8 ms·

How Google Works

358 points by anvarik 12y ago

tonydiv 12y ago
I love the illustrations!
msutherl 12y ago
My hope is that this is partly the case due to what is often lamented as an endemic sense of entitlement in Generation Y. Capable, well-off, "smart creatives," having been raised to believe that they can and will make a positive impact if only they try hard enough and make the right decisions. Cumulatively (not collectively, yet), they demand the conditions they need to execute and to feel like they're getting a fair bargain for their most precious resource: their "passion." This might mean that we can make the world a better place by raising their expectations even higher. In other words, if no one will work for Google unless they are given the environment and autonomy to do truly great things, as measured by a well-considered external standard, then Google might just be forced to do great things. We all know Google has done some things that are not so great. Regulation is one tool the public wields, but perhaps we can do something about that from the inside as well.
- deciplex 12y ago
  Once again downvoting a perfectly fine post with no indication exactly what your fucking problem is in the first place. Good job, HN.
  - roghummal 12y ago
    Comment too complicated. Needs discussion. HN kryptonite.
  - eru 12y ago
    Disregard early downvotes. Voting still mostly balances out in the end.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- msutherl 12y ago
  To rephrase deciplex's comment, I'd love to know whether and why people disagree.
christiangenco 12y ago
These slides are a summary (introduction? teaser?) for Schmidt and Rosenberg's new book, How Google Works[1]. 1. http://www.howgoogleworks.net/ http://www.howgoogleworks.net/
- eru 12y ago
  Which had an interesting reception among Googlers.
  - cjbarber 12y ago
    How so?
    - hueving 12y ago
      Reflection of a CEO massively disconnected from what it's actually like to work there.
      - general_failure 12y ago
        Most of these execs are smart enough not to have a disconnect. They know exactly how decisions are made and what is going on. These slides are about making existing googlers feel good about what is happening around them. It would suck for the talent at google to be called a pyramid slave.
q_revert 12y ago
I started work at google pretty recently, and expressed an interest in working on a particular project. I made some notes about some of my ideas, and was putting some stuff together to show to one of the teams, to get some input before prototyping. I asked a senior team member to have a look at the notes I had made, and see if they were ready to show to the wider team. His advice? "Go build something, then we can have meetings" Coming from an academic background I find this type of thinking very refreshing.
- kamyfc 12y ago
  Inspiring and made me change my thinking. Gracias.
- DonPellegrino 12y ago
  I was under the impression that the work load at Google is so heavy that it is almost impossible to get "20% time" anymore. During what time did you work on your idea? Are they freeing you of all responsibilities to build your prototype or do they expect you to do it in your free time and then donate it to the company? Thanks, I'm very curious about this aspect of Google's culture.
  - mgraczyk 12y ago
    I joined Google a few months ago and have not had this experience. The company is gigantic so everybody's situation is a little bit different, but plenty of people still have 20% projects. The culture strongly emphasizes a "build first and ask questions later" attitude.
    - davidw 12y ago
      Another guy saying he still uses his: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8431951 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8431951
  - cromwellian 12y ago
    I think it depends. If you're working on something with a hard upcoming deadline, chances are you have no 20% time. If you're working on a launched product in incremental/maintenance mode, chances are you have extra time. Sometimes greenfield projects or rewrites also permit lots of 20% time, because you've got existing implementations, so you can have some people maintain the old one and some people go work on the new rewrite using new tech. I'm one of the unlucky ones with very little free time at the moment. :)
skrebbel 12y ago
And then Larry Page walked in and said "Focus! Everybody's goal is to push Google+ now!"
- simi_ 12y ago
  IANAG, but as far as I understand G+ is a twofold process: first, there's transforming Google into a platform (as per Yegge's famous rant [0]) and secondly, there's the mediocre social network (they've managed to fail at both UX and perf, kudos for that achievement). The latter, and the confusion itself are obviously pretty idiotic. The G+ platform, despite the annoying name, is a pretty solid idea. Larry Page claims to want to be a modern, successful Tesla [1], and I believe and appreciate him for that, but some of his actions since he took the reins again (G+, Android) are ones you'd rather expect from an Ellison or Gates. Probably that's a good tradeoff for being able to sustain innovation at a massive scale, but I'm just wondering whether some of the decisions he makes are just plain uninspired, rather than ruthless. This being said, Larry is still the reason I want to work for Google at some point in the future. I feel like he's one of the very few high-profile CEOs that appreciate ideas and cool shit more than money, and that's something I think hackers in particular need to appreciate. 0: https://plus.google.com/+RipRowan/posts/eVeouesvaVX https://plus.google.com/+RipRowan/posts/eVeouesvaVX 1: http://www.businessinsider.com/larry-page-the-untold-story-2014-4 http://www.businessinsider.com/larry-page-the-untold-story-2...
quickdraw46 12y ago
Loved the presentation, makes me realise how much more difficult it is to hire and foster innovative culture here in India where the office space is still marred by the age old 'BOSS Rules' culture.
- kamyfc 12y ago
  Totally agree.
galago 12y ago
