Google Case Analysis

In: Business and Management

Submitted By joyce301
Words 2482
Pages 10
Google Misses the Mark
There were many areas where Google may have missed the mark in the initial layout and design after its acquisition of You Tube. The first major mark Google missed was the initial design of the video service. Google initially designed the service where users were able to search video content. Google wanted to make an easy search function so that its users could easily search television shows and also find when and where to watch them. The search function was in no way comparable to You Tube. You Tube’s design was more simplistic and searching was much easier.

Google’s video service overall missed the mark in the small details as well. The Google video service did not incorporate the small details that users liked such as the number of views. This information was only available to the uploader and not the viewer. Google’s service allowed the user to search captions from a video, but the search would produce only related information such as broadcasting dates and not the actual video. Once Google began allowing user contributed content, it required special version of Video LAN to view the videos, making it inaccessbile to the average viewer. Google also offered a new flash technology which made it a lot quicker to upload a video, but viewing the video took considerably longer.

Youtube was a smaller company and there was no real threat or fear of lawsuits for copyright infringement. With Google, their pockets seemed endless and were a prime target for such lawsuits. This made Google more inclined to remove any copyrighted content and to sell premium videos, when the average user would not even consider paying for online video content (Cool, p4.) You Tube’s appeal was more of a user controlled site where anything was allowed and the content waas not controlled, which was all changed with Google’s acquisition. You Tube offered free music,…...

Similar Documents

Google Case Analysis a project by Larry Page and Sergey Brin in 1996 as a search engine, Google has become one of the largest Corporations to date. By 2000, the Google search engine was provided in 15 languages. After that, the Google toolbar was released. In 2002, Adwords was released, which was a new technology for cost per click pricing system for advertising. Today, the well-known Gmail was also created by Google, and the very popular YouTube was even acquired by them. In 2010, Google was viewed as the Global Leader in technology that focused on how the people obtained information. It has about 40 different products and services within, as the search engine (including Google Images, Google Books, Google Scholar, Google News, Google Finance, Google Videos, etc.), applications (including Google Docs, Google Calender, Gmail, etc.), clients (including Google Toolbar, Google Chrome, etc.), Google Geo (including Google Maps, Google Earth, etc.), Android and Google Mobile (including Google Mobile, Mobile Ads, etc.), Google Checkout, and Google Labs. All these products have positively impacted the way in which we communicate, access information, and locate things with ease, and this is what makes Google today, one of the strongest brand recognitions in the world. Based on the SWOT Analysis carried out, following results show Google’s main strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats: STRATEGIC ANALYSIS Google’s mission is to: “Organize the World’s Information and make......

Words: 2034 - Pages: 9

Google Case Analysis

...its core search businesses, which options made most sense for Google at the time? Explain why 1. In 2011, in addition to enhancing its core search business, it did not make sense for Google to venture into the business of building a full-fledged portal like Yahoo. This is mainly because even though portal business did fit into the framework of Google’s mission which is “to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful”, a fully fledged portal is meant to offer access to a broad range of third party content and related services organized into various categories like Autos, Finance, Games, Health, Kids, Movies, Music, Shopping, Sports and Travel would be an additional cost. This is because, the portal would be creating an extensive and diverse source of information on a single platform which would require the use of various technologies, platforms and web-based applications to perform multiple procedures which would be an additional cost to Google compared with the cost of just maintaining its search engine site. Finally in the words Eric Schmidt, Google’s CEO (2001-2011)……”we are not in the portal business, we’re in the business of making all the world’s information accessible and useful”, Google cannot envelop Yahoo but can opt to itemize all its product lines (Gmail, Finance, Google map, Google docs, Google books, and YouTube) in a simple and un-clustered manner on its Google homepage.   2. An ecommerce intermediate is meant to......

Words: 423 - Pages: 2

Google Case

...Expectancy Theory---------------------------------------------------------------4 2.4. Three needs theory--------------------------------------------------------------4 3. Hiring practice in Google-----------------------------------5 4. Job design in Google-----------------------------------------6 5. Many questions on hiring practice and job design in Google--------------------------6 6. Practical implications-----------------------7 7. Conclusion--------------------7 8. Reference list---------------------8 Executive summary Google is a successful company among employees and IT industry that vast candidates want to join into Google and become a ‘Googler’ (Page & Brin, 2012). Based on its success, it is obvious that there are many unique strategies implemented in Google. For example, motivational company value, rigorous hiring practices and autonomic job design principles. This report attempts to explore these main tactics behind Google’s success. Besides, it also analyses many motivational theories to evaluate Google’s practices. While all information within this report has come from vast resources, ranging from academic journals and books, the lack of academic investigations such as survey etc. has to be recognised on analysis of practice of Google. 1. Introduction The known Google was set up in September 1998 by its founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin who created an epoch-making search engine for people and even changed the world (Byrnes & Cowan,......

