• Save
MANAGING PEOPLE Group Assignment - Examine the success of Google.com
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Like this? Share it with your network


MANAGING PEOPLE Group Assignment - Examine the success of Google.com



- Critically evaluate the performance of groups within Googles’ work culture. ...

- Critically evaluate the performance of groups within Googles’ work culture.
- Discuss the concept of empowerment and its relevance to Google.
- Discuss what management problems you and your team foresee that Google faces in the next few years in order to remain competitive.
- Through your research discuss the success/failure of any other organisation which you consider to be similar in structure and managerial philosophy to Google.



Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



1 Embed 1

http://v2p.syncrocloud.com 1



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

MANAGING PEOPLE Group Assignment - Examine the success of Google.com Document Transcript

  • 1. KCB IDs: 14478, 14486, 14507, 14508 University of Wales (Kensington Collage of Business) MBA MODULE TITLE: MANAGING PEOPLE GROUP ASSINGMENT TITLE:Examine the success of Google.com and report on the following management issues (Questions 1,2,3, and 4) LECTURER NAME: JAS NAIDOO KCB IDs: 14478, 14486, 14507, 14508 DATE OF SUBMISSION: 11/03/2011 0
  • 2. KCB IDs: 14478, 14486, 14507, 14508Question-1: Critically evaluate the performance of groups within Googles’ work culture.This paper will discuss performance of groups in the following paragraphs, the impact of Control,Hygiene, Maslow Theories and Cultural Diversity on performance teams within Google’s workculture. The member of this kind of team should go through professional teaching to make them tohave comprehensive information of group dynamics, gathering information and critical thinking.According to Goffman `performance` may be defined as all the activity of a given participant on agiven occasion which serves to influence in any way, any of the other participants.Culture (Control Theory)Handy (1985) evaluated the effort of Roger Harrison as culture is associated with OrganizationalStructure and Culture. Google is consisted of task culture in which teams are established to solveparticular problems. Power comes from expertise. These cultures often present the multiplereporting lines of a matrix structure.Control theory, developed by Hamilton in 1922, managers have a finite amount of time, energy, andattention to devote their job. As they are close to supreme head of the whole organization, Googleuses control theory by working groups in three (triumvirate), they act and decide quickly. By thisway, they managed hundreds of projects all at once.Motivation-Hygiene TheoryHerzberg (1959) developed the motivation-hygiene theory which shows the factors causing jobsatisfaction and dissatisfaction.a)Hygiene Factors:Pay and benefits: Google increased the salaries and it is taken as tactics of human resources in orderto prevent the employees move to other firms, such as Facebook. The base 10 percent salary boostapplied to each Google workers.250 percent bonuses of the base salary is applied to top executives.Half of bonuses are based on individual performances and the other half will be financialperformances.Status: The engineers are brainiest on globe and they are happy to work with the best and brightestpeople in their field in a collegial, cooperative atmosphere. Stanford Ph.D.s are so common. It affectsGoogle culture.Supervision: They work in small groups and they manage their own projects. Having self-disciplineinside a mini-dot.com boom company is difficult. In this case, adult supervision will always beneeded.Interpersonal Relations: Google ended up employing many AltaVista engineers, who made enormouscontributions to Google’s success. According to cultural diversity theory, diversity is high such as;rivals’ engineers, best engineers in the world, gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transsexual employees,women engineers, black network, employees from different nationalities. All disappears nationalboundaries to strenghten the company’s retention programs. They don’t have strict rules. Disputesare common, but points are won or lost. Employees are happy and respectful to each other.Company Policy-Administration: Google feels small while growing rapidly. The other companyprinciples are; `work should be fun`, `It’s best to do one thing really, really well`, `fast is better thanslow`, `you can make money without doing evil`, `you can be serious without a suit`, `always delivermore than expected`. They spend 20 percent of their time working on what they think will mostbenefit Google. This drives them to be more creative and their goal is to change the world.Work Conditions: They supply first class facilities to their workers such as; free fabulous food, diningfacilities, gyms, laundry rooms, massage rooms, haircuts, carwashes, dry cleaning, wide variety 1