“As a result, barriers to entry that have stood for decades are melting away. Every incumbent business is vulnerable to competition and disruption.” Upper middle class dudes from elite academic institutions create businesses. What's the new thing? Maybe I'm misstating this and I'm just going to piss away what few points I have less, but hasn't business always been this way? Railroads killed the stagecoach, the lightbulb killed gas lamps, Craigslist killed the newspapers. Amazon might well kill Google, but if they do, its not necessarily a new thing.
- leoc 12y ago
  He's talking about the prospects of businesses taking on incumbent businesses, not the chances for individuals. Incumbents like the regulated taxi industry or Borders Books don't just roll over for new challengers no matter where the new firm's CEO went to college.
- balazsdavid987 12y ago
  Tsssh, please don't wake me up from my startup dreams! But you are right, it happens very rarely that an individual creates a billion-dollar disruptive sexy cool company without the specific kind of socio-eoconomic background you mentioned. On the other hand, one can live a perfectly fine life off a small business with a local scope and - I think - that's not in the unreachable zone unless you are starting from the other extreme side of the society.
- ethnomusicolog 12y ago
  Yes, but the demographic constituency who can play the game is expanding. It's getting easier to hack your socio-economic status.
  - galago 12y ago
    The guys that started Google came from Stanford, the Facebook guy, Harvard. The Dropbox guys, MIT. Is there someone who went to Bunker Hill Community College or its many equivaltents who was able create a majorly disruptive business? I don't want to sound like Reddit, but link to something.
codeonfire 12y ago
The motivation of Google is not even discussed here. Why do you want to create a certain environment for "smart creatives?" Oh yeah, almost forgot... so they'll make products that will make Google lots of money. This always leads to a logic contradiction. If they are so smart and creative, why do they need Google? Everyone knows if you create the next g-mail you still walk in on Monday and get a salary, not equity. You might get a huge bonus, or Google might choose get another airliner instead. That's a risk you'll be taking.
- enobrev 12y ago
  "Smart and Creative" does not mean "Lucrative". Less cynically, one might consider it a virtuous circle. Google gives smart and creative people a chance to organize into small teams and innovate. When some of those projects become lucrative, more smart and creative people can be hired, and so on. I've certainly found myself at odds between projects I'd Love to tackle versus bills that Have to get paid. After enough failures and false starts, it becomes less personal risk and more general survival. I look forward to going out on my own again and trying some more, but I need to contribute to my current employer first as I save up the energy and resources for my next personal endeavor.
- rjaco31 12y ago
  You'd have conceived a system used by billions though
- balazsdavid987 12y ago
  > If they are so smart and creative, why do they need Google? Many things cannot be created individually, no matter how smart and creative you are. Think of pyramids, space ships, - or even GMail. It's about leveraging the resources of a big company. And not to forget the low risk: you build something while you are on salary vs. building something for equity that may or may not worth dollars in the end.
  - grayclhn 12y ago
    Just a tip: you don't want to be one of the people building a pyramid. You may want to think of a non-enslavement-and-death example when you explain why somewhere might be a good place to work. I can just imagine the recruiter's pitch now...
g123g 12y ago
In addition to obviously selling the upcoming book this also seems to be selling Google to potential "smart creative" types. Kind of saying that Google is the one which has the ability to give "smart creative" types the freedom they need to flourish. So in addition to selling copies of the book Eric is also selling Google to potential employees.
doctorKrieger 12y ago
google is blah great blah because blah blah, blah blah work at google.
pXMzR2A 12y ago
I didn't know Google as a startup that needed showcasing on HN.
sz4kerto 12y ago
This is not how Google works, this is a PR product -- it's full of fashionable and/or trivial things that we see on various blogs every single day. I don't see why is this interesting to the HN crowd, but well, who am I to judge this. :)
- paganel 12y ago
  I think it's related to a book written by Schmidt and that Rosenberg guy, I think I just read a review about it a couple of weeks ago (here's the review: http://www.economist.com/news/books-and-arts/21620056-search-giant-shares-some-its-business-methods-dont-be-modest http://www.economist.com/news/books-and-arts/21620056-search...). As for the presentation itself, maybe it's because I'm becoming more and more grumpier with age and haven't drunk my coffee yet, but there's something to be said about today's langue de bois, with expressions like "smart creative" and "Internet Century" being some worthy examples.
  - TeMPOraL 12y ago
    Nah, I think it's neither age nor coffee. As much as I love what Google is doing, I get this distinct impression that they're starting to get infected with bullshit language (which usually leads to bullshit thinking). The presentation is full of "wooden language". It's like it was made for some corporate managers or something. And don't get me started on pictrues in the presentation. It really feels like clip-arts all over again. I just hope they don't add them to Google Docs.
    - warfangle 12y ago
      > It's like it was made for some corporate managers or something. Because it was ;)
  - paulojreis 12y ago
    Yeah. They are criticizing the jargon and methods of "big business", yet the language they use and the methods they promote are what all big businesses advocate today (even if only as PR stunts). I work at a telco, so just imagine the amount of BS I hear being touted (but not applied, of course) everyday... It's no different than this - smart employees, innovation, moving fast,... - just presented in a lousier fashion. :)
