These days, the question of analyzing and encouraging particular achievements at the workplace presents a matter of extreme importance. The policy of recognizing some talents among employees and rewarding for prominent performance significantly contributes to increasing the competitiveness of a company. To improve the outcomes of the business, it is essential to pay attention not only to the quality of the product or service delivery but also to the performance of the staff. The latter is capable of supplying the company with the best results in case employees are satisfied with their working conditions and feel that they are appreciated.
Therefore, the importance of reward, recognition, and performance management should not be underestimated. A great number of companies, which are successful worldwide, stick to this approach, and Goggle is among them. This way, the purpose of this paper is to analyze reward, recognition, and performance management processes in Goggle, discuss some problems in this field, and propose sufficient improvements.
Description of the Current Methods to Manage Employee’s Performance in Google
The currents methods applied in Google concerning performance planning imply different criteria of human resource management. According to Lombardo (2017), these dimensions involve communication, client service, support for diversity, and problem-solving abilities. In addition, the reward program is established and matches the aforementioned points. Lombardo mentions that “the company’s HRM evaluates employees’ performance in internal communications and problem-solving activities to decide on performance management approaches” (2017, para. 5). Furthermore, Google attempts to elaborate performance management practices by the company’s goals in the field of human resources management.
Therefore, it is essential to ensure whether an employee can fulfill particular requirements and contribute to supporting the results of the business and achieving new targets. For instance, the fact that the support for diversity has received special attention leads to increasing the rates of innovation, which improves the competitiveness of Google in the current market of Internet-related services and products. Furthermore, Google draws the attention of its employees to these criteria, as it appears to be one of the primary corporate objectives. The emphasis on problem-solving abilities also results in supporting organizational resilience.
Apart from sufficient planning and connections to the companies’ goals, Google’s performance management also involves establishing measurements and standards. Lombardo highlights that “the firm uses individual measurements of ethical conduct and contributions to innovation and quality of output” (2017, para. 7). In addition, team variables, such as collaboration level, are also included in the list of evaluation criteria for Google employees.
As was mentioned earlier, innovation is one of the main targets of Google, so much a trait as creativity is highly appreciated, too, as it allows to make a considerable contribution to this corporate objective. This way, the company is determined to maintain a high level of ethical conduct, innovation, and the quality of output and always emphasizes in case employees show superior performance by these measurements.
Google’s human resource management also leverages particular interviews to take into consideration the concerns about individual and team performance. The individual option is aimed to address the skill, knowledge, abilities, and other features of staff members, while the team conversation covers the performance of an employee as a part of the project group. The forms of interviews may vary and be structured or unstructured, formal or informal (Lombardo, 2017). Interestingly, Google’s human resources managers may conduct unstructured and informal conversations on the working issues in the fun meeting areas.
Another focus of performance management implies addressing problems in the quality of work and work behavior. Google intends to detect specific errors or unsatisfactory working techniques to maintain a sufficient level of quality of work. Moreover, human resources managers are concerned about “negativism, power struggles, and tardiness or delays” (Lombardo, 2017, para. 11). Summarizing Google’s approach to reward, recognition, and performance management, it is essential to highlight that it presents a complex system, which is aimed to receive as much as possible objective evaluation. It consists of performance planning, establishing measurements and standards, connection to the corporate objectives, conducting interviews, and analysis of problems.
The Effectiveness of the Current Methods
First of all, it is worth highlighting that Google collects data about performance management regularly and sticks to making decisions by KPI results. The current success of Google, which is spread and used worldwide, demonstrates the effectiveness of the performance management system. It is evident that Google succeeds in delivering Internet-related services of high quality, and its pervasion in the global society is considerable. The methods of human resource management allow the company to direct employees’ skills, knowledge, and talent to achieving daring aims. In addition, the planning of performance management prevents senseless efforts of the staff members. This fact improves the competitiveness of Google in the market for Internet-related services and products and supplies it with continuous development.
Such an approach also contributes to stimulating the staff, as they become engaged with the idea that the entire company has to fulfill the ambition. They become even more motivated, as their efforts to improve the outcomes and achieve the common goal are appreciated and praised (Pratap, 2017).
Employees feel that the importance of their work is not underestimated, so they are satisfied with the opportunity to benefit from Google and receive additional payments and status promotions. That also leads to turnover decline, as people perceive their workplace as the possibility of career realization. They are aware that in case of significant contribution, they will receive a sufficient status and salary. Another beneficial outcome is the fact that it helps to maintain the image of the company. For instance, motivating the employees to stick to Google’s major objective has considerably contributed to supporting its innovative culture.
Establishing appropriate standards and measurements is also beneficial for the company’s results. They set a satisfactory level for delivering particular services and creating products and involve regulation of the stage of the processes (Pratap, 2017). Therefore, this policy is an integral part of guaranteeing the high quality of the work. It helps prevent particular errors and misunderstandings between personnel and improves the outcomes of the operation. In addition, standards, which have been elaborated for many years and appeared to be a result of eventful experiences, help newcomers get acquainted with their duties without serious mistakes, which may cause negative consequences.
