Abstract
At the heart of every competitive firm is an efficient organizational culture. This fact explains why many corporations have been focusing on organizational theory to create the best working environments that can support their business objectives. The practice has led to diverse organizational behaviors, leadership processes, and project management procedures. This paper uses the case of Google to explain why business and leadership models are usually supported by admirable organizational cultures. Google’s model focuses on fitting approaches to produce desirable products, apps, and services that can support the needs of its clients. The discussion will also address the opportunities and challenges that can be considered by Google to come up with superior practices and eventually become successful.
Introduction
Organizational theory has been developed to explore how business firms maximize efficiency, solve emerging problems, and pursue their objectives. The model focuses on a wide range of attributes that must be examined to understand how companies can be managed efficiently. Many corporations have understood how organizational behavior and human resource theories can be utilized to improve performance, leadership, and motivation.
At Google, the relationship between people and organizational culture has presented new opportunities that can drive performance. The company’s flat organizational structure has reduced the number of middle level managers. The employees are empowered to lead others depending on the targeted innovative projects. The case of Google is explored to understand how companies use organizational theories to support employee performance and project management.
Literature Review
Successful organizations launch and complete a wide range of projects within the shortest time possible. Mullins (2013) indicates that companies must develop apposite cultures and structures to empower their workers. When employees appreciate their companies’ leadership structures and cultural attributes, they will be ready to support every agenda. Human resource management theorists have presented numerous concepts that can be applied in different settings to increase productivity. However, managers must be aware of the unique hurdles that make it impossible for workers to achieve their objectives.
Bessant and Tidd (2011) assert that organizational theory fails to offer a concrete definition of culture in the working environment. This is the case because organizational culture is characterized by various assumptions, beliefs, behaviors, and norms that influence employees’ practices. Some companies have expanded the concept to include attributes such as work ethics, practices, and artifacts (Pettinger 2000). This analysis explains why it might be hard to understand the nature of culture implemented in a given organization. Hofstede and Hofstede (2010) acknowledge that companies promote specific behaviors and beliefs to ensure various goals are achieved. In project management, culture becomes a vital factor that determines the success of a given team.
Organizational behavior is a model used to study how practices within a firm affect people’s actions. The role of behavior in businesses explains why it is a critical attribute of organizational theory (Clegg, Kornberger & Pitsis 2008). Micro organizational behavior is a concept used to analyze the group dynamics and individual attributes in a given company. This element is studied by theorists to come up with adequate models that can support organizational performance.
To begin with, motivational theories have emerged to explain how employees can be guided to form teams, communicate efficiently, and establish a positive culture (Hofstede & Hofstede 2010). One of these theories was proposed by Abraham Maslow (Dulaimi & Ang 2009). Maslow’s theory asserts that individuals’ needs can be organized in such a way that they form a hierarchy. The theorist indicates that every level within the hierarchy should be considered in a systematic manner. The needs at each level must be considered before focusing on the next stages (Dwivedulaa, Christophe & Bredillet 2010). Organizational managers and leaders must meet such expectations if the workers are to continue supporting the company’s aims.
Human resource theory has emerged as an expansion of various organizational concepts and notions. The theory describes how organizational structures and behaviors have the potential to influence employee performance. Managers who understand the relevance of various HR theories can apply the right leadership structures to ensure the targeted goals are realized. Dulaimi and Ang (2009) acknowledge that there are numerous aspects that dictate the nature of employee behavior. Organizational leaders should be aware of such attributes if they are to record positive outcomes.
Group mechanism is a concept stemming from organizational behavior and structure. The nature of leadership will influence the responsiveness of different employees. Similarly, the established teams will echo the existing structure within the organization. This understanding explains why HR theories have been used in many corporations to come up with appropriate leadership models. Several structures have emerged over the years (Bessant & Tidd 2011). In a flat organizational structure, individuals are empowered to pursue their goals while at the same time focusing on the vision of the targeted company. According to Pettinger (2000), the model is beneficial because every worker is empowered to focus on the best outcomes.
