Question

Google faced a challenge. Ever since the company started, it’s highly trained and self-motivated engineers questioned whether they needed managers. In the high-technology culture, employees actually believed that managers did more harm than good. But Google grew rapidly and by 2013 had 37,000 employees with just 5,000 managers, 1,000 directors, and 100 vice presidents. The organizational structure was flat rather than hierarchical. How could Google’s managers convince its skeptical employees that they needed managers to operate effectively and remain competitive?

Google launched Project Oxygen to prove that managers don’t make a difference (this was their hypothesis). “Luckily, we failed,” said project co-lead Neal Patel. To accomplish the goal, they hired several PhD researchers to form a people analytics team. As with everything Google does, they applied hypothesis-driven research methods to analyze the “soft skills” of managers. Project Oxygen was a multiyear research study designed to uncover the key management behaviors that predict employee satisfaction and organizational effectiveness. One part of the project was an employee survey about their managers’ behaviors. The research team also interviewed employees who were quitting about the behaviors of their managers and why they were leaving Google. The team discovered that there was less turnover on teams with the best managers. They also documented a statistical relationship between high-scoring managers’ behaviors and employee satisfaction. So they concluded that managers did matter and then conducted another study to learn specifically what Google’s best managers did.

Here’s what they found. Project Oxygen identified eight behaviors shared by high-scoring managers:

• Is a good coach
• Empowers the team and does not micromanage
• Expresses interest in, and concern for, team members’ success and personal well-being
• Is productive and results-oriented
• Is a good communicator — listens and shares information
• Helps with career development
• Has a clear vision and strategy for the team
• Has key technical skills that help him or her advise the team.

Because this project was evidence-based, the sceptical engineers were convinced that the best managers did make a difference. In describing Project Oxygen, David A. Garvin from the Harvard Business School notes: “Data-driven cultures, Google-discovered, respond well to data-driven change.” Google now offers training and feedback to low-scoring managers. However, they learned that the best approach is to have panels of highly rated managers tell their stories about how they coach and empower their teams. Rather than being told what to do by upper management, they get advice from their colleagues.

Answer the following questions thoroughly. Provide language and evidence taken directly from the course and course concepts. Define all organizational behavior terms and explain all theories.

1. Why did they use an evidence-based approach? Describe the type(s) of evidence Google used in their research.
2. Are you convinced that managers matter? Why or why not? What additional evidence would you like to see?
3. Describe a design for the next steps in Project Oxygen to further develop Google’s managers.

Answer 1

They used an evidence based approach not to prepare for the future, rather cope up with an existing situation. For this evidence-Based research Google chose the employees who were quitting google to conduct interviews about managers and their importance in a team.

Hypothetical approach, or data driven approach is good to make strategies for the future, however when you are already struggling with a problem, it is best to go straight into the action and ask the people who are facing the problem themselves, as to what are their views on it.

After seeing the results of this evidence- based approach i am definitely convinced that managers matter. A manager is like the leader of a group essential to drive the team through good and bad by transferring vision and approach, and even skills to make sure each individual in the team is able to perform its best.

The additional evidence that I would need to see in the above case is the duration, for each manager for which they had been managing the same team. The reason behind this is that a manager needs time to build synergy with its team, and share a bond wherein, he understands every member of the team to full potential.

The next step in the project Oxygen could be workshops for managers, by other managers who are performing really well on numbers. These workshops could act as a smart way of knowledge transfer and experience sharing.