5 ms·

Six months after he took the reins, Page announced that Google would adopt a “more wood behind fewer arrows” strategy that would put more of Google’s resources

by hvs 13y ago

Six months after he took the reins, Page announced that Google would adopt a “more wood behind fewer arrows” strategy that would put more of Google’s resources and employees behind a smaller number of projects. There's nothing more soul-crushing for an organization than a board of directors.

mattzito 13y ago
I think it's not unreasonable for senior management at a company to say, "Geez, you know, we have our fingers in too many pies". Sometimes their logic is sound - they're distractions, they're consuming resources that could be used on core business ideas, we can shift innovation to a focused group of our core innovators. And sometimes it's not sound - it's purely about the dollars and sense. But to argue that the board of directors is what's soul crushing about an organization seems odd to me.
- jzwinck 13y ago
  "we can shift innovation to a focused group of our core innovators" It might be easier to manage a separate Innovation Department, but what happens when someone on another team has a great idea? Do we transfer that person to the Innovation Department to continue innovating? What would that mean for their team left behind, relieved explicitly of responsibility, and implicitly of capability, to innovate? Maybe the whole company should be tasked with innovation, but innovators should be allowed 80% time to write CRUD apps if they so choose.
  - mindcrime 13y ago
    It might be easier to manage a separate Innovation Department, but what happens when someone on another team has a great idea? Exactly. At the end of the day, anybody in a company can be responsible for a valuable innovation. This is why something like "20% time" is such a good idea in the first place. It avoids the trap of assuming that you can actually accurately select the people who "should" be doing innovative stuff. OTOH, having a dedicated Research department where people spend 100% of their time on research and cutting-edge stuff also seems like a good idea. An interesting approach might be to have both "20% time" AND "Google X" but with a policy that allows the Hoi Polloi folks a chance to rotate through the dedicated research group on occasion.
- hvs 13y ago
  My point is that they tend to be penny-wise and pound-foolish. Killing an idea like 20% time because it'll save money in the short term while destroying a culture of innovation that can lead to gains in the future is precisely what I meant by "soul crushing."

by hvs 13y ago

mattzito 13y ago

I think it's not unreasonable for senior management at a company to say, "Geez, you know, we have our fingers in too many pies". Sometimes their logic is sound - they're distractions, they're consuming resources that could be used on core business ideas, we can shift innovation to a focused group of our core innovators. And sometimes it's not sound - it's purely about the dollars and sense. But to argue that the board of directors is what's soul crushing about an organization seems odd to me.

jzwinck 13y ago
"we can shift innovation to a focused group of our core innovators" It might be easier to manage a separate Innovation Department, but what happens when someone on another team has a great idea? Do we transfer that person to the Innovation Department to continue innovating? What would that mean for their team left behind, relieved explicitly of responsibility, and implicitly of capability, to innovate? Maybe the whole company should be tasked with innovation, but innovators should be allowed 80% time to write CRUD apps if they so choose.
- mindcrime 13y ago
  It might be easier to manage a separate Innovation Department, but what happens when someone on another team has a great idea? Exactly. At the end of the day, anybody in a company can be responsible for a valuable innovation. This is why something like "20% time" is such a good idea in the first place. It avoids the trap of assuming that you can actually accurately select the people who "should" be doing innovative stuff. OTOH, having a dedicated Research department where people spend 100% of their time on research and cutting-edge stuff also seems like a good idea. An interesting approach might be to have both "20% time" AND "Google X" but with a policy that allows the Hoi Polloi folks a chance to rotate through the dedicated research group on occasion.
hvs 13y ago
My point is that they tend to be penny-wise and pound-foolish. Killing an idea like 20% time because it'll save money in the short term while destroying a culture of innovation that can lead to gains in the future is precisely what I meant by "soul crushing."