3 ms·

Reading some of the comments on this thread and others about Google (disclaimer: I work for Google), I feel it necessary to point out that much of the time when

by cletus 14y ago

Reading some of the comments on this thread and others about Google (disclaimer: I work for Google), I feel it necessary to point out that much of the time when people criticise Google that: 1. They're pushing their own agenda; 2. Such comments are typically one-sided Google can't or won't comment; and 3. That observation or opinion is often selective, misrepresentative, biased or a combination thereof. So the next time you read a post about, oh I don't know, how someone's Adwords account was unfairly banned for no good reason and you see that the person claiming such just so happens to sell Valentine's Day gifts and it's the week of Valentine's Day then maybe just maybe that post is a misrepresentative PR stunt. Likewise if you see people who worked for Google for a matter of months posting on every Google-related thread as some kind of self-proclaimed expert you should realize that they're pushing a particular viewpoint that paints the company in a worse light and them in a better light. Chances are it didn't work out for them. Perhaps they have legitimate gripes. Perhaps they just didn't fit in. Maybe they even self-destructed and burned all their bridges. Whatever the case, their accounts of Google should at least be viewed skeptically. So please apply some filters to such comments like: - does this person know what they're talking about? - what agenda are they pushing? Now I'm no expert on Google (having worked here <2 years now) but let me give you my observations. 20% does still exist although from what I gather the nature of it has changed somewhat. It's probably fair to say that 20% time is less used now and when it is it's more for trying out or auditioning for a new team. Personally I find it difficult to split my focus this way. This kind of compartmentalization is not my strong suit. I have the same issue with personal projects. When not at work I'll often think about work anyway. YMMV. That all being said, I know of recent examples of people doing 20% time and I know of some cases where those 20% ideas turned into 100% time (if you will) on something new. As far as daydreaming and other "lateral thinking" time goes, I'd say Google is by far the most accepting of this than any other company I personally have worked for. There are massage chairs, pool tables, tennis tables, consoles, etc around and people use them. They're not just decorative. Google also as far as I've seen tolerates failure. I mean don't get me wrong, you're still better off succeeding than failing :) but you won't get fired if your project fails. As far as individual experimentation goes I'll say this: Google is an example of something that I believe holds true for life in general: you get out of it as much as you put in. This goes to the "individual experimentation" point. If you want to check out someone else's code, fix or add something and raise a CL for it you can. The other side will need to accept it of course. If you just want to dick around with something you can do that too.

gwillen 14y ago
I worked at Google for four years, so I think I can speak with a bit more authority than the 'matter of month'ers you criticize, when I say: Yes, some of the criticisms, especially those by outsiders with clear agendas, are overblown. That said, a lot of them are very real. Most of the Google employees who openly criticize the company were there for a lot more than 'months' (and I'm pretty sure I know who you're targeting with that epithet.) I would say that one can build a somewhat realistic picture of the environment inside the company from the postings of ex-employees on HN. It's a lagging indicator, obviously. But the complaints aren't made up. As for 20% time itself: it's always been somewhere between fiction and fact, in the sense that, in practice, you had to be very assertive or have a very supportive manager to use it, and you were generally cutting into your performance review scores by not using that time on your main project. My understanding now is that it's more or less officially dead, but that postdates my tenure at the company, so I can't confirm it.

by cletus 14y ago

gwillen 14y ago

I worked at Google for four years, so I think I can speak with a bit more authority than the 'matter of month'ers you criticize, when I say: Yes, some of the criticisms, especially those by outsiders with clear agendas, are overblown. That said, a lot of them are very real. Most of the Google employees who openly criticize the company were there for a lot more than 'months' (and I'm pretty sure I know who you're targeting with that epithet.) I would say that one can build a somewhat realistic picture of the environment inside the company from the postings of ex-employees on HN. It's a lagging indicator, obviously. But the complaints aren't made up. As for 20% time itself: it's always been somewhere between fiction and fact, in the sense that, in practice, you had to be very assertive or have a very supportive manager to use it, and you were generally cutting into your performance review scores by not using that time on your main project. My understanding now is that it's more or less officially dead, but that postdates my tenure at the company, so I can't confirm it.