Managing people could be one of the hardest things to do. Managers meet people from different backgrounds and work with the same people to achieve organizational goals and objectives. The workers could make the managers come up with performance management strategies, such that each worker would know what duty they would be undertaking at any given time. Though it brings competition and rivalry among workers, it could keep them on check and focused in achieving goals and objectives set by the organization.
Decision making could be defined as the process of choosing from various choices or ideas, and taking an action (Aguinis 2008). A decision may be defined as a plan of action that could be consciously chosen from a range of alternatives in order to help in achieving a desired result (Rosemary 2012). Decisions could be centered on three key problems: a crisis problem, this would be a serious difficulty that requires immediate action. Non crisis problem, this would be a difficulty that needs resolution, but would not have the immediacy and importance of a crisis (Savory 1988). Opportunity problem, this could also be referred to as a situation that would be able to offer a strong opportunity for an organizational or a company gain if the set objectives would be met (Kandula 2004).
Managers have to consider the available alternatives and choose the best one of all the others on the list; this increases the chances of success (Pulakos 2009). The best alternative should be selected considering the business environment and the best interest of the other employees. The decision making process should be continuous; the managers have to make decisions on a range of policies and administrative issues (Paladino 2007). For an organization to remain active, decision making should always continue. The decision should also be based on reliable information, this helps to improve the quality of decision (Allan 1999).
Introduction to Google and Yahoo Organizations
Google is an American multinational company which usually provides internet related services and products, which includes software technologies, advertising, cloud computing and internet search. Google was found by Sergey Brin and Larry page while both were attending Stanford University. It came to be first incorporated as a privately owned company on September 4, 1998. Early 2006, the organization moved to their current headquarters offices at Mountain View in California.
Yahoo is also an American multinational company which was found by Mr. David Filo and Mr. Jerry Yang, in January 1994. Both were attending Stanford University as Ph.D. students at the time. Since then, it would be known for search engine, news, mail, directory, advertising, social media, online mapping, fantasy sports website and many other services. It has current headquarters in Sunnyvale, California (Armstrong 2008).
The current performance management strategies of both companies are that they communicate effectively, whenever they have a strategy to implement. This would help in engaging all the workers in order to achieve the desired results (Paladino 2010). They also incorporate both top-down and bottom-up approaches in handing work issues and even when motivating their workforce (Pell 1999). The current workforce of Google is at 54,604 while that of Yahoo is at 16,286. Both companies have a multicultural workforce. Both Google and Yahoo are under the Information industry, mainly concerned with communication and data.
The main challenges that these companies are facing include; improving customer service, when the customers feel that they are not satisfied by some of the products offered they may leave anytime to other service providers (Adkins 2006). Coming up with a growth strategy could be another challenge, if the companies would not choose the perfect time for their strategies, it would end up suffering a growth opportunity loss (Dressler 2008).
PMS Comparative Study Between the Organizations
The two organizations have different performance management strategies; for Yahoo, they have devised a way of communicating and interacting with the customers whereby they send them emails to announce the upcoming of new changes and technologies. They have performance improvement questions that they ask both customers, and the workers so as to give suggestions on how improvements could be done in different areas. They establish their products and services as strong, sustainable and unique. The workforce at Yahoo is also from a diverse background and race (Cokins 2010).
At Google Inc., they ensure that there is no friction at the workplace and tend to switch the workers from one place to another to increase efficiency as much as possible. Each and every person would be valued in the company, and each person would have the capability of creating an idea, and putting it in action for the benefit of the company (Smither 2009). The company could not decide on which specific product to avail to the market, but would rather produce a variety of products for the intended population to choose on their own, the ones that matches with their needs (Enos 2000).
Human Capital Practices at the Organizations
Google usually uses a panel to assess the demand of customers and what product would be appropriate to the needs of the customers. They continually modify their hiring approaches so as to get high quality workers who would be capable of delivering as per their expectations (French 1986). They also tolerate risk, and whenever an employee does a mistake, the mistake would be taken in a positive way, and it acts as a lesson so as to be avoided in the future (Verweire 2004). Whenever there is a loop hole, they ensure that change has taken place quickly and efficiently in that whoever would be hired fits in as soon as possible and works efficiently (Corey 2003) . At Google, the workers would be given time to come up with any technical project during 10% of their time every week (George 2009).
Yahoo has a high risk of external testing and experimentation as compared to Google. They release their software slowly so that they would hear the public opinion before they could modify it. This is a high level of risk since if the customers have a negative impression in the first instance then they are likely not to try the software anymore. Yahoo appears to be only improving on already existing services and not coming up with new ideas. Their share of the market is also running low since Google has been coming up with the same services to offer (Luis 2009).
