Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
22
18
23
34
46
Our employees, wh o call thems elves G ooglers, are everyth ing. W e hope to recru it man y m or e
in the futu re. W e will reward and treat th em well.
Larry P ag e and Serg ey Brin, Found ers of Goog le
1. Introduction
Man aging
organiz ations
human
within
res ourc es
eff ec tivel y
and f as t pac ed
has
bec om e
bus iness
vital
to
environm ent
1.1.
T o anal yz e the innovati ve HR prac tic es and the 'Bes t Plac e to W ork
For' c ulture at G oogl e
T o an al yz e the f uture implic ati ons of G oogles HR practic es in the long run
2.
Google.com
2.1.
Sourc e: h tt p :/ / www . g o og l e. c om /
in 1996
(Iyer
&Davenp ort,
2008 ) and
has
morphed
divers ifies
into e-mail,
online mapping,
networking,
Septemb er
1998.
It
had
less
than
It
G oogl e
was
regis tered
in
10,000 s earc h queries eac h day. A year later, the number increas ed to 60
million queries a day (c omp an y webs ite) . Till 1999, G oogl e had no s ys tem f
or gen er ating s ignif ic ant revenu es . The c omp an y mad e s ome mon ey b y lic
ens ing the s earc h s ervic e to other s ites . Under pres sure from the board to
get prof ess ion al help, the f ounders recruited Eric Schmidt in earl y
2001. Schmidt was s urpris ed to disc over that every Friday the f ounders s
hared
G oogl es progress with all the empl oyees and on occ as ions they inc luded
a
detail ed financ ial revi ew (Vog elstein & Burke, 2004). He requested Brin
and Page to disc ontinue the prac tic e but s oon realiz ed that the meetings
were ingrain ed in G oogl e's c ulture and united the s taff . In a 10 -pers on man
ag em ent meeting to discuss ways to gen erat e revenu es , Sc hmidt f ound that
eac h pers on had a vi ewp oint
zed
that
of dat a.
Sc hmidt reali
G oogl e empl oyees loved to talk it out, jettis oning hier arc hy,
business s ilos and layers of man ag em ent f or a flatt er, networked structure
wh ere the guy with the bes t dat a won (Ben Elgin, 2005).
2.2.
Vision
G oogl es miss ion s tat em ent is T o organiz e the world inf ormation and mak
e it univers all y acc ess ible and us ef ul (G oogl e.c om). The work c ulture and
employee emp owerm ent philos oph y at G oogl e was app arent from the day
the c omp an y was launc hed in 1998. T he f ounders , Larry Pag e and Sergey
Brin, wanted to es tablis h G oogl e as a c omp an y that was to be s een as a c
ompan y run by the geeks (Las hins ky Adam) . T he HR Departm ent, in its alignm
ent with the business strat eg y of trying to attrac t the best minds across the
glob e to work f or G oogle, has
s inc e
always
aim ed
to
bec om e
the
Cultural
(1988)
env
def ines
the
c ulture
as:
T he
c limate
an d
practic es
diff erenc es
ess .
between
a part
of
the
c ompan ys
succ
Depending on his theory it s eems that G oogle Inc. is the typ e Z US f irms.
Fig 1 O uc his fram ework
Cul tural
Type J (Japane se
Type A (typical
Type Z (credi te d
characteristic s
m odel)
Am erican m odel
Am erican m odel)
Life c ontract
Evalua tion
Careers
Mod erately b as ed on
on sp ec ialt y
spec ialt y
Control
Decisi on m aking
Group ed and
Individu al
Group ed and
to em ployees
cons ensu al
cons ensu al
Responsibility
Collective
Individu al
Individu al
Narrowed (individual
Glob al (individual at
family)
task s)
work )
Sourc e: Siehl, C. & Ma rt in, J. (1998), Measuring Org aniz at ional Cu lture
Ouc hi argues that the c ulture of the T ype Z firms helps thos e to outp erf
orm typic al Americ an firms. The m ain reas on it that firms like G oogle s ys tem
atic all y invests in their people an d op erati ons over the long run and s o
obtain s tead y and s ignific ant improvem en ts in the long-term perf ormanc e.
