3 ms·

Why indeed? Especially when the company has grown so large and sclerotic that developing new products has become a struggle against entrenched corporate bureauc

by gamble 16y ago

Why indeed? Especially when the company has grown so large and sclerotic that developing new products has become a struggle against entrenched corporate bureaucracy. I'm sure it's a very tempting and logical proposition, in the short term.

mr_november 16y ago
>Especially when the company has grown so large and sclerotic that developing new products has become a struggle against entrenched corporate bureaucracy Out of curiosity, what do you have to support the claim that google has become this slow-moving monolith (yes, I'm paraphrasing) other than random articles from tech media? If you have first-hand knowledge I'd love to hear it because google is still a great company to work for in my eyes and I'd like to hear the opposite view.
- MikeCapone 16y ago
  I'd like to echo your question. It's crazy how quickly the meme that "google is losing it/becoming a slow giant bureaucracy" has taken hold in the recent past...
  - jacques_chester 16y ago
    We need to institute a process to manage the memes of excessive bureaucratisation. They take hold too fast and with insufficient oversight. I propose we form a working party to thrash out a draft proposal for such a process, to circulated to all the relevant stakeholders in due season.
- mkramlich 16y ago
  one way of looking at it is, ask yourself how many new products/services has Google launched this year, due to internal development? And then compare that number to their total employee count of about 22,000. Do you think if say you split off just 50% of those folks, took them and spread them out between hundreds of small little startups each with a fresh and independent entrepreneurial drive and vision, and all legacy process/culture/tradition/rules stripped away, the end result would be way way more new products and services and innovation released into the market? For me, the answer would be yes, I'd expect that. Purely on a people numbers basis, and speaking in general terms. (Of course, it would depend on lots of other factors like the nature of the individuals, etc. But you get the idea.) A software startup only takes 1-4 decent people to get off the ground, and sometimes it doesn't take a heck of a lot more beyond that to scale it up. Now compare that to Google's 22,000. Yes lots of hard-core optimizing of hardware and software going on there, which I respect. But most of them are just polishing corners on Google's legacy products/services, and minding the store, not creating or bringing a fundamentally new and distinct product or service to the market. Also, based on everything I've seen, I think Google hires mostly for highly academic engineering-focused types -- not entrepreneurs and not highly creative types. They mostly get those kinds only through acquisitions (or acqui-hire, as some have called it) lately, not hiring. This is my impression from afar anyway.

by gamble 16y ago

mr_november 16y ago

>Especially when the company has grown so large and sclerotic that developing new products has become a struggle against entrenched corporate bureaucracy Out of curiosity, what do you have to support the claim that google has become this slow-moving monolith (yes, I'm paraphrasing) other than random articles from tech media? If you have first-hand knowledge I'd love to hear it because google is still a great company to work for in my eyes and I'd like to hear the opposite view.

MikeCapone 16y ago
I'd like to echo your question. It's crazy how quickly the meme that "google is losing it/becoming a slow giant bureaucracy" has taken hold in the recent past...
- jacques_chester 16y ago
  We need to institute a process to manage the memes of excessive bureaucratisation. They take hold too fast and with insufficient oversight. I propose we form a working party to thrash out a draft proposal for such a process, to circulated to all the relevant stakeholders in due season.
mkramlich 16y ago
one way of looking at it is, ask yourself how many new products/services has Google launched this year, due to internal development? And then compare that number to their total employee count of about 22,000. Do you think if say you split off just 50% of those folks, took them and spread them out between hundreds of small little startups each with a fresh and independent entrepreneurial drive and vision, and all legacy process/culture/tradition/rules stripped away, the end result would be way way more new products and services and innovation released into the market? For me, the answer would be yes, I'd expect that. Purely on a people numbers basis, and speaking in general terms. (Of course, it would depend on lots of other factors like the nature of the individuals, etc. But you get the idea.) A software startup only takes 1-4 decent people to get off the ground, and sometimes it doesn't take a heck of a lot more beyond that to scale it up. Now compare that to Google's 22,000. Yes lots of hard-core optimizing of hardware and software going on there, which I respect. But most of them are just polishing corners on Google's legacy products/services, and minding the store, not creating or bringing a fundamentally new and distinct product or service to the market. Also, based on everything I've seen, I think Google hires mostly for highly academic engineering-focused types -- not entrepreneurs and not highly creative types. They mostly get those kinds only through acquisitions (or acqui-hire, as some have called it) lately, not hiring. This is my impression from afar anyway.