Communication is streamlined since employees can liaise with their superiors depending on their levels of expertise. Managers offer insights to ensure the targeted results are realized (Dulaimi & Ang 2009). The structure has been supported by many scholars because it presents opportunities such as teamwork, motivation, proficient leadership, and decision-making. Individuals associated with the leadership model will make decisions and address customers’ concerns much faster.
On the other hand, hierarchical organizational structures are embraced in the military and corporations that follow rigid instructions. This kind of leadership makes it possible for workers to execute orders and deliver tangible results within the stipulated time (Mullins 2013). Unfortunately, the model has been losing touch in the world of project management. Companies pursuing specific projects might not benefit from it since it reduces collaboration and efficiency (Dulaimi & Ang 2009). Decisions are presented by topmost leaders, thereby impacting teams’ performance. Companies associated with this kind of organizational structure will develop an inflexible culture that affects profitability.
Clegg, Kornberger and Pitsis (2008) believe that companies should establish appropriate cultures, structures, and environments depending on their business goals. Since such aims differ significantly, managers should promote desirable organizational structures and behaviors to achieve the right results (Robbins & Judge 2013). This fact explains why companies implement unique managerial patterns and structures to achieve their goals. This knowledge encourages business leaders to embrace the power of organizational theory.
The model guides leaders to focus on various changes experienced in their sectors. Such observations can inform new developments, innovative tendencies, and organizational behaviors to drive performance. The main goal should be to promote organizational development and produce superior practices that can support the company’s agenda (Pettinger 2000).
Group mechanism theory has been expanded to catalyze new practices that can foster teamwork. This concept focuses on the nature and role of culture in every working environment. The existence of a desirable culture and leadership will promote new behaviors and improve functionality. Individual characteristics such as innovativeness, personality, values, and ethics will also emerge (Clegg, Kornberger & Pitsis 2008). Consequently, the individuals will make decisions much faster and solve emerging problems.
When the microenvironment within a company is desirable, it becomes easier for workers to promote the best strategies to deliver positive results. The attributes of the macro environment are also addressed by different stakeholders. Macro organizational theory asserts that companies should adapt to the changes experienced in their industries using appropriate structures, cultures, contingencies, and strategies (Robbins & Judge 2013). From this analysis, it becomes clear that top management should promote concepts such as leadership, motivation, team building, problem-solving, and job satisfaction to produce desirable organizational practices.
Application of Literature in the Business of World
Google is a leading provider of Internet-based services, software, applications, and computer hardware. The company is a leading innovator and marketers of products such as Android, Google Play Store, and Internet-based advertisement services. Its search engine, email, and cloud computing services continue to meet the unique needs of many customers across the world. These products and services explain why the company dominates these three industries: Internet, computer hardware, and software (Henderson 2017). Google serves customers across the globe, thereby making it one of the most successful corporations today.
The company has acquired many firms to maximize its objectives. Google’s products have transformed the way many people across the world live. Some of its leading products include Google Chrome, Google Translate, cloud storage, Google+, Google search engine, and Google Maps. It currently employs over 70,000 people globally (Henderson 2017). Google was also ranked as the best company to work for by Fortune Magazine in 2008 and 2012 (Travica 2015). It still remains one of the most admirable corporations across the globe. These statistics show conclusively that Google has a unique and admirable position to the world. Its services, products, and business model appear to meet the needs of every global customer.
Travica (2015) indicates that Google attracts employees much faster because of its effective organizational culture. The company treasures, guides, and empowers its workers using desirable strategies. For instance, the working environment is redesigned in such a way that different workers can focus on their personal needs and promote the company’s goals. The environment has childcare centers, gyms, free snacks, and complementary massages. The company offers friendly and competitive packages to its employees.
