|
|
|
|
|
|
posts related to Goolge management practices and Google itself
Recommended posts: Google: Experiment Quickly and Often - The 70% Solution - Chaos Management (by design) at Google - Web Search Improvements - Google: Good Service not Arbitrage
Try our Curious Cat custom management improvement search engine powered by Google
Deming’s 14 points (for software development) by Jamie Dinkelacker (Geo/Maps Engineering Program Manager at Google Inc. Focus on lean principles and agile practices for software development):
A good read. Also a good blog on management improvement ideas and software development (though not very active). See my Deming on Management resource where I try to explain what Dr. Deming actually said and meant and dispel some misconceptions.
Related: Dr. Deming’s 14 Points - Deming’s Ideas at Markey’s Audio Visual - Lean, Toyota and Deming for Software Development - Google: Ten Golden Rules
Awhile back I wrote about why I didn’t think the American Customer Satisfaction Index claim that Yahoo beat Google for customer satisfaction was evidence of a broken indicator. Well here is another indicator, but this time it puts Google clearly in 1st place, while Yahoo has been improving: Search Engines: Intense Competition Drives Better User Experiences
Google still has plenty of room to improve (for one example, their blog search is still very poor). And Yahoo is better than many people realize. But I think Google is still clearly better from my experience and looking at the available data (Google keeps gaining market share for one import piece of data).
Related: Search Share Data, Checking the ACSI - Meeting Like Google - Improve Google
Another interesting experiment from Google: Using Prediction Markets to Track Information Flows: Evidence from Google
Interesting paper. I would guess most readers of this blog won’t be able to apply prediction markets to there workplace in the short term but never-the-less I find the paper interesting.
Related: Management is Prediction - Google Experiments Quickly and Often - Secrets of the World’s Best Companies
The Google Way: Give Engineers Room
Consider the collection of engineers who wanted to promote “agile programming” inside the company. Agile programming is a product development approach that incorporates feedback early and often, and was being done in a few scattered parts of the organization.
The Agile grouplet formed to try to take this idea and spread it throughout the organization. It did so by banding together and reaching out to as many groups as it could to teach the new process. It created “Agile Office Hours” when you could stop by and ask questions about the process. It handed out books and gave internal talks on the topic. It attended staff meetings and created the concept of the “Agile Safari,” in which you could volunteer to work for a time in groups that were using Agile, to see how it ticks.
Related: Google Software Engineering - Agile Software Development - Agile Management - Managing Innovation - Larry Page and Sergey Brin Webcast - Google: Ten Golden Rules
Last month, in a long post criticizing the ACSI I took issue with, among other things, the implications being drawn from an ACSI rating. The ACSI rating of Yahoo was higher than that of Google (though statistically insignificantly so). Anyway, here is some new data on search volumes of the leading providers:
Top 5 Search Providers for August 2007, Ranked by Searches (U.S.)
| Provider | Searches (000) | Year over Year Growth | Share of Searches |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Google Search | 4,199,495 | 39.8% | 53.6% |
| 2. Yahoo! Search | 1,561,903 | 8.9% | 19.9% |
| 3. MSN/Windows Live Search | 1,011,398 | 69.8% | 12.9% |
| 4. AOL Search | 435,088 | 32.4% | 5.6% |
| 5. Ask.com Search | 136,853 | 0.0% | 1.7% |
Source: Nielsen//NetRatings MegaView Search
So Google grew 39.8% year over year and Yahoo grew 8.9% year over year. Google now has 53.6% of the total searches. Granted this is limited data but it seems to confirm that Google is in fact continuing to increase their lead in search volume. Practically all evidence seems to support this belief - the ACSI seems to be the exception. Which might indicate great insight provided by the ACSI that everyone else is missing. Or it might show ACSI results are doing a poor job of providing a useful measure of customer satisfaction with search engines. I go with the second.
Related: posts on using data effectively - Website Data - Understanding Data - posts on Google management - Curious Cat Management Improvement Search
Yahoo Mail Innovates, Gmail Stagnates
To me Yahoo is really continually improving the service, not innovating. Still an interesting exploration of visible improvement.
