Answer all questions for the following “On the Job” scenario questions in your textbook. In doing so, be sure to showcase your knowledge. Feel free to use additional resources, and remember to cite all sources in APA format. Even if you only use the textbook, you must cite it. Failure to do so will result in a grade of zero for the assignment.
Chapter 15 – On The Job Scenario 15-7- Why Google’s Restructuring Plan Makes Sense. Answer questions 1-3.
Script
What are you going to be watching for in this new world of Alphabet that has been Google for so long?
>> I just am still trying to digest it. But I’m just reminded, the other night I was at a dinner party and somebody was interrogating me. Why does Google do Google Maps? And I was thinking, you know, it does take some explaining what their ecosystem is. But ultimately most things they’ve been doing have really tried to drive you back ultimately to their service in order for you to see more advertising. And I think maps would be said to be one of those. On the other hand, the new stuff, like the car, the pharma, you know, the life extension products. Those don’t do that. So they really, maybe there is a real logic for a holding company model. You know, it’s an extraordinary company that I think all of us would have to admit is possibly the most earth-shakingly significant, world-changing business that we, you know, feel the influence of every day in our lives. And, you know, we can’t help watching this with incredible fascination and I can’t —
>> I love that word, earth-shaking. Earth-shaking, David, as we’ve been trying to digest this news. Live on the air again, Google changing its corporate structure to separate search, YouTube and other web companies from its research and investment divisions. Divisions like Google X, which will also be part of the new Alphabet company. Google, Inc. Calico. Google Ventures. Google Capital. I want to bring in James Cakmak of Monness, Crespi and Hardt who was with us earlier talking about Twitter. James, you also happen to cover Google. What do you make of this news?
>> I think it makes total sense. I mean, they’ve been telegraphing that Sundar has increasingly going to be taking a bigger and bigger role at Google. And really, we see Google relatively disadvantaged in mobile relative to the five horsemen, we call it, Facebook, Pinterest, LinkedIn, Snapchat, and Twitter. Those are the companies that are optimized for mobile. And if having a guy like Sundar come on board, very operationally focused, product focused, and removing that from the moonshots, I think, is certainly a good thing, so.
>> Okay but what about all the moonshots? What about all the moonshots? What sort of standards will they be held to from a Wall Street perspective?
>> Yeah, the moonshots, I think, are fine as long as the core business is optimized for the future. The future is about mobile and the future is about native. Unless, the only asset that Google has really that can capitalize on that seismic shift is YouTube. And YouTube is doing fine and dandy and everything, but in the meantime, you have Facebook breathing down your neck and doing so in a very curated fashion. Where you know you’re getting the right videos in front of the right users at the right time to engage. That’s something YouTube doesn’t really have. So I think a guy like Sundar can bring focus, much needed focus into the company that wasn’t there before.
Discussion Questions
The restructuring of Google into the Alphabet holding company separates its web companies from its research and investment companies. Of the four contextual variables influencing the success of an organization’s design, which do you feel is the most likely reason Google decided to restructure into the Alphabet Inc. holding company model? 15-4
Before restructuring, Google held many companies under the same organizational structure. Would this make Google more mechanistic or organic? How about after the restructuring? 15-4C
Organizations are dynamic entities. What stage of the organizational life cycle was Google at before restructure? Were all of the Google’s companies at the same stage? How about after restructuring, what stage does the Alphabet Holding Company began at?
Chapter 16- On The Job Scenario 16-8d- Dish CEO Ergen: I’m Easy To Work With For High Achievers. Answer questions 1-3.
Script
>> We change where we need to change. I think I’m a really easy guy to work for and with if you’re a high achiever and you want to achieve something. If you’re just want a job, you’re probably not going to like it too much here, right? I mean I think, I think Dish is a culture for those people who want to achieve something. And there is some uncertainty, as you know, as we’re talking about what are you going to do with wireless. Our shareholders don’t know exactly so there’s some uncertainty, so it takes a little bit of bravery as a shareholder. You have long-term thinking. And I think even for employees. They’d like to know what’s going to happen tomorrow, but we don’t always know what’s going to happen tomorrow. So it’s a special kind of, it takes trust in your management, it takes a bit of adventurous spirit to work here because you don’t always know exactly where you’re going to go. And you’re not in a training program. So you have to a bit more of a self-starter. But for those people who like that. Wow, you can start at, we have people who started in the warehouse that are executives. There’s people who started in call centers who are executives now. People who are achieving kind of their own internal potential and they’re passionate about what they’re doing and they’re having a lot of fun.
>> So if you were to write a management book, Charlie. What would the title be?
>> I don’t know, I couldn’t write a book, number one. But I think it’s, I do think that companies that, the culture of a company is important. And I think that companies, companies don’t have a good track record of surviving a founder. Right? And the ones that do have a culture that carries on, right? And that’s not to say culture wouldn’t evolve and change over time, but the culture’s what carries on, not the people. So I think you have to, and then I think once you, once you establish a culture, I think you’ve got to, you’ve always got to hire and train into that culture. Right? And maybe where, we’ve made some mistakes in the past where maybe we got complacent and we didn’t do a good enough job up front making sure that people really understood what our culture is all about. But you know it is really a good place to work for people who want to accomplish something. And you know, when you take people, when you launch the satellite, we’re, you know we had, we didn’t know how to spell satellite and yet we built and launched 21 of them, I think, so far. And none of us knew anything about it. Now we have some of the best experts in the industry when it comes to that kind of thing. So and they were just college kids or come from another company and so forth. And I think, I think what people generally say they like about the culture is they can make a difference. And they can get decisions and do things quickly. Whereas a lot of companies, it’s a lot of data, a lot of analyzing, a lot of, a lot of meetings without a lot of decisions. Here we’re moving pretty quick. You know, the negative part of it is we do, we have high expectations. And if you’re not somebody who’s used to high expectations, you’re just not as comfortable here. We don’t, you know it’s, I remember my kids, you know, would be in the relay, in the track meet at school. And the person who came in first, and the person who came in last, they all got medals for participating. But we don’t do it that way here. You know, you get, you don’t get a medal for participation.
>> So that whole feel good mentality that you see sometimes in management books or in MBA courses about, you know, create a happy, everybody wins and you know create a happy work environment. That’s not exactly.
>> No, I think you should have a happy work environment. I think– I don’t think everybody, I don’t think everybody in a for-profit corporation wins. I think that there’s people that are more valuable than others which is why some people get paid more than others. And certainly, you know, the title and the pay and the responsibility drive people to success and drive people to achieve things. So but you can have that and have a happy environment. And a lot of companies have been able to do that. We’ve been able to do that. We’re not perfect at that yet. I don’t think we’re as good as we can be at that yet.
Discussion Questions
The text follows the view of Edgar Schein suggesting that organizational culture has three levels. The levels range from visible artifacts and creations to testable values to invisible and even preconscious basic assumptions. Which of these factors does Charlie Ergen mention in the video?
Of the three theories about the relationship between organizational culture and performance – the strong culture perspective, the fit perspective, and the adaptation perspective – which appears to describe the culture at Dish Network?
Charlie Ergen is the co-founder of Dish Network. As a founder and leader, how can Mr. Ergen mange the organization’s culture? From the limited information in the video, what elements of managing culture does Mr. Ergen seem to be performing well and which factors does it seem he needs more work on?
