Does
Schmidt's description of the Google Culture make sense to you? Is this a
reasonable way to view the work that most people are doing in your workplace? As
a leader, does it take courage to have and to implement this point of view? Could
this approach backfire?
For
a manager, the right answer to the question "What is the single most
important thing you do at work?" is hiring. This is similar to sports
coaches or general managers. Yes, they go to meetings all day too, yet the
single most important thing do is draft, recruit, or trade for the best players
they can. Smart coaches know that no amount of strategy can substitute for
talent, and that is as true in business as it is on the field. From the outset,
Google's founders understood that to consistently hire the best people
possible, the model to follow wasn't that of corporate America, but that of
academia. Universities usually don't lay professors off and invest a lot of
time in getting faculty hiring and promotion right usually with committees and
not hierarchical. "Our people are our most important asset" is a well
known cliche, however, you need to change how the members of the team are
hired. The nice thing is that anyone can make them. (Schmidt and
Rosenberg, 2014)
A
workforce of great people not only does great work, but it attracts more great
followers. The best workers are like a herd: they tend to follow each other.
Most people came to Google because they wanted to work with the best smart
creatives. This is known as the "herd effect." Passionate people
don't wear passion on their sleeves, they wear it in their hearts and includes:
persistence, grit, seriousness, drive and all-encompassing absorption. (Schmidt
and Rosenberg, 2014)
You
usually hear people say they only want to work with someone they would want to
have a beer with. However, truth be told, some of the most effective colleagues
are people we most definitely would not want to have a beer with. And in some
cases they are people we would rather pour a beer on. You must work with people
you don't like, because a workforce comprised of people who are all "best
office buddies" can be homogeneous, and homogeneity in an organization
breeds failure. Multiple viewpoints and ideas, aka diversity, is the best
defense against myopia. (Schmidt and Rosenberg, 2014)
Interviewing is the most important thing you can do. Review
resumes and perform Google search. Check LinkedIn profile. The goal of the
interview is to form and opinion of him/her. A strong opinion. A yes or no.
Find the limits of his/her capabilities. The best interviews feel like
intellectual discussions between friends ("What books are you reading
right now?"). Google looks at four categories: leadership, role-related knowledge,
general cognitive ability and Googleyness (uniqueness, creativity and
collaboration). (Schmidt and Rosenberg, 2014)
Another part of the interviewing process that most companies
screw up is letting the hiring manager make the hiring decision. The problem
with this is that the hiring manager will probably be the new employee's
manager that after a few months or a year. Besides, in most organizations, who
you work for matters a lot less than who you work with. Google uses hiring
committees whose decisions are based on data, not relationships or
opinions. (Schmidt and Rosenberg, 2014)
Google's
"20 Percent Solution" encourages all employees, in addition to
working their regular projects, to spend 20 percent of their time experimenting
on what they think will benefit, develop and grow Google. This is a great
example of empowerment, creativity and innovation. Most of Google's growth and
advancements have happened because of this. For example, both AdSense and
Google News were prototyped in "20 percent time." High risk projects
usually are removed from consideration and provide lessons learned. However,
many succeed and become important businesses which in turn can create
additional opportunities. (Beahm, 2014)
I have worked
for several companies that used the "buddy system" in hiring. This created
"pyramids" competing with each other and promoting rivalry within the
organizations. In addition to this, there were golf tournaments, parties etc only
with the select few. And guess what, this was the downfall of the organizations
(along with other culture and strategy issues) and those organizations aren't around
anymore. And I have worked for several organizations that use hiring committees
and these organizations are successful and still in business. In addition, these
companies hire the best talent, aka A's, and use similar criteria to Google: leadership,
role-related knowledge, general cognitive ability and Googleyness (uniqueness,
creativity and collaboration). In addition, the talent includes academia qualifications
and above all passion.
What
can you take away from this exercise to immediately use in your career?
Apply
"Google's Hiring Dos and Don'ts":
·
Hire people who are smarter and more knowledgeable than you are.
·
Don't hire people you can't learn from or be challenged by.
·
Hire people who will add value to the product and our culture.
·
Don't hire people who won't contribute well to both.
·
Hire people who will get things done.
·
Don't hire people who just think about problems.
·
Hire people who are enthusiastic, self-motivated, and
passionate.
·
Don't hire people who just want a job.
·
Hire people who inspire and work well with others.
·
Don't hire people who prefer to work alone.
·
Hire people who will grow with your team and with the company.
·
Don't hire people with narrow skill sets or interests.
·
Hire people who are well rounded, with unique interests and
talents.
·
Don't hire people who only live to work.
·
Hire people who are ethical and who communicate openly.
·
Don't hire people who are political or manipulative.
·
Hire only when you've found a great candidate.
·
Don't settle for anything less.
(Schmidt and Rosenberg, 2014)
References
Beahm, George (2014). The Google Boys: Sergey Brin and Larry
Page In Their Own Words. Agate Publishing: Chicago.
Eric Schmidt on business culture, technology, and social issues (2011). Retrieved
from http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/strategy/eric_schmidt_on_business_culture_technology_and_social_issues
Schmidt, Eric and Rosenberg, Jonathan (2014). How Google
Works. New York: Grand Central Publishing.
No comments:
Post a Comment