  • 3. KCB IDs: 14478, 14486, 14507, 14508insurance programs, employee assistance plan, retirement and savings plan, holidays, collegesavings plan, time away vacation, maternity benefits, take-out benefits, tuition reimbursement,employee referral program, back-up child care, on-site doctor and other great benefits.Job Security: They have wide variety insurance programs such as; dental insurance, vision insurance,life and AD insurance, voluntary life insurance, short term & long term disability insurance, businesstravel accident insurance, employee retirement and savings plan.Google gives importance to quality of work life, give effrot to value their engineers and be respectfulto them. Google create a desired work environment and the world’s worker of choice. As jobsatisfaction is too high, the success of the company is one of the highest companies all around theworld. Page said `happy people are more productive`. The effectiveness and productivity of workincrease substantially when employees are satisfied with their performance.b)Motivators:Achievement: The accomplishment period is quick and achievement is more personal in smallgroups. People from different nationalities and different cultures use their products. David Friedbergexplained that good employing is crucial for Google’s achievement. `There are certain types ofpeople where it is not about the money. And the firm employes those kinds of people.`Recognittion for achievement: With of visitors every month, Google has become an essential part ofeveryday life, -like a good friend-connecting people. The brand is famous all around the world withits global success.Work itself: Workers performing within Google should have the freedom to talk about their ownthoughts and ideas, use them in practice to bring considerable profits to the firm and its employees.Responsibility: Each member of Google workers carry high responsibilities of managing the grouptask because they are so intelligent. Each employees can change the world so responsibility is veryhigh.Advancement: The employees at Google are all bright, impatient, ambitious people and they wantto be CEO from the first date of their career starts. In terms of rewarding pschology and motivation;Google approved `Founders’ Award` for employees for a while to the people who showentrepreneurial achievement, in order to keep them at the firm but the application didn’t work andchanged with delivering smaller prizes because some the workers felt overlooked at the company.Growth: Google is fast growing start-ups. Google is the technology leader in organizing the world’sinformation. Each employee can feel their professional growth as they deal with new challenges intheir group performance.As the company is famous, unique, fast growing and successful; motivation is very high at thecompany. Google is far beyond their rivals and the employees feel themselves special, important,happy and highly motivated.Maslow TheoryThe work of Maslow makes the point that needs are organized on a priority basis. As basic needsbecome relatively satisfied the higher needs come to the fore and become motivating influences.Physiological, safety, social, esteem, self-actualization. Google satisfied employees’ all needsincluded self-actuailization and accomplishment levels. Google created a desirable workatmosphere for its employees to make them more happy and creative. This directly effects thegroup effectiveness in a positive way. 2
  • 4. KCB IDs: 14478, 14486, 14507, 14508Question-2: Discuss the concept of empowerment and its relevance to Google.Empowerment is the process of authorizing employees to debate, analysis, take action, decisionmaking, keep under-control the management and make some corrective activities via takingdecisions in independent ways.This is a new atmosphere for the company which authorize employees to become more creative andforce them to take more responsibilities. Consequently, the more contribution for the company.Empowerment concepts are one of the hardest criteria to implement for the companies. The mainproblem is that executives has lack of information which provides understanding problem aboutwhat is empowerment and how the implementation going to become. It should be embraced andcelebrated as a critical element in the formula for success.Generally, perception of management is controlling people and forcing them to work under-pressureand when they see the result of people who has no self-confidence to say something which makescompany more proactive; managers think that this is a big success which they have done well.Nowadays, there are companies which are exaggerating controlling employees for instance limitedtoilet breaks, standing behind while you are working, strict warning even being late for 5 minutesand so on. Managers do not hesitate to put you down and behaving you like a robot. On the otherhand, the expectation of the high level of the work without appreciation.Google denied to acting as many companies do. Google provides flexible work policy that allowsstaffs to work freely and forces, encourages staffs to use once a week to discover any sort ofinteresting projects individually, is fine and probably not harmful, if unpredictable. After all, Googleis not the first high profitable, non-mature, fast-growing organisation to tell its staffs that workshouldnt feel `corporate`. Likewise, its practically a tradition for such policies to be scaled back ifand when growth and profits slow. For the company, this situation seems unlikely in soon, butlonger-term itd been bet such flexibility will indeed be curtailed.Google has implemented a Formula which they have generated. The formula is 70-20-10; if we needto open it: This rule means they have free time to spend on their current assignments which is 70%.On their related projects 20% and the rest which is 10% on new project where they want. 70-20-10formula is a guide for management