A Critical Analysis of Leadership and Motivation at Google

This report provides a critical analysis of leadership and motivational theories as implemented by Google, a leading technology company. The report begins with an examination of Google's motivational strategies, including the application of Herzberg's two-factor theory, Maslow's hierarchy of needs, and McClelland's theory of needs. It then delves into the leadership styles of Google's CEO, Sundar Pichai, highlighting his key practices and their impact on the company's success. Finally, the report analyzes Google's organizational structure, discussing how it contributes to the company's overall profitability and global presence. The analysis covers various aspects of Google's internal management, employee relations, and strategic approaches, demonstrating how these factors contribute to its leading position in the technology industry. The report emphasizes the importance of effective leadership and motivational techniques in achieving customer satisfaction, enhancing productivity, and gaining a competitive edge in the business environment.

Leading
Business
Organisation

TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................1
TASK 1............................................................................................................................................1
Critical analysis of the motivational theories undertaken by Google.....................................1
TASK 2............................................................................................................................................7
Critical analysis of Google's CEO leadership styles..............................................................7
TASK 3............................................................................................................................................9
Analysing the organisational structure of Google in the light of achieving corporate success9
CONCLUSION..............................................................................................................................11
REFERENCES..............................................................................................................................13

INTRODUCTION
Leading business organisation has become a growing phenomenon in today's tough
trading business environment. It has become a mandatory process to lead the business operations
of an organisation in an effective and exotic way. Doing this helps the business to meet the
highest level of customer satisfaction which will benefit the company to increase and enhance its
overall productivity. Moreover, with the help of an effective leadership and management
techniques the company finds it easy to gain global exposure in an impressive way (Osterwalder,
2010). In context with such case scenario, the present report highlights the crucial role of
leadership and management theories in the well established international company, Google. It is
the leading technology company which specialises in rendering internet related services in a
much vibrant manner. The services range from online advertising technologies and software
including cloud compounding. The report lays significant concern over how the company
motivates its employees and how its organisation's structure contributes to the overall
profitability of the company.
TASK 1
Critical analysis of the motivational theories undertaken by Google
In today’s corporate and hyper competitive business environment, it becomes a difficult
task for every company to sustain long in such an environment. In order to maintain competitive
edge in the international market, every organisation should lay its significant concern over
treating its employees as core asset for the company rather than mere cost to the company. The
corporation should put all its efforts in maintaining positive and friendly work culture which
motivates its employees to generate best results in less time. In addition to this, the company
should also emphasize on reducing work load and creating friendly environment in order to bring
innovations in the workplace.
With regard to the present case scenario, Google with no doubt comes as one of the best
company in motivating its employees in an impressive way. It is all because of such motivational
activities, the company has now become one of the world's largest technological brand. When it
comes to encourage and motivate the employees, the said company stands out from among the
masses (The Importance of Leadership in Business, 2015). Currently, Google won the “Best
Company to Work For” award in 2014 by Fortune Magazine and Great Place to Work Institute.
1

Within a short span of time, the concerned company has acquired a bright and talented workforce
comprising over 50,000 employees spread across the globe (Haeckel, 2013). To do this, the
company significantly focuses on its key strategies to pamper and motivate the employees by
satisfying their major needs in the workplace in an effective way. Doing this benefits the
company to gain outstanding ideas and innovative range of products from them. The following
picture clearly reflects the work culture of Google which motivates them to produce the best and
impressive results in an exotic way-
Apart from such facilities, the stated company also emphasises on other extrinsic and
intrinsic rewards in order to attract highly skilled and talented employees in the organisation.
With such reference, the company implements various valuable and effective motivational
theories that act as crucial tools in retaining the employees within the workplace and increasing
the overall productivity. The vital theories undertaken by Google are Edrick Herzberg’s two-
factory theory, Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and David’s McClelland's theory of needs.
Edrick Herzberg’s two-factory theory
According to this theory, Herzberg laid significant attention on the major factors which
either forces an employee to quit the job position or forces him to continue the job with a strong
sense of commitment and confidence towards their own work. Herzberg called such factors as
dis-satisfiers (hygiene factors) or satisfiers (motivational factors). Hygiene factors generally
reflect the work conditions, salary and company norms and policies. However, motivational
factors encompass status and recognition within the workplace, growth and responsibilities etc.
2
Illustration 1: Google's workplace
(Source: Ganz, 2010 )

