Human Resource Theories And Policies Implemented By Google In Different Regions

Company Background

The Human Resource Department is one of the essential parts of an organization, which decides upon the overall business plan and practice that are implemented in order to ensure proper employees are being recruited by an organization. It also helps to ensure that all the employees are positively motivated, which helps them to provide full potential within in the workplace. The human resource strategies are implemented based upon the organizational behavior and also the objectives of the organization. The local culture also plays a significant part in deciding about the human resource policies. Better level of understanding of the local policies is believed to be one of the effective ways that can help the MNCs to implement effective forms of business communication.

The aim of this current report is to discuss the human resource theories and policies that are implemented within the human resource department of Google. The report will take the examples of the work culture theory and practice of Google from three different nations from Asia, Europe, and North America. The report will compare the HR policies that are implemented in each of the nations. The positive and negative aspects of the HR policies will be mentioned and thereby make it possible to distinguish the best HR policies of all the mentioned nations. At the end of the report, a reflection will be provided, which will be based upon the best human resource policies that are implemented by Google in order to improve upon the working capability of employees.  

Google Inc. is a multinational technology company based in the United States and is currently one the biggest, popular and largest company in the globe. The company is mainly known to provide internet-related service that mainly includes internet search engine service. The company later expanded their service in the category of software and cloud computing. The company was established in the year 1998, which was initiated with the help of various Investments made by large-scale organizations. Headquarter of the company is currently located in California of United States. Being one of the largest multinational corporations and most popular Internet service providers across the globe, Google has its organization spread in all the major nations. Currently, the company has more than 60,000 employees working in different places. With the help of effective organization policies, it has been possible for Google to be one of the successful multinational companies in domain of internet technology. The HR policies that are implemented in different regions the organization is done in accordance with that of the Local cultural diversity.

Google is currently believed to be one of the reputed organizations in terms of workplace environment, which provides huge opportunity for talented candidates to make better future. An effective way to manage the cultural diversity among different nations is believed to be one of the major causes of success for Google over the past many years. It is possible for them to bring about new innovation the technological and internet market. This is mainly possible due to the high level of employee motivation that is present within the workplace of Google. The company has also implemented effective selection criteria, which has enabled them to select the best candidates having dynamic range of capability. This has helped to improve upon for all products of the company, thereby making it one of the most successful multinational corporations.

Countries of Google Operations

One of the biggest multinational organizations, Google has its operational parts in all of the major nations of the globe. This report will, however, consider the cases of India, UK, and USA for comparing the company's policy. There is a huge cultural difference in the three Nations, which is why it is essential for Google to implement different HR policies. By considering these three different nations, which are located in Asia, Europe, and North America, it is possible to analyze the huge difference that exists in the Google's policy in managing the human resource.

It will be also possible to consider the positive and negative aspects of the respective local culture and diversity that has a significant impact on the overall performance of Google over the past many years. The cultural difference in these Nations will help the company to assess the best possible human resource policy that can be implemented within the workplace of the organization in order to improve their productivity and maintain the existing reputation.

The institutional and cultural settings of different countries across the globe are diverse and multifaceted, implying that multinational companies are influenced to a large extent by these factors when it comes to doing business in different countries. The cultural and institutional settings of India and UK are diverse and distinct from each other as well as from that of US. The impact of Google’s global HRM practices on its host country employees and managers are noteworthy in this regard.

The significant differences drawn between the working culture of India and the US are related to working hours, flexible shift timings, HR centric work, blockers and promotions. According to Patel and Rayner (2015), Indian organizations have long working hours for their employees since the break taken in between the shift timing are long, while the counterpart teams in the US have shift timings less in duration. Conference meetings are held mostly outside the office premises, and it is noteworthy that US companies have no fixed office hours. Flexible shift timing is a key feature of US-based companies that allow employees to work at their disposition keeping productivity and communication with seniors into consideration. The number of meetings held in among professionals in India is far less than the average number of such meetings held in the US. In India, the common culture is to drive the main burden of work towards the Head-Quarters, implying that the substantial amount of work is not distributed equally among the different teams scattered in different geographic locations. The operations work is usually done at the headquarters, leaving the other departments to supervise the rest of the functioning. Further, an employee might be blocked by an infrastructure related concern or team dependency issue in India, unlike in the U.S. Further, in India, the workforce is driven towards climbing the ladder of corporate success by gaining promotions based on technical expertise solely. The importance of leadership skills is not given much worth and value across the different organizations. Employees are more focused on showcasing their technical knowledge and management, and leadership skills take a backseat.

