Google's Struggle | Develop and Refine Superior Systems and Principles of Organizing People

Jan 1, 2012
|
Self Management Institute

Numerous management books, and countless magazine and newspaper articles, have examined Google's innovative way of organizing over the past few years. Specifically, writers and academics alike have marveled at Google's unique tactic for inspiring innovation: allow each employee "flex" time--discretionary time that they can spend on the project of their choice. As the project grows "legs" (that is, as it begins to show some promise), it's the employee's responsibility to lobby his co-workers and managers for additional resources.

It's a genius concept: we've always intimated that when employees are allowed the freedom to direct their own work, and to pursue their ideas, that they'll be more satisfied with their work, AND they'll likely be more innovative. It's a fundamental principle of Self-Management.

The thing is, Google has grown to a company some 20,000 people strong. And, despite their innovative flex-time program, ultimately, in order for a project to progress past the initial stages, it needs to be endorsed by the company leadership (who then assigns employees to work on the project in their non-flex time). Basically, the project can only go so far with a group of employees committing their flex-time to the project; ultimately, it has to pique the interest of someone up the chain of command, thereby "legitimizing" the project.

What Google really needs is to fully embrace the principles of Self-Management. A news story this week in the Wall Street Journal implies that Google is starting to see some attrition (workers are leaving, frustrated that they can't get their projects through the bureaucratic red-tape, even at a relatively egalitarian company like Google). Worse, some of these employees are taking their ideas elsewhere--to another "start-up" company that'll embrace the concept and give it full attention.

Google will be an interesting company to watch over the next few years. They've been very successful at minimizing bureaucracy as they've grown, but maybe they've reached the tipping point. The question is will they recognize the situation for what it is, and expand on the principles that have enabled them to be so successful for so long (the principles that are so similar to those of Self-Management), or will they look elsewhere and fade off into relative obscurity while some new start-up steps in and out-innovates them?

Stay tuned...

Read the Wall Street Journal story here