Google Inc. is an American international technology firm that specializes in internet related products and services. Some of its most notable services include software, cloud computing, search, and online advertising techniques. The organization’s management understands the importance of employees in creating a competitive advantage to win customers and create. As a result, the leadership has stringent recruitment process, which ensures that only the best-qualified personnel are hired. The management wishes to hire people who understand the speed at which changes have to be in initiated at the facility. In effect, workers ought to be exemplary in their roles and the entire company. The firm ensures that the recruits are ideal for the long-term, which means that it does not hire excessive experts in one area because they could become redundant in the future. The firm looks for certain traits in its recruits that include leadership skills, role related expertise, attitude, and aspirations. In reality, some of these characteristics are unrelated to a person’s transcripts or grades. Therefore, the firm identifies individuals that can transform the organization and help it to achieve both short and long-term goals. The organization’s management believes that hiring the right people and engaging them intensively during the selection process guarantees an excellent workforce. The firm has invested in enhancing efficiency in the hiring process and increasing communication with all candidates. Even though the leadership contends that involving colleagues in the process increases the time taken to hire, on the contrary, the management believes that Googlers are an essential part of the success of selection of the right candidates (Google.com). Although many successful firms in modern business world emphasize on expertise when selecting workers, Google Inc. has taken a different approach to hiring the best people by looking for several personal characteristics that make them effective individual and team players.
One of the most critical skills that Google Inc.’s management looks for in its recruits is the ability to mobilize teams. The administration understands the essentiality of teamwork in its business practices given that the firm depends on workers to create services that meet the changing needs of the marketplace. Therefore, innovation plays a significant role in the success and sustainability of the firm. However, workers cannot meet the needs of the clients if they do not work as teams. In this regard, the company requires recruits to be ready to take up roles, which are not included in their roles. The leadership does not expect the workers to be too rigid to stick to the task specifications because they would fail to achieve the organizational expectations. Each employee is considered a leader and thus has to mobilize the other workers to work towards a common goal (Google.com 1). Consequently, the firm promises the recruits to empower them to make independent roles that help to push it forward. Even though the top management team approves all the decisions, the workers have the power to offer opinions that could aid the company in raising the standards of internet-related services. Therefore, the recruits have to show a positive attitude towards their interactions with peers. They should not view their colleagues as rivals, but they should be partners working towards a shared goal. Recruiters at the firm expect candidates to possess developing leadership skills. In practice, the company hires close to five thousand people every year for varying positions. However, all employees have to view themselves as leaders of their teams (Nisen 1). In this way, candidates should express their ability to guide their colleagues even when they are new to the firm’s workforce because Google Inc. does not value hierarchy.
The company identifies persons with various passions and strengths as opposed to exceptional skills. Recruits should prove to have adequate experience that increases the chance of success in one’s role. For instance, when the firm is hiring people to fill engineering positions, the recruits should possess excellent coding skills and expertise in technical areas. The old saying that the first impression is essential in the selection process especially during interviews does not apply at Google Inc. The leadership has realized that some recruits could be nervy during their interviews; as a result, it gives them adequate time to prove that they are worth for the available roles (Lamont 1). In essence, the first impression dissuades interviewing panel from recruiting the best personnel because if one fails to impress, the committee spends the rest of the time looking for reasons to reject the candidate. On the contrary, if one impresses within the first ten seconds, then the interviewers try to find reasons to hire that person (Bock 1). Therefore, companies that utilize that strategy in their selection processes end up with the wrong persons because a candidate could prepare to give a bad impression on the first interview. Since Google Inc. does not look for exceptional skills, it means that the recruiters have to look for hidden traits in the candidates before making a decision.
According to Bock, Google Inc. utilizes the power of structured interview to determine how a candidate would perform one he or she gets the job. In reality, unstructured interviews could only explain fourteen percent of a worker’s performance. However, Google Inc. uses one of the best predictors of people’s performance when they get a job, which is work sample test. Studies establish that work sample test account for twenty-nine percent of an individual’s abilities. In this strategy, recruits acquire a sample piece of work that relates to what they would be doing once they are hired. The interviewing panel then assesses the candidates’ performance at it. Nevertheless, the management accepts that such strategy cannot provide an accurate prediction of a worker because actual performance is dependent on other traits, which include the ability to collaborate with colleagues, adaptation to uncertainty and learning. At the same time, some job roles lack ideal pieces of work that interviewers could present to the recruits. Therefore, the strategy is limited to people applying for task-oriented jobs such as call centers. At Google Inc., most of the roles are task-oriented; thus, it eases the application of this strategy (Bock 1). Consequently, the firm uses work samples to select candidates for technical areas such as product management or engineering. Candidates are required to work out engineering problems during the interview.