By adopting such a motivational theory, the stated company focuses on the factors which really
encourages and motivates the employees within the workplace (Haugh and Talwar, 2010). In
order to increase and boost up the morale of employees, the management of the said company
should provide its workforce with both the factors which motivates them to work hard with full
dedication.
The major hygiene factors according to Herzberg are
 Company policy and administration
 Technical supervision
 Inter-personal relations with supervisiors, peers and subordinates
 Salary
 Job security
 Personal life
 Status
 Working conditions
However such factors do not motivate the employee but prevent the said company from
negative outcomes. Apart from this Herzberg's motivational factors include
 Achievement
 Advancement
 Recognition
 Growth possibilities
 Responsibilities
Google focuses on providing all such hygiene factors to its employees in the best possible
way which helps the company to achieve the heights of success in an effective and efficient way.
The following diagram helps to gain an in-depth understanding about the said theory-
3

Illustration 2: Herzberg's two factor theory
(Source: Pava, 2015 )
However, the said theory has been criticized exclusively on the following aspects
 The theory is not conclusive. The reason behind such a fact is that the professionals may
prefer challenging jobs and responsibilities. The methodology adopted for data collection and research is defective because the
information gathered will either be biased or subjective.
Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs
It is another theory adopted by Google to effectively impress its employees and retain
them in the workplace in order to enhance its business productivity and performance in the
international and competition market (Harmon, 2014). According to this theory, the company
should lay considerable concern over the various level of needs in a hierarchical form. The needs
of an individual in the workplace starts from the lowest level which includes the basic necessities
of food, cloth and shelter and it touches the highest level of needs comprising of self-
actualisation and self- esteem needs. The following diagram gives an impressive details of needs
of an employee within the organisation-
4

Illustration 3: Maslow's hierarchy need theory
(Source: Anderson, 2013)
By implementing such theory, Google focuses on the key needs of an employee in the
following manner- Physiological needs- In order to fulfil such needs, the company provide its employees
with fascinating facilities of food, cloth, shelter and breathing. This helps the employees
to work with positive attitude towards achieving organisational goal in an effective way. Safety needs- After satisfying the basic needs, the employee moves to generate higher
level needs which includes proper safety and security in the workplace. The said
company lays major focus on providing a safe, healthy and secure work environment
which helps the employees to produce effective and quality results within the
predetermined time frame (Daft, 2012). Love and belongingness- To fulfil such needs of an employee, Google has a vibrant and
exotic work culture. It possesses a friendly and supportive work environment which helps
the staff to work with proper coordination and cooperation to achieve the common goal
of company. Esteem needs- The mention firm very impressively allows the employees to grow and
develop their skills within the workplace. It helps them to gain status and recognition in
the company as well as society in an effective way.
5

 Self- actualisation needs- To fulfil such needs, Google emphasises to gain the individual
a fantastic exposure in the corporate world (Brown and Harvey, 2011).
However, the said theory is criticised on the following grounds-
 Insufficient hierarchical structure of needs
 Lack of cause and effect relationship
 Unawareness of individual's needs Measuring the satisfaction level of needs is not practical.
David’s McClelland's theory of needs
This theory reflects the learning concepts along with major beliefs that many of the
individual needs are attained from the work culture itself. According to this theory, there exist
three essential needs of an employee within the organisation. These are-
1. Need for achievement
2. Need for affiliation
3. Need for power
Need for achievement mainly focuses on those employees who tends to excel and as a
result seeks to avoid high and low risks situations. They possess an intrinsic desire to accomplish
something higher and superior along with getting to the down of the problems and completing
harder tasks. They require continuous feedback from the management of the said company to
view their overall progress and growth of their own achievement. However, the need for
affiliation relates in developing harmonious relations with other employees within the
organisation (Doz and Kosonen, 2010). The people falling under this set of needs perform well
in consumer interactions and customer services. Lastly, the need of power concentrates on
people who lay major concern over controlling and managing the behaviour of all the employees
in the concerned workplace in an appropriate way.
However, Google implements such theory by considering its criticism on the following
aspects-
 Provides little intention in the public sector Need to achieve is not mastered in adult life
By critically analysing the various motivational theories undertaken by Google, it can be
seen that due to such an impressive fact the company is easily able to attain the leading heights
of success in an effective way and within short span of time. It is all because of its beautiful
6