barrystaes 12y ago
That stupid webpage keeps forwarding me to an empty page after a few seconds in.
- rkaplan 12y ago
  Me too. Use the embed link instead: http://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/40175706?rel=0 http://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/40175706?rel=...
pibefision 12y ago
I've received the book last week and read it during the weekend. It has plenty of insights and great ideas that you can take and try to use in your current area of work.
WoodenChair 12y ago
I found these slides rather shallow. Smart, creative people are the best employees? Who knew! The Internet led to massive disruptions in traditional businesses? Wow! Sorry for my cynicism/sarcasm, but I see the book campaign as Eric Schmidt positioning himself for his next role. He's trying to secure his personal Google legacy as he gets ready for an exit. I can't imagine it's all that enticing to go from CEO to chairman in a company where the founder takes back the CEO role... how much influence does that leave you?
- mkx 12y ago
  The slides, if not educational, are inspiring and elucidating . They might not reveal new insight, but frame existing insight in a way that's easy to understand.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- guybrushT 12y ago
  > I found these slides rather shallow I couldn't agree more with you. I was expecting some fact-based, data-driven insights/perspectives from Google - so, for me I'd say the "insights" seem disappointingly shallow because they are just "opinions". I keep hearing that one of the big way in which "how google works" is different is that their "people operations" (HR) runs very differently from other companies. I would have loved to understand - how? "What's different now?" is such a, I am sorry to say, stupid question. Depending on anyone's opinion, their world view, whether they think macro or micro - the answer can range from "nothing at all" to "everything is different". Lets take communication as an example - "what's different now?" - depending on who you talk to, they can argue that the fundamental needs are just the same (just forms have evolved) or someone can argue that things are radically different now because of X (where X could be snapchat or any new-age medium etc.). The same is true for entertainment - I have had discussions where I was convinced that the "fundamental need to be entertained" is just the same, but I also see so many new media around (so of course, its different now). It would have been great if they had given more insights on how a successful internet age company truly works from the inside - a bit more than "its best to work in small teams, keep them crowded, and foster serendipitous connections". I thought Eric/Google could contribute a new perspective to this discussion, given their vantage point. Otherwise its just another tautological business/self-help book. I am a bit disappointed because Google's vantage point in this world is so unique (they see so many things in the world, that others don't - given their reach & size) - that they could have really added something very positive and new to "What's different now". The whole point about "Smart Creatives" also seems so shallow - for hundreds of years and maybe before, "Smart Creatives" as they have defined it, are having tremendous impact! Where is the "So what?" I understand that this is just a teaser to encourage people to read the book. If so, its just bereft of any fact-based, data-driven, truly unique perspectives or insights that I, personally just won't bother.
general_failure 12y ago
Dunno but I found most of it fairly clichéd
- _pmf_ 12y ago
  > Dunno but I found most of it fairly clichéd That's what they get from imitating Apple, the poster child of whitewashed generic stock presentations.
andy_ppp 12y ago
Wow! I Love him talking about creating company culture for smart creative people! Those are presumably the same smart creative people that Google illegally stopped from competing in the job market. Nice one!
junto 12y ago
Page 54. For the success of those products we need to add two extra components (in my opinion): http://image.slidesharecdn.com/howgoogleworksfinal1-141012171037-conversion-gate01/95/how-google-works-15-638.jpg?cb=1413303906 http://image.slidesharecdn.com/howgoogleworksfinal1-14101217... (Technical knowledge + business expertise + creativity) You also need: Luck + Hard (smarter) work
phreanix 12y ago
Was that a little nod to Apple in slide 42?
bsaul 12y ago
I think google's culture has become quite of a joke, and only the people inside the company are still not aware of it. "Do no evil" has been replaced by "pay no tax". They've launched two succesful products in their entire history (search engine and gmail), the rest has been bought or only work because they're given away for free. An from what i've heard, internal culture with meetings that explain what should people at google think to really be a "googler" is turning into an orwelian nightmare ("but it's for the general good" isn't an answer to limited personnal opinion).
ardoi 12y ago
Interesting how on slide 15 when describing characteristics of smart creatives, out of technical knowledge, business expertise and creativity it is business expertise that is associated with needing brain power.
plainOldText 12y ago
One line from the slides (33) - "Optimize for growth, not revenue." I'm curious, why is everyone nowadays so obsessed with growth? Is growth really that much more important than revenue? What if you strike a balance between the two? I remember reading what one of the WhatsApp's founders once said: "[..] we focused on business sustainability and revenue rather than getting big fast [..]" And it looks like they did alright.
- jadc 12y ago
  I am not sure what the full context for your quote is, but most people would agree that Whatsapp focused on growth (in terms of number of users) and not so much revenue (i.e. they made enough to be sustainable and independent).
  - plainOldText 12y ago
