Are you Google material?
I've got a backlog of new posts saved as drafts, which I'll try to finish up in the next few days. Until then, check out this really interesting recruiting video from Google ...
Clearly, the video demonstrates ...
- Google's commitment to attracting and developing great people. The video alludes to how Google defines executive greatness -- which makes it much easier for Google to spot great candidates when they apply. You'd be amazed at how many companies lack a consensus on what makes an executive great. And if you haven't defined executive greatness, then you won't be able to identify it and hire it when it comes along.
- How Google is building a great company. Those of you who have read Good to Great will notice how Google is concentrating on the "First who -- then what" rule, whereby a "Good to Great" company focuses first on getting the right people on the bus, and then figures out exactly where to drive it. This is critically important in an industry like online search, which is characterized by dynamic change. Moreover, the incredible rate at which Google hires new employees forces it to be clear about which ones will mesh with the company's culture.
As you watch the video, there are a couple of things to note about how Google manages its employees:
- Implementation of the 20% Rule - At Google, all engineers get to devote 20% of their time to work on pet projects (assuming, I guess, that the project is relevant to Google's business). In most companies, it takes a special kind of person to be an intrapreneur: Usually, intrepreneurs must be able to identify what's relevant to their company's strategic thrust, and then sell their ideas internally, marshaling corporate resources around the new concept. This is hard to do: Human beings tend to fear what they don't understand and kill what they fear, so getting a company to nurture the possible cannibalization of an existing business takes guts. Jack Welch tried it at GE with his DestroyYourBusiness.com initiative -- but that's not the same as paying one's engineers 20 cents on every dollar to do it. With its 20% Rule, Google seems to have squarely addressed Clayton Christensen's Innovator's Dilemma.
- Change is implemented in days and weeks. In cultures characterized by that kind of speed, all planning must be reality-based and execution-oriented. Think about it: If an engineer is expected to demonstrate value (however abstract) for the discretionary 20% of his time, the peer pressure to develop commercially viable projects must be amazing. In such an environment, I'd imagine that, eventually, every Google engineer learns to assess the viability of his ideas in much the same way a venture capitalist would.
Surprisingly, Google is unconcerned that candidates come from prestigious schools. However, Google does seek candidates who are passionate, high-energy, understand the Google product space, and commited to great engineering.
And how does Google identify candidates who can apply complex engineering concepts in the workaday lives of ordinary people? This interview question from Google's co-founder, Sergey Brin, gives a clue:
"I'm going to give you five minutes," Mr. Brin tells a typical candidate. "When I come back, I want you to explain to me something complicated that I don't already know."
Peter Drucker used to say that the best way to gut check the leadership ability of an executive is to ask yourself "Would I want my child to work for this person?" In Mr. Brin's case, I'd have to say yes -- especially if my kid were a budding software engineer.
To see Google's CEO, Eric Schmidt, discussing his own job interview with Sergey Brin, click here.
____________________________________________
Q: Need the number of a recruiter who "gets it?"
A: Download Harry's contact info for future reference.
Comments