Ethics and Management 7 “Google” Ethics and Management Isaac Moreno, Roy Rexroat, and Christina Ramirez Hawaii Pacific University Lindsey A. Gibson, PhD November 25, 2014 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The objective of the review is to provide an ethical and moral perspective within management and to instill a good guidance system for business organizations with estimation on the usefulness and competence of the use of Google’s Internet websites as a communication tool for information distribution. It emphasizes the importance of related issues such as behavior management system, and accessibilities. This information will also discuss the main challenges faced when managing their website. Google has established for a variety of purposes one thing is for sure, is that information dissemination to personnel can be used as a platform to manage e-business applications with top efficiency. A requirement for good ethical behavior is to have an excellent website which can effectively govern online with a functioning decision making mechanism enabling good interaction between key initiatives. Website governance and strategy must be well devised by having the ability to align and incorporate well with other business strategies. Three of these major strategies deal with communication, funding, and human resources. The execution taking Google to the top would be to use a good website strategy which must be through clear, consistent, and all-inclusive with timely regulations and directive guidelines. The implementation of an ethical system would help centralize all website-related activities. The most important characteristics of a good management system will be out to ease when being used by top management, customizable workflow, high protection and a multilingual foundation. The current level of employment and related training resources for website management are currently insufficient, considering the significance and impact that websites have on the organizations’ which are mandated. Without appropriate funding and experienced management, a website would lose its effectiveness and value in a short period of time. Having a good management system in an organization are faces various challenges for unifying their web presence through efficient content and having an application of consistent online trademark. Attentiveness should be increased by the organization at large to other departments in which the web can continue to develop, and that it would require considerable and sustained assets in human resources and training. For most of these challenges, they will curtail from the decentralized structure of most management system and websites in terms of content generation, due to the lack of overall web governance, executive web strategy integrated with business communications, standard guidelines, policies and expertise. Listed below are the suggestions addressed to all departments of Google. Other recommendations proposed for the considerations for top ma ...

1. Ethics and Management
7
“Google” Ethics and Management
Isaac Moreno, Roy Rexroat, and Christina Ramirez
Hawaii Pacific University
Lindsey A. Gibson, PhD
November 25, 2014
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The objective of the review is to provide an ethical and moral
perspective within management and to instill a good guidance
system for business organizations with estimation on the
usefulness and competence of the use of Google’s Internet
websites as a communication tool for information distribution.
It emphasizes the importance of related issues such as behavior
management system, and accessibilities. This information will
also discuss the main challenges faced when managing their
website. Google has established for a variety of purposes one
thing is for sure, is that information dissemination to personnel
can be used as a platform to manage e-business applications
with top efficiency. A requirement for good ethical behavior is
to have an excellent website which can effectively govern
online with a functioning decision making mechanism enabling
good interaction between key initiatives.
Website governance and strategy must be well devised by
having the ability to align and incorporate well with other
business strategies. Three of these major strategies deal with

2. communication, funding, and human resources. The execution
taking Google to the top would be to use a good website
strategy which must be through clear, consistent, and all-
inclusive with timely regulations and directive guidelines. The
implementation of an ethical system would help centralize all
website-related activities. The most important characteristics of
a good management system will be out to ease when being used
by top management, customizable workflow, high protection
and a multilingual foundation.
The current level of employment and related training resources
for website management are currently insufficient, considering
the significance and impact that websites have on the
organizations’ which are mandated. Without appropriate
funding and experienced management, a website would lose its
effectiveness and value in a short period of time. Having a good
management system in an organization are faces various
challenges for unifying their web presence through efficient
content and having an application of consistent online
trademark. Attentiveness should be increased by the
organization at large to other departments in which the web can
continue to develop, and that it would require considerable and
sustained assets in human resources and training.
For most of these challenges, they will curtail from the
decentralized structure of most management system and
websites in terms of content generation, due to the lack of
overall web governance, executive web strategy integrated with
business communications, standard guidelines, policies and
expertise. Listed below are the suggestions addressed to all
departments of Google. Other recommendations proposed for
the considerations for top management can be found in the body
of this information. The implementation of these
recommendations would increase the effectiveness and
efficiency of Google’s management of their internet website, in
particular through good website governance and updated
website strategy and policy.
Legal analysis of Google’s ethical responsibilities and expanded