    source for the quote: http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2014-02/19/whatsapp-exclusive http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2014-02/19/whatsapp-excl...
- rmsaksida 12y ago
  There was a post about Zoho just yesterday, a company which always focused in sustainability and revenue and did very well. (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8456398 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8456398)
- pinkyand 12y ago
  Many businesses today have a relatively strong network effects of some sort.With that kind of business , growth is what's needed to achieve competitive advantage.
rmsaksida 12y ago
The presentation is a little silly, yes, but if there's any truth to it - if Google actually works this way - that could make all the difference. There are places that simply don't give a shit about "smart creative" types, and there are places that claim to have a Google-like culture but in practice are just regular old boss-centric jobs. Every CEO wants to be like Google, but very few actually commit to it. It usually starts like this: the CEO wants to have smart creatives and delegate decisions. But then he thinks about all that hard-won money he'll be throwing at an employee, so he hires someone middle level or fresh out of college "with huge potential". Then he systematically micromanages the guy, because he just can't make that jump. The poor soul either abides (not so smart creative after all) or quickly runs out of steam (this guy will quickly start looking at job posts). Eventually the new hire disappoints in some way and the CEO cynically complains about the failed promises of the cool tech company culture which he tried to implement. Seeing a very successful company like Google follow these principles, and win, might influence decision makers in a positive way.
frozenport 12y ago
If you are the top tech company is it hard to attract talent?
Leander_B 12y ago
And then you apply for a job and wait... wait... and wait some more with no updates. Rather fix/speed up recruiting than making bogus slides. If a customer (or applicant) expresses interest in your company, also be humble and give an answer within acceptable time.
freshflowers 12y ago
The fact that this content-free advertisement for Google gets upvoted to the front-page of a community where most people can see right through it (regardless of how they personally feel about Google) suggest HN is getting astro-turfed. Seriously, who upvotes this?
dothething 12y ago
Seems like a desperate attempt to drum up book sales. Whomever created this could have just found motivational posters and pasted them in all 50 slides. I found nothing in this but same old tired cliches; try hard, don't give up, think big. "What's different now?"
diltonm 12y ago
The images were distracting, the text was not prominent enough and slide 29 is religiously and humanly offensive to several billion people.
peterwwillis 12y ago
> "Never forget that hiring is the most important thing you do." Uhh.... I think at least a hundred commenters on HN who've gone through Google hiring would disagree with you.
jason_slack 12y ago
I can't seem to find it but Jeff Dean did a talk a long while back about How Google's search works, how they predict. I wish I could see it again. He talks about "shard" servers. Anyone remember this?
dalke 12y ago
The answer to "What has changed? Which assumptions do people make that are no longer true? Why does everything feel like it's speeding up?" is supposedly "Technology is transforming virtually every business sector." It list three examples which are mostly true. But the same answer could easily have been said any time in at least the last 120 years -- and it was. I think the complaint about the shallow content in this presentation is completely justified, because there's nothing really new about the idea of change. Steam power. Electricity. Telegraph. Telephone. Mechanical calculators. Slide rules. Cheap aluminum. Flight. Punch card sorting machines. Linotype machines. Each of those are examples where technology transformed business sectors. The telegraph made it possible for information to reach around the world on the same day it happened. Ham radio enthusiasts talked to each other around the world, including bouncing TV signals off the moon. Scratch off the names and it's the same ideas that this presentation promotes as something somehow new. It's assumes the fallacy that what you grew up with was slow and unchanging. It's difficult to read much of the research literature from the 1960s without hearing people talk about the "information explosion" and there being too much change and things out of balance. Mail order is an 1800s example of "barriers to entry melting away" and is how Sears gained its fame. So was the rise of the daily newspaper, subsidized by advertising that made is possible for people to know what was available. "Power has shifted from companies to consumers" ... Hello, the 1930s called. Consumer Reports wants to know if you would like a subscription so they can pay for rigorous testing. Or do you seriously think that mass edited unrestricted feedback can't be gamed? "Individuals and small teams have a massive impact." etc. That sounds a lot like the HP Way, which has as point #1 "We have trust and respect for individuals" Except, oddly enough, the Google way doesn't mention ethics. Compare to the HP Way where "We conduct our business with uncompromising integrity." and that as a good corporate citizen HP will "meet the obligations of good citizenship by making contributions to the community and to the institutions in our society which generate the environment in which we operate. Does Google consider ethics less important than business nirvana? What is new in this presentation that HP didn't cover in the 1960s?
modx07 12y ago
"Focus on growth, not on revenue" Not an exact quote but an idea that was expressed in the slides. I'm curious as to how one achieves this....if this was a sincere bit of advice then I'd love to learn more about what he meant!
dennisgorelik 12y ago
These slides are one of recruiting tools for Google.