Related: Kaizen Online - Kaizen definition -Innovation Examples - Google Innovation webcast -
Google Video sold digital videos that were controlled by Digital Rights Management DRM (so the purchaser didn’t buy something they bought the right to view the digital media according to a set of constraints. I, and many others find these DRM deals a bad deal for customers. I think Google realized that DRM made their Google Video a bad business (though maybe they decided it was a bad business for other reasons).
Well Google’s original method of existing the business left many people upset - with good reason I think. Google has wisely reacted to that feedback by improving the exit strategy (including full refunds and the ability to play videos purchased for the next 6 months). This improvement is evident for customers but also is an improvement from the perspective of the other stakeholders too. An update on Google Video feedback
To recap: we decided to end the Google Video download to own/rent (DTO/DTR) program, and are now refocusing our Google Video engineering efforts. The week before last, we wrote to Google Video DTO/DTR program customers to let them know that videos they’d already bought would no longer be playable.
We planned to give these users a full refund or more. And because we weren’t sure if we had all the correct addresses, latest credit card information, and other billing challenges, we thought offering the refund in the form of Google Checkout credits would entail fewer steps and offer a better user experience. We should have anticipated that some users would see a Checkout credit as nothing more than an extra step of a different (and annoyingly self-serving) kind. Our bad. Here’s how we’re hoping to fix thing…
Related: Dell Listening to Customer - other companies refuse to listen - Google: Good Service not Arbitrage - Dell, Reddit and Customer Focus - Discover Card Dis-service
Ok, this is one of those posts you might want to ignore or you might enjoy. Before blogs there is little chance this would reach you. But I am tired of seeing the American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) promoted as if it were some encouragement for better management when all it seems to do to me is encourage superficial, non data based claims. And since it my blog I can rant if I feel like it.
ACSI: Flat Customer Satisfaction Suggests Continued Weak Consumer Spending
That is the title of the news release. Are they kidding!! They think a flat American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) reading is going to lead to weak consumer spending? I doubt it. I really doubt it. What data, or theory is that based on? Jeez this whole thing just makes me crazy. Trying to use a index to promote the “importance of quality principles” (ASQ is one of the “sponsors” of this effort) and customer focus in this way - ARGH. It does the opposite - showing people how to misuse numbers. How to overreact to variation. How to compare one dot to another dot and make claims from those 2 dots. I am sure I will make mistakes in my statements but the ACSI has bugged me since it was started with the way it ignores sound quality practices and promotes the opposite of what people like Dr. Deming taught.
I suppose it it possible their was a statistically significant change in the actual consumer satisfaction in favor of the Big Three versus Asian Manufacturers, though I doubt it. But fine, lets say it isn’t just random variation. And heck for a sentence or two lets even accept this measure of “satisfaction” is even meaningful. Why would making more cars mean your quality is going to slip? This seems like trying to say something about numbers when you don’t really have anything to say. Toyota will make more cars next year, most likely (unless there is a large recession), so is your prediction that their ASCI is likely to slip? Please read Practice and Malpractice in Management Research v 6.0 by Paul R. Carlile and Clayton M. Christensen.
Making a prediction and testing it out would at least be applying some semblance of the PDSA cycle (granted I probably shouldn’t even bring that up as it is such a stretch from a what PDSA really is) - but the concept of PDSA is that it is a learning cycle. You make a prediction based on your theory and then test out your theory. The claim is making more cars means your quality is going to slip (which in the context I take them to mean is equivalent to the ASCI number slipping - otherwise the quote is basically a non-sequitur)?
(more…)
Marissa Mayer speech at Stanford on innovation at Google (23 minutes, 26 minutes question and answers). She leads the product management efforts on Google’s search products- web search, images, groups, news, Froogle, the Google Toolbar, Google Desktop, Google Labs, and more. She joined Google in 1999 as Google’s first female engineer. Excellent speech. Highly recommended. 9 ideas:
(inside these are Marissa’s comments) [inside these are my comments]
Interviews on how to hire in Silicon Valley. I especially like Guy Kawasaki’s comment - “the key to getting great people to work for you is to have a great product. That is why Google does so well. That is why Apple does so well.” I agree with the concept that a huge part of hiring good people is offering them a place where they feel proud of what they are working on. This is even more true when you talk about great software developers that have more choice than most in how they choose to earn a living.
via: How Are Companies in Silicon Valley Hiring?