At the same time, the organization incorporates general cognitive ability tests, which account for twenty-six percent of a worker’s performance. Unlike brainteasers and case interviews, cognitive ability tests have predetermined wrong and right answers. The tests are predictive because they establish a candidate’s ability to learn. In practice, people’s collaboration with learning ability and raw intelligence determine individuals’ success in their jobs. However, such tests are discriminative because they exclude non-Caucasian and non-male test takers, particularly in the United States. In addition, the firm uses structured interviews given that they account for twenty-six percent in predicting an individual’s abilities. In this system, the interviewer asks a regular set of questions that have explicit criteria to evaluate the responses’ quality. However, structured interviews are divided into two groups, which are situational and behavioral. In behavioral tests, candidates are required to define their achievements and match them to the requirements of the current job. On the other hand, situational tests present a task-related hypothetical situation in which recruits are asked to describe what they would do if they found themselves in a given predicament (Vella 1). Interviewers at Google Inc. are required to probe deeply to evaluate the thought process and veracity behind the explanations provided by the candidate.
At Google Inc., the interviewers score results from interviews using a consistent rubric to eliminate biases especially when an applicant provides an answer that matches to the recruiters’ passions. In this regard, the hiring team uses five constituent components to allocate scores for general cognitive ability. One of the critical parts is a determination of how “well the candidate understands the problem” (Bock 1). The system is fair because it gives all applicants applying for the same position the same set of questions. At the same time, it ensures that the interviewer does not run out of time and fail to cover all the areas for each recruit. The organization has a succinct hiring rubric that addresses the issues of biases given that the interviewers must provide detailed reports about each candidate for further reviews. In practice, it filters complicated, vague, and messy work situations into measurable and comparable results. The hiring team at Google Inc. primary objective is not to assess the candidate but is to establish a rapport with them. In reality, candidates have to be free with the interviewers to provide the best answers to their questions. In essence, “Interviews are awkward because you’re having an intimate conversation with someone you just met, and the candidate is in a very vulnerable position” (Bock 1). In the past, the majority of Google Inc.’s rejected applicants had miserable experiences to share about their interviews at the firm. However, the management has streamlined the process because it wishes to attract the best-qualified personnel to the firm. Therefore, the hiring team treats candidates as partners and does not want to expose their vulnerability because it would have devastating effects on the candidates’ relationship with the firm. In any case, the company understands that some of the failures could be suitable for other positions; as a result, it wants to create an impression of Google Inc. as an ideal place to work. The efforts of the firm selection team have seen nearly eighty percent of failed candidates recommending their friends to apply for jobs at the company.
In most businesses, interviews are done by bosses, which mean that candidates get the chance to meet their senior only. On the contrary, Google Inc. gives interviewees an opportunity to meet persons who would be working for them or their peers depending on the position. The assessments that junior employees provide are essential in determining the right candidate for a job because the juniors would spend much of their time with the recruit. On one hand, the system prevents managers from hiring their old friends while it presents Google Inc. as a nonhierarchical company. On the contrary, it ensures that hiring teams recruit candidates who win the trust of their peers and juniors. In reality, the best candidates inspire and excite subordinates thus creating an atmosphere of confidence and teamwork in the future. Additionally, the organization has a cross functional interviewer who is a person with limited or without any form of connection to the group interviewing the candidate. For instance, a member of the legal team could be asked to be part of interviewing a sales representative. In this way, the firm helps in providing a disinterested evaluation. Notably, a Googler, as the firm’s employees are known would have little interest in filling a particular job but at the same time wishes to maintain the high standards of hiring (Vella 1). As a result, such a person would not look for flaws in prospective recruits but would be searching for strengths that would make the right candidate a successful Googler.