Cultural and Institutional Settings in India, UK, and US

This is supported by Stahl and Tung (2015) who state that in western countries, there are no restrictions of office working hours. However, employees have an urge to maintain punctuality and complete the set work within the supposed deadline. In countries such as India, employees are not often punctual and stretching the working hours is a common scenario that is perceived to be a sign of increased dedication towards work. Kaur (2017) opined that there is a huge difference between the work culture of IT companies in India and other countries such as the US and the UK. The authors have mainly focused on the productivity, processes, and hierarchy. In western countries, the productivity is higher as compared to the countries in the East. In the Indian IT sector, processes are often made complex, and the tendency is to maintain the status-quo rather than coming up with novice strategy and ideas. Further, the hierarchical structures in Indian organizational systems are multi-layered, making it difficult to find resolutions in issues in a simple and time-saving manner. It is also to be highlighted that hierarchy has a strong relationship with the work-experience of an employee. Even if an employee is a phenomenal performer, he would not be promoted to the position of a manager lest he has a considerable amount of experience.  In the UK and the US, organizations are way flatter, and a person holding a designation proves his real worth through his daily interactions. In such countries, the performance of an employee is valued, and promotion is gained on the basis of multiple factors.

Dickmann, Brewster and Sparrow (2016) outlined the differences in business culture witnessed in the US and UK and gave special attention given to the definitions of success in each of these countries and work-life balance. Different cultures have different forms of definition for success, and this principle is prominent in this case. In the US, a successful employee is more defined as a person who has achieved success regarding finance. In contrast, in UK, position holds more importance rather than monetary gains. Therefore, in the latter country, the entrusting of responsibilities and duties take the lead when it comes to organizational functions.  The work-life balance is also drastically different between the two countries. Employees in the US give more emphasis on work-life balance and aim to engage in interests outside their work life. However, in the UK, socializing and establishing social relationships with colleagues is a common instance. With regards to professionalism among employees Cadden, Marshall and Cao (2013) state that employees in the UK are more apologetic as compared to American standards. They appreciate individuals showing modesty and maintain strict professionalism by not taking any favors. In the US, the culture of self-confidence implies that professionals are more approachable for speaking up their minds and putting forward their views and opinions.

Since different countries in the East and the West have different definitions and principles embedded in cultural and institutional settings, the differences of HRM practices between home and host country impact vastly on employees and managers. Since it is a difficult process to transfer the HR policies between different countries, managers face difficulties in adhering to the policies as there are arising conflicts. The HR practices are affected by the business style and strategy of the host country as well as its culture.  Employees are impacted in terms of selection and recruitment, compensation and benefits and training and development. There is an increased level of autocracy in a number of countries. Managers, therefore, need to follow the autocratic style of leadership for managing the employees. Decisions are to be taken without input from the employees, who have no decision making authority within the workplace (Tung 2016).

The underlying differences in institutional and cultural settings across India, UK and US have driven the employees and managers at Google to adapt to changes brought about in the workplace. Unlike in India, managers of Google in the UK and US focus more on leadership attributes and come up with strategies to keep the leaders on track. Focus on leadership drives the vision of the employees of Google towards being emotionally connected and mission-aligned. Critical thinking ability and rational thought process are distinct features of the employees of Google in UK and US unlike India (Sparrow, Brewster and Chung 2016).

