories, resulting in a more horizontal rather than vertical organizational structure. This structure should align with the company's business goals and objectives and serve as the foundation of its culture. Furthermore, it impacts employee behavior, performance, motivation, and cooperation. To be effective, organizational structures need to be adaptable to process demands and potential changes while maximizing the utilization of resources and workforce input.

The text emphasizes the importance of organizational structures that are flexible, encourage employee creativity, and effectively utilize the skills and abilities of the workforce. One suggested structure is a functional organizational structure, which groups employees based on their positions or tasks. This structure offers benefits such as improved communication among specialists, increased teamwork and shared knowledge, and faster decision-making. For Google, a functional horizontal organizational structure is considered the most suitable solution.
Sources:
- http://www.google.ru/imgres?q=theory+x+and+theory+y&um=1&hl=en&newwindow=1&tbm=isch&tbnid=rYbrJ1LCU65GzM:&imgrefurl=http://www.betacodex.org/node/508&docid=cQsQGFU3-jPPFM&imgurl=http://www.betacodex.org/sites/default/files/theory-x-
- http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/google_inc/index.html?scp=1&sq=google%20organization&st=cse
- http://www.google.com/intl/en/about/corporate/company/execs.html
- http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/13/technology/13google.html