Unlike other organizations that focus on expertise in their selection processes, Google Inc. places more emphasis on ownership, humility, leadership, and ability to learn. The interviewing panel only ensures that recruits for technical jobs possess coding skills, but expertise fails to make it to the top of the critical traits of the firm’s candidates. The management contends that when people self-identify themselves as highly experienced or experts in certain areas, they have higher chances of defending their points of view when questioned as opposed to being curious. As a result, changing such people’s outlook towards their jobs becomes difficult thus reducing their chances of succeeding in the ever-changing technology field (Andersen 1). In effect, such experts cannot find a better solution to emerging organizational challenges as they stick to their beliefs.
Google Inc. looks for individuals that take responsibility for the search for solutions to problems, which push the firm forward. The ideal candidates should be passionate about changing their practices and making things happen. In the modern business environment where changes are inevitable, companies such as Google Inc. cannot depend on task doers or order takers to create a competitive advantage. In effect, the firm looks for people with internal motivation o provide better solutions to emerging organizational challenges and create products and services that meet the changing needs of the clientele. Humility is another trait that hiring teams at the firm focus on. Candidates have to prove that they value other people’s ideas and appreciate their colleagues’ ability to provide better solutions. Successful candidates have to possess both small ego and big ego because it makes such individuals assume that others have viable ideas. Consequently, such persons perform exemplary as people and members of a team (Andersen 1). In modern workforces, teamwork is essential to the success of the firm. Therefore, people who adopt a know-it-all attitude have lesser chances of achievement because they dissuade colleagues from providing better practices that would push a firm towards its goals.
Google Inc.’s management understands the importance of the ability to learn in all of its candidates regardless of their positions at the company. In essence, a college education provides graduates with skills to apply in real life situations. However, changes in the modern business environment require individuals who can pick new things and learn from their failures. Candidates should prove that they could utilize disparate pieces of information to find patterns that offer the next step. Prospective employees have to be curious because the trait enables them to learn from their mistakes. Nevertheless, the organization does not allow its workers to use the trial and error method because such a strategy could lead to numerous unsatisfied customers. Employees should adopt a collaborative model of leadership, which means that even those applying for senior positions at the firm should be ready to listen to others. Therefore, prospective workers should possess excellent communication skills to enable the efficient exchange of information with their peers. In a technology company like Google Inc., the staff has numerous ways of sharing relevant information with each other (Andersen 1). However, it is critical to demonstrate exemplary oral skills because they assure the employers that such person would create positive relationships with his or her peers. In reality, Lack of effective communication skills increases the chances of interpersonal conflicts, which affect individual output thus devastating the organizational performance. On the contrary, the ability to express oneself verbally or in writing ensures that messages get to the audience as they were intended. Consequently, the flow of information is simplified which in turn saves the time taken to find solutions to organizational challenges.
In modern businesses, employees are critical to the success and sustainability of an organization. However, unlike the majority of companies that focus on candidates’ college grades and expertise on their field, Google Inc. puts more emphasis on the ability to leadership, role related knowledge, attitude, and ownership of the firm. Successful candidates are required to be responsible for all their actions to enable efficient completion of duties. At the same time, the workers must prove to be effective team workers given that at the firm, they have to form several groups of Googlers. The management allows prospective employees a chance to interact with different Googlers to ease assessment of the candidates’ ability to work with other people. In this regard, some candidates are interviewed by their juniors given that they would spend much of their times together. The recruiters assess candidates’ learning abilities because, in modern businesses, changes are inevitable. Therefore, successful employees should possess the capacity to adapt to uncertainty because what works today for a given department could be outdated tomorrow. In such situations, the candidates should show the desire to find solutions to emerging organizational challenges by learning from their experiences. The management keeps a structured interview because it wishes to give all recruits equal opportunities to express their strengths. At the same time, the interviewers allocate adequate time to all candidates to enable the establishment of positive relationships between the interviewers and the interviewees. The firm embraces cognitive ability tests to gauge recruits skills in absorbing information. In reality, answers to questions could be right or wrong depending on the view of the listener. Therefore, interviewers at the firm assess a recruit’s ability to respond to questions after careful examination of the information given. In this regard, first impressions are useless at Google Inc.’ selection process; they restrict recruiters into finding flaws on candidates that create negative first impressions. Consequently, employers that use that strategy fail to get the best out of potential employees in the interviews.
This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers. You can order our professional work here.