but it enables also employees to take risks. Instead of normaland also formal channel Google’s management perception forces and encourages employees towork directly with each other. Open communication Google’s provides to the organization and ideapolicy is managerial feature which is one of the most important. It provides the employees a sensethat they can contribute to the Google’s business goals.Google let employees set their own goals instead of company’s mutual goals. Google sees managersnot for controlling employees and feel them like they are under-pressure. Google sees theirmanagers as a leader to empower their employees. Employees set their goals and make evaluationsquarterly basis and in that chain managers’ duty is to make recommendations in order to be reachedthe goals by employees. Managers are acting as supervisors on the other hand employees` feels likethey are leaders because they are setting their own goals. This provides more contribution incompany. Google let the employees determine their own parameters on their tasks and duties andencourage to the leader of their own. Google wants their employees to think loud in order to getmore contribution and remove the barriers between departments and also individuals. Everyemployee has an access to be in a meeting of every department. That transparency provides everydata to all employees and it helps to determine their goals and also reach their goals. Employeeslove to work in Google but not because of good salary and bonuses, employees love the work whichcomes from the cross-functional leadership structure. 3
  • 5. KCB IDs: 14478, 14486, 14507, 14508Google empowers their employees via training , freedom in the company to access every data ,development, information, let them to discover something which could be beneficial to thecompany, freedom to determine their goals, let them to be their own leaders and pieces of mind inthe company. These criteria are the key reasons to be innovative proactive and creative whichcompany has been targeted via empowerment process. It reflects as dynamism to Google.Employees also get benefit from these implementations. Employees focus on their own goals whichthey have determined and the evaluation the progress per quarter of the year, this implementationremoves the harmful effect of under-pressure. Hiring new employees is one of the ways ofempowerment for Google but the process of being employee of Google is quiet comprehensive. Themethodology of Google is unconventional. Company investigates all talents in universities and whenthey find a talent, they try to hunt it, so Microsoft does.The group of recruitment team in Google is quiet big and team consists of high number of companyworkers and they decide the level of training stage during the on boarding period. New employeesplace in small groups and in order to speed up the adaptation period and also absorbing thecompany culture.The data of the 100 Best Company to Work for 2007 of FORTUNE defined that Google is the top bestcompany to work for. This explains that how a successful structure Google has and also this is theproof of right empowerment policy.Question-3: Discuss what management problems you and your team foresee that Googlefaces in the next few years in order to remain competitive.What has Google done for just 12 years to become the 4th best valued brand on 2010 (Interbrand,2010), to hire 20.621 high skilled employees (Google Financial Tables, 2010), to become the 4th bestcompany to work for (Fortune, 2010) and so on? Matrix management structure, task culture, theconcept of empowerment, providing the motivation and satisfying of its highly skilled peopleresources and the workplace democracy which all have been successfully followed by Google as itsmanagement approach can be described as its recipe for complexity or chaos in remainedcompetitive business world. On the other hand will these doings be sustainable for Google in beyondchaotic and random business world?The Google co-founders Page&Brin, the businessmen who have never gone to business school buthave the shared success vision, have attempted the projects by using their own and their employees’distinctive dynamic competences and competitive advantages which occur on the market. Startingup the business by filling the existed lack of well search engine, hiring the top talented engineerswhile they were unemployed because of the explosion of the bubble of technology companies on2000, hiring Schmidt as a CEO on 2001 to structure the internal management have been themilestones of Google. As it’s defined on `Ten Things of Google`, one of their motto is “It’s the best todo one thing really, really well” by hiring really, really well engineers. According to Google’slocomotive motto, which is “Don’t be evil”, Google shares its success with its stakeholders. It’s amagnet for top talented engineers to working in Google because of the perks such as ‘FoundersAwards`, ’70-20-10 Formula / Flexible Work Time’, encouraging employees entrepreneurship, cross-functional management structure, being among the top talented engineers and so on. Google realizethat its engineers are the distinctive asset over its competitors, and the engineers realize thatworking in Google is distinctive from the others. This can be defined as a magical spiral which bringsthe success and wealthy. Google receives over 100 top talented applicants for every opened positionand the hiring process takes months.By hiring of Schmidt, the company has been structured in its unique matrix management structurewhich provides to organisation effectively managing wide variety of projects by wide range of highly 4
