Slashdot Mirror


Google's Idea of Productivity Is a Bad Fit For Many Other Workplaces

New submitter rjupstate writes "Google places a lot of value on the spontaneous creativity that can occur when two employees from completely different parts of the company meet. It's an ideal that Google has perfected over the years, but it's not something that will work for most other organizations. Executives trying to replicate Google's approach could even create major problems among their workforces."

4 of 167 comments (clear)

  1. Google, eh? by serviscope_minor · · Score: 5, Interesting

    While google do this and I'm sure are very good at it, it's not Google's invention and it's certainly not new.

    This is/was one of the major roles that the US National Labs play. Compared to univesities there is a lot more mixing between divisions and as a result a lot of very interesting science gets done because new and unexpected things pop up.

    Of course now that they're run by nice efficient profit making private companies rather than hippie commie inefficient public universities, that's pretty much been killed and all semblance of productivity has gone. But that's a rant for another day.

    If companies think that this kind of innication nd productivity is a bad fit then it's because they're assuming implicitly that they won't be around for more than a year. If they're going to be around you need to develop new products and also develop better ways of creating/designing/building those products. If you're not doing that, then you risk losing out to someone who does.

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  2. The reverse, however, does not work either by vikingpower · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I work in a small R & D team set up as an internal joint venture between two daughter companies of the same group. Some time ago, the other daughter - i.e. the one I do not belong to - withdrew its commitment. We decided to carry on, on our own. What happens now is that our people go informally to engineers and stakeholders of the "other" daughter, and that work is being done as before - albeit without the formal blessing of management, almost in a subversive way. Do I like it better this way ? Sure, it feels like working, suddenly and again, in a combination of an open-source project and a start-up. Is it frustrating ? Yes, whenever I try to get some resources for a task longer than a few days. Overall, though, it's better.

    --
    Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
  3. Re:Examples? by serviscope_minor · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Google wave was certainly innovative, mostly because it so effectively made even young users feel old.

    "This seems cool, but I'm not really sure what use it is or even how to use it. I'll just go back to email, then."

    As for innovative stuff which makes no money: most of it never will, that's life. Look at university research. Most will never see the light out of some small academic circle. But every so often it comes out with massive world changing things. The thing is, it is impossible to predice in advance what will be interesting and what will be useful.

    Though search aside, I'm having trouble of thinking of things from google with a really big impact.

    Android was purchased from outside. Chrome has made a big impact, but it (a) uses the webkit engine which isn't google, (b) is heavily advertisied on the worlds biggest advertiser and (c) is solid, but not especially innovative. Google groups came from deja-news years back, worked great until they removed threading, then sucked.

    Google maps was really pretty cool. Though I remember seeing a java applet one a few years prior which was considerably smoother. Google maps is the first cool and not needing a plugin one that I remember seeing.

    Google earth---they just bought some GIS company and released for free what GIS people were used to paying $-nan for. Cool, but not new.

    Drive---meh.

    Docs, kinda alright but I work with sharp people and LaTeX + git has served me very well so far.

    Go seems OK as a better alternative to scripting languages, but the go authors seem to have (a) hilariously misunderstood C++ and (b) be baffled as to why it's not got much traction in the C++ community. This is particularly surprising given the names involved. Nevertheless it seems a decent enough language.

    But one does hear of interesting and useful internal projects, like a C++ refactoring tool based on the LLVM parser that allows things like automated API changes to huge codebases, except that these things have a habit of never appearing outside. Maybe it makes them more competitive or maybe it's just smoke. Hard to tell.

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  4. 60s era thinking by Goldsmith · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I used to work at General Atomics's original campus in La Jolla, which was created in the 60s.

    The campus was mainly a series of concentric circles. The main circular building had a curvature which was "calculated" to maximize random interactions with scientists and engineers outside your normal working group while also giving an illusion of working in a small group. There were pools, gyms, baseball fields and support buildings around the outside and along the radial lines. The center of the circle was a large cafeteria.

    This was all great as long as nuclear power was going to save the world and money was rolling in. When the company hit hard times the ball fields were turned into office rentals and many non essential services were stopped.

    When the company once again was making money with military hardware, the new buildings were simpler and located in a less expensive area of San Diego.