The corporation has established values that guide its workers and encourage them to establish meaningful teams. Members of every group are required to respect one another and emulate the practices exhibited by their managers. The workers are required to share their ideas with each other. For instance, the company has something known as “Thirsty Thursday”. This concept means Thursdays are used by workers to share their experiences and concepts that have been learned (Travica 2015). This practice has resulted in a successful workforce that remains innovative and creative.
Groups and teams are empowered to embrace the concept of transparency. Google’s employees communicate with each other effectively, ask relevant questions, and promote honesty (Baiden & Price 2010). Feedbacks are presented in a timely manner to ensure mistakes are identified and addressed immediately. Topmost leaders portray similar behaviors by liaising with their followers employees. Managers admit whenever they are wrong and encourage others to do so (Henderson 2017).
Humility and honesty have become consequential attributes that define Google’s workplace culture. These evidence-based practices have produced loyal employees who focus on new innovations to meet every customer’s needs.
Teams are empowered to pursue their innovative projects that can support the company’s business model. Project teams are supported using the right incentives, resources, and ideas. The managers at Google offer timely insights to ensure innovative projects are completed successfully. The company’s positive organizational culture encourages workers to share their ideas and address every problem (Travica 2015). Communication is decentralized to make sure feedbacks and suggestions are received instantly. The culture has been reshaped in such a way that individuals can pursue their personal projects without including their workmates. However, they are encouraged to borrow ideas from their superiors and teammates to maximize their potential.
The role of leadership has led to positive cultural practices at Google. For instance, leadership is a driving factor whereby employees are motivated and empowered to focus on their personal goals. They are also guided to embrace the company’s values and objectives.
Effective communication, teamwork, and empowerment are powerful drivers that have supported the company’s micro environment. Similarly, such strategies make it easier for the company to develop appropriate models that can be utilized to make it competitive in the macro environment setting (Henderson 2017). The move also sustains a powerful business model that meets the needs of external stakeholders such as business partners, customers, and community members.
Google’s promising performance cannot be understood without examining the role of work-life balance. In order to empower its workers, Google supports various exercises and sporting activities within the workplace. Employees can complete their roles at home depending on their needs or schedules. There is also adequate time for bonding and association. These practices have made it possible for the workers to learn from one another and achieve their aims. Leadership at the corporation has become a shared concept whereby individuals contribute equally to decisions and projects (Henderson 2017). Change is always encouraged in an attempt to achieve the intended goals and identify new opportunities that can maximize performance.
Challenges and Opportunities
The above analysis indicates that the success of Google is attributable to the nature of its organizational culture. The company has established a meaningful structure whereby leadership is a shared concept. The strategy makes it possible for employees to identify innovative ideas and implement project teams to achieve them. The individuals receive timely feedbacks and insights from their leaders or workmates. Decisions are made much faster, thereby making it easier for every project to be completed in a timely manner (Travica 2015). It can be appropriate to have a clear understanding of some of the challenges project teams are likely to encounter in their endeavour to deliver meaningful and timely results.
The first possible challenge arises from the nature of organizational structure. A flat hierarchy creates an environment whereby individuals tend to have similar influences. When the levels of disagreement and distrust increase, the employees might abandon their respective projects and eventually disorient the company’s business model (Travica 2015). The second challenge arises from the company’s best practices whereby projects are pursued randomly.
Employees are empowered to identify and focus on their specific projects. The main goal is to ensure every successful project is embraced and included in Google’s offerings. This kind of approach can affect the success of various projects. This might be the case when some groups decide to abandon their projects.
Project teams might be unable to deliver their goals within a specific period. This is the case because the organizational structure lacks adequate checks and balances. Some members of a given team might decide to focus on their personal objectives instead of those of the company. The issue can have significant impacts on the company’s resources and goals. Additionally, the issue of leadership might result in numerous troubles (Henderson 2017). It is notable that the organizational behavior and human resources model implemented at the company promote participation and empowerment. When individuals fail to respect one another, the project team might not complete its activities successfully.
