Why more Google's are needed?
I have been thinking of writing this article since a long time and finally,it is on my blog.It is said that Innovators come from companies that promote Innovation.Most of know that Google allows it's employees to spend 20% of the time to work on their own ideas 
No wonder,why Google gets so many innovators which help Google grow to newer heights.So let's see why Google has an innovative ecosystem which is difficult for other organizations to build up?
As per my understanding,below could be some of the reasons why the other companies are not promoting this culture:
a. Too much work pressure and more focus is on deliverables(especially in product based companies where Time to Market is the deciding factor of the product)
b. Services based companies are based on billing/hour (of the employee ie.40 hours per week) hence their business model does not fit in Google's category
c. Lack of research environment
d. Lack of market knowledge(by the employees)
e. People competency(Google has stringent interview session which enables Google to get the right and competent set of the people from the crowd)
f. Very attractive pay package offered by Google(which would also be a morale booster for its employees,but it is not primary for many people)
There could be multiple reasons which I might have missed out,but the bottom line is we require more companies like Google
. In fact,Microsoft also tried its hands on innovation but is behind Google to promote innovation.SiliconValley Watcher has a nice article on Microsoft V/S Google(in the field of innovation) and definitely,Google has a clear edge over MSFT.
The article mentions :
No wonder,why Google gets so many innovators which help Google grow to newer heights.So let's see why Google has an innovative ecosystem which is difficult for other organizations to build up?As per my understanding,below could be some of the reasons why the other companies are not promoting this culture:
a. Too much work pressure and more focus is on deliverables(especially in product based companies where Time to Market is the deciding factor of the product)
b. Services based companies are based on billing/hour (of the employee ie.40 hours per week) hence their business model does not fit in Google's category
c. Lack of research environment
d. Lack of market knowledge(by the employees)
e. People competency(Google has stringent interview session which enables Google to get the right and competent set of the people from the crowd)
f. Very attractive pay package offered by Google(which would also be a morale booster for its employees,but it is not primary for many people)
There could be multiple reasons which I might have missed out,but the bottom line is we require more companies like Google
. In fact,Microsoft also tried its hands on innovation but is behind Google to promote innovation.SiliconValley Watcher has a nice article on Microsoft V/S Google(in the field of innovation) and definitely,Google has a clear edge over MSFT.The article mentions :
Google is faster at innovation than any other organization of any size.And the innovation comes from the marriage of business models around useful, simple SEA/services. And just like a startup seeking a market, Google's emerging business groups rely on market validation (usefulness to users) before continuing to the next stage.Definitely,more the no of Google's , more the expectation of innovation but where are the organizations that promote innovation?
Read the complete article here
posted by Himanshu Sheth @ 4/04/2007 11:15:00 PM
7 Comments
7 Comments:
You are absolutely right about the points you mentioned about other companies. The success of Google is their Innovation. :-)
This comment has been removed by the author.
Hi Himanshu
This article urged me to give some comment.
First of all thanks for sharing it. Yes, your points are quite valid. To cultivate culture for innovation is difficult. Yes it involves allow employee to deviate from their work schedule (read Gantt Chart). Innovation also means that manager need to encourage risk taking and accept failures for new project.
And culture always set by top people in management (Founders, President, CEO etc. ) They will do it, if market demands it. Microsoft has enjoyed monopoly in desktop OS. Now it is facing threat from open source, so trying to encourage innovations for new features in Windows. While from the beginning Google provided innovative products in the new world of Internet. Now other competitors also provide search engines so Google has to come with some other new innovative products.
3 strategies to win in competition. Cost (Reduce price with cost cutting), Quality and Differentiation. For service industry first two applies. For product companies, innovation is more essential. However once prototype for innovative product is made, ‘time to market’ is more critical as the environment(market, standards, entry of new similar product) is ever changing. So in a typical product company, R&D people are encouraged for innovation and others to meet the deadline.
However for Google, I think, differentiation is the only strategy. A thin boundary between R&D staff and production (development team) staff. Its target market is all Netizens. (who use Internet). So it encourages new ideas from all level.
As being employee, most of us think Google is best employer. However probably Goggle kind of culture, organization structure is aligned to its strategy.
Regards
From
Manish
www.geocities.com/panchmatia_manish
Well said Himanshu.
Indian companies not only lack in innovation culture they lack in attitude.
yes they do earned good wealth and name from their present approch but that wil no longer ensure bright future.
You cannot be world leader by doing same stuff again and again.We started as coolies becoz at that time we just want to get us a entry into software world and US market moreover internet was missing.
Now we need a NEW infy/ wipro/tcs who wil be guided by market dynamic of present world. We now have a local customers to serve,internet and ocst of innovation is much loer then 1980-90s.
No matter how much INFY,TCS,WIPRO talk about about iinocation or cultuer they are to big to be reinvented with all new culture.
I can see lots of opportunities here!!!!!!
Hey,
@Nirmal:Thanks for your point.
@Satpal:I think we need a Google from India rather than Infosys or TCS.May be Guruji.com could turn up the next innovative thing from India.
-Himanshu
Hey Manish,
It took me two minutes to read the complete comment.Excellent obsevation epsecially Cost,Quality and Differentiation.Microsoft is definitely feeling the heat from OS and yes,it needs to catch up else it is already loosing the rat race ;-)
-Himanshu
Dear Himanshu.
Thinking blogs are open for all, yes am your new follower. But just to the blog so far ;).
Look at the statistics:
India (p.a.) - 3.75 lac B.Techs, 1000 Phd(s). Researches approx 0.26%
US (p.a.) - 75K BS, 15000 PhDs. Approx 16.67% researches
While working with an R&D Lab what I’ve learnt is that India now badly needs research, sponsored research projects more than anything. And we should actually stop worrying about Google & Yahoo(s), they are just the by products.
I agree we need more google(s), and then on the same hand we need professors and sponsors first. With the present environment we can have great product making companies but how long will they remain independent? Model is out, you make hotmail and M$ buys it.
While taking to Guruji's mentor Anurag, I realized it’s not long that they too will be eaten by a big fish soon.
I'd suggest people like you, who take the heat through your blogs should write more to influence students to consider higher studies further.
Also let us not completely take existing services giants out. I still see only TCS has given most number of sponsorships to MoMo meets, they still sponsor programs at IIITs. They definitely deserve respect for all that.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home