Similarities and Differences Between the PMS of the Organizations
The similarity between the two companies is that, both of them have a wide base workforce that is multicultural. The workers of both companies would be constantly trained on new technologies and operations in the information industry (Schwartz 2002). They also tend to motivate their workers in different ways, from salary increment to having sources of entertainment at the work place, for example, pool tables at Google. Both of them also directly interact with their customers through sending of mails and answering to comments on the blogs. Both organizations have their assessments and evaluations being done in every department to enable them to identify the areas and departments which needs improvement.
Both Google and Yahoo have performance improvement questions and suggestions that they usually seek from both customers and workers to enable improvements on the services offered. Whenever there is a problem at the work place, both usually try to handle it within the company before the situation could get out of hand (Person 2008).
The differences that the organizations have in their performance management strategy is that, at Google, they do not condemn mistakes and risks, but they correct whenever mistakes happen, and they learn a lot from the risks that they take (Phillip &Hunsaker 1996). Whenever Google makes a loss due to a mistake done by an employee they learn to avoid the occurrence of the same in the future. At Yahoo, they fear taking the risks in the first place; they release their services at a slow rate fearing the response of the public. Google releases new applications, and services real frequently as compared to Yahoo, whom have been into enhancing, and improving the performance of the services they had already introduced in the market. When it comes to efficiency of the services that these two offer, yahoo has been slow of late as compared to Google which offer almost the same services. This has made Yahoo lose their customer base to their main rival Google (Robert & Mathis 2008).
At Google Inc., they ensure that there is no friction at the work place and tend to switch the workers from one place to another to increase efficiency as much as possible, while at Yahoo, the workers just stick to their job descriptions and there is no sharing of work as they view that as wastage of time. At Google, every individual would be valued, and anyone of the workers would have the chance to create an idea, and implement it to enable an outstanding performance in the company. They use the down-up strategy, where each employer is valued which is different from Yahoo. The company does not choose which product to put out into the market, but they avail a range of products for their customers to choose for themselves which matches with their needs, as compared to Yahoo, who take one product in the market and waits for comments from the customers before they release another one.
Advantages and Disadvantages of PMS
Through the application of the performance management strategies, the companies stand a high chance of excelling to greater heights in the information industry. The workers tend to be motivated to achieve higher results as the conditions at the work place tend to value high achievers (Tracey & Weiss 1997). There could be also a better strategic clarity; the workers understand the objectives that they would have to achieve after a stated duration of time. The quality of the workers also tends to be on the rise since everyone would be committed to their job descriptions and objectives that they would be achieving. There would be high quality services being offered from the companies, because of the rising in quality of the workforce that they have (Smith 2010).
The Cons of Performance Management Strategies
Some of the cons of performance management strategies arise as a result of competition among the workers (Schwartz 2001,). Since motivation would be on offering, the workers would compete against each another in order to achieve the wanted and best results (Bhattacharyya 2000). That would lower the personal output of the workers. There would be favoritism too between the management and some of the workers. The workers who could be perceived as underachievers would be looked down upon as compared to those who meet their personal goals. Managers would be in a dilemma too, as they would be torn between implementing the organizational strategies, and supervising whether the workers would be achieving the set goals. There would be problems with information sharing, because some of the workers would want to use the ideas they have to uplift their own standards (William 2009).
Ability of the Organizations’ current PMS to bring their organizations to a higher level. With performance management strategy, an organization understands the need for success in both the organization and the people’s personal life. One gets assisted in finding unique opportunities that not only suits the organization, but is also in line with his or her personal goals and talents (Dresner 2007). Training also gets provided together with support in areas where one has less confidence.
Google Organization’s Current Performance Management Strategy
Google organization’s current performance management strategy can enable it to bring the organization to a higher level. First and foremost, they hire people who have determination, smart and they value the ability of their workers more than experience (Schwartz 2001). While considering ability, Google Company also takes into account people’s talents. Google’s famous Googleplex offers every amenity that almost every employee could need. The goal of management at Google is to ensure that employees have an easy time while working at Google. When employees meet few obstacles as they work then the organization can perform at a higher level (Enos 2000). Google provides extra training for its staff and opportunities to develop talents as they take part in the different activities provided at Google.
The performance management strategy can also enable it bring the organization to a higher level if properly maneuvered (Kandula 2006). The employees of the company get expected to work extra hard and long hours. To make achievement of goals easier for everyone though, Yahoo Company encourages teamwork which helps provide support in areas where one has less confidence. Further training also gets provided in areas where one is not sure of achieving the objectives that would be set. Both organizational and personal success gets ensured at the yahoo company by the provision of added benefits such as savings plans and medical insurance. These two companies current performance strategies can enable them reach a higher level.