internal management system that the company has gained an exotic exposure in the global
economy (Doz, 2011).
TASK 2
Critical analysis of Google's CEO leadership styles
Google Inc. is dead in the eyes of audience because of strategic reorganisation. Now it
has become a slimmer company led by CEO Sundar Pichai which is a subsidiary company of the
brand new giant known as Alphabet Inc. Sundar pichai is the highest ranked executive in the
global technological community. He effectively leads the incredibly essential job of ensuring that
the company's core business operates smoothly and impressively. This Indian executive has
given rise to the product management innovation for Chrome and Chrome OS. He is crucially
responsible for heading Google's Android Division in a significant and effective way.
The Indian born chief executive officer possesses fantastic and exotic leadership styles
which has benefited the company in tremendous manner to closely accomplish the heights of
success in the corporate economy (Smith, Binns and Tushman, 2010). Pichai is enriched with
both soft and hard skills in an effective way. He precisely and clearly understands the need of
product in the conceptualised world and put efforts to manage its overall maintenance and cost.
The basic leadership practices adopted by the concerned CEO in the light of achieving a
vibrant exposure is listed below-
 He gets to know his employees in an effective way.
 Develops new criteria to promote and reward his high and best performing employees.
 Impressively solve the major problems of his workforce.
 He allows his staff to even operate outside the hierarchy of the company.
 Continuously reviewing the performance level of his employees in an impartial manner.
 Provide expert guidance to the overall organisation.
 Empowers his team in a highly appropriate way.
 Expressing interest in the success of his team members.
 He focuses on result oriented and productive outcomes
 Helps his employees in developing and enhancing their career options in a systematic
way.
 Developing a clear and transparent vision, mission and strategy for the organisation.
7

 Providing effective technical training sessions to his staff (Williams and Williams,
2010).
 Building strong communication channels across the company.
 Rendering the workforce with attractive incentives and reward systems.
 Providing a quality and premium work atmosphere.
 Satisfying the needs and satisfaction level of employees in a significant way.
Apart from such interesting and fascinating practices adopted by Pichai, he also
undertakes the most interesting and result oriented leadership style in order to increase its
business operations. The stated CEO lays its prior attention over implementing a participative
leadership style within the workplace. According to such a leadership style, the management of
the company emphasizes on involving the innovative and creative ideas of its employees in a
systematic and effective way. This helps the company to gain various thoughts and ideas related
to product innovations. By considering the employees decision, the said company is able to
accomplish the demands and requirements of its core customers in an effective way (Gulati,
Puranam and Tushman, 2012). Furthermore, it also benefits the company to gain a high sense
of commitment, trust, loyalty and confidence from its employees towards their own work. With
the help of such leadership style, the employees of Google work with proper coordination,
cooperation and dedication towards achieving the common goal of the organisation within the
pre determined time frame.
However, such a leadership style does not work with unskilled workers. If the company
tends to involve unskilled and less talented staff in the decision making process, it is with no
doubt going to loose its overall concern of maintaining the competitive edge in the international
economy. Also, with the use of this style, the company takes immense time on formulating a
particular decision over achieving organisation's success. Apart from this, the management of the
said company is required to provide all the delicate and sensitive information to its employees
which in turn results in the leakage of information in the corporate world (Zott, Amit and
Massa, 2011).
Therefore, by critically analysing the participative leadership style, Pichai undertakes and
implements such a strategy by considering its major demerits in an effective way. Furthermore,
he also lays significant concern over implementing a Transactional leadership style. It is also
known as managerial leadership and focuses on supervising and organising the business
8

