Is Investment in Employee Happiness at Google Increasing Employee Satisfaction at the Organization - Case Study Example

Is the investment in employee happiness at Google actually increasing employee satisfaction at the organization?

Introduction

Motivation is always of high importance to companies such as Google given the fact that the contribution of their employees is of high importance to the performance of the organization and its brand image. There are various approaches that have been used by various organizations in the bid of making sure that their employees remain motivated. This will be achieved through the review of literature materials on motivation and happiness of employees that will help in synthesising the extent of appropriateness of this approach at Google with reference to case studies. A SWOT analysis will be used in the determination of the extent to which this will work.

Findings

In accordance to a study that was undertaken by Steiber and Alänge (2013) asserts that there is an observable increase in the productivity of employees at Google as result of the use of motivation strategies that focus on keeping the employees happy. According to the study, the increase in productivity at Google as a result of this motivation strategy is about 12%. It is asserted in their report that the increase in productivity of happy employees can be as a result of the fact that happy employees are always invigorated, meaning that they are motivated to achieve their goals which are easier to align to the goals of the organization because they are happy.

Girard (2009) asserts that Google is one of the companies that are known for their unique cultures. A look at Googleplex might give someone the impression that they are looking at a playground and not a place of work. However, the management at Google looks at it differently. According to the people operations’ head at Google, Laszlo Bock: the perk given to the employees at the organization include: unrestricted meals and dental care; doze pods; immediate doctors; ping pong and video games; and hybrid car subsidies. This obviously comes at a cost for Google. However, given the high competition for talent at the Silicon Valley, it can be said that all these are not in vain. This extent to which Google has gone into making sure that their employees are satisfied can be said to be the reason as to why the company has a very low rate of turnover. It can also be said that this is a way through which the organization has made sure that they are in a position of getting the most from their employees because the employees feel valued and give their best as they feel part of the organization. With happy employees, the organization has been able to be ranked as one of the most innovative one because of the level to which the employees feel that they are part of the organization and if the organization excels they excel too.

Love and Singh (2011) is opinion that when it comes to motivation of employees, Google comes second to none. Fortune Magazine and the Great Place to Work Institute recognized Google as the best organization to work for in the year 2010. This is a list that Google had topped for five consecutive years. This is an indication of the extent to which the motivation strategies that are used at Google have been effective. The approach of putting the happiness of employees above everything is a thing that has highly contributed for the rating that Google has as a destination for employees, especially for the highly talented. One thing that should be noted is that the environment in which an individual works is of high effect on their productivity. When an employee is given an environment of freedom and flexibility, such as the one that is present at Google, they usually find themselves in a position that they can be of maximum creativity, which has been reflected n the level to which the organization has been productive over the past decade.

Hinkin and Tracey (2010) reveal that the level of motivation of employees at Google has been able to increase by 37% as a result of their motivation strategy. The motivation strategy that is used at Google is based on the fact that happy employees usually work harder in the bid of reciprocating the people that make them happy. Studies have revealed that employees who are happy are always willing to do faster and more without compromising the quality. Hinkin and Tracey (2010) believe that the motivation strategy used by Google is perfect for the kind of the industry that the organization is involved in because their success highly depend on the ability of their employees to be creative. The initiatives such as making the working environment accommodating to different types of people is the price that Google has to pay in order to make sure that all their employees are willing to give their best without much supervision.

Analysis of the findings

It is clearly evident the being able to motivate employees is key to their productivity. This is a fact that is supported by human resource management theory. However, the massive expenses in employee happiness as done by Google would have been termed as an unnecessarily expensive approach in employee motivation prior to use by Google. There are a number of factors that can be used in supporting the effectiveness of this approach. One of the factors is that happiness has psychological effect on the performance of people. A happy person will definitely work harder not because they are expected to work harder or the need to fulfil the expectations of the organization that they work for, but as a way of expressing their happiness. This usually happens subconsciously, in that people start working more without actually planning to do it. Sometimes they do it even without realizing that they are putting more effort (Finkle 872).

In the case of Google it can be said that they build the culture in such a way that is circulates around employees being kept happy at all cost. They might be spending more on this, but the result of such investment can be said to be effective given the performance of the organization in the market. The high investment would have been useless if in any case the organization were not able to recover the amount of finances that are invested in the same. The fact that Google has been ranked as one of the best companies to work for can be said to be a fact that has contributed to the ability of the company to hold on to their best employees. With such a system the company is able to make sure that they have the most creative team in the market while at the same time making sure that there is stability in the various units of the organization because they will not have to keep on replacing members of the various units at the organization (Sadri and Bowen 45).

Despite the fact that Google has been able to use the “employee happiness” approach in motivate their employees for maximum productivity, not all organizations can be able to effectively use this approach. This is an indication that this approach is not of universal applicability. The approach only works well for Google because of factors such as the industry that they operate in, their structure, and culture. Therefore, this can be sued in supporting the argument that the company must have undertaken numerous researches before finally settling for this method of employee motivation. If they would not have done so: the move would have been a very big gamble. As a result of this assertion, it can be said that the kind of investment that Google made in motivation cannot be recommended for all organizations. Therefore, every organization can only undertake studies with the aim of determination of the most effective approach for them. Otherwise, they might end up spending allot of money in motivation strategies that might end up not working. As for the case of Google all has worked and the ranking of the company as a destination for employees and market performance can be used to support such an assertion.

Conclusion

It can be concluded that the motivation of employees actually has an influence on the productivity of employees. This can be seen in the case of Google who choose to make sure that employees are happy in order to have them motivated. What becomes clear through this commentary is the fact that this is a very expensive method of motivating employees. However, Google are left with no option given the high competition for employees in the Silicon Valley. They could not risk losing their best employees. From a critical point of view, it cean be seen that by keeping their employees happy, Google has been able to kill two birds with a single stone because they have been able to maximize their productivity while at the same time retaining their best and most creative employees. The happiness of employees at Google has even reflected in their performance in the market.

Work cited

Finkle, Todd A. "Corporate Entrepreneurship and Innovation in Silicon Valley: The Case of Google, Inc." Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 36.4 (2012): 863-884.

Girard, Bernard. The Google way: How one company is revolutionizing management as we know it. No Starch Press, 2009.

Hinkin, Timothy R., and J. Bruce Tracey. "What makes it so great? An analysis of human resources practices among Fortune’s best companies to work for." Cornell Hospitality Quarterly 51.2 (2010): 158-170.

Kuntze, Ronald, and Erika Matulich. "Google: Searching for value." Journal of Case Research in Business and Economics 2 (2010): 1.

Love, Linda F., and Parbudyal Singh. "Workplace branding: Leveraging human resources management practices for competitive advantage through “Best Employer” surveys." Journal of Business and Psychology 26.2 (2011): 175-181.

Sadri, Golnaz, and Clarke R. Bowen. "Meeting employee requirements: Maslow's hierarchy of needs is still a reliable guide to motivating staff." Industrial engineer 43.10 (2011): 44-49.

Saini, Gordhan K., Purvi Rai, and Manoj K. Chaudhary. "What do best employer surveys reveal about employer branding and intention to apply?." Journal of Brand Management 21.2 (2014): 95-111.

Steiber, Annika, and Sverker Alänge. "A corporate system for continuous innovation: the case of Google Inc." European Journal of Innovation Management 16.2 (2013): 243-264.