Unit 5: Organizing for Innovation at Google - Discussion Post

This discussion post analyzes Google's innovative organizational structure, specifically examining the advantages and disadvantages of its flexible and flat "technocracy" on the creative side. The post explores how Google's unique culture influences the type of employees it attracts and retains, emphasizing the importance of innovation and creativity. Furthermore, it addresses the tension between centralization and decentralization of R&D activities, highlighting the challenges faced by multinational firms compared to those operating in a single national market. The student provides a response to a peer's post, offering agreement and disagreement on the discussed points, and references relevant literature to support the arguments. The discussion delves into the impact of Google's culture on employee engagement and potential turnover, as well as the practical application of organizational structures in various companies.

Running head: UNIT 5 - ORGANIZING FOR INNOVATION
Unit 5 - Organizing for Innovation
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author Note:

1UNIT 5 - ORGANIZING FOR INNOVATION
Unit 5 - Organizing for Innovation
A. 1. What are the advantages and disadvantages of the creative side of Google
being run as a flexible and flat "technocracy"?
The advantage of running the creative side of Google as a flat and flexible
“Technocracy” is that it promotes innovation and productivity. The Google culture and
facilities have been created in such a way that employees have more incentive to work longer
hours (Ho, 2014). It is also mandatory for the employees to dedicate 20% of their work hours
to personal projects where they would develop new ideas. These have positive impact on
their review. Their work culture is almost free of promotion on the basis of seniority which
facilitates better collaborative work among the employees.
The disadvantage of this practice is that the apparent structure of the organization and
the work process remains chaotic and new people face much difficulty in aligning with this
practice. People who want clear titles and designation for the job that they do, Google is
unsuitable. Google is more concerned with innovation and generation of new ideas rather
than hierarchy and titles. This kind of culture leads to overworking and might result in the
loss of work life balance, as the facilities are too alluring to leave work.
2. How does Google's culture influence the kind of employees it can attract and
retain?
Google’s culture is created in such a way that it attracts employees who are more
innovative and creative (Steiber & Alänge, 2013). These people do not have any desire
for title and post. They have no qualms about working extra hours for the sake of a
project and they believe in generating new ideas. People who want traditional 9 to 5 jobs,

2UNIT 5 - ORGANIZING FOR INNOVATION
are suitable for the production unit of Google. Whereas, the other departments are more
organized and work in a traditional way that attracts employees suitable for such culture.
B. Why is the tension between centralization and decentralization of R&D activities
likely to be greater for multinational firms than for firms that compete in one
national market?
Organizations that work in multiple countries have to comply with issues and laws
related to each country rather than one which the companies operating in one national
market do not have to do. Foreign markets have different kinds of resources and their
needs are also diverse. Centralized structure may work for a national company while it
will be difficult for multinational organizations. The reason is different cultures have
different affinity towards a particular structure of organizations. For example, collectivist
cultures like China are more comfortable in hierarchical structure while individualistic
countries like Australia prefer decentralized culture.
Response to peer post
I like what you are saying Rodriguez and agree with you about these issues. What you
have written about Google’s flexibility and performance mentality, seems accurate but I
disagree with you on some points. You have said the Google company culture is supportive
of innovation and creativity which is true to some extent. The problem that I feel with this is
that employees might become too involved and start depending on the organization for their
happiness and engagement. This creates a void that the organization cannot fulfill and it
might lead to sudden turnover due to disillusionment (Finkle, 2012).

3UNIT 5 - ORGANIZING FOR INNOVATION
Another thing that attracts my attention is that theories talk about differences in
organizational structure and how they are culturally variable but it is rarely in practice. Most
of the organizations are still following the traditional structure to some degree. The reason
might be seen in Google’s style. It is understandable that most companies would not be able
to manage that kind of working style neither are they so dedicated to research and
development as Google is.

4UNIT 5 - ORGANIZING FOR INNOVATION
References
Finkle, T. A. (2012). Corporate entrepreneurship and innovation in Silicon Valley: The case
of Google, Inc. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(4), 863-884.
Ho, M. (2014). Google's organisational culture [Video]. Retrieved from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_R3XG7s2hw
Steiber, A., & Alänge, S. (2013). A corporate system for continuous innovation: the case of
Google Inc. European Journal of Innovation Management.