  • 6. KCB IDs: 14478, 14486, 14507, 14508skilled people resources. It has been said that by Schmidt “... putting the right business andmanagement structure around the vision and gem ...” have brought the success of Google. (Jarvis,2009). The matrix management has early formed on defence industry which had faced highchallenges to rapidly create more complex military equipment, during the World War 2 spread allover the world. The most highly skilled and intelligent people such as engineers, mathematicians andscientists were pooled for work assignments by being assigned to multiple projects while they wereworking on a project. Thus, each person might have to have multiple reporting lines, both verticaland horizontal, against the conventional definition of management principles about unity ofcommand that addresses the employee should receive commands from one line only and shouldreport to one line only. (Fayol, 1916) The mandatory of the rapidly and closely coordination of theprojects at all levels have brought the necessity of the multidirectional commands andmultidirectional communications.Schmidt reformed the coordination and communication of working teams effectively to meet therapid expansion of the organisation in order to remain competitive. The task culture which has smallteam approach, highly skilled and specialists in their own experienced area and multidirectionalcommunication (Handy, 1985) has harmonised with already existed empowerment and providingthe high level motivation and satisfaction of its employees.The existing management can be faced any possible issues because of the natural drawbacks of thematrix management structure and the treats from its rivals such as big companies like Microsoft orrapidly growing entrepreneurial companies which can be attractive for Geeks to work for.The main drawbacks can be defined as the insufficiency of management to communicate effectivelyamong the project groups, the insufficiency of management to resolve power challenges andconflicts, the lack of clear expectations of employees because of the lack of their interpersonal skillsand misaligned reward and accountability. The small autonomous project groups in Google havecohesively worked on individual tasks towards to the final result. Every engineer has known whathe/she should do about the particular task. The project managers and the function managers are theconnection nodes of the lines of the work flow from down to top even Page, Brin and Schmidt. Thereis a harmony of management from top to down because of the interpersonal skills and formalstructure however it seems informal. The highly consultative decision making have contributed tohave constructive conflicts. The system benefits from the hardness of the micromanagement ofhighly skilled engineers but from their interpersonal skills and their knowledge. The well structuredreward and accountability system helps to retain the top talented engineers.Google’s HR department is very important to sustain its success on the market against its rivals andto sustain its attractiveness to work for. If the department accidently doesn’t attach importance tothe strict hiring process of engineers and causes of hiring inferior engineers, it can cause to wreckthe Google’s attractiveness among the top talented engineers who are defined its distinctiveintangible asset by Google. The period of wrecking by maggots takes long time, maybe a decade.During this period the maggots can be very successful hiding themselves and converting others. Theconstructive conflicts may convert to deconstructive conflicts because of the culture of rising to theoccasion. The deconstructive conflicts may break the team spirit and may cause of not desiring toattend project teams in which the engineers cannot require permission to switch. The coordinationand multidirectional communication may be injured. The project teams may start to dumbing-downas well Google itself. The broken of attractiveness to work for may cause of inability to hire toptalented engineers and may reinforce the dumbing-down. For managing the poor interpersonalskilled and inferior engineers, Google may slowly switch to micromanagement which reduce thecreativity which is essential for Google’s competition against its rivals. 5
  • 7. KCB IDs: 14478, 14486, 14507, 14508On the other hand, the human beings don’t get satisfaction even he/she has many distinctiveopportunities from the others. Even if Google’s work conditions and perks seem attractive andsatisfying for employees, some employees can think of misaligned reward and accountability. Oncean employee thinks he/she faced unfairness, it badly effects his/her work motivation. Becoming themore key role of employee for the company may cause have the more expectation especially ifhe/she is top talented. This situation may cause seeking different opportunities such as having muchmore perks by working for Google’s rivals or becoming an entrepreneur to be like Google’s co-founders. Again Google may slowly and deliberately switch to micromanagement in which theengineers cannot require permission to control themselves on the tasks.Finally, the shared vision between the co-founders, Page&Brin, and the CEO, Schmidt, has been thelocomotive of