The Unique Values and Strategies that Lead Google to Success

Fifteen years ago, google was just a number. A number so large, in fact, that no one ever needed it. Nothing of such gargantuan size existed in the real world, so google remained an abstract concept. It was never needed in math. It was never needed in chemistry. It was never needed in economics. It was never needed, in the real world, by anyone, for anything. If google had disappeared from the Earth, never to be seen again, life would have gone on just as it had before, uninterrupted.

Fast forward to today. Google is no longer just an abstract number, but rather the key interface to our knowledge base, our society, and even our own identity. Anyone with a computer interacts with Google on a daily basis. We use it for answering questions, sending emails, finding directions, editing documents, watching videos, maintaining schedules, and even translating languages. Remove Google from the Earth today, and life becomes much harder for everyone. We need Google.

But how did Google go from just some big number to a $200 billion corporation, ingrained in so many aspects of our lives (1)? The following case study will explain the history of Google, and the unique values and strategies that have lead it to become one of the most successful corporations in the world.

In March of 1996, Larry Page and Sergey Brin, two Ph.D. students at Stanford University, began working on a dissertation with the goal of developing "the enabling technologies for a single, integrated and universal digital library" (2). To do this, Page mapped the World Wide Web and its link structure as a huge graph. To explore the mathematical properties of the World Wide Web, Page and Brin came up with the initial version of the PageRank algorithm, the same algorithm that drives Google's search technology today. While the top search engines of that time ranked results simply based on the number of times a search term appeared on a website, PageRank ranked results based on the number and importance of sites that linked to a website.

After analyzing PageRank's output, which gave, for a given website, a list of backlinks ranked by importance, the duo came to the realization that their algorithm would produce better search results than existing search engines, such as Yahoo! and MSN. They realized this was what users' needed, and in September 1998, Page and Brin formally incorporated their company, using a misspelling of the word "googol" as their name, meant to represent the vast amount of information on the net that the company would organize and "make universally accessible and useful" (3,4). And so, on September 4th, 1998, Google Inc. was born (4).

It is important to note the values of Google's founders when they started the company, as those same values have remained the core philosophy of the company to this very day. Google was started by two Ph.D. students with a thirst to create a useful product that would change the world for the better. Many companies, on the other hand, are founded by business professionals, with a thirst to create an efficient, profitable corporation. Not only were Page and Brin extremely focused on a product's usefulness over its profitability, but they were also against the bureaucratic, formal, and money-centric ideologies of large corporations. Google's founders so believed in these views that they made them part of Google's official corporate philosophy right from the beginning. According to the web giant's manifest, the "core principles that drive [Google's] actions" are always putting the user first, written as "focus on the user and all else will follow," being socially and ethically responsible, written as "you can make money without doing evil," and maintaining a fun, informal, and non-bureaucratic environment, written as "you can be serious without a suit" (3). These three main points have become the mantra that defines all of Google's actions, and are the principle reason behind Google's massive success.

Out of Google's three main principles discussed above, arguably the most well-known is Google's "Don't be evil" philosophy. Although it is not literally written this way in the corporate manifest, this philosophy regarding corporate social responsibility has become Google's unofficial motto. In fact, when Paul Buchheit, a senior engineer at Google, came up with the shortened phrase as "a bit of a jab at a lot of other companies, especially [Google's] competitors" who were "exploiting the[ir] users," it was quickly written down on every whiteboard used throughout the company, so every employee would always remember that Google was there to serve its users, not the other way around (5). While Sarah Soule, a professor of organizational behavior at Stanford, suggests that many companies behave more socially responsible in response to anti-corporate activism, Google is actively socially responsible on its own accord (18). Rather than waiting for complaints from activists, Google strives to be as responsible as possible with every action it takes and product it makes, because its dedication to not being evil is one of the central values of the corporation. Google believes that by instilling a "Don't be evil" culture, the corporation is able to establish a baseline for honest decision-making that disassociates Google from any cheating and corner-cutting. This, Google believes, enhances the image, trust, and usefulness of the corporation in the eyes of users, outweighing the short term gains associated with breaking the "Don't be evil" principles (6). And so far, this philosophy has served Google very well.