3. encounters: Larry Page and Sergey Brin have tried to keep the
small company feel that they had when they started out but
obviously some changes have occurred with becoming a mega
corporation. The company culture has evolved to be a carefree
environment with the feeling that you are not at work. Although
it is work and a work environment is legally what has been
born. This environment has all of the same rules and regulations
as any other job. The protection for the employee still exists
and labor laws protect people.
Google has encountered legal and ethical dilemmas, which have
helped its image and raised concern as well. Google has had a
line of “trust” issues spanning from privacy with “Street view”
to collecting email passwords (Liedtke, 2010). Although Google
is a US company its is available wherever the Internet can be
accessed without local governments blocking it. This creates a
standard of business practice for Google to adhere to US
regulations with regard to US service. So the legal and ethical
issue constantly is challenged asking who do they legally have
sanctions with regards to laws and customs. Google has broken
local laws in almost every jurisdiction that it has service in.
Ethically speaking is it good that Google is writing the laws, as
the out of date methods of law cannot hold them liable for the
breach of breaking a law. In the EU Google was collecting data
from unsecured Wi-Fi servers and services, which is not illegal.
The information that it was collecting was obtained by scooping
up unprotected Wi-Fi networks with the Google Street –view
cars. This was looked at as a form of wire-tapping and made
people outraged. This type of behavior threatened the public’s
trust with Google. Google immediately apologized and no
longer equips its cars with Wi-Fi detecting devices (Liedtke,
2010).
Google uses its motivation for its employees in many forms.
With over 50,000 emplyees it must continue to strive for
excellence but in its unique way. In 2014 it was named “Best
company to work for” by Fortune Magazine (On, 2014). Google
although making the list 5 times in a row still seems to follow

4. local labor laws steer away from employee backlash. This is
heavily built upon their culture, leadership, and motivation.
Google offers amazing perks and benefits such as flex-spending
accounts, no-cost health benefits, vacation packages, tuition
reimbursement, and 18 weeks off paid maternity benefits (On,
2014). All of their benefits go way above and beyond any legal
standard. They offer onsite medical doctors and fitness centers
which helps compliment the on-site car wash and oil change.
Lunch and dinner are provided completely free and gourmet
snacks everyday. They offer a democratic voice where every
week they discuss the top 20 most asked questions (On, 2014).
So with all of this fun and transparent work environment how
does Google still manage to end up in legal issues? The answer
is simple, they are contiully on the cutting edge of creating
situations that have never been created before. Google goes
where people want to go but did not know they really wanted to
go there. They answer questions like “what does technology
want”? This type of exploratory model sends them into
unchartered territory from time to time.
The major legal issues that seem to arise are overstepping
Google’s boundaries onto individual’s personal privacy. The
boundary that Google is stepping in addition to personal is on
local laws with regard to Internet regulation within
governmental jurisdictions in the US and other countries. In
countries such as China the local government mandated that
Google censor certain information from its search engines.
China has taken great lengths to ensure searchable topics such
as Tiananmen massacre, democratic activism, Free Tibet, and
other sensitive topics be unsearchable by its citizens (Frizell,
2014). Google reacted initially by adding a feature banner
warning to users that the search content may break connection
to Google and it is outside of Google’s control (Lomas, 2013).
Google decided to drop the banner warning as it was already
being censored and did not see the benefit of continuing the
feature. Google struck a deal with the Chinese Government
allowing it to self-censor. This decision brought up several