358 points by anvarik 12y ago

I love the illustrations!

My hope is that this is partly the case due to what is often lamented as an endemic sense of entitlement in Generation Y. Capable, well-off, "smart creatives," having been raised to believe that they can and will make a positive impact if only they try hard enough and make the right decisions. Cumulatively (not collectively, yet), they demand the conditions they need to execute and to feel like they're getting a fair bargain for their most precious resource: their "passion." This might mean that we can make the world a better place by raising their expectations even higher. In other words, if no one will work for Google unless they are given the environment and autonomy to do truly great things, as measured by a well-considered external standard, then Google might just be forced to do great things. We all know Google has done some things that are not so great. Regulation is one tool the public wields, but perhaps we can do something about that from the inside as well.

deciplex 12y ago
Once again downvoting a perfectly fine post with no indication exactly what your fucking problem is in the first place. Good job, HN.
- roghummal 12y ago
  Comment too complicated. Needs discussion. HN kryptonite.
- eru 12y ago
  Disregard early downvotes. Voting still mostly balances out in the end.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
msutherl 12y ago
To rephrase deciplex's comment, I'd love to know whether and why people disagree.

christiangenco 12y ago

These slides are a summary (introduction? teaser?) for Schmidt and Rosenberg's new book, How Google Works[1]. 1. http://www.howgoogleworks.net/ http://www.howgoogleworks.net/

eru 12y ago
Which had an interesting reception among Googlers.
- cjbarber 12y ago
  How so?
  - hueving 12y ago
    Reflection of a CEO massively disconnected from what it's actually like to work there.
    - general_failure 12y ago
      Most of these execs are smart enough not to have a disconnect. They know exactly how decisions are made and what is going on. These slides are about making existing googlers feel good about what is happening around them. It would suck for the talent at google to be called a pyramid slave.

q_revert 12y ago

I started work at google pretty recently, and expressed an interest in working on a particular project. I made some notes about some of my ideas, and was putting some stuff together to show to one of the teams, to get some input before prototyping. I asked a senior team member to have a look at the notes I had made, and see if they were ready to show to the wider team. His advice? "Go build something, then we can have meetings" Coming from an academic background I find this type of thinking very refreshing.

kamyfc 12y ago
Inspiring and made me change my thinking. Gracias.
DonPellegrino 12y ago
I was under the impression that the work load at Google is so heavy that it is almost impossible to get "20% time" anymore. During what time did you work on your idea? Are they freeing you of all responsibilities to build your prototype or do they expect you to do it in your free time and then donate it to the company? Thanks, I'm very curious about this aspect of Google's culture.
- mgraczyk 12y ago
  I joined Google a few months ago and have not had this experience. The company is gigantic so everybody's situation is a little bit different, but plenty of people still have 20% projects. The culture strongly emphasizes a "build first and ask questions later" attitude.
  - davidw 12y ago
    Another guy saying he still uses his: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8431951 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8431951
- cromwellian 12y ago
  I think it depends. If you're working on something with a hard upcoming deadline, chances are you have no 20% time. If you're working on a launched product in incremental/maintenance mode, chances are you have extra time. Sometimes greenfield projects or rewrites also permit lots of 20% time, because you've got existing implementations, so you can have some people maintain the old one and some people go work on the new rewrite using new tech. I'm one of the unlucky ones with very little free time at the moment. :)

skrebbel 12y ago

And then Larry Page walked in and said "Focus! Everybody's goal is to push Google+ now!"

simi_ 12y ago
IANAG, but as far as I understand G+ is a twofold process: first, there's transforming Google into a platform (as per Yegge's famous rant [0]) and secondly, there's the mediocre social network (they've managed to fail at both UX and perf, kudos for that achievement). The latter, and the confusion itself are obviously pretty idiotic. The G+ platform, despite the annoying name, is a pretty solid idea. Larry Page claims to want to be a modern, successful Tesla [1], and I believe and appreciate him for that, but some of his actions since he took the reins again (G+, Android) are ones you'd rather expect from an Ellison or Gates. Probably that's a good tradeoff for being able to sustain innovation at a massive scale, but I'm just wondering whether some of the decisions he makes are just plain uninspired, rather than ruthless. This being said, Larry is still the reason I want to work for Google at some point in the future. I feel like he's one of the very few high-profile CEOs that appreciate ideas and cool shit more than money, and that's something I think hackers in particular need to appreciate. 0: https://plus.google.com/+RipRowan/posts/eVeouesvaVX https://plus.google.com/+RipRowan/posts/eVeouesvaVX 1: http://www.businessinsider.com/larry-page-the-untold-story-2014-4 http://www.businessinsider.com/larry-page-the-untold-story-2...

quickdraw46 12y ago

Loved the presentation, makes me realise how much more difficult it is to hire and foster innovative culture here in India where the office space is still marred by the age old 'BOSS Rules' culture.

