4 ms·

> failure of automation Many of the Google horror stories are less a failure of automation and more just a failure of well designed business processes. This s

> failure of automation Many of the Google horror stories are less a failure of automation and more just a failure of well designed business processes. This same event could/would have occurred if it were humans sending the "additional information required" emails and also following a protocol of "shut them down in 10 days if they don't provide". The fact that this process was (most likely) automated is not the issue. Honestly, as an outsider, it would appear that Google is a tech company that isn't actually very good at business. They do some smart tech things with their huge number of smart workers, but the business side seems to make a lot of very poor decisions (or simply doesn't even consider some part of the business or doesn't prioritize business processes well).

eastbound 4y ago
Every time I’m told it was an automatic system at Google, I doubt it. I can’t imagine all those heavy decisions aren’t actually reviewed by humans, who validate the automatic suggestions. Would anyone imagine that the decision to cut off a customer entirely, is not checked by a clerk? by a lawyer? The defense “It was automatic” doesn’t even pass the basic sanity test.
- shadowgovt 4y ago
  At Google's scale, cutting one paying customer isn't a heavy decision. That's what makes doing business with them so weird; it may be mission-critical to your business, but to them it's a Tuesday.
ethbr0 4y ago
> it would appear that Google is a tech company that isn't actually very good at business Their primary product (ads) sells itself. So as a company they haven't ever had to become good at business -- in the interacting-with-other-business-entities sense.
eitally 4y ago
I suggest a large part of this is Google's longstanding strategy of outsourcing as much non-product, non-sales functions as possible to vendors. There's a strong disconnect, and also strongly antagonistic incentives, getting in the way of closed loop alignment (not to mention being able to flexibly/reactively adjust business processes based on market needs).

eastbound 4y ago

Every time I’m told it was an automatic system at Google, I doubt it. I can’t imagine all those heavy decisions aren’t actually reviewed by humans, who validate the automatic suggestions. Would anyone imagine that the decision to cut off a customer entirely, is not checked by a clerk? by a lawyer? The defense “It was automatic” doesn’t even pass the basic sanity test.

shadowgovt 4y ago
At Google's scale, cutting one paying customer isn't a heavy decision. That's what makes doing business with them so weird; it may be mission-critical to your business, but to them it's a Tuesday.

ethbr0 4y ago

> it would appear that Google is a tech company that isn't actually very good at business Their primary product (ads) sells itself. So as a company they haven't ever had to become good at business -- in the interacting-with-other-business-entities sense.

eitally 4y ago

I suggest a large part of this is Google's longstanding strategy of outsourcing as much non-product, non-sales functions as possible to vendors. There's a strong disconnect, and also strongly antagonistic incentives, getting in the way of closed loop alignment (not to mention being able to flexibly/reactively adjust business processes based on market needs).