G oogl e tries to retain its employees and evalu ate them in a quantitative but als
o qualitative mann er. In f ac t, the c omp an y mad e its work en viron m ent c ol orf
ul and vehic les the im age of a fun plac e to work through what it propos es
(Siehl & Martin, 1998) . For example, empl oyees c an have f ree s nac ks or
bring their pet at the offic e or go to the gym and spa s al on (en vir onm
ental atm os phere illus trat ed in Appendix 2) . Employees c an ben ef it from f
lexib le working hours and have s om e time f or their s elf -direc ted proj ects
whic h shows the importanc e of the c reati vity and innovation from eac h and
in ever y dep artment. Mor eover c ontrol
implic it mec hanis m. There arent an y
5
is
don e
through
inf ormal
and
man ag erial
hierarc hies
employees c omplete
Even
or
man ag em ent
freed om
(Silves ter,
s truc ture,
Anders on&
whic h
gives
Patters on,
the
1999) .
thought empl oyees c an mak e their own dec is ion if s omething is wrong
on a product t o rec tif y it dec is ions ar e us ually occ urring in groups and bas ed
on the principles of full inf ormation s haring. Plus , the c onc ern f or peopl e goes
beyond the individual at work and ext ends to the individu als inter ests , hobbies ,
beli efs etc .
G oogl e c ultur e c an be als o anal yz ed and def ined as an organic struc ture
(See Appendi x 3) . This typ e of structure is c harac terized by flexibility, emp
owerm ent and team work (Siehl, & Martin, 1998) . This s truc ture def ines
well G oogles organiz ation as it is non -hierarc hic al and cross -func tional:
there arent an y barriers
en c ourag ed
to
between
get invol ved in other activities then their own. Als o the top
man ag ement leaves their offic e door open in order f or work ers to f eel free
to c om e and talk directly. Moreover empl oyees emp owerm ent and the d ec
entralization of power c an b e noted (Steven, Brad &Suc iu, 2004). G oogl ers
are reward ed f or their hard work in an extrem el y rel axed en vironm ent that
enc ourag es
creativit y through
permits on e to m eet ever yon e and stay as a team. O rganizati on c ulture als o
aff ects the beh avi ors of work groups and teams . W ork groups are not nec es
s arily teams a team is a work group that has a pers on ality of its own ( Las
hins k y Adam) this is wh en memb ers c ollab orat e and ass ume an identity of
their own as a unit. G oogle ad opt ed an a s tructure that c ame s eem c onf us
ing to s om e in matters of c ontrol or dec is ion making but it is working very
well. It permitted them to meet s ucc ess an d have less an employee turnover.
Reinf orc ing its emphas is on building a healthy work c ulture, G oogle hired
Stac y Savides Sullivan as the Chief Culture Offic er in 2000.G oogl e has man
ag ed to pres ent the c ombin ation of a f inanc ially s ucc essf ul c ompan y off e
ring a highl y s ought af ter work en viron ment (Lashins ky & Vog els tein2004) . It
lays importanc e on off ering a work-lif e balanc e by prom oting the c ulture
of flexi -timings f or G oogl ers , breaking the norm of fi xed m and ator y working
hou rs. O wing to this,
6
G oogl ers enjoy the f lexibility of working from hom e while als o c hoos ing
a c onveni ent time to c om e to work. In addition, f ac ilities inc luding day c ar e c
ent ers and medic al f ac ilities allow G ooglers to bal anc e their prof ess ion al
and pers onal c ommitments (Bus iness W eek, 2005).
2.4.
ood
Social G
to
each
other
and
to
the
outs ide
world
be
Evil, whic h reminds its empl oyees that c ommitment to be ethic al is part and
parc el of being a lead er at G oogl e. 99% of the empl oyees indic ate that, Man
ag em ent is hon est and ethic al in its bus iness prac tic es (Ben Elgin, 2005
). T he s tandards
internal bus iness practic es (res pec ting eac h oth er, protec ting c onf identialit
y, prot ecting G oogl es ass ets, etc ), extern al relations with c ustom ers and
partners , and the impac t on of G oogl e's work on the larg er s oc iet y (G oogl
e Sol ar Pan el Proj ect, 2009) . T he beh avior of on e memb er c an have an
impac t, either direc tly or indirectly, on the beh avi or of others . Als o, the s
ocial s ys tem does not have bound aries ; it exc hang es goods , ideas, c ulture
with the en vironm ent ar ound it.