Words: 2323 - Pages: 10

Case Analysis : Google

...competition in the search industry. Which of the five competitive forces seem strongest? weakest? What is your assessment of overall industry attractiveness? Ever since Google was created there really haven’t been any competitors that have come close to giving them a scare as far as competing with what they offer. Of the five competitive forces the threat of substitute products or services and the power of buyers are the highest. The weakest of the five for Google is the threat of new entrants because the entry barriers for the industry are high, and high customer loyalty to Google would make it much more difficult for a new entrant. 2. How is the search industry changing? What forces seem most likely to bring about major change to the industry within the next three to five years? Throughout the case, it mentions many times that the next big thing in the search industry is cloud computing. However, there are many other new areas that Google is entering such as Google TV, and they are continuing to develop their Google Maps and other areas such as their Android market (phones, tablets, and Google TV will be powered by android). After reading the case and thinking about what will bring in a major change, I think it will be cloud computing. Although most companies are still in the early stages of this, Google is projecting this to grow up to $95 billion by 2013. 3. What are the key factors that define success in the industry? What are the key competencies,......

Words: 870 - Pages: 4

Google Case Analysis

...Case analysis about Google’s Strategy in 2010 The article talks about how Google works, how they have been evolving and their innovations. The article starts talking about the year 2010 and the billion dollar sales that the company had that year. Then it emphasize how Google went from the searches in the computer to negotiations with several big and important brands to launch the android operating system for mobile phones which helped the widespread of internet and of mobile devices in the world. Google beneficiated too from the raise of banner ads and video ads displays. Also wanted to launch in 2010 Google TV believing that this market could grow to $95 billion by 2013. As you can see, Google is always trying to innovate, to search for new markets, leading technology to the future. In July 2010 Schmidt commented that Google´s new ventures into mobile devices, television search and cloud computing would allow the company to “organize the world´s information on any device and in any way that we can figure out to do it”. Another useful innovations that Google launched was Google earth and its companion Google maps in 2004, that allowed internet users to search and view satellite images of any location in the world. Then people could see it in 3d (street view). Also between 2005 and 2010 Google included Google news, book search, music search, video search, Gmail, web-based calendar, web-based document and spreadsheet applications, Picasa web photo albums, translation......

Words: 435 - Pages: 2

Google Case Analysis

...1. Using competitor intelligence from the case material, assess the levels of market commonality and resource similarity that Google has with three key industry competitors. How will they influence competitive behavior and the intensity of rivalry? Market Commonality refers to the number of different markets two or more direct competitors are involved in. For instance Sony and Samsung are direct competitors and are involved in number of different markets which includes Smartphones, Televisions, and Hi Fi Systems and so on. Market commonality also pertains to the degree of importance each competitors give to their each market. For instance, Sony and Samsung may give more importance to their Television line of products because it either maybe their most popular products of all or it may be due to their anticipated future market of that product. Multimarket competitors are less likely to attack each other aggressively, but will respond aggressively when they’re being attacked. For instance Airlines industry is a multi-market industry wherein the prices are similar, but if the competitors comes up with a promotion, others would swiftly respond. Resource similarity on the other hand, refers to how the each of the firms’ resources both tangible and intangible can be compared. For instance, Sony and Samsung both are market leaders in LCD and LED manufacturing. Both have exceptional intangible resources in terms of designing products and their level of knowhow and technological......

Words: 3386 - Pages: 14

Case Analysis- Googles "Three- Thirds" Hr Team

...Case Analysis: Google’s “Three-Thirds” HR Team Debbie Martin Empire State College Organizational Behavior May 2014 What is a team? A team is defined as a group of people with a full set of complementary skills required to complete a task, job, or project. Team members (1) operate with a high degree of interdependence, (2) share authority and responsibility for self-management, (3) are accountable for the collective performance, and (4) work toward a common goal and shared rewards(s). A team becomes more than just a collection of people when a strong sense of mutual commitment creates synergy, thus generating performance greater than the sum of the performance of its individual members. (Business, 2014) Google’s HR team has the potential to be a very effective and strong team. Each section has their expertise that would benefit the other groups. With the current model, the groups are only encouraged to have regular interaction. The lack a defined, common goal and expectation of the HR group as a whole. Google Upper Management is trying to capitalize on their HR team to assist with a sluggish economy and cost cutting efforts. In HR’s case, this involves making sure that Google is hiring the best possible candidates they can. The most costly component of any business is training of new employees. By utilizing the various HR groups it has established, Google is trying to minimize turn over, ensure longevity as well as compatibility. In......