Warner (2014) point out that transferring policy of human resource between home and host countries is quite problematic. The obstacles are related to the institutional environment. Since there is a diversification of behaviors, attitudes, and values, there is no single approach through which managers at Google address the employee's concerns in different countries. Management policies are influenced by the cultural factors. Since failure in adopting the HRM practices in the host country's culture is the cause of negative consequences, employees are always under pressure to perform as per the evolving and dynamic set of guidelines outlined by the managers. The employer-employee relationship is highly impacted in this process. Under the pressure of performing as per international standards, conflicts arising between the two parties are more prominent whose resolution is difficult to attain. Lastly, while one of Google's host countries might be adjusting to the corporate values they uphold, the other might not, further aggravating the issue.

In the current world of globalization, the relationship of labors has no borders. For large scale multinational corporations like Google is highly affected due to the policies of International Labour. According to toSteiber and Alänge (2013), the cultural difference across various Nations all across the globe has been one of the major issues for multinational corporations for dealing with matters related to global labor relations. As mentioned in the previous section there is a huge cultural difference in the workplace of Google at various countries that are in India, UK, and USA. There are many cases in the past records, which suggest that due to cultural difference between these Nations and workplace procedures, it is not possible for the company to coordinate their activities according to their organizational objectives (Nyberg et al. 2014).

Given lower significance to the issues related to global labor relations, Google has not enabled to deal with the issues related to that of workplace cultural difference.  There are several risks that are associated with issues related to International Labour unions, which can be a matter of concern for large scale multinational corporations. The Global labor relations are not only one of the major corporate social responsibilities; it is also related to the issue of non-binding nature of International Labour standards. Different nations all across the globe have implemented various different types of labor standards, which are implemented depending upon the local cultural and institutional settings.

According to Wagner (2013), the major risks that are encountered by Google due to difference in global labor relations strategy is mainly due to the fact of negative reputation of workplace culture. The relationship between the client and investors are also compromised due to lower level of coordination that is an impact of cultural diversity across Asian European and American Nations. The supply chain can also be disrupted, which can compromise upon the value of International Labour. There is also the risk of exposing sensitive information, which can compromise upon the planning process of an organization. Economic activity of a local region has also a strong influence upon the labor relations.

In Asian countries like India, labor relationship strategies have been implemented in order to resolve the conflict among the labor unions and also resolve cases related to internal economic conflict. Due to the high rate of cultural diversity within various states of India, Google has to face with severe issues related to internal conflict within the employee. In spite of the advanced level of institutional and cultural settings, within what place across India, the internal conflict has compromised upon the overall performance rate. There are several external factors related to restrictions of the employees, which is mainly due to the protocols that are implemented by labor unions.

Strong influence of the government in the internal activity of the labor unions has been one of the major obstacles faced by Google in managing the employees of India. There is also the hierarchical management system, which is the reflection of the external social system that is a major source of disrupting the organizational communication (Laudon and Laudon 2016). It is important to mention in this context that due to the effect of globalization employers have to push less regulatory policies within the organizational function.

The main purpose of the labor law that is implemented by the United Kingdom government is to establish an effective relationship between the workers and the employers. There are standard sets of Benefits and fundamental rights that the employees in all the workplace of UK can enjoy. This includes the right to minimum wage along with other health and safety benefits, that every employer needs to provide to their workers. Maintaining high level of transparency if one of the essential component in all the major workplaces in the United Kingdom. This helps to establish an effective relationship between the employees and employers thereby helping the business organizations of UK to improve their productivity by creating healthy environment within the workplace (Kianto et al. 2014). Nevertheless, for large-scale multinational corporations like Google, have to share huge amount of information with the employees of the workplace in the UK in order to maintain transparency. This can be one of the major risks that are encountered by the company in the past many years. The Google Company often had to conduct high level of scrutiny within the employees of the United Kingdom, which have them to prevent misuse of the information that is provided to the Employees. This has been a major issue that has been encountered by Google UK over the past many years. A Higher level of scrutiny formula has to be implemented, which is needed to ensure that no employees within the workplace of Google UK have the opportunity misuse the internal information of the company.  

