Google’s decision to enter China was easy from a business
perspective but much more difficult when using the “Don’t be evil” indicators.
When present in China Google sometimes experienced that their traffic where completely
rerouted to Baidu – their filtered search competitor in china. Even though
Sergey Brin was against entering China, the decision was made. The idea was to
work inside China to change the system of censorship so Google informed the
user when censorship happened. Surprisingly many censorship requests from the
government was made against sites that where not illegal according to Chinese
law. When Google later came under a very serious hacker attack from China that
targeted Gmail accounts – especially from dissidents, the decision was reviewed.
Google decided to leave. For leaders, decisions are when the hard work begins. Google’s
approach to decisions is that it is not sufficient to take the right decision.
The process of decision making, the timing and the way it is implemented is
just as important as the decision itself. Even though the decision in reality has
been taken, it is important to hear people out and respect their opinions.
Decision that used to be made based on opinions and
anecdotal evidence could now be made based on data. Google’s don’t seek to
convince – they seek “ let me show you” with data. Those closest to the data
are normally best equipped to make decisions and management should let them.
Google don’t believe in supporting decisions with a myriad
of financial KPIs , Eric Schmidt is known for stating “Revenue solves all known
problems.” Google are against what they call “Booblehead yes” or the “Novell
Nod” which is agreeing in public but undermining afterwards. It is not about
getting to consensus or yes – it is about getting to the best solution that
everybody wants to rally around.
Decisions should be inclusive, cooperative, equal and
solution orientated. “Be interested in finding the best way, not in having your
own way” Coach Wooden. Deadlines are important – especially with incomplete information.
In a deadlock it is the responsibility of the most senior person to make the
decisions – a bias for action. Eric Schmidt uses the PIA rule: Patience,
Information, Alternatives to help make decisions.
In Google it is know that smart arguments do not convince
people – to convince people you need to touch their hearts. This they call the
Oprah Winfrey rule. In Google this is done by ending arguments or discussion
with “You are both right” to acknowledge the input and value from everybody.
Once a decision is made it is important that people are able to “Disagree and
commit”. If this is not possible people have to escalate the issue in public
and state why. This removes a lot of dissent.
Well run meetings can be very effective. Google has a number
of rules to ensure effectiveness: An owner with hands-on experience of the
topic, not a matter of being important, easy to kill, manageable in size, time
kept and participants involved.
Google needs lawyers like all other companies – but they do
not need lawyers like most US corporations are employing: Backward looking and risk
adverse. Instead they are using what
they call “horseback law” where lawyers are expected to ride in like a cowboy
in a western movie, access the situation and do something or leave. Most of the
time simple advice is needed rather than a full 50 page legal brief.
No comments:
Post a Comment