activities in an exotic way. Adopting such a leadership style, Pichai boost the level of compliance
of his employees through both punishments and rewards. He pay attention to the employees
work to find major faults, errors and deviations (Baden-Fuller and Morgan, 2010). Such a
leadership style is undertaken by the concerned CEO only when there arises emergency and
crisis situations and the projects are required to be completed in a specific and appropriate way.
However the said theory is criticised on the basis that it encourages the employees only on the
ground level. Punishments and incentives does not tends to motivate the higher level employees.
From the above critical analysis of various leadership styles, it can be seen that the CEO
of Google implements it in an appropriate way by properly considering and evaluating its merits
and demerits. All such factors forces the stated company to expand and develop its business
operations beautifully in the tough trading corporate business environment. Because of such
leadership styles the company can easily attain the heights of success within the standard time
frame.
TASK 3
Analysing the organisational structure of Google in the light of achieving corporate success
Google is the leading high tech global company headquartered at Mountain view,
California. It was founded by Larry Page and Sergey Brin in 1998 and serves as one of the best
internet search engine across the globe. It implements its mission, vision and business objectives
in line with the organisational structure (Schaltegger, Lüdeke-Freund and Hansen, 2012). Its
vision is to design powerful search engine in an effective way. The mission statement of the
company reflects organising all the information across the universe in order to make it useful and
accessible to the audience (Cavusgil and et.al., 2014). Finally the objective statement of Google
lays significant concern over user experience and innovations. The informal corporate slogan of
the company is “Don’t be evil”. It makes its overall profit by delivering cost- effective and
relevant online advertising. Google renders option payment in 48 different currencies and
audience interfaces in 42 different languages.
All such achievements are possible because the company follows an appropriate cross-
functional organisational structure (Fullan, 2014). It is technically a structure which specialises
in the level of flatness. This structure lays a considerable concern over managing the business
operations on the basis of various teams in order to generate effective and efficient results. With
9

the help of such an organisational structure, the company is able to effectively work with skilled
group of individuals encompassing various functional expertise and knowledge which works
towards achieving the common set of company's goal (Antony, 2011). Moreover, such an
organisational structure benefits the company to gain a strong sense of commitment and loyalty
towards their work. Also, the workers are able to accomplish the company's objective by
working together with proper coordination and cooperation along with positive approach towards
a particular situation (Rainey, 2010). The said organisational structure is designed horizontally as
well as vertically as reflected through the following diagram-
Thus, the said company's structure has three vital characteristics-
 Product based definition
 Function based definition
 Flatness
Google implements functions on the ground of grouping its employees. The above
diagram gives a clear picture of various management teams within the organisation. The firm
10
Illustration 4: Organisational structure of Google
(Source: Casadesus-Masanell and Ricart, 2010).

also undertakes the use of products as a strong basis for employees grouping. For instance, the
corporation groups its workers for establishing innovative Nexus devices in an effective way.
Google also groups its overall workforce for efficiently and impressively conducting the Fiber
business operations in the corporate economy (Cummings and Worley, 2014). Apart from this,
the company's organisational structure possess significant flatness. It means that the company's
employees, groups or teams can skip the conversation with middle management and are allowed
freely to directly report to CEO Sundar Pichai. Employees in Google are served with friendly
and supportive work environment and are allowed to share relevant information across various
teams.
By clearly analysing the cross functional organisational structure of Google, it can be
interpreted that such an outstanding and vibrant structure helps the company in contributing
strongly to the overall business success (Chesbrough, 2010). This structure allows the company
to gain an in-depth knowledge about each and every employees thereby implementing measures
to meet the highest level of job satisfaction. Such a beautiful structure of company attracts the
eyes of employees and they wait eagerly to be a part of such a structure. By implementing an
exotic organisational structure the company is easily able to increase and enhance its overall
productivity in a systematic way. Also, this structure clearly avoids the chances of disputes and
conflicts among the employees within the workplace. Furthermore, it provides equal
opportunities to the workforce to grow and develop their career in the said organisation in an
effective and impressive way (Chand, 2015). In addition to this, Google benefits by generating
innovative products which satisfies the customers demand in an effective way. This helps the
company to expand its business operations across the globe and beat its line of competitors
which basically includes Yahoo!, Firefox etc.
CONCLUSION
From the above report it can be impressively concluded that Google has implemented
various motivational and leadership styles in an effective way which helps the company to gain a
beautiful and demanding global exposure in the hyper competitive environment. Adopting
effective leadership practices has helped the company to retain the best workforce within the
organisation and deliver quality results in the corporate economy. Also, the report helps to gain
an insight learning about the organisational structure of the mention company in a precise and
clear way. It can be said that with the help of such an effective structure of company along with
11