The "Don't be evil" view on corporate social responsibility can be seen as early as 1998, the same year the company was incorporated. Google's founders published a paper advocating against "advertising funded search engines" because they are "inherently biased towards the advertisers and away from the needs of the consumers" (6). While Google eventually used advertising as its primary mode of profit (as it continues to today), the company always focused on its users over its profitability, which, ironically, lead to its extreme profitability. In order to make its pages as user friendly as possible, Google only shows text based advertisements, because other forms, such as images, may generate more revenue but create a cluttered page design and increase loading time, which are non-ideal for the user (3). Also, in order to make sure searches are as relevant and accurate as possible, Google refuses to sell ad placement in their search results, and rather only shows ads on the side of the page, under an '˜Ads by Google' header (3). Similarly, Google won't "allow people to pay for a higher ranking" in the search results, keeping results as accurate and unbiased as possible (3). By employing these user-over-profits policies, which stem from the initial founders' core belief in corporate responsibility, Google is able to provide the most useable, most accurate, most relevant, and most speedy search results. For these reasons, by 2004, Google served more than 84% of all search requests on the Internet (7). This, in turn, attracted hundreds of thousands of advertisers, who wanted to be seen not just in response to many search queries, but in the most relevant search queries, because that's where users are most likely to need the product or service an advertisement is promoting (7). Here, by employing its "Don't be evil" corporate responsibility philosophy on its own accord, Google was able to set the foundation for its now $23 billion per year revenue, earned almost entirely through online advertising (8).

While initially the term evil in the informal "Don't be evil" motto and formal "you can make money without doing evil" philosophy symbolized corporations that focus on maximizing short-term profits through actions that are not in the best interest of users, as Google has grown larger the term has come to represent much more. Today, Google believes being evil doesn't just mean mistreating or exploiting users, but encompasses mistreating or exploiting any aspect of our world. Because of this, Google has actively decided its corporate social responsibility must cover a much larger range of topics than its original narrow focus on the ethics of its search engine technology. Google now states it is "firmly committed to active philanthropy," and "addressing the global challenges of climate change, education and poverty alleviation" (10). This grander commitment to social responsibility can clearly be seen through Google's involvement in China, Google's dedication to user privacy, and Google's commitment to being environmentally friendly.

As a company with hundreds of millions of users, Google uses a huge amount of energy to power its servers. However, unlike many tech companies, Google strives to "implement innovative and responsible environmental practices across [the] company" to reduce their environmental impact (9). In fact, Google has committed to being completely carbon neutral. Google does this in a number of ways. For one, Google strives to have the most energy efficient operations, algorithms, and servers. Google states it has the "world's most efficient data centers" and also uses high-efficiency lighting and energy-efficient building control systems at all of its global offices (9). Secondly, Google fulfills a large amount of its energy needs using completely renewable resources. For example, Google has made a 20-year commitment to using 114 megawatts of wind-generated energy per year provided from a windmill farm in Iowa (9). Google also owns a 1.6 megawatt solar power facility that generates 30% of the energy needed to power Google's buildings (9). Google has even launched "RE
While Google's external politics have largely been defined by the "Don't be evil" mantra, Google's internal politics are mainly a result of its other popular corporate motto, "you can be serious without a suit" (3). Google believes a fun, informal, non-bureaucratic corporate environment leads to a more engaged, more happy, and more creative personnel, and so employs many practices that reflect these beliefs. One primary thing Google strives for is to be as fun of a workplace as possible. For example, Google's buildings are littered with pool tables, volleyball courts, video games, pianos, and ping pong tables. It is common for room decorations to include lava lamps, massage chairs, and large inflatable balls (13). Google offers free bikes, segways, and scooters to employees. Google also lets employees establish in-company clubs, such as the "Black Googlers Association" and the "Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Googlers Association," as well as hobby-clubs for things such as meditation, wine tasting, and salsa dancing (12,13). They offer free, first class dining facilities, custom made milkshakes, and employ a "workers can never be more than 100 feet away from food" rule. And when new movies premier, Google regularly buys out movie theatres so employees can go together and watch for free. For these reasons, it's easy to see why Google was ranked the best company to work for in 2008 and 2009 (11).

However, Google's fun work environment isn't the only reason it has continually been voted as one of the best companies to work for. Google is also known as a great place to work because of the informal, non-bureaucratic way it deals with its employees. In contrast to most large companies, which employ isomorphic principles that lead to a formal, bureaucratic work environment, Google believes that "smart people and good ideas are better than procedures, rules, or strong-armed leadership," and so does not employ scientific management or bureaucracy with its employees (13). While Max Weber, the founder of bureaucracy, would argue that bureaucracy would allow Google to be most efficient, efficiency is not Google's primary concern (15). Google's main goal is to be most useful to consumers, and satisfy as many consumer needs as possible with their products. Bureaucracy implies strict division of labor, rules, and standardization, which are the opposite of Google's goals -- to maximize the creativity and collaboration of its employees with hopes that this will lead to the best products and solutions possible. Strict division of labor would remove much collaboration between employees, eliminating potential eye-opening discussions about new and better products and solutions. And standardization and rules would stifle creativity as everyone would be doing everything the exact same way. Just like Robert Merton, a strong critic of bureaucracy, Google believes a bureaucratic environment would lead to goal displacement in workers (16). Rather than focusing on making the most useful products for consumers, employees would be caught up in enforcing and following rules in efforts to be most efficient. For these reasons, Google chooses to employ management tactics in strong contrast with bureaucracy.