kamyfc 12y ago
Totally agree.

galago 12y ago

“As a result, barriers to entry that have stood for decades are melting away. Every incumbent business is vulnerable to competition and disruption.” Upper middle class dudes from elite academic institutions create businesses. What's the new thing? Maybe I'm misstating this and I'm just going to piss away what few points I have less, but hasn't business always been this way? Railroads killed the stagecoach, the lightbulb killed gas lamps, Craigslist killed the newspapers. Amazon might well kill Google, but if they do, its not necessarily a new thing.

leoc 12y ago
He's talking about the prospects of businesses taking on incumbent businesses, not the chances for individuals. Incumbents like the regulated taxi industry or Borders Books don't just roll over for new challengers no matter where the new firm's CEO went to college.
balazsdavid987 12y ago
Tsssh, please don't wake me up from my startup dreams! But you are right, it happens very rarely that an individual creates a billion-dollar disruptive sexy cool company without the specific kind of socio-eoconomic background you mentioned. On the other hand, one can live a perfectly fine life off a small business with a local scope and - I think - that's not in the unreachable zone unless you are starting from the other extreme side of the society.
ethnomusicolog 12y ago
Yes, but the demographic constituency who can play the game is expanding. It's getting easier to hack your socio-economic status.
- galago 12y ago
  The guys that started Google came from Stanford, the Facebook guy, Harvard. The Dropbox guys, MIT. Is there someone who went to Bunker Hill Community College or its many equivaltents who was able create a majorly disruptive business? I don't want to sound like Reddit, but link to something.

codeonfire 12y ago

The motivation of Google is not even discussed here. Why do you want to create a certain environment for "smart creatives?" Oh yeah, almost forgot... so they'll make products that will make Google lots of money. This always leads to a logic contradiction. If they are so smart and creative, why do they need Google? Everyone knows if you create the next g-mail you still walk in on Monday and get a salary, not equity. You might get a huge bonus, or Google might choose get another airliner instead. That's a risk you'll be taking.

enobrev 12y ago
"Smart and Creative" does not mean "Lucrative". Less cynically, one might consider it a virtuous circle. Google gives smart and creative people a chance to organize into small teams and innovate. When some of those projects become lucrative, more smart and creative people can be hired, and so on. I've certainly found myself at odds between projects I'd Love to tackle versus bills that Have to get paid. After enough failures and false starts, it becomes less personal risk and more general survival. I look forward to going out on my own again and trying some more, but I need to contribute to my current employer first as I save up the energy and resources for my next personal endeavor.
rjaco31 12y ago
You'd have conceived a system used by billions though
balazsdavid987 12y ago
> If they are so smart and creative, why do they need Google? Many things cannot be created individually, no matter how smart and creative you are. Think of pyramids, space ships, - or even GMail. It's about leveraging the resources of a big company. And not to forget the low risk: you build something while you are on salary vs. building something for equity that may or may not worth dollars in the end.
- grayclhn 12y ago
  Just a tip: you don't want to be one of the people building a pyramid. You may want to think of a non-enslavement-and-death example when you explain why somewhere might be a good place to work. I can just imagine the recruiter's pitch now...

g123g 12y ago

In addition to obviously selling the upcoming book this also seems to be selling Google to potential "smart creative" types. Kind of saying that Google is the one which has the ability to give "smart creative" types the freedom they need to flourish. So in addition to selling copies of the book Eric is also selling Google to potential employees.

doctorKrieger 12y ago

google is blah great blah because blah blah, blah blah work at google.

pXMzR2A 12y ago

I didn't know Google as a startup that needed showcasing on HN.

sz4kerto 12y ago

This is not how Google works, this is a PR product -- it's full of fashionable and/or trivial things that we see on various blogs every single day. I don't see why is this interesting to the HN crowd, but well, who am I to judge this. :)

paganel 12y ago
I think it's related to a book written by Schmidt and that Rosenberg guy, I think I just read a review about it a couple of weeks ago (here's the review: http://www.economist.com/news/books-and-arts/21620056-search-giant-shares-some-its-business-methods-dont-be-modest http://www.economist.com/news/books-and-arts/21620056-search...). As for the presentation itself, maybe it's because I'm becoming more and more grumpier with age and haven't drunk my coffee yet, but there's something to be said about today's langue de bois, with expressions like "smart creative" and "Internet Century" being some worthy examples.
- TeMPOraL 12y ago
  Nah, I think it's neither age nor coffee. As much as I love what Google is doing, I get this distinct impression that they're starting to get infected with bullshit language (which usually leads to bullshit thinking). The presentation is full of "wooden language". It's like it was made for some corporate managers or something. And don't get me started on pictrues in the presentation. It really feels like clip-arts all over again. I just hope they don't add them to Google Docs.
  - warfangle 12y ago
    > It's like it was made for some corporate managers or something. Because it was ;)
- paulojreis 12y ago
  Yeah. They are criticizing the jargon and methods of "big business", yet the language they use and the methods they promote are what all big businesses advocate today (even if only as PR stunts). I work at a telco, so just imagine the amount of BS I hear being touted (but not applied, of course) everyday... It's no different than this - smart employees, innovation, moving fast,... - just presented in a lousier fashion. :)

barrystaes 12y ago

That stupid webpage keeps forwarding me to an empty page after a few seconds in.

rkaplan 12y ago
Me too. Use the embed link instead: http://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/40175706?rel=0 http://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/40175706?rel=...

pibefision 12y ago

I've received the book last week and read it during the weekend. It has plenty of insights and great ideas that you can take and try to use in your current area of work.