Complex level of the equation all formula is involved within the workplace of Google UK, which is needed to ensure the trustworthiness of the employees. This can also help in the matter related to global labor relationship, which has enabled the employees of Google UK to communicate with stakeholders of Google in all parts of the globe. The policies of global level relationship in UK and all other parts of Europe can vary usually depending upon the context. This has imposed Google to spend extra human resource in order to ensure that all the policies related to local global relationship in the European region are being maintained.

The guidelines for multinational Enterprise are one of the essential parts of the labor laws that are implemented within the way workplace of UK is quite different from that of the Asian regionsShen and Benson (2016). Hence, is essential for the Human Resource Department of Google to deal with the challenge of different laws of nations across the globe. The respect for the corporate social responsibility is also one of the essential parts of the global labor strategy in UK. Hence it is essential for Google to spend a significant part of their human resource in deciding upon the policies related to corporate social responsibilities while doing business in UK.

Wages equality is one of the essential parts of the labor laws in the United States. However according to recent reports, one of the major issues that are encountered by Google in the united states is due to the fact that they are not able to provide equal wages for the employees irrespective of their gender. This has been a major issue which has compromised up on the workplace reputation of Google in United States. In spite of the fact that system is compensation is often provided to the employees, the workplace reputation of Google in United States has been at stake due to the complex nature of global Labour relationship, which are essential components of labor laws in the US (Aswathappa 2013).

The US Department of labor has implemented special law or Google Inc. which has forced them to pay for required compensation for all the employees. The enforcement of the law has also obligated Google to deal with all major compensation that is needed to deal the data that is needed in the overall process. Proper documentation of all the employees is also a part of the Federal contract, which is needed to conduct routine line scrutiny for the behavior and conduct of the workers. The corporation of Google is also essential in this case, which can help them to fulfill the terms and conditions related to law enforcement. It is also essential for the Google Company to properly review all the documents of legal cases that are associated with every employee. This is also believed to be one of the major challenges, which has caused loss of resources.

The talent development and compensation strategies of Google are widely influenced by the different cultural and institutional settings of the host countries. The responses of the managers and employees of the host countries towards the strategies have both positive and negative side of them. According to Reiche et al. (2016), the attempt of Google to replicate its original work culture in India and indulge in nurturing Indian talent had helped in fuelling up the dot-com boom in the country. This is not to be referred to a complete outsourcing strategy in its core sense. Rather, it is regarded as a brain drain in reverse.

Google had chosen Bangalore, India, as the site of its first research and development wing with the reason that employees who were Indian and were working for Google in US wanted to take part in the growth of the company in India. Google has a high employee friendly environment in India and talent development is steady since the hiring process is steady too. Employees of Google India opine that there is a halo effect as securing a job at the company increases prospects within the society. Income is a chief factor for employees of this host country and the benefits offered by the company are embraced by those who are keen on to work with the firm. Since the annual salary of the employees at Google is much higher than those of other countries, the competition to secure a job at the company is extremely high. Thousands of job application very years reflect that fact that the firm has been successful in creating a space of its own in the country's labor market. Since the attrition rate for the employees of this sector is high, the eagerness of employees to join this company is striking. Google is proud to announce that they have the cream of the talent the country has to offer.

The success of Google in India is driven by the confluence of the individuals with different backgrounds who are able to create an entrepreneurial network. In addition, the campus-like environment of the company has been welcomed by the employees. Flexible schedules, perks and benefits, and hi-tech office environment have been effective in drawing in the talent. Persona freedom given to the employees along with proper resource allocation had been absent from the industrial sector prior to the emergence of Google in India. Organizational motivation is another factor that has had a positive impact on the employees. The pleasures of working in such an environment have overpowered the burden to work under stressful conditions. Employees point out that Google gives employees more freedom than other companies. Management theory has to say that creativity is more profound when the workgroup has individuals from diverse backgrounds. The exchange of approaches, ideas and viewpoints are useful in coming up with innovative solutions for problems. In the US, the company has to come up with explicit ideas to build diversity, unlike in India where the society is not segregated. The opportunity to work in a diverse workplace is also advantageous for employees of the firm (Marchington et al. 2016).