Conducting both individual and team performance interviews allows one to assess the work of an employee without prejudices. It is impossible to promote a staff member with sacrifice in another employee, which supports fairness. It is also worthy of note that every person has his or her own unique experience, which may benefit the company. This way, people are capable of expressing their opinion and advancing some efficient proposals. This approach helps recognize talented staff members and leverage their prominent ideas to improve Google’s outcomes and implement sufficient improvements.
Key Results Areas in HR Reward, Recognition, and Performance Management
Although the strategy of performance management seems to be effective, and the results are evident, there are still some problems, which should be addressed comprehensively. According to Payscale’s employee turnover report, “Median tenure at Amazon is just one year, and Google performs only marginally better with a median tenure of 1.1 years” (as cited in Johnson, 2018, para. 2). Nowadays, the lack of employees, who have specific talents in the technology field, is evident (Johnson, 2018).
For this reason, organizations predominantly struggle to identify prospective staff members. This fact has a significant influence on the ability to retain the same talent in the background of the increasing efforts in recruiting and poaching. Johnson explains this tendency the following way: “a shortage of qualified tech professionals and a surge in available, high-paying job vacancies has created a perfect storm resulting in the current candidate-driven marketplace” (2018, para. 6). This way, in the present-day developments, people, who are in the search for an appropriate workplace, have more power as compared to employers in the process of job offer negotiations.
Such a situation results in candidates’ reluctance to spend their time working at posts, which do not supply competitive payments, which are in high demand nowadays. The report by Kapor, covering the reasons employees tend to leave their workplaces, reveals that “high salaries along with recently-reported toxic work environments and employee mistreatment are core drivers of tech talent turnover” (as cited in Johnson, 2018, para. 6). Apart from it, the majority of top specialists are highly likely to quit the job due to the lack of opportunities for career promotion and professional development. This way, despite innovative HR performance management, the high rate of turnover appears to be a pressing concern for Google.
It is worth admitting that current Google’s reward, recognition, and performance management strategy is effective in the context of the majority of indicators. However, some improvements should be advanced and implemented to improve the outcomes and address arising problems, such as a high turnover rate. Johnson offers a sufficient solution to this issue, which implies a “commitment to career mapping” (2018, para. 9).
This proposal involves a discussion between a manager and an employee on his or her professional aims and determinations on career promotion. Then, the ambitions are compared with the opportunities supplied by a particular business. This implementation would contribute to minimizing the turnover rate in Google, as the staff member will be aware of their possible career path at an early stage and be able to make the best decision for them.
Another possible pressing concern, which is highly likely to be caused by a performance management strategy, regards the motivation to do best by a salary increase. Although it presents an efficient option for stimulating the personal to make maximum efforts, it also involves some hidden drawbacks, which should be taken into consideration. Landsberg marks that “annual pay-for-performance plans, if properly designed, call for incentives to rise and fall with company performance” (2009, p. 13). It has become a common sight that paying for a performance system may not be the result of high results, but be an entitlement. Therefore, the incentives tend to stimulate employees to focus exclusively on activities, which are significant for receiving rewards instead of doing the work, which is intended to benefit the entire company.
This way, the aforementioned proposal can be useful for addressing this problem too. Predominantly, working conversations include the discussion of duties of the personnel and setting the goals by a manager. In other words, they are intended to control the performance of employees and evaluate their efficiency. The necessity to discuss mutual expectations is apparent, as employees tend to feel that their ambitions and professionals aims are highly likely to neglect (Likierman, 2009). Misunderstandings may result in the ineffectiveness of the pay-for-performance system and a decline in the outcomes of an organization. Consequently, Google should implement the conversation on professionals’ expectations on their career path in performance interviews to decrease the turnover rate and improve the results of the current performance management strategy.
To maintain and increase the level of competitiveness in the Internet-related services and product market, Google has established methods of reward, recognition, and performance management processes evaluation. They include planning, implementing standards and measurements, conducting interviews, connecting to the corporate objectives, and detecting errors. The current policy appears to be useful in the context of controlling the quality of delivering services and creating products.
In addition, it contributes to motivating employees to do their best in the workplace. However, there are still problems, which require an urgent solution, such as the high turnover rate. Implementation discussions on mutual expectations of both the manager and the person may help address this issue. Moreover, it may prevent the pay-for-performance system from becoming an entitlement, which has no connection with the actual efforts of a person.
Johnson, T. (2018). The real problem with tech professionals: High turnover. Forbes. Web.
Landsberg, R. (2009). How to make pay for performance pay off. Journal of Financial Service Professionals, 63(6), 12-13.
Likierman, A. (2009). Successful leadership: how would you know? Business Strategy Review, 20(1), 44-49.
Lombardo, J. (2017). Google’s HRM: Training, performance management. Panmore Institute. Web.
Pratap, A. (2017). Google’s human resource management strategy. Notesmatic. Web.