WoodenChair 12y ago

I found these slides rather shallow. Smart, creative people are the best employees? Who knew! The Internet led to massive disruptions in traditional businesses? Wow! Sorry for my cynicism/sarcasm, but I see the book campaign as Eric Schmidt positioning himself for his next role. He's trying to secure his personal Google legacy as he gets ready for an exit. I can't imagine it's all that enticing to go from CEO to chairman in a company where the founder takes back the CEO role... how much influence does that leave you?

mkx 12y ago
The slides, if not educational, are inspiring and elucidating . They might not reveal new insight, but frame existing insight in a way that's easy to understand.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
guybrushT 12y ago
> I found these slides rather shallow I couldn't agree more with you. I was expecting some fact-based, data-driven insights/perspectives from Google - so, for me I'd say the "insights" seem disappointingly shallow because they are just "opinions". I keep hearing that one of the big way in which "how google works" is different is that their "people operations" (HR) runs very differently from other companies. I would have loved to understand - how? "What's different now?" is such a, I am sorry to say, stupid question. Depending on anyone's opinion, their world view, whether they think macro or micro - the answer can range from "nothing at all" to "everything is different". Lets take communication as an example - "what's different now?" - depending on who you talk to, they can argue that the fundamental needs are just the same (just forms have evolved) or someone can argue that things are radically different now because of X (where X could be snapchat or any new-age medium etc.). The same is true for entertainment - I have had discussions where I was convinced that the "fundamental need to be entertained" is just the same, but I also see so many new media around (so of course, its different now). It would have been great if they had given more insights on how a successful internet age company truly works from the inside - a bit more than "its best to work in small teams, keep them crowded, and foster serendipitous connections". I thought Eric/Google could contribute a new perspective to this discussion, given their vantage point. Otherwise its just another tautological business/self-help book. I am a bit disappointed because Google's vantage point in this world is so unique (they see so many things in the world, that others don't - given their reach & size) - that they could have really added something very positive and new to "What's different now". The whole point about "Smart Creatives" also seems so shallow - for hundreds of years and maybe before, "Smart Creatives" as they have defined it, are having tremendous impact! Where is the "So what?" I understand that this is just a teaser to encourage people to read the book. If so, its just bereft of any fact-based, data-driven, truly unique perspectives or insights that I, personally just won't bother.

general_failure 12y ago

Dunno but I found most of it fairly clichéd

_pmf_ 12y ago
> Dunno but I found most of it fairly clichéd That's what they get from imitating Apple, the poster child of whitewashed generic stock presentations.

andy_ppp 12y ago

Wow! I Love him talking about creating company culture for smart creative people! Those are presumably the same smart creative people that Google illegally stopped from competing in the job market. Nice one!

junto 12y ago

Page 54. For the success of those products we need to add two extra components (in my opinion): http://image.slidesharecdn.com/howgoogleworksfinal1-141012171037-conversion-gate01/95/how-google-works-15-638.jpg?cb=1413303906 http://image.slidesharecdn.com/howgoogleworksfinal1-14101217... (Technical knowledge + business expertise + creativity) You also need: Luck + Hard (smarter) work

phreanix 12y ago

Was that a little nod to Apple in slide 42?

bsaul 12y ago

I think google's culture has become quite of a joke, and only the people inside the company are still not aware of it. "Do no evil" has been replaced by "pay no tax". They've launched two succesful products in their entire history (search engine and gmail), the rest has been bought or only work because they're given away for free. An from what i've heard, internal culture with meetings that explain what should people at google think to really be a "googler" is turning into an orwelian nightmare ("but it's for the general good" isn't an answer to limited personnal opinion).

ardoi 12y ago

Interesting how on slide 15 when describing characteristics of smart creatives, out of technical knowledge, business expertise and creativity it is business expertise that is associated with needing brain power.

plainOldText 12y ago

One line from the slides (33) - "Optimize for growth, not revenue." I'm curious, why is everyone nowadays so obsessed with growth? Is growth really that much more important than revenue? What if you strike a balance between the two? I remember reading what one of the WhatsApp's founders once said: "[..] we focused on business sustainability and revenue rather than getting big fast [..]" And it looks like they did alright.