2.5.
oogle
in G
with c omplete integrity and hones ty. However, at the s am e time, the HR dep
artment has to ens ure that the mark et dyn amics are n ot ad vers el y aff ected
by the s heer volum es
Anders on,
of
inves tment
invol ved
in
the
proc ess
( Silves ter,
ens ures to build a strong employee- employer rel ations hip. G oogl es HR
prac tic es clearl y
reveal
the
whic h help
Rec ruitment
f orem os t step
in the overall
HR proc ess es . H iring the right peopl e is a key HR philos oph y at G oogl e
the medi an ag e of empl oyees at G oogl e is 27 years (Mullan ey, 2004),
making it the young est workf orc e across the industry.
G oogl e
is
proud
of
its
c entralized
rec ruiting
team,
c om pris ing
of
hiring spec ialis ts , to fill the c omp an ys growing rep ertoire of job positions .
T o attrac t and ret ain best empl oyees and to pay more att ention to them,
G oogl e has creat ed the disruptive approac h f or rec ruiting. It has devel op
ed a recruiting mac hine to c ateg oriz e the jobs f or the rec ruitment proc
ess (Ellie Levens on,
2003). T his c ontains det ails of the entire
the organiz ation
hrough
from
the
lead ers
to
entry-level
empl oyees . T
its branding, public relati ons, and recruiting eff orts , G oogl e has
attrac ted man y prof ess ion als from every indus try and university. G oogl e
takes meas ures t o chang e the way the empl oyees work s o as to attract
and
retain
the
implem ented the s tandard bes t prac tic e tools f or recruiting f unctions ( s ee
Appendi x 4) .Known as Peopl e Oper ations , the HR team at G oogle empl
oys an Applic ant Trac king Sys tem (ATS), that en ables the recruiter to keep
an acc ount of the number of res umes pos ted on G oogl es W ebs ite, s creen
them and shortlis t c andidat es f or the rec ruitment proc ess .
As the c omp an y aspires to work only with great empl oyees , it has put in
plac e
a rigorous s elec tion proc ess . Inter vi ewers rank the pot ential c andidat es
on a
8
in
an
inf orm al
styl e,
thes e
ability ins tead of f oc us ing on their previ ous work exp eri enc e (Bak er Lor en).
Further, G oogl e is f am ou s f or the us e of mathem atic al probl ems while sc
reening c andidat es (Mills Elinor , 1999). Thes e res pons es
imultan eous ly,
e,
an
making
empl oyee
s aid,
T he
man ag ers
Highlighting
the
s am
ely inter ested in me as a pers on. They were taking notes . O ne even mad e a c
up of c off ee f or me ( A Look Inside the G oogle T al ent Mac hine). The rec
ruitment proc ess , a highly ardu ous f eat, c om es to an end onl y when it is
finally appr oved by Pag e. Addition all y, t he c omp any als o evaluat es c
andidates on their G oogl eyn ess , ability to work in G oogl es flat organiz ation
al struc ture and their knac k of working in s mall teams . Valuing intelligenc e
and creati vity, G oogle als o pays c los e att ention to the ac ad emic rec ord o f
applic ants instead of their work exp eri enc e (Fletc her Sarah) . T o avoid any c
ompromis e in their
funds
its
quest
f or
the
recruiting
func tion
is
the
data -driven
approach
to
ass ess ment (Las hins ky Adam) . T he c omp an ys new ass ess ment tool reli
es on an alg orithm to identif y c andidat es acc uratel y, s o as to matc h or res
embl e with their existing top perf ormers . The alg orithm evalu ates the pot
ential s ucc ess of
1
0
the c andidat es and this innovati ve f unc tion rec ognizes and res ol ves the
maj or drawb ac ks in the ass ess ment meth odol ogi es that rel y on ac ad emic
grad es , SAT sc ores , degrees from top sc hools, prior indus try exp erienc e
and s ubjec tive inter vi ew res ults. G oogl e mad e a signif ic ant s hift from the
tradition al approac h in terms of rec ruitment to new inn ovati ve approac hes
that prevented press ure of bus iness loss es , laws uits or trad e unions (Mullan
ey, 2004). T he trans ition from the
c om m on
intuition
approac h
to
sc
ant
rec ruiting
eff ec t on
the
team
andidat es to G oogl e.
2.8.
Compensation Structure
G oogl e stands out as being on e of the most s ought af ter and yet on e of the
most underpaying employers in the industry. However, the HR s trateg y f its
perf ec tly with the business mod el and vis ion at G oogl e wh ere empl oyees
are attrac ted not to the s hort term mon etar y returns from work, but rath er
to the s upport s ys tem that c ould help them c reat e an ything (J os ey, 2005).
