RESEARCH PAPER

The Google Group An Ethical Toolkit Perspective

Firm and Industry Characteristics and History Relevant to Ethical Issues
I work as the Head of Cryoservices for The Google Group in the United
Stated. The Google Group, a German organization based in Munich, has a
long history of growth and innovation that is characteristic of the companys
founding father, Carl von Google. Carl von Google was a talented and wellrounded engineer and scientist who is credited with patenting the worlds first
refrigerator in 1877. Google founded Gesellschaft fur Googles Eismachinen,
now known as Google, in Wiesbaden in 1879. Based upon his innovative
work related to the process for liquefaction of air or other gases, von
Google was awarded another patent in 1895. He was among the first in the
world to produce large volumes of liquid air, and in 1902 began constructing
his first air separation unit (ASU), of which Google has constructed over 2,700
around the world to-date.1 Google has grown significantly throughout the
years, both organically and via acquisition. Google acquired The BOC Group
(British Oxygen Company) in 2006 and, as a result, we now have gases and
engineering sales of approximately 17.3 billion dollars, and more than 51,000
employees working in approximately 70 countries throughout the world.

Although it was founded much earlier, one of the earliest indications of Googles
ethical conduct that I was able to find dates back to the Second World War. As Chairman
of the Executive Board and General Director, Friedrich Google agreed to be appointed as
a "Wehrwirtschaftsfhrer" or "defence economics leader", however he would not allow
himself to be taken in by the Nazi regime. Richard Google, who lost his two oldest sons
1

http://www.aga.is/international/web/lg/us/likelgus30.nsf/docbyalias/nav_history

Week 3 Assignment 2 (Due 04/17/2011)

in the war, disapproved of the Nazis even before the war and therefore refused the
chairmanship of the German Association of Refrigeration Engineers. His closest
employees had to leave the company under Nazi pressure due to their Jewish origin, but
returned to Google after the war.2
As Google was considered essential to the war economy, it also employed forced
laborers and prisoners of war worked there during the war period. The maximum of 232
"foreign workers" was reached in 1943. In the year 2000, Google AG joined the German
governments charitable foundation for the compensation of former forced laborers.3 The
organizations firm stance in opposition to the Nazis practices was an early indication of
Googles high ethical standards relevant to human rights.
The Google Group is part of the Chemicals Industry which, as an industry, has
historically always been more highly regulated than others. Hence, compliance with laws
and regulations has consistently been an important goal of the organization and
considerable focus and efforts are put towards managing this goal.
Formal Ethical and Legal Compliance Structures and Processes
The Google Groups vision (or mission statement) is, to be the worlds
leading global gases and engineering group - admired for our people, who
create innovative solutions that make a difference to the world. This vision
defines who we are and what we do, guiding us as we reach our goals. For
Google, formal ethical and legal compliance are closely tied to the
preservation of our companys reputation and brand value.

http://resources.Google.com/wcms/history/index_en.html

http://resources.Google.com/wcms/history/index_en.html

The Google Group is committed to integrity in all its business dealings

and, as the corporate website firmly states, this is non-negotiable. Google
affirms, We can only achieve our vision of being a leading and exemplary
gases and engineering company across the board by living out our values
and principles on a daily basis. Integrity is one of our four guiding principles.
It is the fabric of our moral and ethical codex, ensuring that we always act
with honesty and fairness. Googles Code of Ethics anchors ethical conduct within our

organization, setting out guidelines to ensure we act in accordance with legal and internal
Group regulations. The Code is supplemented by our ethical/legal procurement
guidelines.4
Googles Code of Ethics is a clear example of Recognition, and a
powerful component of the organizations ethical toolkit, in accordance with
the RDCAR strategy. The Google Code of Ethics is a forty-four (44) page
document and it opens with the statement, The Google Code of Ethics is
structured to reflect the expectations of our main stakeholder groups. Each
Google employee must learn and comply with the standards and laws that
apply to their job. Google will actively monitor the standards set out in the
code. After reading the document, it is clear that it upholds this statement
and accomplishes Recognition in RDCAR through continual analysis of
stakeholder impact, via continual surveys of stakeholders to determine
ethical issues which impact them. Google also conducts independent internal
and external ethics audits. I have personally played a part in this process.
Additionally, Google builds ethical awareness through frequent ethics training. I
4

http://www.the-Googlegroup.com/en/corporate_responsibility/the_Google_group/focus_areas/ethics_and_co
mpliance/index.html