Both Google and Yahoo have the capability to find out their current performance level by using their current performance management strategy. They could do this through looking at balanced measures between growth and learning perspective. This means that it is possible to measure employee training that gets provided, and corporate, cultural attitudes, in comparison to corporate and individual self-improvement (Marr 2006). They both provide training for their employees and depending on the type and quality of training provided; the companies should be able to detect their performance level.
Using their balance scorecards, the two organizations, should be able to tell the business process perspective. This shows how well the organization is running and whether products and services meet the customers’ requirements. At the Yahoo organization, employees become trained to ensure that all the needs of every customer get met at all times. Google Company also ensures that its employees become aware of the goods and services needed by the customer so that these become met efficiently (Geary 1995). These organizations are able to detect their current performance level. Since the performance management strategy also gets drawn from the organization’s objectives, it is easier for Google and Yahoo to detect their performance level. This is because all that need to be done would be to know whether the organization’s objectives get met or not.
These organizations can also detect their performance level by looking at both individual performance and team work’s effectiveness (John & Kotter 1992). They can analyze to what extent teams are collaborating to improve the workflow. Yahoo puts a lot of emphasis on team work and can detect their performance level by looking at the intensity of team work and its achievements. This could be evaluated and assessed through looking at the effectiveness in performing one’s responsibilities and improved work behavior. They could also detect the performance level by observing every employee’s effectiveness.
Possible Challenges That Could Be Caused by Current Performance Management Strategies
Performance management strategy would be to elevate the general performance of the organization. As the management comes up with the strategy, the general goal is normally to meet the organization’s objectives, requirements of the employees, and at the same time still maintain a high performance at the company (Dana 1995).
The performance management strategy of the Google Company faces a number of challenges as they move to enact it in order to ensure high returns. The number of employees that Google currently has is an immensely high number and, therefore, difficult to maintain. It is difficult to provide training for all the employees continuously because it is costly and work cannot be stopped for training. This means that a good number of the workers would not get the opportunity for advanced training and quite a number get dissatisfied and could resign before they meet the set objectives. With a grater workforce, there could be competition among the employees, meaning that the few chances for advanced training and they could be for those who could be competent in their areas of specification (Parmenter 2007). Since the strategies also put a lot of focus on talents, only few experienced people would be available where experience would be needed.
The Yahoo Company is also facing more or less similar problems as Google. Training in areas where employees are not competent is extremely costly and requires a lot of resources. Yahoo also puts a lot of emphasis on team work, which does not necessarily lead to achievement of the required goals. Several conflicts arise due to this strategy which only leads to further problems within the organization. This may also lead to ineffectiveness and wastage in the organization and ultimately lead to lower performance than anticipated. Both of the companies are also facing challenges as they realize that similar measures are not suitable to all departments. This is because they change with circumstances (Cokins 2010). Measure should be designed to stimulate continuous improvement rather than simply monitor performance.
The current performance management strategies that have become adopted by both companies can lead them either way. If too much concentration gets placed on the employees and the customer gets left out, then productivity will decline since they are the consumers of the products (Marc 2004). If most of the companies’ resources get used on pleasing the employees and less on pleasing the customer, then there will be less productivity. If too much attention also gets given to the customer, and the employee gets neglected, the result will still be the same (Bacal 2006). Productivity would still be low. Their current strategy is to provide for the employees needs fully and in return the employees are to provide the needs of the customer fully (Verweire 2004). If this takes place as planned by the book, then the productivity of the two companies can be immensely high. This is because customers’ requirements would be met without fail and; therefore, customers stay faithful. Talents, however, could be difficult to handle within the company. This is because one would always tend to lean towards talent rather than experience which would make one more of expert in an area. The current performance management strategy should, therefore, get maneuvered with considerable expertise so as to lead to high performance level.
The current performance management strategies used by both Google and Yahoo could work successfully if they would be slightly adjusted so as to encourage meeting of the objectives set by the organizations (Austin 1996). The companies should consider including a combination of various methods for establishing and achieving organizational results. Any organizational result should be rated in terms of financial results (Bernard 1994). The sole and ultimate goal of any performance management strategy should be to make a customer happy and satisfied with the services.
The decision making process in any organization or company should be a continuous one, and matters must not be left at the mercy of the employees or the customer (Teale 2003). An appropriate example, in Yahoo, before any product or service could be taken to the market; they seek the opinion of the customers or workers. The managers should always be close to make the final decisions about issues concerning the organization (William 2009).
There must be effective communication of objectives to the employees. As much as employees in both companies have the freedom to decide on their own, and come up with their own creative innovations, all the activities that they engage in should ultimately meet the goals of the organization (Eckerson 2006).