One of the major causes of success for Google in the European region including UK has been some of the Revolutionary human resource management policies. Google has been able to achieve this remarkable feat by transforming the overall process of recruitment in their UK Company. The mirroring ability of the research and development program for all major products and services has also been one of the major talent retention programs that have been initiated by Google. Proper search method is carried out with effective data collection that is a part of analysis of both types of existing employees (Kehoe and Wright 2013). Rather than focusing on traditional human resource management technique, in UK Google is dependent upon developing effective relationship that is needed as a part of providing compensation to the Employees. One of the most positive aspects of this human resource policy is the ability of the company to nurture the young talent which is necessary for long-term sustainability of the company (Kavanagh and Johnson 2017). On the other hand, the major drawback of the human resource policy that has been implemented as a part of compensation policy in UK is due to the fact that it is not possible for the company all the time to verify the detailed background of all the employees. This can increase the risk of employing fake candidates that is a part employment issue that has been encountered by the company over the recent years. Application of statistics and algorithm in the process of making major decisions related to the human resource department has also been proved effective as it helps the company to analyze the exact situation and also understand the changes in the labor policies. It is thereby possible for the company to provide suitable components and depending upon the change in the workplace environment and also the demand of the employees (Ellinger and Ellinger 2014).

After doing careful assessment related to the human resource policies that it implemented by Google all across the Nations in different parts of the globe, I can strongly say that effective policies related to the management of employees in different places have been one of the major cause of success for the company. Hence it is possible for them, established as one of the reputed workplace destination. Effective human resource policies, I believe have also ensured the company to bring about necessary changes that are needed in the current days in order to sustain in the technological domain.

In the given report, I have carefully examined the human resource policies of Google that are implemented in India, USA, and UK. It can be said that in order to respect the cultural diversity of each Nation, Google company has to implement different set of laws and working Framework in order to improve upon their workplace capability in each of the regions. The different type of policies that are implemented in each of the Nations has it own positive and drawbacks. Nevertheless, the general policy of Google, which is to respect the different styles of working culture across all nations around the globe, is I think one of the popular ways that have been able to attract talented stakeholders.  

Human resource policy that is implemented by Google in India is one of the most challenging and effective. This is mainly because due to the fact that India is one of the culturally diverse nations in all across the globe. Hence, according to me, it is never easy for any large scale multinational corporations to adjust with the working environment and business external condition of India. In spite of this fact, Google India has been one of the major successful brand in the nation, which was able to provide employment two huge number of talented candidates and also bring about technological revolution. It is important to mention that, in spite of being one of the developing nations of the globe, the Revolutionary product and service that has been launched by Google in India has been able to bring about digitization across the nation and also to the people.

The company has also set up their office city of Bangalore which is believed to be one of the most technologically advanced regions of the country. This has enabled them to attract all the talented candidates and also provide them with the proper opportunity to showcase their talents. With the help of the effective human resource policy, it is also possible for Google to provide an effective solution for the problem of unemployment in the country which I believe as even raise the popularity of the brand within the nation and also among the youth generations. I also personally feel that the user-friendly environment within the workplace of Google India has also been one of the major cause of success. The compensation package that has been offered by Google in India has also been one of the major causes of their growth. I do strongly believe one of the effective policy for large-scale multinational corporations to gain competitive advantages is to provide with effective compensation package for the employees, which can help them to retain the talent and thereby able to improve the productivity. With pay scale issues in all other major multinational corporations in India, Google has been able to provide attractive packages for all level of employees. This has insured about the fact that even the workers in the lower class are able to get motivated and provide their full working capability for fulfillment of company’s objectives.

I do strongly believe it is also recommended for a large scale multinational corporations like Google, which has to deal with a huge amount of employee base, it is highly essential to conduct regular scrutiny among the employees. This can be one of the effective ways to deal with the issues that are encountered in the workplace of Google in a culturally diverse region. It is also possible to deal with the issues that the company has to face due to fake candidates and poor level of performance. I would also recommend about regular training programs that need to be initiated for the employees, which can help them to modify up on their working skills and also inherit new working capability that is needed to deal with the change in the technological world.  

