The organizers of last week’s Management Lab conference on "Inventing the Future of Managment" amplified the value of the event for us attendees by persuading Google CEO Eric Schmidt to speak with us over dinner on Thursday night. I’d not had the chance to hear him before, and was blown away; he was funny, direct, engaged, and razor sharp. I was particularly impressed that instead of sticking to talking points (a common tendency among senior executives, especially those leading large, heavily-scrutinized companies) he took questions, and actually answered them.
In his initial remarks I heard him stress two elements of Google’s success: hiring the smartest people they can find, and making decisions as a group after deliberation, rather than by individual fiat. Schmidt told the story of how shortly after he was hired he had a meeting with his senior colleagues about bringing on an executive he thought would be a good fit. His co-workers disagreed, and as a result the CEO of the company was not able to hire someone he favored.
As I listened to him speak I felt one of my frustrations as a teacher surface, and decided to ask him about it. I asked something like:
"Eric, like many people here I teach at a business school, and I’ve always been disappointed with the results whenever I use Google as a case study. My executive education students always say that there’s nothing for them to learn from your company because it’s just too different from theirs — you’re very young, you’re in this strange online industry, and you’re full of people with 145 IQs.
I’ve been trying to push back against these arguments in the classroom, but as I listen to you here tonight I’m starting to think that my students might be right! As you’ve described it, Google seems to be a completely unique organization. So what can other companies and managers really learn from you?"
His response was unequivocal, and fantastic. As best I can recall, he said:
"They can learn to listen. Listening to each other is core to our culture, and we don’t listen to each other just because we’re all so smart. We listen because everyone has good ideas, and because it’s a great way to show respect. And any company, at any point in its history, can start listening more."
Many participants in the conference voiced the belief that a move away from authoritarian and imperial corporate leadership would be a smart move, and that we need to retire the belief that intelligence, omniscience, and infallibility rise in lockstep with height on the org. chart. It was fascinating, and encouraging, for me to hear Schmidt agree so closely with that viewpoint even though he hadn’t been present during the day; he was just the man who came to dinner.
He gave a powerful and actionable piece of advice, and one for which the technologies of Enterprise 2.0 are tailor-made. Let’s see how many businesses and business leaders have what it takes to follow it.
And if you want to learn more of Google’s secrets, check out the article "Reverse Engineering Google’s Innovation Machine" by Bala Iyer and my friend Tom Davenport in the April Harvard Business Review.
{ 25 comments… read them below or add one }
Hello Andrew,
The HBR article is very impressive. You wouldn’t expect a new employee to modify Gmail or other service, but they actually can do it. That is closely related with what Schmidt said to you.
But I don’t understand why it was so hard to get an official opinion from Google, even for Thomas Davenport.
Although, as Davenport says, there are a lot of sources of information around the web, from its own employees. So you are able to understand how the relationships work inside Google.
Thank you for sharing you question and its answer.
Regards,
Francisco Morales
Chile
It’s nice to know that Google’s high-end wetware isn’t the only thing that makes them special. Fostering employee contribution and allowing more egalitarian decision making are steps that any enterprise can take. Hopefully they will!
“hiring the smartest people they can find,”: This, ofcourse, can only be done with lots of money.
“They can learn to listen. Listening to each other is core to our culture, and we donÂ’t listen to each other just because weÂ’re all so smart. We listen because everyone has good ideas, and because itÂ’s a great way to show respect. And any company, at any point in its history, can start listening more.”
While I can easily agree that any company can start listening more, the concept that ‘everyone has good ideas’ is conceptually comforting but pragmatically flawed. New employees hired in a ‘doing’ position (paid primarily to do – not to primarily think as Google employees are) can’t provide great ideas without experience and training. Some employees coming in are not only lacking in educational backgrounds and past experience but also lack a competent grasp of analytical skills.
The truth of many companies be they as large as UPS or as small as our family retail store is that the jobs are not so challenging, not so well paid that you get the best minds, as Google does, that management can easily foster an environment wherein listening comes naturally and easily.
But I donÂ’t understand why it was so hard to get an official opinion from Google, even for Thomas Davenport.
Although, as Davenport says, there are a lot of sources of information around the web, from its own employees. So you are able to understand how the relationships work inside Google.
Another good thing we can learn from google is that, they give encouragement to creativity and ideas, if we see google labs, you will find so many applications that are in pipe line.
Thanks for sharing in insights into the conference including discussion with Eric Schmidt. I’ve admired Mr. Schmidt’s candor as when he is interviewed in the media, he comes across as very intelligent and honest. Good to hear he is as engaging in person.