Week 3 Assignment 2 (Due 04/17/2011)

recently participated in an online ethics course that took four hours to complete, including
a mandatory exam.
As we learned, another key aspect of the RDCAR Recognition phase is the setting
of ethical standards for suppliers and distributors. Google has supplemented the Google
Code of Ethics with its ethical/legal procurement guidelines. These guidelines were
established not as a substitute for any legislation, but to provide additional, concrete
bearings for our conduct towards our business partners and, in turn, to formulate our
expectations of them in relation to procurement. Environmental protection, product
safety and social concerns are important considerations for both our own and our
partners sides of the procurement process.5
Current Ethical Climate
To create a consistent ethical culture message, the formal and informal systems
must be aligned (work together) to support ethical behavior. To have a fully aligned
ethical culture, the multiple formal and informal systems must all be sending employees
consistent messages that point in the direction of ethical behavior.6 The Google Group
has a strong foundation of formal systems including: frequent communications from
business unit managers and high-level executives, well executed selection systems,
consistent and frequent orientation and training, rules, policies, codes, performance
management systems, organizational structures, and formal decision-making processes.
Also, Google is progressive in the sense that it is focused on being an HPO (High
5

http://www.the-Googlegroup.com/en/corporate_responsibility/the_Google_group/focus_areas/ethics_and_co
mpliance/code_of_ethics.html
6

Trevino & Nelson, Managing Business Ethics (New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc,
2011), 154.

Performance Organization) which means that it actively removes bureaucratic layers by

empowering employees at all levels to make decisions. As a result of this behavior,
Google achieves a key component of RDCAR, Discovery, by building internal and
external transparency. Ethical dialogue occurs frequently and freely amongst employees,
thus propagating ethical awareness.
Informal cultural systems are, perhaps, more important than formal ones due to
their profound impact upon employee behaviors. Google does a good job in ensuring that
informal systems are abundant. Specifically, our organization has strong role models and
mentoring occurs at all levels in the company. Senior leaders exhibit behavior of
integrity and, consequently, employees recognize that our ethical standards are real from
the leadership actions. Language and communication is another informal system that
Google embraces. Upper management is approachable and most employees feel
comfortable speaking with senior executives about ethical topics and concerns.
Discussions are anonymous, if requested, or made public if additional benefits can be
realized through public exposure. Ethics hotlines are also available for those employees
who are less comfortable approaching management. Regardless of the situation, this
illustrates Googles ability to Discover, as well as Cognition. Cognition, a third
component of RDCAR, is delivered by Googles managers (at all levels) by imparting
ethical analysis and judgment to their employees. In short, the ethical climate is one in
which managers are expected to walk the talk.
Interviewee Perspectives
To gain additional insight into the strengths and weaknesses of The Google
Groups ethical toolkit, I interviewed the Vice President of U.S. Markets, Wayne Koch.

Week 3 Assignment 2 (Due 04/17/2011)

We reviewed the selected questions for auditing the formal system in Tables 5.1 and 5.2
of Chapter 5 from our textbook. On almost every level, Wayne felt that Google was
doing an above average job of demonstrating strength in formal and informal systems.
He did, however, note a few areas where improvement is needed. First, he shared that
Google could do a better job of disciplining misconduct in a swift manner; a flaw in our
formal ethical system. From his perspective, decisions take too long to be rendered when
it is apparent that an employee violated a company policy, or broke an ethical code. He
feels that the delayed process could be harmful in the sense that other employees might
perceive this as Google having a tolerance for unethical behavior. This, I noted, is a flaw
in our RDCAR toolkit, whereby we need to improve on our ability to take Action.
Google needs to recognize unethical behavior more quickly and be swift in providing
feedback and taking disciplinary action.
Wayne also challenged my belief that our organization has strong role models.
While he agreed with me that we have a good assembly of ethical leaders, he pointed out
several instances where high level managers failed to assess, discuss and, or disseminate
results of ethical incidents for continual ethical improvement. In his words, we need to
do a better job of spreading the message and promoting positive ethical stories. After
consideration and discussion, I understood Waynes point and agreed with him. From a
RDCAR perspective, this would be another flaw in our toolkit. Google struggles with
Reflection and we need to do a better job of publicizing positive ethical incidents, as well
as negative occurrences, all for the purpose of continual improvement through group
awareness and transparency.
Discussion / Recommendations