Related: Interviewing and Hiring Programmers - Google’s Answer to Filling Jobs Is an Algorithm - Google Exceeded Planned Spending on Personnel
Often people have trouble understanding Dr. Deming’s disapproval of arbitrary numerical targets. What he was trying to prevent is what many see every day, such as managing to quarterly earnings targets. There are several problems with numerical goals but in here lets focus on one. The change from managing for what is best for the business to managing to hit a target. Google Profit Trails Analyst Estimates; Shares Slide:
Great statement. And if more people could manage that way, one of the problems with numerical goals would be eliminated. But with so many organizations tying huge bonuses to meeting arbitrary numerical targets you will have a great deal of difficulty getting managers to hire 3 extra people this quarter, who will help the business, but will ruin their chance at a bonus. Or even if they just take a hit on their performance appraisal compared to the other managers that meet the headcount target - even if it meant turning away talent the organization could have benefited from greatly - and then the manager that missed their target loses out in the next promotion opportunity.
I am happy to own a tiny portion of Google and glad they are making decisions like this. Now just because I think there is a good case to be made for exceeding the targets that doesn’t mean that hiring more people is necessarily good. It is perfectly possible Google is hiring too many people and making a bad prediction about how these people will benefit Google in the long run. I am just saying I strongly support not tying yourself to short term numerical targets, if you predict a better decision requires taking actions that will cause the target to be missed.
Google increased profit by 28%, from the second quarter last year, to $925 million (and down from $1.0 billion in the first quarter of 2007). Lest you think personnel can’t really cost Google that much can it, just the stock based compensation in the second quarter reduced earning by $242 million in the quarter (an “expense” that wasn’t reported just a few years ago). Google had 13,786 full-time employees as of June 30, 2007 (up 1,548 in the quarter) - so that is over $17,500 per full time employee. If anyone at Google wants to talk I am open to considering an employment offer.
Google Gadgets are small tools and toys that integrate with iGoogle. Google is funding developers to work on creating gadgets through Google Gadget Ventures. Great idea. They offer:
1. Grants of $5,000 to those who’ve built gadgets we’d like to see developed further. You’re eligible to apply for a grant if you’ve developed a gadget that’s in our Google gadgets directory and gets at least 250,000 weekly page views. To apply, you must submit a one-page proposal detailing how you’d use the grant to improve your gadget.
2. Seed investments of $100,000 to developers who’d like to build a business around the Google gadgets platform. Only Google Gadget Venture grant recipients are eligible for this type of funding. Submitting a business plan detailing how you plan to build a viable business around the gadgets platform is a required part of the seed investment application process.
Google continue to make good moves to manage in a new world. With this program they are not investing in creating an infrastructure to develop software, support software, hire staff… Instead they get to tap the drive and capabilities of those developers working on products which increase the value of iGoogle through small cash incentives. Previously they offered Google Gadget Awards. They also fund Google summer code - to support software developers creating open source software and reducing computer waste (where they didn’t stop with improving the servers they use but to making a broader impact on society). They really do a great job of leveraging their efforts well.
Related: Google Innovation and Entrepreneurship - Google Custom Management Improvement Search Engine - Experiment Quickly and Often - Innovate or Avoid Risk
It is good to see more people understand the bad practice of excessive short term focus on quarterly profits. It is also a bit amusing to see the Chamber of Commerce pushing an idea Deming was called unrealistic for pushing.
The right way to handle a surprise:
Roughly a quarter of the companies in the S&P 500 have stopped giving guidance (or never started), including Berkshire Hathaway, Coca-Cola and Google. Check the investor-relations area of a company’s web site to see whether it plays what David Hirschmann of the Chamber of Commerce calls the “fool’s game” of earnings guidance.
Related: Management: Geeks and Deming - Deming’s Seven Deadly Diseases of Western Management - Goodbye Quarterly Targets? - Distort the System
High-efficiency power supplies for home computers and servers (pdf) by Urs Hoelzle and Bill Weihl - Google:
Google has adopted the technology for their servers. And they are working to have the technology adopted by manufacturers; so when we buy computers they will use this technology to reduce waste. This is good since not many of us cannot eliminate this muda ourselves (since we don’t build our own computers - as Google does). It is also an example of a company with a higher purpose that makes a good deal of money. Google definitely understands the concept of eliminating waste.