jadc 12y ago
I am not sure what the full context for your quote is, but most people would agree that Whatsapp focused on growth (in terms of number of users) and not so much revenue (i.e. they made enough to be sustainable and independent).
- plainOldText 12y ago
  source for the quote: http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2014-02/19/whatsapp-exclusive http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2014-02/19/whatsapp-excl...
rmsaksida 12y ago
There was a post about Zoho just yesterday, a company which always focused in sustainability and revenue and did very well. (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8456398 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8456398)
pinkyand 12y ago
Many businesses today have a relatively strong network effects of some sort.With that kind of business , growth is what's needed to achieve competitive advantage.

rmsaksida 12y ago

The presentation is a little silly, yes, but if there's any truth to it - if Google actually works this way - that could make all the difference. There are places that simply don't give a shit about "smart creative" types, and there are places that claim to have a Google-like culture but in practice are just regular old boss-centric jobs. Every CEO wants to be like Google, but very few actually commit to it. It usually starts like this: the CEO wants to have smart creatives and delegate decisions. But then he thinks about all that hard-won money he'll be throwing at an employee, so he hires someone middle level or fresh out of college "with huge potential". Then he systematically micromanages the guy, because he just can't make that jump. The poor soul either abides (not so smart creative after all) or quickly runs out of steam (this guy will quickly start looking at job posts). Eventually the new hire disappoints in some way and the CEO cynically complains about the failed promises of the cool tech company culture which he tried to implement. Seeing a very successful company like Google follow these principles, and win, might influence decision makers in a positive way.

frozenport 12y ago

If you are the top tech company is it hard to attract talent?

Leander_B 12y ago

And then you apply for a job and wait... wait... and wait some more with no updates. Rather fix/speed up recruiting than making bogus slides. If a customer (or applicant) expresses interest in your company, also be humble and give an answer within acceptable time.

freshflowers 12y ago

The fact that this content-free advertisement for Google gets upvoted to the front-page of a community where most people can see right through it (regardless of how they personally feel about Google) suggest HN is getting astro-turfed. Seriously, who upvotes this?

dothething 12y ago

Seems like a desperate attempt to drum up book sales. Whomever created this could have just found motivational posters and pasted them in all 50 slides. I found nothing in this but same old tired cliches; try hard, don't give up, think big. "What's different now?"

diltonm 12y ago

The images were distracting, the text was not prominent enough and slide 29 is religiously and humanly offensive to several billion people.

peterwwillis 12y ago

> "Never forget that hiring is the most important thing you do." Uhh.... I think at least a hundred commenters on HN who've gone through Google hiring would disagree with you.

jason_slack 12y ago

I can't seem to find it but Jeff Dean did a talk a long while back about How Google's search works, how they predict. I wish I could see it again. He talks about "shard" servers. Anyone remember this?

dalke 12y ago

The answer to "What has changed? Which assumptions do people make that are no longer true? Why does everything feel like it's speeding up?" is supposedly "Technology is transforming virtually every business sector." It list three examples which are mostly true. But the same answer could easily have been said any time in at least the last 120 years -- and it was. I think the complaint about the shallow content in this presentation is completely justified, because there's nothing really new about the idea of change. Steam power. Electricity. Telegraph. Telephone. Mechanical calculators. Slide rules. Cheap aluminum. Flight. Punch card sorting machines. Linotype machines. Each of those are examples where technology transformed business sectors. The telegraph made it possible for information to reach around the world on the same day it happened. Ham radio enthusiasts talked to each other around the world, including bouncing TV signals off the moon. Scratch off the names and it's the same ideas that this presentation promotes as something somehow new. It's assumes the fallacy that what you grew up with was slow and unchanging. It's difficult to read much of the research literature from the 1960s without hearing people talk about the "information explosion" and there being too much change and things out of balance. Mail order is an 1800s example of "barriers to entry melting away" and is how Sears gained its fame. So was the rise of the daily newspaper, subsidized by advertising that made is possible for people to know what was available. "Power has shifted from companies to consumers" ... Hello, the 1930s called. Consumer Reports wants to know if you would like a subscription so they can pay for rigorous testing. Or do you seriously think that mass edited unrestricted feedback can't be gamed? "Individuals and small teams have a massive impact." etc. That sounds a lot like the HP Way, which has as point #1 "We have trust and respect for individuals" Except, oddly enough, the Google way doesn't mention ethics. Compare to the HP Way where "We conduct our business with uncompromising integrity." and that as a good corporate citizen HP will "meet the obligations of good citizenship by making contributions to the community and to the institutions in our society which generate the environment in which we operate. Does Google consider ethics less important than business nirvana? What is new in this presentation that HP didn't cover in the 1960s?

modx07 12y ago

"Focus on growth, not on revenue" Not an exact quote but an idea that was expressed in the slides. I'm curious as to how one achieves this....if this was a sincere bit of advice then I'd love to learn more about what he meant!

dennisgorelik 12y ago

These slides are one of recruiting tools for Google.