Conclusion

In the final concluding note, it can be said that over the past few years Google has been one of the major technological Giants and one of the most popular multinational corporations all across the globe. It is believed that effective human resource management policies have been one of the major causes of success of the company, which is present in all the major nations of the globe. The company has also been able to implement effective human resource management policy, which is in accordance with the cultural diversity of the respective region. The example of India, UK, and USA has been given in the given case, which has allowed understanding the importance of difference in HR policies depending upon the external business environment and labor laws. One of the major parts of all multinational corporations in current world of globalization is to deal with the local culture in order to gain popularity and competitive advantage.  

The human resource policy that has been implemented by Google over the past several years across different nations also need to be modified regularly. This can help the company to bring about suitable changes depending upon the local labor laws.

Reference

Aswathappa, K., 2013. Human resource management: Text and cases. Tata McGraw-Hill Education.

Cadden, T., Marshall, D. and Cao, G., 2013. Opposites attract: organisational culture and supply chain performance. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 18(1), pp.86-103.

Dickmann, M., Brewster, C. and Sparrow, P. eds., 2016.International Human Resource Management: Contemporary HR Issues in Europe. Routledge.

Ellinger, A.E. and Ellinger, A.D., 2014. Leveraging human resource development expertise to improve supply chain managers' skills and competencies.European Journal of Training and Development, 38(1/2), pp.118-135.

Kaur, K., 2017. A review on the HR culture: India, US, Europe. Journal of Applied and Advanced Research, 2(2), pp.103-105.

Kavanagh, M.J. and Johnson, R.D. eds., 2017.Human resource information systems: Basics, applications, and future directions. Sage Publications.

Kehoe, R.R. and Wright, P.M., 2013. The impact of high-performance human resource practices on employees’ attitudes and behaviors. Journal of management, 39(2), pp.366-391.

Kianto, A., Ritala, P., Spender, J.C. and Vanhala, M., 2014. The interaction of intellectual capital assets and knowledge management practices in organizational value creation. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 15(3), pp.362-375.

Laudon, K.C. and Laudon, J.P., 2016. Management information system.Pearson Education India.

Marchington, M., Wilkinson, A., Donnelly, R. and Kynighou, A., 2016.Human resource management at work.Kogan Page Publishers.

Nyberg, A.J., Moliterno, T.P., Hale Jr, D. and Lepak, D.P., 2014. Resource-based perspectives on unit-level human capital: A review and integration. Journal of Management, 40(1), pp.316-346.

Patel, T. and Rayner, S., 2015. A transactional culture analysis of corporate sustainability reporting practices: Six examples from India. Business & Society, 54(3), pp.283-321.

Reiche, B.S., Mendenhall, M.E. and Stahl, G.K. eds., 2016.Readings and cases in international human resource management.Taylor & Francis.

Shen, J. and Benson, J., 2016. When CSR is a social norm: How socially responsible human resource management affects employee work behavior. Journal of Management, 42(6), pp.1723-1746.

Sparrow, P., Brewster, C. and Chung, C., 2016.Globalizing human resource management.Routledge.

Stahl, G.K. and Tung, R.L., 2015. Towards a more balanced treatment of culture in international business studies: The need for positive cross-cultural scholarship. Journal of International Business Studies, 46(4), pp.391-414.

Steiber, A. and Alänge, S., 2013. A corporate system for continuous innovation: the case of Google Inc. European Journal of Innovation Management, 16(2), pp.243-264.

Tung, R.L., 2016. New perspectives on human resource management in a global context.Journal of World Business, 51(1), pp.142-152.

Wagner, M., 2013. ‘Green’human resource benefits: do they matter as determinants of environmental management system implementation?.Journal of Business Ethics, 114(3), pp.443-456.

Warner, M., 2014.Culture and management in Asia.Routledge.