G oogl es c omp ens ation progr am, als o c all ed pay-f or-perf orm anc e, f oc
us es on providing reward f or s trong perf ormanc e as well as training f or
overc oming weakn ess es f or underperf orm ers . This philos oph y of G oogle
was applied to all G oogl e employees , and there was an increas e in the prop
ortion of c omp ens ation in
and
through
on -the-job
acc ordanc e
with
the
on
levels
of
empl oyee
offic ials , frequent dep ar tmental meetings and lec tures by f am ous pers onn el.
G oogl es moti vati on mec hanis ms adopt ed f or empl oyees invol ve rapid dec
is ion -m aking
ideas
but
exp ec ts
the
empl oyees
to
ambitious
At G oogl e, empl oyees ideas are tak en into c on s ider ation and approved f or
implem enting whic h enh anc es employee c reativit y and boo s ts empl oyee
moral e. Additionall y, G oogl ers als o f etc h good s alaries . W hile f res h MBAs
are
off ered
s al aries
between
$80,000
and
$120,000
per
annum, exp
erienc ed engineers draw an annual pac kag e of $130,000 along with 800
10
to
by G lass door
(a c ar eer
Total Compensation
Fig 1 Sal ary c omp aris on of G oogl es Software engineers with c omp etitors
(in $)
100%
98%
94%
92%
4,958
6,871
96%
14,7
33
4,75
90%
Bonus
88%
Salary
86%
82%
80%
100,417
98,771
84%
97,8
4
84,25
Softwar
e
Engeneer
Software
Engineer
Development
Software
Engeneer
Software
Engeneer
Using this blend of s alar y and perks emb edd ed in an exc iting work c
ulture, G oogl e has em erged as an employm ent brand, diff erentiating its elf
from
aiming
with similar
talents
that
G oogle bec am e the firs t c ompan y wher e the Board of Direc tors requ es ted
f or a reduc tion in their s al aries and c omp ens ation bec aus e they f elt they
11
wer e getting paid more m on ey than they need ed. All the empl oyees agreed
on the s entiment, an d in 200 8 09, the
12
empl oyees f orm ally dem and ed a wag e c ut thems el ves. During the s am e
period, the turnover was 1.43% (W illoc k Rob).
2.9.
70/20/10Rule
w onders
W I -Fi
Week , 2005 ).
initiative
giving
all
and
Franc
hares an offic e with one or more member of the team. W ith ever y team
member being knowledg eabl e s itting next to eac h other, knowl edg e s haring
is a part of lif e ever yda y at G oogle.
entire team, T otal Q uality Man ag em ent (Q uali ty and Integrat ed System) is
c oordinat ed within the team. In addition to physic al proximity, eac h G oogl er
e-m ails a s nippet onc e a week to his work group describing what he has don e
in the last week
Acc ording
ever y
empl oyee s har es the problem and s olution that he/s he c am e up with.
2.10.
Googles
performance
performance
ia
staff
The s ucc ess of G oogl es products and s ervic es is mainl y bec aus e of
innovati on exp ec ted by the c omp an y from every empl oyee and 20% time
given by the c ompan y f or the purpos e. It is ob vi ous that the HR ac tivities
and polic ies ar e ac tually driving G oogl es c orpor ate business s ucc ess. T o
en c ourag e creativit y and interac tion am ong empl oyees, G oogl es offic e is
des igned s o as to provid e c olors ,
HR
practic es
reveal
that
lighting
and
s har ed
room.
G oogl es
empl oyee
gen erat es
more
(Fletc her Sarah, 2008). T his helps G oogl e lever ag e its workf orc e produc
tivit y, whic h in turn enh anc es empl oyee moral e. G oogl es HR polic ies and
work c ulture are unique and the man ag ers are all owed to try new appr oac
hes, to mak e mis tak es and learn from f ailure. The organiz ations rec ruiting
func tion is diff erent from tradition al method ol og y. T he c ompan ys f oc us is on
reduc ing rec ruiting c os t and increas ing the suc c ess of the organiz ation by
hiring good perf orm ers wh o have the c ap ability to bec om e top perf ormers
(Iyer Bala and Davenp ort T hom as H, 2008) . G oogle ac knowledg es that talent
man agem ent plays a signif ic ant rol e in its succ ess . G oogle is c ons idered
by man y pers onn el as the bes t plac e to work mainl y bec aus e of its f un
at wor k and various
uall y and have f un at work plac e, acc ording to man agem ent exp erts from W
harton
Univers ity,
All the
perks
provid ed
Peter Capp elli, Man ag em ent Prof ess or and Director of the Center f or Human
Res ourc es at W harton s aid, T hes e ben ef its help c omp ani es recruit
people wh o are willing to s pend alm ost all of their time at work. Steven
E. Gross,
s aid,
G oogl e, with its vas t array of ben efits , is trying to diff erenti ate its elf from
other c ompani es that want to hire p eopl e with the s ame talents .