success of the management. The harmony amongst them has encouraged whole thecompany from top to down to growing rapidly and sustainably. If the harmony breaks down becauseof any reason such as serious deconstructive conflicts amongst them or health problems which cancause demoralisation, Google may face to slow down on growing rapidly. Slowing down may spreadon a long period at dynamic, rapidly growing companies which are still managed by first generationtop management such as Google. For example the health problem of Steve Jobs, may have caused toslow down on growing of Apple in a period, maybe in a decade, if the prevention won’t be takenagainst this situation.Although it has been plotted some fast tracks to disaster for Google, it has been thinking that Googlehas had preventions not to have fast tracks to disaster even in a long period.Question-4: Through your research discuss the success/failure of any other organisationwhich you consider to be similar in structure and managerial philosophy to Google.There are lots of companies which has similar organisational structure and managerial philosophywith Google in the business world. Especially these companies are multinational companies whichhave common organisational problems and difficulties. All these companies have difficulties torespond market changes and their competitors’ actions. In addition to this, these organisations` solidhierarchical structure causes to make counter-moves to their competitors. Matrix organisationalstructure gives many possibilities to the companies to cope with these problems and also increasethe employees’ satisfaction.Procter&Gamble has a similar organisational structure like this such as Google. It has been wantedto analyse Procter&Gamble’s success or failure of its organisational structure because it has beenthought that it is a good example. Procter&Gamble has changed and restructured its organisation in1999. This makes this company easier to analyse its success or failure after this new structure.Procter&Gamble is an American worldwide company which is established in 1837. It contains manywell-known brands, such as Ariel, Braun, Gillette and Duracell. The company had some problems inthe year 2000’s first half. The company’s expected earnings growth rate was 14%. But it was toomuch line under this expectation and had just half of this rate. Although, Procter&Gamble wasannounced an enormous decrease its net profit in April 2000, for the period of January-March 2000.According to this situation, “Organization 2005” program has been announced and launched by DurkJager, Procter&Gamble’s CEO, in July 1999. This was a plan for six year length and provided a lot ofchanges in Procter&Gamble’s organizational structure. Program was included the standardization ofwork processes, revamping the organizational culture, reduction in hierarchies to enable fasterdecision-making, and retrenchment of employees. But the implementation of “Organisation 2005”program was not easy. The CEO, Jager, wanted to do so many changes in a short period. But hecouldn’t become successful and gave his post up in 2000; 17 months after starting the “Organisation2005“program. Alan George Lafley took over the Jager’s position. He also believed that the company 6
  • 8. KCB IDs: 14478, 14486, 14507, 14508needs a new organisational structure which easily responds the market changes and ease the newproducts innovation to mature market structure. He believed that the program was well-enough butthe implementation of this program had mistakes. And he decided to continue perform the programin his way.Procter&Gamble’s organisational success or failure has to be evaluated in two main parts. The firstpast should be success or failure about during implementation of this restructuring programbetween 1999 and 2005. Second part should be the Procter&Gamble’s success or failure dependingon the new organisational structure after 2005. This system will help us both understanding of howrestructuring a new organisation is difficult and whether this new organisation structure is beneficialto the company or not. It is believed that whether a company is successful or not, it has to beanalysed the company’s growth an acceptable rate or not also its profitability growth.As it was mentioned before, Jager, CEO, gave up his position in the company according to theProcter&Gamble’s dissatisfactory current position. While he was leaving his position he said, “I amproud of the vision we set out to achieve with Organization 2005, and weve made importantprogress. Its unfortunate our progress in stepping up top-line sales growth resulted in earningsdisappointments" (CNN Money, P&G CEO Quits Amid Woes, June 8, 2000). Immediately after statingto launch the program “Organisation 2005”, the company still had financial problems.Procter&Gamble’s shares were $117 in January 2000 but the stock fell below $90 a share in Februaryand also Procter&Gamble’s earnings dropped 10%. The expected earnings growth was a rise by 7%.This financial situation effected the implementation of “Organisation 2005” program. It can be saidthat it was a failure for the Procter&Gamble but it has been had to consider that to change thecompany’s whole organisation structure is not easy. Procter&Gamble is a big company and has lotsof employees. To decide and implement such a program has too many dangerous. One of the biggestdangers is the employee’s dissatisfaction. Because it has been had