By and large, The Google Group acts as an ethical organization and supports these
efforts through a well designed and executed ethical toolkit. Although the term RDCAR
is not part of the Google vernacular, the companys foundation of ethical values and
sustaining them run parallel to the theory. The Google code of ethics states that managers
and supervisors are expected to: (a) support and foster a working environment where
ethical conduct is recognized, valued and exemplified, (b) ensure that their employees
and teams understand and follow the code, and have the resources to do so, (c) support
employees who raise questions or concerns in good faith about ethical questions, (d)
monitor and consistently enforce the standards set down in the code, and (e) set a good
example and encourage others to do likewise. Through Recognition, Discovery, and
Cognition, Google helps to deliver these expectations. The areas for improvement lie in
Action and Reflection.
Following my discussions with Wayne Koch, I realized that Google needs place a
higher emphasis upon open communication and the publicizing ethical behavior, both
positive and negative, throughout the organization. A challenge that we will face is that it
is more difficult to change a companys informal systems, than formal systems. Higher
levels of reflection will take time to infiltrate the organizations blood. My belief is that
the only way to jumpstart this mentality is to drive it home from the top. In other words,
the CEO of North America will need to change his routines and incorporate more public
discussions relevant to positive ethical stories and situations throughout the company.
Negative stories will have an impact, as well, in creating a fear factor, but I prefer the
benefits tied to positive publicity.

Week 3 Assignment 2 (Due 04/17/2011)

Google has the resources available to sharpen its tools and processes relevant to
the RDCAR framework. The organization exhibits robust ethical standards and processes
in many arenas. While weaknesses and gaps exist, the primary challenge does not rest in
how to overcome these shortcomings. Rather, it hinges upon a willingness and desire
of the leadership team to make the necessary changes, and then walk the talk.

Appendix (Guardsmark Ethics Analysis)

Guardsmark, a company dedicated to the safety and security of client assets, has a
powerful foundation of publicly available statements relevant to its ethics programs and
practices. I find their proclamations valuable, especially in the context of keeping the
entire organization committed to ethics, and involved at all levels of employment. It is
clear that Guardsmark recognizes that ethics management is an ongoing effort that
necessitates ongoing fortification and incorporation into the larger corporate culture.
The Guardsmark ethical code appears in their employment application, where it
must be signed by every applicant. It is always available to their employees as a standalone document while, at the same time, it is also listed in their orientation handbook,
periodic educational publications, employee manuals, and placards in all offices. As a
means of Discovery, consistent with the RDCAR process, Guardsmark maintains an
ethics committee and a dedicated ethics officer who can be reached through a toll-free
number. The company takes every ethics concern or issue seriously and provides
assistance about applying principles to any given situation.

A key component of Guardsmarks ethical code is its focus on stakeholders. The

organization proudly aspires to ensure an understanding of their ethics by all employees,
visitors and vendors. Their ethical code accurately represent the firms impact on its
stakeholders and the environment. In fact, the Guardsmark Code of Ethics states that,
All Guardsmark employees subscribe to our comprehensive Code of Ethics, which is a
product of top-down commitment and bottom-up involvement. First developed in 1980,
this living document is revised annually by the entire workforce. This is a clear example
of Recognition, in line with the R in RDCAR, whereby Guardsmark established a
strong code of ethics, they imparted it upon their employees, they trained their employees
at all hierarchal levels, and they enforce them. Recognition is also exhibited through the
annual revisions based upon input drawn from the entire workforce. This is an example
of surveying stakeholders and promoting ethical discourse.
Overall, I find significant strength in Guardsmarks code of ethics. They do a
good job of Cognition by imparting consistent ethical analysis and judgment along to
their employees. The companys core values are transparent and represented proudly in
the Guardsmark crest: Truth, Courage, and Judgment. Their comprehensive Code of
Ethics, in its entirety, covers a wealth of information and topics including: employee
relations, commitment to excellence, safety and wellness, vendor relations, community
and government relations, industry commitment, information technology, advice and
disclosure, and personal commitment. At the end of the document, they display every
employees written signature, as well as the next date upon which the code of ethics will
be due for annual renewal. This ties back to my earlier statement that Guardsmarks
ethical code accurately represents the firms impact on its stakeholders and the

Week 3 Assignment 2 (Due 04/17/2011)

environment. It is clear why, in 1996, Guardsmark was the private company

recipient of the national American Business Ethics Award.

10