Analysing Project Oxygen for Google

December 15, 2022

Analysing Project Oxygen for Google

Order Number	636738393092
Type of Project	ESSAY
Writer Level	PHD VERIFIED
Format	APA
Academic Sources	10
Page Count	3-12 PAGES

Instructions/Descriptions

[Order Now]

Analysing Project Oxygen for Google

Google faced a challenge. Ever since the company started, it’s highly trained and self-motivated engineers questioned whether they needed managers. In the high-technology culture, employees actually believed that managers did more harm than good.

But Google grew rapidly and by 2013 had 37,000 employees with just 5,000 managers, 1,000 directors, and 100 vice presidents. The organizational structure was flat rather than hierarchical. How could Google’s managers convince its skeptical employees that they needed managers to operate effectively and remain competitive?

Google launched Project Oxygen to prove that managers don’t make a difference (this was their hypothesis). “Luckily, we failed,” said project co-lead Neal Patel. To accomplish the goal, they hired several PhD researchers to form a people analytics team. As with everything Google does, they applied hypothesis-driven research methods to analyze the “soft skills” of managers.

Project Oxygen was a multiyear research study designed to uncover the key management behaviors that predict employee satisfaction and organizational effectiveness. One part of the project was an employee survey about their managers’ behaviors. The research team also interviewed employees who were quitting about the behaviors of their managers and why they were leaving Google.

The team discovered that there was less turnover on teams with the best managers. They also documented a statistical relationship between high-scoring managers’ behaviors and employee satisfaction. So, they concluded that managers did matter and then conducted another study to learn specifically what Google’s best managers did.

Here’s what they found. Project Oxygen identified eight behaviors shared by high-scoring managers:

Is a good coach
Empowers the team and does not micromanage
Expresses interest in, and concern for, team members’ success and personal well-being
Is productive and results-oriented
Is a good communicator — listens and shares information
Helps with career development
Has a clear vision and strategy for the team
Has key technical skills that help him or her advise the team.

Because this project was evidence-based, the sceptical engineers were convinced that the best managers did make a difference. In describing Project Oxygen, David A. Garvin from the Harvard Business School notes: “Data-driven cultures, Google-discovered, respond well to data-driven change.”

[Order Now]

Google now offers training and feedback to low-scoring managers. However, they learned that the best approach is to have panels of highly rated managers tell their stories about how they coach and empower their teams. Rather than being told what to do by upper management, they get advice from their colleagues.

Why did they use an evidence-based approach? Describe the type(s) of evidence Google used in their research.

Are you convinced that managers matter? Why or why not? What additional evidence would you like to see?

Create a brief description of the design for the next steps in Project Oxygen to further develop Google’s managers.

Leaders: Are They Born or Made?

With the research on the twins reared apart and evidence from the Big Five personality theory relating personality traits to leader emergence in groups, one question that arises is whether leaders are born to greatness or if leadership can be acquired by anyone.

There are arguments on both sides of this issue among scholars of OB. For example, research suggests genetic factors contribute as much as 40% to the explanation of transformational leadership. This suggests that much of charismatic, visionary leadership is an inborn trait.

On the other hand, many people believe that transformational leadership can be learned, and experimental research has shown that leaders can be trained to exhibit charismatic behaviors. Also, followers responded positively to leaders that have been trained, and their performance increased. An integrative perspective suggests that leaders have certain inborn traits that predispose them to self-select into leadership positions.

For example, an employee who exhibits extraversion might be more likely to pursue a high-level position in an organization. Once hired into a leadership role, these people may respond to leadership training more than those who are not as interested in becoming leaders. The best thinking on this at present is that leadership is most likely a combination of inborn traits and learned behavior.

The implications for organizations are to carefully select those hired into leadership and then provide the training needed to enhance leader effectiveness. Those with innate leadership skills have an advantage, but an individual may be able to enhance his or her leadership capabilities by learning about the behaviors that comprise effective leadership and then practicing the behavioral skills needed.

In your opinion, is leadership born (hereditary) or learned (through training, for example)? Support your position.

If leadership is both born and made, as some researchers believe, what do you think is the best way to identify leadership potential?

What type of leadership training would you recommend to complement the selection process?

Analysing Project Oxygen for Google

RUBRIC

Excellent Quality

95-100%

Introduction

45-41 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Literature Support

91-84 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Methodology

58-53 points

With titles for each slide as well as bulleted sections to group relevant information as required, the content is well-organized. Excellent use of typeface, color, images, effects, and so on to improve readability and presenting content. The minimum length criterion of 10 slides/pages is reached.

Average Score

50-85%

40-38 points

More depth/information is required for the context and importance, otherwise the study detail will be unclear. There is no search history information supplied.

83-76 points

There is a review of important theoretical literature, however there is limited integration of research into problem-related ideas. The review is just partly focused and arranged. There is research that both supports and opposes. A summary of the material given is provided. The conclusion may or may not include a biblical integration.

52-49 points

The content is somewhat ordered, but there is no discernible organization. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on may sometimes distract from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.

Poor Quality

0-45%

37-1 points

The context and/or importance are lacking. There is no search history information supplied.

75-1 points

There has been an examination of relevant theoretical literature, but still no research concerning problem-related concepts has been synthesized. The review is just somewhat focused and organized. The provided overview of content does not include any supporting or opposing research. The conclusion has no scriptural references.

48-1 points

There is no logical or apparent organizational structure. There is no discernible logical sequence. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on often detracts from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.