Words: 1687 - Pages: 7

Google Case

...Team 2- Decision Strategies | Google’s Case Analysis | | | Prashant Sinha, Xinyi Wang, Karthik Pedduri, Deepak Mittal, Shubham Goel | 11/5/2014 | | Case Background This case talks about Google, the world’s leading search engine and one of the world’s most technically innovative companies. Google was founded in 1998 by two Ph.D. students at Stanford who were able to leverage their algorithm to rank random search results by relevancy to build a multibillion dollar business. The company employs more than 30,000 people and is one of the most sort after companies for software engineers. Despite such a tremendous growth at a fast pace, Google has still been able to maintain the small company feel, giving its employees freedom to invest 20% of their time in any projects of their choice. This has been one of the sources of innovation for the company. SWOT Analysis for Google Strengths The biggest strength for Google is the established brand name with a worldwide market share of more than 70% in the search engine space. Also, Google has been able to distinguish its services from all others and has gained high awareness, perceived quality, and brand loyalty through its branding which is mostly done by word of mouth. Google has also been growing by acquiring companies with diversified market offerings. The leadership has ensured that most of the internet using population is using their products some way or the other making them the most successful marketing......

Words: 716 - Pages: 3

Google Case Analysis

...Marlee McManus MKTG 433 Dr. Sciulli Google Case Analysis Due Via D2l: 2/6/15 1. Provide a SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats) analysis of Google. Incorporate items from the articles as well as your own ideas. Strengths: It is Google’s efficient and effective user friendly interface, and the output of impeccably accurate results, that makes the company the frontrunners of the global search engine market. The company constantly updates and upgrades its technology and search algorithms to produce the best results possible. In 2001, Google implemented image search capabilities, which has come to expand to include the capability of searching for videos, news data, documents, books, and many other forms of “rich data”. With the launch of Google Instant in 2010, a program that predicts a user’s search query based on what they are typing, Google further enhanced the efficiency of the user’s search experience. Their position as the leading global internet database is further reinforced by their ability to produce results in various languages, and output localized search results. Furthermore, the fact that Google’s employees are required to spend 20% of their time developing their own projects acts as a perpetual catalyst to innovation--which always keeps the company one step ahead of their competitors. Weaknesses: Google relies primarily on advertisements as the source of their revenue. The problem with this is that advertisers’ spending patterns......

Words: 2093 - Pages: 9

Google Case Analysis

...What is your assessment of the overall industry attractiveness? Why so? Industry attractiveness could be defined as how manageable it is for the different companies in the industry to achieve profits. The industry attractiveness could be determined through thorough evaluation of the external environment. The group would be answering the seven questions in assessing the company's industry and competitive environment. The first question is do the dominant economic characteristics of the industry offer sellers opportunities for growth and attractive profits? The search industry has a large market size. The case states that there are beyond 103 million Americans and an estimated 2 billion people worldwide who surfs the internet from smart phones. And almost all companies and people use computers and the internet. With these, advertisers are more willing to invest on the search industry. Most of the time, companies in the search industry competes globally but there are also search companies that caters to the local company like Baidu in China. With the numerous internet users, it creates opportunity for the search industry to broaden the scope of their products Usually in this type of industry, the market is not segmented, broadening its reach to the people and favoring the advertisers. The industry is in the rapid growth and takeoff position in the life cycle. With the increasing technological capabilities, it seems that potentials in the next years are limitless and......

Words: 1578 - Pages: 7

Case Analysis of Google Inc 2014

...MEMO Date: June 25, 2015 To: From: Re: The Google Giant Google’s distinct governance structure, corporate culture, and organizational processes are key factors in Google’s success in the search engine services industry. All three of these aspects of the organization have allowed Google to capitalize on superior innovation and ultimately obtain the majority of the market share worldwide. Overall, the structure, culture, and processes have proven to strengthen Google’s market share and core competencies. However, it is also important to consider the weaknesses associated with these factors. Google’s governance structure for top management consists of the ownership of one-third of the shares but control over 80% of the votes. Although top management only owns one-third of the company, their control over 80% of the votes allows them to stay in control of Google’s future and prevents potential takeovers from investors. In Google’s case, this structure has proven to be a success, as top management has a clear vision for Google and has been able to capitalize on their independence from investors to date. This structure also allows for a significant amount of investment in Google (another two-thirds), without giving up decision control (only 20%). A potential weakness associated with this structure is that with only 20% of votes available to investors, it might be challenging for Google to find proper investors, as they’d simply act as a passenger. However,......