5. ethical topics such as Googles rights and obligations to offer
content without censorship. In regards to traditional business
standards Google was banned in China in 2005. This then set
Google on a path to create a search engine specifically for
China by creating a “Hack” by using a “back-list” of banned
websites. They did this by setting up a computer within China
that would get blocked by the Chinese firewall and learn which
search words were banned (Keen, 2006). This was a legal
alternative reached by Google and the Chinese Government.
This then created a “Google China” search from within China
that would not bring up unauthorized content. The question then
was did Google violate its own business standards.
Google’s claims to “focus on the user and all else will follow”,
this is from their own website, recently Larry page admitted that
Google “probably needs a new mission statement” (Andrew,
2014). Google is far from its inception 14 years ago and now
has a power presence in advertising, email, publishing, movies,
automotive, education, and mapping industries. They have
become so powerful that lawmakers now have their full
attention focused on Google (Andrew, 2014). Terror groups
such as Alqueda and ISIS are using the Internet for promoting
their agenda, therefore companies like Google need to think
ethically and cooperate with lawmakers to stifle such potential
threats in the future according to Robert Hannigan the Uk spy
chief (Andrew, 2014).
Based upon the general legal analysis of Google’s presence the
recommendation of using this US Company owned resource to
help search out “Bad Guys’ and thwart future notorious acts in a
must. Google not only has a duty to protect its home country but
to protect its users from violence and evil powers. The UK
government has sought out Google’s help for combating
extremists online. Other companies include Twitter, Facebook,
and Microsoft which the British Prime Minister David Cameron
have discussed ways they can reduce the spread of recruiting
and messages online (Gross, 2014). This type of request is

6. something that they are willing to grant but a larger leagal and
ethical dillama rises. The issues of general data protection and
privacy are in question. Google, as well as the others have a
policy that removes posting of violence or threatening content.
The problem lies within most of these evil organizations are not
generally posting openly violent content but in code (Gross,
2014). The other issue that Google faces is countries who claim
the need for information based upon their endless granting of
power. Google has to make a decision based upon the ethical
dilemma of giving up the information, censorship, or privacy.
There is no cut a clear answer but at the present time it is a very
delicate relationship with all parties involved from the user to
the authorities and the companies providing the services.
References
Andrew, K. (2014, Nov 10). CNNopinion. Retrieved Dec 1,
2014, from CNN:
http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/10/opinion/google-new-mission-
statement/
Frizell, S. (2014, June 4). China. Retrieved Dec 1, 2014, from
Time: http://time.com/2820452/china-
censor-web/
Gross, J. (2014, Oct 22). Wall Street Journal online. Retrieved
Dec 1, 2014, from Wall Street Journal:
http://online.wsj.com/articles/u-k-seeks-help-from-tech-firms-
in-combating-extremists-online-

7. 1414010650
Keen, A. (2006, May 3). Google in the Garden of Good and
evil; how the Search-engine giant moved
beyond mere morality. Retrieved Dec 1, 2014, from The weekly
standard:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/00
0/012/176wtlbv.asp
Liedtke, M. (2010, Oct 27). Tech. Retrieved Dec 1, 2014, from
Huffington post:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20101027/us-tec-
google-ftc/
Lomas, N. (2013, Jan 4). TechCrunch Crunchbase. Retrieved
Dec 1, 2014, from TechCrunch:
http://techcrunch.com/2013/01/04/google-quietly-removes-
censorship-warning-feature-for-
search-users-in-china/
On, M. (2014, Sept 25). Human Resources. Retrieved Dec 1,
2014, from entrepreneurial Insights:
http://www.entrepreneurial-insights.com/google-way-
motivating-employees/

8. GOOGLE Paper Structure:
Must be typed, double-spaced with a one inch margin, and 12
point New Times Roman font.
Please organize as follows:
Body:
This is the analysis section of your paper containing details of
the areas in your executive summary. The following sub-
sections are needed:
Introduction
Company description, if applicable
Ethical Analysis
a. What are the ethical issues in this case? Describe
b. Analyze the ethical issues by applying several course
concepts and theories
c. Recommendations and conclusion based upon your ethical
analysis. Your conclusions and recommendations must be
supported by the course concepts you described in the preceding
section and not based on opinion.
Overall Recommendations
The overall recommendations must contain preventive measures
that address the prevention of ethical and legal problems.