Despite these challenges, the case study presents numerous opportunities that will continue to support Google’s business agenda (Henderson 2017). It is agreeable that the past years have been successful for the company. This achievement indicates that the existing organizational culture and structure are opportunities that can result in improved performance. Every project team can consider these opportunities in an attempt to achieve its goals much faster.
Leadership, communication, decision-making, and problem-solving are some of the best practices associated with the company’s working environment. These strategies present opportunities that can guide, empower, and make it possible for different project teams to achieve their objectives. These organizational attributes create an environment whereby every employee is willing to be part of ongoing projects (Travica 2015). The best thing is for companies to understand how to manage people and establish apt cultures that can maximize performance.
Recommendations
Several recommendations can be embraced by Google to become successful and remain a leader in its segment. To begin with, the corporation should sustain its business model through the use of its organizational culture. The approach will ensure the workers are empowered to pursue their goals and support the company’s business model (Travica 2015). The leaders should empower the workers and encourage them to pursue their goals.
The decision to improve some of the best practices such as leadership, communication, work-life balance, and collaboration can deliver better results. The workers will be empowered to embrace such behaviors and support one another (Travica 2015). Identification and implementation of new projects will be completed much faster.
The organization can implement effective timeframes and guidelines to dictate the manner in which different teams pursue their innovative projects. The move will ensure various projects are monitored and completed in a timely manner. Additional resources and ideas will be presented to deliver meaningful results (Robbins & Judge 2013).
A new practice can be implemented without adjusting the company’s culture (Baiden & Price 2010). The practice can be designed in such a way that new leaders are appointed to coordinate projects and teams. The move will minimize levels of laxity, improve decision-making processes, and ensure the targeted objectives are realized (Henderson 2017). The move will increase the level of participation and problem solving. When such aspects are taken seriously, the company will develop a superior culture and ensure every project is completed successfully.
Conclusion
The case of Google explains why organizations and people are inseparable within the realm of management. The company applies pertinent organizational theories and concepts in an attempt to come up with the best culture and structure. The strategy has created a successful corporation that competes in different market segments and sectors. Google boasts of a powerful business model that is supported by an admirable organizational culture. Project teams use the model to pursue their goals and make the company successful. Employees promote evidence-based practices such as continuous learning and sharing of ideas. The recommendations presented in the paper can be tapped to empower every worker and eventually make the corporation more profitable.
Reference List
Baiden, B & Price, A 2010, ‘The effect of integration on project delivery team effectiveness’, International Journal of Project Management, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 129-136.
Bessant, J & Tidd, J 2011, Innovation and entrepreneurship, 2nd edn, Wiley, West Sussex, UK.
Clegg, S, Kornberger, M & Pitsis, T 2008, Managing and organizations: an introduction to theory and practice, 2nd edn, Sage, Los Angeles, CA.
Dulaimi, M & Ang, AF 2009, ‘Elements of learning organizations in Singapore’s construction industry’, Emirates Journal of Engineering Research, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 83-92.
Dwivedulaa, R, Christophe, N & Bredillet, C 2010, ‘Profiling work motivation of project workers’, International Journal of Project Management, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 158-165.
Henderson, F 2017, Software engineering at Google. Web.
Hofstede, G & Hofstede, G 2010, Cultures and organizations: software of the mind: intercultural cooperation and its importance for survival, 3rd edn, McGraw Hill, New York, NY.
Mullins, L 2013, Management and organizational behavior, 10th edn, Prentice Hall, England, UK.
Pettinger, R 2000, Mastering organizational behavior, Palgrave, England, UK.
Robbins, S & Judge, T 2013, Organizational behavior, 15th edn, Prentice Hall, Boston, MA.
Travica, B 2015, ‘Modeling organizational intelligence: Nothing googles like Google’, Online Journal of Applied Knowledge Management, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 1-18.