G oogl es main
aim
is
to ac hieve
s ever al
goals
s uc h as
attract
the
best knowl edg e-workers, help the empl oyees work long hours by f eeding
them gourmet m eals on -s ite, handling oth er time-c onsuming pers onal c hores
and to remain as G ooglers f or a long er period of time.
2.11. Googles G aps
G oogl e is well -known as a great empl oyer and maj ority of its rec ognition h
as c ome as a res ult of HR progr am s and ideas . However there are s om e
gaps in the HR prac tic es of G oogle.
13
Addition all y,
14
2.15.
Gaps
system
in
G oogle
HR
G oogl e is lac king in its ability to trac k the on -the-job perf orm anc e of new
hires . The number of temp orar y and c ontrac t employees in the recruiting
func tion at G oogl e is
high.
T he
unwillingness
to give
perm an ent
job s
immedi atel y to rec ruiters may reduc e G oogles abilit y to get exp erienc ed
recruiters . G oogles emph as is on attrac ting youngsters might hurt its ability t
o at trac t mor e s eni or and exp erienc ed p ers onn el (Vogels tein & Burke, 2004)
.
2.16. Challenge of growth
As G oogl e c ontinues to grow bigger, it f ac es the c ontinual c halleng e of
being
abl e to handl e succ essfully its open and f un-f illed work culture. Kevin W erbac
h, ass is tant Prof ess or of Legal Studies and Bus iness Ethics at W harton
Univers ity s aid, G oogle h as don e a rem arkabl e job in growing f rom a s mall,
privat e
c ompan y to a 15,000-pers on organiz ation in jus t a f ew years , without killing its
startup-like innovation c ulture. But, an alys ts are c onc erned that as the c omp
an y grows, it is diff ic ult f or it to provid e the s ame f inanc ial and other inc
entives f or its empl oyees. G oogl es met eoric growth als o pos es a threat to its
intimate t eam culture and its ability to h andle creati ve c onf lic ts am ong G oogl
ers. Further,
G oogl e struggles to k eep its c ulture away from the s hac kles of bureauc rac
y while being able to s timulat e its employees . Avoiding org anizati on al
letharg y from creeping in while c ons tantly l aunc hing new produc ts is als o
not an eas y
f eat to acc omplis h. Horns ey beli eves that overc oming its growi ng pains is
the biggest c halleng e f ac ed b y HR at G oogl e (Bus iness W eek , 2005). She
add ed, So m an y c ompani es have s tarted off ver y innovative, creati ve and
vibr ant, but
have then f ail ed and bec om e bureauc ratic . Its always a d anger when you
grow. Highlighting the s am e, G oogl e's human res ourc es c hief has s ai d the
runaway succ ess of the f ast -growing intern et c omp an y is gen erati ng its own s
et of peopl e man ag em ent probl ems .
15
2.17.
gap
Div
ersification
In c as e of diversif ic ation, G oogl e had trouble in rec ruiting talented loc als in
its
South Asian op erati ons, a board member
eek,
2005). In partic ular, the venture c apitalis t cited a s hortag e of web develop
ment
16
skills s uc h as knowl edge of J avaSc ript and Ajax (As ync hron ous J avaScript
and XML), the web des ign tec hnol og y us ed in the lates t gener ation of webs
ites like G oogl e Maps and Flic kr. Middle man ag ers als o ar e in s h ort supply.
He added, I know firs thand that we ve had a bit mor e of a c halleng e trying to
hire engin eers f or G oogl e in Bang al ore c omp ared to other parts of the world .
2.18. Gap in company nature
The nature
of
work
at G oogl e undergoes
ew empl oyees are able to ac hieve the tas k f or what they were initiall y hired.
It is als o opin ed
that this
may hinder
unction. Bec aus e ever y hire has been ext ens ivel y screen ed and G oogle
believes , All empl oyees have high pot ential and if s omeon e f ails, G oogl e
man ag ers tak e the attitude that theyr e to blam e, not the empl oyee.