to consider not only thecompany’s financial position but also you have to consider the employee’s satisfaction. Theemployees have to be informed about changes and their future carriers in the organisation. Theemployees were informed about the organisation and their morale has not been affected during thisoperation. With this point of view Procter&Gamble’s financial lost while the implementation the“Organisation 2005” program was not big enough to mention about a failure.After the implementation of the “Organisation 2005” program, the company returned to moredynamic structure. Innovation of new products became easy for the Procter&Gamble.Procter&Gamble has very slow and solid hierarchical structure. The “Organisation 2005” programbrought rapid system and the company’s respond to changes in the market more effective andfaster. This new dynamic organisational structure made the Procter&Gamble more powerful than itscompetitors during the global recession in last 2 years. Also Procter&Gamble has a very goodposition in Fortune’s world most admired companies list from 2006 to 2010. In 2006Procter&Gamble was the third most admired company in the world. This success is directly relatedwith the Procter&Gamble’s new organisation structure. Procter&Gamble’s success was not only in2006 but also continued to 2010. The company was in top 5 during this period of time. In addition tothis Procter&Gamble’s financial position became better than before launching the “Organisation2005” program. These evidences can show us new organisation structure has added much to thecompany and its current position among its competitors.In conclusion, although some difficulties and problems with implementation to this neworganisational structure to the company, Procter&Gamble had been successful. The neworganisational structure has many visible evidences which can show its success. Organisationalstructure of the company has gained a new and fresh look escaping from the awkward structure.Innovation of the new products has been easier. In addition to this, satisfaction of the employeeshas increased and also Procter&Gamble has gained higher ranks in the last 5 years in Fortune’s most 7
  • 9. KCB IDs: 14478, 14486, 14507, 14508admired companies list. The differences between company’s previous position and its currentposition can help us to understand the benefits of this new organisational structure. According tothese differences it can be said that Procter&Gamble’s “Organisation 2005” had been successful.Total word count for Question-1 : 1062Total word count for Question-2 : 903Total word count for Question-3 : 1336Total word count for Question-4 : 1076(Total word count excluding Cover Page and References: 4377) 8
  • 10. KCB IDs: 14478, 14486, 14507, 14508REFERENCESBlanchard K., Carlos J.P., and Randolph A., 2001. The 3 Keys to Empowerment: Berret - KoehlerPublishersBusiness Featured News, 2010. Google Ten Percent Salary Raise [online], Available at:<URL: http://www.staho.com/google%E2%80%99s-10-percent-salary-raise/206725/>[Accessed: 25 February 2011]Cole G.A., 2004. Management: Theory and Practice 6th ed.: South Western Cengage LearningDegen R.J., 2009. Designing Matrix Organisations that Work: Lessons from the P&G Case: UNISOLBusiness School – Glob AdvantageFortune, 2010. 100 Best Companies to Work for [online]. Available at:<URL: http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/bestcompanies/2010/full_list/>[Accessed: 01 March 2011]Girard B., 2009. The Google Way: William PollockGoogle, 2010. Financial Tables [online]. Available at:<URL: http://investor.google.com/financial/tables.html>[Accessed: 01 March 2011]Google, 2009. Our Philosophy - Ten things we know to be true [online], Available at:<URL: http://www.google.co.uk/intl/en/corporate/tenthings.html>[Accessed: 01 March 2011]Heller R., 1999. Managing People (Essential Managers): Dorling KindersleyHerzberg F., Mausner B. and Snyderman B.B., 1993. The Motivation to Work: Transaction PublishersIndependent, 2011. Some adult supervision will ensure, Page keeps Google’s Fortune Safe [online],Available at:<URL:http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/comment/stephen-foley-some-adult-supervision-will-ensure-page-keeps-googles-fortune-safe-2191301.html#>[Accessed:25 February 2011]Jarvis J., 2009. What Would Google Do? : Harper Collins PublishersLowe J., 2009. Google Speaks: John Wiley & Sons IncMartin J., 2005. Organisational Behaviour and Management 3rd ed.: Thomson LearningMullins L.J., 2005. Management and Organisational Behaviour: Prentice Hall / Financial TimesOwen J., 2009. How to Manage: The Art of Making Things Happen 2nd ed.: PearsonProcter & Gamble, 2004. P & G: A Company History: Procter & GambleThompson N., 2006. Power and Empowerment: Russel House Pub. 9
  • 11. KCB IDs: 14478, 14486, 14507, 14508Time, 2006. In search of the real Google [online]. Available at:<URL: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1158961-1,00.html#ixzz1E83MSggm>[Accessed: 01 March 2011]Vise D.A., 2008. The Google Story 2nd ed.: Pan BooksOfficial Web SitesGOOGLE [online]. Available at:<URL: http://www.google.co.uk/intl/en/corporate/>[Accessed: 01 March 2011]INTERBRAND [online]. Available at:<URL: http://www.interbrand.com/en/best-global-brands/best-global-brands-2008/best-global-brands-2010.aspx>[Accessed: 01 March 2011]PROCTER & GAMBLE [online]. Available at:<URL: http://www.pg.com/en_US/index.shtml>[Accessed: 01 March 2011] 10