Teams are essential element of organization. In a team, people work together for the attainment of a specific goals or missions defined by the senior management in an organization. There are many factors affecting the team work and organizational performance, among them include the cohesiveness of team, organizational culture, organizational values, leadership, and human resources practices being implemented Google is an organization with strong culture. It is a fast growing company in the past decades, due to its strong creativity and innovation oriented culture (Orr, 2007). It is on of the best employers of the worlds, widely respected and admired by higher education people. Due to the great success of Google, many people would like to apply to work in the organization (Goss, 2010).
Google has different departments and have a strong team oriented culture. People are expected to work together, sharing ideas, discussion and to tap on the creativity or best possible experience of each others in a team, to deliver new and innovative services to the customers. In fact, it is arguing that the ability to innovate, to deliver state of the art technologies, as well as to change fast under the dynamic information technology industry, is the key competitive advantage of Google.
It is not surprising to understand why creativity and innovation is essential for Google. This is because the nature of the industry structure is forcing the company to be creative and innovative for fast growth and to stay relevant in the industry. The strong culture of Google is giving many benefits to the firm (McShane et. al., 2010). Among them include, extraordinary organizational performance; low employee turnover, ability to maintain innovative and relevant in the marketplace, and emerging as the industry leader in the information technology industry. Teamwork at Google Abstract Teamwork is an increasingly a growing phenomenon in learning organizations. The concept is gaining popularity in this highly competitive business world as it allows organizations to maintain a creative edge and retain innovativeness and synergy in its operations. One of the most popular organizations for making effective use of teamwork is Google. Google fosters a corporate culture which not only supports but also encourages team work through project management and entrepreneurial ventures. This paper explores how Google makes use of team work and how teamwork has led Google to gain the success that it has. It also discusses the importance of teamwork and how it is rewarded at the organization. Research for this paper has largely been done through a thorough examination and literature review of academic sources and company profile.
The way that Google has structured itself and divided up the stock has put Brin and Page in a position to which they will be able to retain most of the power of the company aside from the stockholders. The questions that the other stockholders have about the way that the company is structured will not have a very large affect on the overall future of it. They will have very little say in the decisions of how to run the company.Competitive Challenges With Google’s success also came a very large wealth for not only the owners, but the staff who has invested in the stock options and work for the company on a regular basis. This could present challenges within the company because they have to continue to keep their workers happy in order to retain them. There are some contractors that may not have made as much money as others, but Google needs to also find a way to keep them motivated to continue coming up with good and innovative ideas. Satisfied employees not only increase productivity and reduce turnover, but also enhance creativity and commitment (Chen, Yang, Shiau, ; Wang, 2006). Based on the findings, Google is already having a playful variation culture in the organization for the employees. This can enable the employees to have an enjoyment environment and this will be able enhance the relationship between the employees and strengthen their bond to work as a team. An enjoyment environment definitely can let the employees to feel satisfied and subsequently will increase productivity. Apart from that, this will shape a convenient work process for the employees that will smoothen the decision making process for the management team. Google already identified the employees are the organization’s internal customers and this is the reason why it has been constantly giving employees a sense of purpose, enhancing their self-esteem and sense of belonging for being a part of the organization. The company was reorganized into small teams that attacked hundreds of projects all at once. The founders give the employees great latitude, and they take the same latitude for themselves. Eric Schmidt says that Google merely appears to be disorganized. “We say we run the company chaotically. We run it at the edge. This can adapt the culture Google and therefore they can individually to generate the ideas on their own.
On the other hand, Google hires employees that have good academic results but without practical experience and this will be a threat to Google in terms of their organization’s operation. Google is a results-driven organization and if employees with only creative ideas but lacking of skills to realize the ideas they have initially planned, this will absolutely reduce the productivity of the organizations. Google had been public listed on year 2004 and therefore Google had to take the shareholders’ views into consideration before making any decision. The shareholders had been strongly emphasizing on reducing the employee benefits due to the high cost invested on it. This leads to the organizational culture would be degraded and the employees would feel less satisfied and affect their produced results. Employees are very important asset the Google while the shareholders also the contributor of funds for Google. The management team has to weight the importance of both of the stakeholders for the Google as this will create a different organizational culture.
teamwork of all kinds is fraught with tensions, conflicts, obstacles and problems. If these are not managed effectively, rather than surpassing the best members’ capabilities, the total group output may actually equal less than the weakest members efforts” (p.351). This is known as negative synergy. This can be caused by factors such as negative equity, whereby other members of the group underperform so the other person thinks ‘why should I?’, shirking of responsibility, negative effort of group reward whereby everyone is rewarded the same regardless of effort and finally, problems of coordination, so people are obstructing others ability to get on with a task (Buchanan and Hyczynski, 20007). Collectively, this phenomenon has come to be known as social loafing (Ingham et al., 1974). In addition to social loafing, problems of group think can have a negative impact on the performance of teams. Whilst the development of group norms and behaviour can be beneficial to the team, in its extreme form this can lead to the problem of group think (Buchanan and Hyczynski, 2007). Group think occurs whereby members of the group fail to critically analyse, test and evaluate problems, issues and challenges which face the group (Murray et al., 2006). This may be caused as a subconscious desire for members to avoid deviating from the prescribed norms of behaviour and group consensus (Buchanan and Hyczynski, 2007). However, this leads to ineffective team working, which is not beneficial to the organisation (West, 2004).
Managers and team leaders play a pivotal role in ensuring that the problems of social loafing and group think does not occur. In addition managers should recognise team leaders who may advertently or inadvertently encourage the onset of negative synergy, social loafing and group think and take steps to minimise the impact of their ineffective team leadership.
Technology plays an increasingly important role on the way in which teams function (Brooks, 2006). This is because “organisations are becoming increasingly distributed across geographical boundaries and across industries” (Brooks, 2006, p.115). There are many different types of technologies that have emerged which facilitate the development of teamwork both in a virtual and non-virtual teamwork environment. The rise in computer mediated technology, which facilitates communication, planning and organisation, has broken down barriers and can contribute towards making the team more effective (West, 2004; Brooks, 2006). Virtual teams are becoming an increasingly common extension of traditional organisational structures. Brooks (2006) describes the process as the following: “virtual organisations, workplaces and teams are becoming increasingly common place. In a virtual team the member’s primary interaction is through some combination of electronic communications systems, which allows members of the team to cross time, space and cultural boundaries (Brooks, 2006, p.110).
The type of technology which facilitates both physical and virtual teams includes the reduction in costs in recent years of portable PC’s and consumer electronics and of communications devices. For example, laptops have seen a reduction in price and the majority of modern laptops come with in-built microphones, speakers and web cams for video conferencing. The cost of international calls has reduced and can even be made for free using VOIP (voice over internet protocol) technologies, such as Skype and Google Voice.
RefrencesGoss, B. (2010). Planet Google: How One Company Is Transforming Our Lives. The Journal of Communication Inquiry, 34(1), 109.