For many of the same reasons that Google avoids bureaucratic tactics, it also doesn't employ scientific management with its employees. Fredrick Taylor, inventor of scientific management, would argue that Google could be most economically efficient using scientific management, but again, that's not Google's goal (17). While scientific management may fit well with industries whose profits are directly correlated to the amount of work done, at Google creativity and good ideas are the driving factors in company success. Google does not try to squeeze every bit of efficiency out of its employees, because doing so limits the employee's creativity and passion. Instead, workers are expected to take initiative, and are not constantly pushed, watched, or instructed by upper management. Google uses a very strict recruitment process to make sure its employees are self-motivated. Not only must you be the best in your field, but you must "share a commitment to creating search perfection and having a great time doing it" (13). But once an employee is hired by Google, they are given a large degree of freedom in how they perform their work, because, at Google, how efficiently you make something isn't as important as how useful what you create actually is.

Google's informal, anti-bureaucratic tactics can be clearly seen throughout the company. For one, Google has very few cubicles and solo offices. Instead, Google encourages employees to work in "Googlers sharing cubes" as well as "yurts" and "huddle rooms" to allow its employees to interact with each other throughout the work day (13). Google believes that the relaxed environment and ability to bounce ideas off of other employees at any time lead to both great products and happy workers. Here, Google is valuing collaboration and freedom, two ideas directly contrasting with scientific management and bureaucracy, which emphasize strict division of labor, standardization, and prescribed rules (15, 17). Google also employs a policy called "Innovation Time Off," which encourages Google employees to work on any project that interests them for 20% of their time at work (14). Rather than making workers toil away on one project all the time, Google emphasizes this policy to keep employees motivated, nurture new ideas, and foster creativity, three things very important to Google but lacking from Weber and Taylor's arguments. Lastly, whereas most companies are defined by a strict, bureaucratic hierarchy of authority and communication, Google holds weekly "TGIF" meetings where any employee can pose questions they have directly to Google's top execs, Page and Brin, and wholly encourages employees to "spike a volleyball across the net at a corporate officer" during volleyball games (13). In this way, Google breaks down the communication barriers commonly put up by hierarchies of authority used in bureaucratic systems to allow for more open communication channels and a more collaborative environment. For these reasons, it's no surprise that Google's corporate headquarters is nicknamed the "Googleplex," a silly name reflecting the fun and informal nature of the work environment it contains.

Google became the $200 billion behemoth it is today because of a few good ideas. While it's true that Google wouldn't have been able to compete with the web search giants without its unique idea for ranking websites, what really gives Google an advantage over its competitors is its core organizational principles, and its dedication to upholding these principles above all else. Google's commitment to users over profits, maintaining a fun and informal corporate culture, and being socially responsible has led Google to happy users, happy employees, and happy advertisers. Google has successfully made the world a happier place, and profited immensely all the while doing it.

Works Cited:
1)
Seigler, MG (2010). "Google's Big Quarter So Far Worth Over $15 Billion To Wall St. Look Out Below, Microsoft". Techcrunch. http://techcrunch.com/2010/10/14/google-q3/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+Techcrunch+(TechCrunch)
2)
Gale, Alan (1998). "The Stanford University Digital Libraries Project". Electronic Resources Review, Vol. 2 Iss: 9, pp.112 '" 113.
3)
"Corporate Information '" Company Overview". Google. http://www.google.com/corporate/
4)
"Google milestones '" Google Corporate Information". Google. http://www.google.com/intl/en/corporate/history.html
5)
Livingston, Jessica (2007). Founders at Work: Stories of Startups' Early Days. Apress Publishing.
6)
Brin, Sergey; Page, Lawrence. "The Anatomy of a Large-Scale Hypertextual Web Search Engine". Stanford InfoLab. http://infolab.stanford.edu/~backrub/google.html
7)
"Can Google Go Glossy?". Businessweek. http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_50/b3963130.htm. (2005).
8)
"2010 Financial Table". Google Investor Relations. http://investor.google.com/financial/tables.html. (2010).
9)
"Going Green at Google". Google. http://www.google.com/corporate/green/. (2010)
10)
"Corporate Social Responsibility". Google. http://www.google.com/intl/zh-CN/corporate/responsibility_en.html
11)
"100 Best Companies To Work For". CNNMoney. http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/bestcompanies/2008/full_list/index.html(2008).
12)
"Google Diversity and Inclusion". Google. http://www.google.com/corporate/diversity/bestplace.html
13)
"The Google Culture". Google. http://www.google.com/corporate/culture.html
14)
Mediratta, Bharat (2007). "The Google Way, Give Engineers Room". The New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/21/jobs/21pre.html
15)
Weber, Max (1924). "Bureaucracy and Legitimate Authority".
16)
Merton, Robert. "Bureaucratic Structure and Personality".
17)
Taylor, Fredrick (1911). "The Principles of Scientific Management".
18)
Soule, Sarah (2009). "Contention and Corporate Social Responsibility". Chp 5-6.