I purchased the article on Google by Davenport, et al but not read it yet.
regards
MB
Great read! Now, rather than interject my opinions, I’ll take Eric’s advice and listen
wer
“We listen because everyone has good ideas, and because itÂ’s a great way to show respect.”
‘Everyone has good ideas” – It might again be due to the fact that they hire smart people. Unfortunately not everyone is in the kind of business which hires people within 145 IQ zone.
‘It’s a great way to show respect’ – Sure. But I don’t think if these companies will spend their time and money just to respect people ( less Ideas ).
So again it’s difficult to see if these companies can even learn that one point from Google.
Can you please elaborate?
Thanks,
Ram
Great post! Google is definitely a unique company, but I do feel that all companies can learn to use their employees more effectively. Listening is key!
Wow, great conversation. Thank you for sharing that. I think in almost any aspect of life, we can all become better listeners.
At Google there is more than just listenning. They deliberate too. At Google there are probably many more ideas that don’t make it into beta phase than ideas that are fully tested. They listen, but then openly vet and analyze ideas and abandon the weaker ones.
As such, it’s not “everybody has good ideas” but more that “everybody could have good ideas” so you’ve got to be ready to listen to everyone. Some people may have 9 bad ideas then a killer one. You’ve got to listen each time and ask the right questions about each idea to surface its strengths and weaknesses.
And the respect of listening can go a long way. But it requires many of us to change the way we work personally and practice listening. Many folks who go to work for Google have consciously gone there because they want to ideate.
Another value of listening is that the person presenting an idea doesn’t get defensive. A lot of bad ideas have been pursued because the ideater felt he had to defend his idea, then started pushing it forward despite the weaknesses.
During the peak of the Internet bubble, I worked for a firm that did all of these things as well. However, the strong company culture seemed to be fracturing.
When things started going south, the established employees started to blame the crop of ‘new hires’ who weren’t as experienced. My experience was generally positive, and it was sad to see such a collegial meritocracy not survive the dot-com shakeout.
I contrast this to my experience at a large system integration firm, who had a definite hierarchy, but also found
There is certainly a lot to be learned from Google’s management style. A little bit of freedom and respect can go a long way in ensuring that a team stays motivated.
“They can learn to listen. Listening to each other is core to our culture”
A clever way to avoid saying “I really don’t know and your students are probably right”. With a lack of the “Real” competition and taking into the account their huge revenue (and the ability to hire the biggest brains in the industry) they will be a “Unique” company for very, very long time.
I heard about the google’s loyality towards its employees. Where the atmosphere is such that if you don’t want to work in head office or got sick and want to leave the company and move to london or anywhere, they will be ready for you to open an office for you there instead letting you leave the organization. The atmosphere, loyality and free to listen— The outcome is obvious.
I love that Google listens and I truly hope they can maintain that in the years to come. Having worked for over a decade at a major privately held software company, I can tell you from the inside that while it was more like Google in the early years, it is now riddled with poor management and too many people who simply rose up through the ranks based on longevity rather than skills. But who dares tell the emperor he has no clothes?
Great article on IT on Business, excellent management tips given by Andrew. The attendees of the workshop would have learnt a lot. I wish i could have attended it.
It is nice to know that a company like Google is willing to collaborate and learn from each others ideas. A company that is to elite to share ideas and opinions is a company that could very well stay stagnent. I think one of the primary reasons they are so powerful as a company is because they realize the need to learn from others in order to grow.
Andrew,
First of all I want to thank you for this great post.
Google is definitely an unique company and we have no doubt in that. Listening to each others ideas always is proved to be fruitful. Listen to others then only you can make other listen to you.
Thanks man, just what I was looking for. Worked like a charm Thanks so much…
A very interesting point which needs to get in the heads of car repair shop owners… No one there listens.
I know you are really smart people, do you think it can sometimes be a disadvantage to believe you are smart. The smartest people are those who can accept they can't know everything, so they don't always tell you how smart they are, because those type of smart people don't need to learn from other people because they already think of themselves as superior, then they're not as smart as they really think.
Do I contradict myself? Well then I contradict myself!
I know you are really smart people, do you think it can sometimes be a disadvantage to believe you are smart. The smartest people are those who can accept they can't know everything, so they don't always tell you how smart they are, because those type of smart people don't need to learn from other people because they already think of themselves as superior, then they're not as smart as they really think.
Do I contradict myself? Well then I contradict myself!
we've got a lot to learn from these dudes in google
{ 1 trackback }