Although Google and Lenovo are both dominant companies in today's corporate world, these companies adopt a different style of management and have different working culture.
In Google, employees get to enjoy a wide range of facilities in the company. Much freedom is given to the employees by allowing 20% of their work time to be their free time, they can then use the time to develop and research on their own ideas. An advantage of this system is that when people are given the freedom, they tend to innovate and think better and more creatively, compared to limited freedom where creativity is stifled and the flow of thought is blocked. This kind of management style is much like the Western countries giving freedom to their people. Also, during meals at the common cafeteria, Googlers can actually talk and discuss with each other about work, which will increase the efficiency and effectiveness of their work. In Lenovo, there is a dominant leader to lead the company. Employees seldom question their leader and just follow orders and instructions given to them. They trust their leader to make the correct decisions and judgments at the right time. They do not have much free time to develop their own projects whatsoever, but they can still work effectively on the work given. There is discipline enforced to ensure efficient working. However, I believe that unless one can discipline himself or herself, enforced discipline can never ensure everyone following the rules. In my school, there are lots of rules but some people do not even bother to follow the rules. It depends on one’s self discipline; enforced discipline will work on only certain people, never all.
Personally, I prefer the Google way of managing and the culture in the company. In Lenovo, all an employee does is follow orders and rules and instructions, one cannot have a voice of his own as it will be disrespectful to the leader. This is much like the Asian culture and tradition. Some Asians have the mindset that teachers or leaders are always right. They do not dare to question their leader or teacher. I feel that this mindset is a little too restrictive. I believe that if one adopts a respectful and humble tone, one should be allowed to give opinions or suggestions that will benefit the company. Discussions must be allowed for a company to progress. If there are no discussions and only the leader’s ideas are utilised, the brilliant minds in the company will go to a waste. The creativity of each person will be very limited and subjected to the orders of the leaders, resulting in the stifling of creativity and innovation in the company.
On the other hand, Google allows freedom in its company. They want employees to get their work done based on the passion they have towards their respective fields. They do not want to force them to do what they do not like to do. I believe that one has to have the passion and drive in order to succeed in a particular field. Westerners often know what they want in life and pursue their lifelong interests, while Asians usually take the “safe path”, jobs that will ensure a high income. Even though Google gives privileges to its employees, most employees working in Google work because they are passionate about their job, not because of fat paychecks or luxurious facilities. They work for long hours but get paid much lesser than what they can earn with those hours they work. This shows that it is the passion that motivates them to work when they can actually take advantage of the 20% free time.
A personal experience of mine is that I do not really mind doing homework of a certain subject that I like, for example, Mathematics. In primary school, I used to excel in Mathematics. But in Secondary 1, I failed in almost every subject and got a C5 in Mathematics. I decided to work harder the next year. As I practice my Mathematics, my passion for it began to grow. At the end of the year, I got the A1 I have always wanted. It was my passion that got me where I am. Another reason why I chose Google’s style is that I think freedom of expression is extremely important. In the boarding school, the director always welcomes suggestions and feedbacks as it is these things that can make the boarding school a better place to stay in. If the director is the only one providing ideas, there would be limited quality and quantity. Many brains are always better than one.
In conclusion, the Google’s way of management is much like the Western culture and Lenovo’s is much like the Asian culture. Both of the ways have advantages and disadvantages, at the end, it all narrows down to personal preferences.
Hi, Wei Sean. You said in your journal that one of your problems with the Lenovo style of management was that even though they enforce discipline to increase efficiency, without self-discipline, they can never ensure everyone follows the rules. I agree with the fact that a lack of self-discipline may cause a breach in rules, however, I believe that the Lenovo handles the issue of discipline better than Google. Lenovo handles the issue of discipline by putting more restrictions on what employees can and should do, dissuading them from straying from the path of discipline. Even though it does not totally remove indiscipline, it at least serves to reduce it. Google on the other hand totally avoids the problem by setting a high entry barrier, filtering out disciplined people to hire. However, for those who lack discipline but still managed to get hired by Google, the extravagant and incredibly distracting variety of facilities that Google provides only aggravates the problem. How do you feel about Lenovo's and Google's handling of discipline?
ReplyDeleteHi Wei Sean =)
ReplyDeleteOne of the things you said in this journal was, to quote, that "Some Asians have the mindset that teachers or leaders are always right. They do not dare to question their leader or teacher." Honestly, I don't really think this is very true. My interpretation of this was not that people thought everything their teachers said was right, but rather, that out of "respect" to their teachers and leaders, they would not object as objection would be a sign of dissent. "Respect" in a Chinese society would be seen more as not interrupting and being disruptive, not an absolute faith in the teacher or leader, so just pointing out something.
Your journal also seems to present the idea that Googlers are passionate about their work whereas Lenovo employees work mostly for the money. I don't think this is necessarily true; an employee at Lenovo might certainly have the motivation and drive to work at Lenovo, and that would be why he chose to work there in the first place.
Also, the term "Asians" is very broad; while I know it's mostly used to refer to Chinese, Koreans, Japanese, etc; do keep in mind there are people of different races in Asia as well, such as the Malays and the Indians. Just a little nitpicking.
Regards,
Joshua