In other types of industries, the Googley way of working could potentially spell disaster for sales and overall business success. This paper will show whether the Googley way of working is actually sustainable long-term for the company and will discuss whether or not this way of working could provide higher benefits for different companies in need of change to their organisational structures or systems and processes.
Historical theorists such as Frederick Taylor believed in a scientific method for business in which people should be observed over a period of time and then determining, through these observational findings, which method of training is best for performing specialised jobs in the organisation (Bloisi, Cook and Hunsaker, 2006). Combined with the scientific approach, Taylor also viewed workers through a mechanistic standpoint, believing that workers were often inherently difficult and uncooperative and often lacked the ability to absorb knowledge and information successfully. This classical view of management is still at work in many different industries today which have strong leadership hierarchies where virtually all decision-making starts at the top and trickles down the organisation. Google has managed to break away from this classical type of management model where workers are heavily controlled and observed and has given their workers considerable autonomy in most of their own decision-making concepts and job roles. It may only be in an environment where change is constant and there is a need for flexible and rapid decision-making where this chaotic type of leadership concept is going to be successful.
For example, many of the main global automakers are experiencing sales declines in their auto sales, especially noticeable in the United States. Automakers in this category such as Ford and General