Related: Cost of Powering Your PC - How Google Works - Engineers Save Energy - Innovate or Avoid Risk
Google and Ice: A service story:
Good reaction. Better to have avoided the problem in the first place, but still good to react at some point. The question I have is if they have improved the system to avoid the problems the customer experienced. And have they put in place measures which might indicate a problem (say a significant decline in customer spending) so they could intervene more quickly in the future. The last couple of paragraphs are not a great sign - but it is no surprise, Google (and any other organization) would have plenty to improve.
(more…)
An interesting series of posts on Google NYC, Top Google engineer talks to NYC software industry:
Google continues to stress the importance of letting engineers pursue customer delight. It seems to be working pretty well, even if some don’t like the primacy of engineers at Google.
Google Engineering: The REAL story
Engineer finishes task, Produces build for User Experience approval, Engineer releases into build, Build QA’d. Build stage for release…
The Google “weekly sprint” methodology enables flexible iteration integrating user feedback during the development process, Rechis indicated. As is the Google rule, he concluded, “focus on the user and all else will follow.”
Related: Stretching Agile to fit CMMI Level 3 - Agile Management - Google New York Speaker Series
This interesting interview with Google CEO Eric Schmidt covers many topics:
The culture of challenging ideas as done in the academic environment seems a key cultural component of Google. So many other organizations may talk about striving for the best solutions but so much actual activity is driven by who says what not by what is best. Even at Google that is certainly true to an extent, but Google seems much more committed to the best solution. The culture is one of finding the best engineering solution.
Related: Eric Schmidt podcast - Meeting Like Google - Google Shifts Focus - Google Management - Innovation at Google
Google’s Website Optimizer allows for multivariate testing of your website.
Rather than sitting in a room and arguing over what will work better, you can save time and eliminate the guesswork by simply letting your visitors tell you what works best. We’ll guide you through the process of designing and implementing your first experiment. Start optimizing your most important web pages and see detailed reports within hours.
Google provides an online slide show with audio (a good example of one way to share online information sharing in my opinion). This tool seems to have limited experimental options to what is on the page (it does not appear, for example, that one variable could be current customer v. new visitor…). Still it looks like an very easy way to do some simple multi-factorial experiments. Google offers a list of partners for those interested in consulting and more advanced features (and for those experts reading this you can apply to be a partner).
Related: Design of experiments posts - articles on multi-factorial experimentation - Google: Experiment Quickly and Often - Data Based Decision Making at Google
(more…)
Computer Science 101: A Case Study In Google Applications:
The cost to ASU: zero. The university had been spending a half-million dollars a year on servers and storage for its open source e-mail system, including administrative support costs. More important is the faster pace of innovation. “Now we’re on Google’s development curve, not ours,” Sannier says.
Google’s efforts with Google Apps have fairly quietly become quite significant. I find gmail excellent (and Google talk and Google calendar are good but hopefully will be improved significantly). I must say I find Open Office very good and so don’t quite see the value in Google docs but maybe I am missing something (for those few documents that benefit from collaboration Google’s model sounds interesting - though a wiki seem like the best option in that case). Seems very possible Google Apps are an example of Clayton Christensen’s concept of disruptive innovation.
iinnovate podcast interview with Eric Schmidt, the CEO of Google.
“Normal sales quotas” - oops maybe Google can learn from others in this area. I found it interesting that Eric Schmidt teaches at Standford even while being the CEO of Google, because as he says he learns from students questions. The podcast series, done by 2 Stanford students, has quite an impressive list of, I guess, visiting speakers at Stanford: Andy Grove, Alex Counts, David Kelley…
via: Eric Schmidt Interviewed On Entrepreneurship, Management and More
Related: Innovation at Google - Google Shifts Focus - Chaos Management (by design) at Google
Curious Cat Management Improvement Blog curiouscat.com 2005-2006 powered by WordPress - lean manufacturing directory