G oogl es unc on vention al work c ulture has stirred man y deb ates . A12hour working day has bec ome a norm at G oogle, owing to its wid e array of
employee ben ef its. Pet er Cappelli, man ag em ent prof ess or at the W harton
Business Sc hool s aid, Thes e ben ef its help c omp anies to recruit peopl e wh o
are willing to s pend mos t all of their time at work (Bus ines s W eek , 2005)
Further, its recruitment appr oac h, where c andidat es grad es are pref erred
over prior work exp erienc e has als o em erged as a matt er of c onc ern.
Gross
() ass erts , Som e peopl e would argue that working at G oogle is more
3.
Muc h of the c omp an y's s ucc ess has been bas ed on the f act that they h ave
been more f lexible and f orward -thinking than its c omp etitors s uc h as
Micros oft and Yahoo (Ben Elgin, 2005). Man aging growth with the c oll egi ate
atm os phere of the c omp an y is ess ential to s us tain its s ucc ess in the f uture
. G oogl e has built a culture where a well -c hos en elite acc om mod at es
flexibility, s hifting rol es and, ab ove all els e, urgenc y. As G oogl e grows in
size and s trength, it is a c halleng e to maintain the pac e of innovation and c
onvey a s ens e of empowerm ent t o
16
G oogl es engin eers and produc t man ag ers . T her e is a ris k of the org
anizati on los ing its dyn amis m and bec oming more bureaucratic . Mic hael
Ritc hie (2008) ad vis ed, G oogle s hould ens ure that teams rem ain relati
vely s m all s o that bureauc ratic
entrep reneurial
endent
minds . Employees
initiatives
not
s low
down
and they should have the time and res ourc es to purs ue
does
activities . Although
in
bal ancing
bus in ess
and
pleas
and enc ourag e innovation, but the c ompan y s hould not deviat e from its c
ore bus iness s trategy whic h direc tly aff ec ts the revenu e (Mullaney, 2004).
Addition all y, while G oogles willingness t o launc h bet a versions
of new
17
Appendices
Appendi x 1 G oogle Inc .
Years
Events
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Sourc e: h tt p :/ / www. g o og l e. c om / s e ar c h?client=op era& rls =en&q=g oogle&s ourc eid =op era&ie=ut f
8&oe=ut f-8
Sourc e: h tt p :/ / www . g o og l e. c om / in t l/ en / op t i on s/
20
Sourc e: h tt p :/ / www . g o og l e. c om / in t l/ en / op t i on s/
21
22
23
Commitment to the con cern 's t ask and t o th e "t echnolog ic al ethos "
of
material prog ress and exp ansion is more high ly valued th an loyalt
yImport
and ob
edeienc
Prest ige
anc
andeprest ige at tach t o affiliat ions and expert is e valid in
the indust rial and t echnic al and c ommerc ial m ilieu extern al to the
Sourc e: h tt p :/ / www . v a lu eb as efirm
d m an ag em en t. n et/ m e t h od s _b u rn s _ m ec h an is t ic _ org an i c_ s ys t
em s . h t m l
24
R ecr uit er tr ai ni ng :
Sourc e: Sullivan J ohn, A look ins ide th e G oogle t alent mach ine,
h tt p :/ / www. hu m an r es ou rc es m ag az ine . c om . au / a rt i c l es / B 1 / 0 C0429 B 1 . a s p? Typ e=60&Categ ory=1223
Bibliography
A Look Ins ide the G oogle Talent Ma chin e [ online] A vailable at
h tt p :/ / www. hu m an r es ou rc es m ag az ine . c om . au / a rt i c l es / B 1 / 0 C0429 B 1 . a s p ? Typ e =60 & Ca t eg o r y =1
22 3
Bak er Loren, G oog le Rec eives 1,000,000 Job App lic at ions a Year [ on lin e] Available at
h tt p :/ / www. s e arc h eng in e jou rn al. c om / g o og l e - r ec e i v es -100000 0 -job - app l ic at ion s - a y e ar/ 4308
Benefits , Goog le Inc [ onlin e] A vailable at
h tt p :/ / www. go og le. c om . au / s up p ort / j ob s / b in / s t at i c . p y?p ag e =b en e f it s. h t m l
Best g lob al brands for 2008 [on lin e] A vailable at
h tt p :/ / www. in t e rb r and . c om / b est _ g l oba l_b r and s . as p x