beautiful internal management, the corporation has accomplished the leading heights of
achievements and success within the short span of time. Google has beat its line of competitors
and has become one of the leading search engine software across the globe.
12

REFERENCES
Books and Journals
Anderson, D. L., 2013. Organization Development: The Process of Leading
Organizational Change: The Process of Leading Organizational Change. Sage
Publications.
Antony, J., 2011. Six Sigma vs Lean: Some perspectives from leading academics
and practitioners. International Journal of Productivity and Performance
Management. 60(2). pp. 185-190.
Baden-Fuller, C. and Morgan, M.S., 2010. Business models as models.Long range
planning. 43(2). pp. 156-171.
Brown, D. R. and Harvey, D., 2011. An experiential approach to organization
development. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Casadesus-Masanell, R. and Ricart, J .E., 2010. From strategy to business models and
onto tactics.Long range planning. 43(2). pp. 195-215.
Cavusgil, S. T. and et.al., 2014. International business. Pearson Australia.
Chesbrough, H., 2010. Business model innovation: opportunities and barriers. Long
range planning. 43(2). pp. 354-363.
Cummings, T. and Worley, C., 2014.Organization development and change. Cengage
learning.
Daft, R., 2012. Organization theory and design. Nelson Education.
Doz, Y. L. and Kosonen, M., 2010. Embedding strategic agility: A leadership agenda
for accelerating business model renewal. Long range planning. 43(2). pp. 370-
382.
Doz, Y., 2011. Qualitative research for international business. Journal of International
Business Studies. 42(5). pp. 582-590.
Fullan, M., 2014.Leading in a culture of change personal action guide and
workbook. John Wiley & Sons.
Ganz, M., 2010. Leading change: Leadership, organization, and social movements.
Handbook of leadership theory and practice,19.
Gulati, R., Puranam, P. and Tushman, M., 2012. Meta‐organization design:
Rethinking design in interorganizational and community contexts.Strategic
Management Journal. 33(6). pp. 571-586.
13

Haeckel, S. H., 2013. Adaptive enterprise: Creating and leading sense-and-respond
organizations. Harvard business press.
Harmon, P., 2014. Business process change. Morgan Kaufmann.
Haugh, H. M. and Talwar, A., 2010. How do corporations embed sustainability across the
organization?. Academy of Management Learning & Education. 9(3). pp. 384-396.
Osterwalder, A., 2010. Business model generation. Sage.
Pava, M., 2015. Leading with meaning: Using covenantal leadership to build a
better organization. Macmillan.
Rainey, D.L., 2010. Sustainable business development: inventing the future through
strategy, innovation, and leadership. Cambridge University Press.
Schaltegger, S., Lüdeke-Freund, F. and Hansen, E.G., 2012. Business cases for
sustainability: the role of business model innovation for corporate
sustainability. International Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development.
6(2). pp. 95-119.
Smith, W.K., Binns, A. and Tushman, M.L., 2010. Complex business models:
Managing strategic paradoxes simultaneously.Long Range Planning. 43(2). pp.
448-461.
Williams, S. and Williams, N., 2010.The profit impact of business intelligence.
Morgan Kaufmann.
Zott, C., Amit, R. and Massa, L., 2011. The business model: recent developments
and future research.Journal of management. 37(4). pp. 1019-1042.
Online
Chand. S., 2015. Importance or Significance of a Sound Organizational Structure. [Online].
Available Through: <http://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/organization/importance-or-
significan>. [Accessed on 13th April 2016].
The Importance of Leadership in Business. 2015. [Online]. Available
through:<http://smallbusiness.chron.com/>. [Accessed on 13th April 2016].
14