Words: 546 - Pages: 3

Case Google

...Please read the case and answer the question: what classical principles of organization theory does Google controvert? what principles are employed? Google’s Innovation Machine In the pantheon of internet-based companies, Google stands out as both particularly successful and particularly innovative. Not since Microsoft has a company had so much success so quickly. Google excels at IT and business architecture, experimentation, improvisation, analytical decision making, participative product development, and other relatively unusual forms of innovation. It balances an admittedly chaotic ideation process with a set of rigorous, data-driven methods for evaluating ideas. The company culture attracts the brightest technical talent, and despite its rapid employee growth Google still gets 100 applicants for every open position. It has developed or acquired a wide variety of new offerings to augment the core search product. Its growth, profitability, and shareholder equity are at unparalleled levels. This highly desirable situation may not last forever, but Google has clearly done something right. Indeed, Google has been the creator or a leading exponent of new approaches to business and management innovation. Much of what the company does is rooted in its legendary IT infrastructure, but technology and strategy at Google are inseparable and mutually permeable—making it hard to say whether technology is the DNA of its strategy or the other way around. Whichever it is, Google seems......

Words: 2495 - Pages: 10

Case Analysis: Google

...Case Case:  Google   MBA  Japan-­‐  INSY  690  (Case  Analysis  Assignment)   Student:  Lance  Shields               1. What were the key factors behind Google’s early success? • Perfecting an innovative search engine was clearly the most important factor for Google founders’ early success. Turning the keyword spam problem on the web into an opportunity by solving it while grad students at Stanford led to Sergey Brin’s and Larry Page’s now famous PageRank algorithm. Instead of counting keywords like old search engines, the founders created reliable searches through the number of websites that link to a page or “votes” to weight search result relevance. • Google focusing on the user was another trait that attracted people initially as the nononsense simple white search page and distinctive colorful logo with no ads or editorial content on the page lead to easy and fast searches that Yahoo couldn’t imitate. This is described in their first truism “Focus on the user and all else will follow” where they talk about simplicity of interface and speed of page loads. • Google delivered search results people really wanted lead to users trusting Google as they promise to not sell placement in search results to advertisers and instead rely on the “true” natural search to deliver users the content they really are looking for. At the same time, their sponsored links were relevant......

Words: 2154 - Pages: 9

Google Case Analysis

...Kimberly Weatherspoon September 22, 2011 Capstone Course Google Case: Discussion Google’s mission to organize, and make all information accessible and useful to its users drives Google’s strategies to expand into new markets, gather further information, and make that information available in a beneficial, valuable manner. Google's objectives are to grow, expand into international markets, and continue developing new products such as new advertising technology. Strategically, Google differentiates themselves by focusing on the core product of search services and has benefited from a competitive advantage in "faster response times, and greater economies of scale,” which translates into lower costs. Therefore, Google not only has an advantage in the differentiation arena, but also in cost and speed as well. Google's search-engine business model has propelled it to a dominant role in the industry based on its expertise and differentiation. Google’s innovations and diversity keep them in a leading position. The decision point for Google to deal with the Chinese market proposed a number of decision points. First was the decision of whether or not to enter this new market at all. China is a very population-heavy market with the potential for revenue-generating transactions by selling advertisements to companies in the local area. Profitable markets with the possibility of yielding high returns such as the Chinese market attract new players to......

Words: 1307 - Pages: 6

Google Case Analysis

...Google Case Peter Senge’s five disciplines are: shared vision, mental models, personal mastery, team learning and systems thinking. As a Google employee, I would use these disciplines to understand the entry into the Chinese market. Google released a public letter stating, “…We aspire to make Google an institution that makes the world a better place” (Argenti, Page 19). Peter Senge’s first discipline, Shared Vision can be used to understand the changing environment at Google during the timeframe of the article. The majority of Google employees are doers, not decision makers, so they have to go along with any changes in the company’s direction or move to another company. The executives made the decision that it would be better to do business in China since the service would be better than anything currently available even if it was not as open as the US version. I’m not sure how many employees knew that “Do no evil” was followed by “Do nothing illegal” but the executives and corporate attorneys understood this and made the decision. At this point it is up to employees to determine for themselves if this supports their values and beliefs or if it’s time for them to look elsewhere for work. Team Learning and Systems Thinking can be used to assess the major events influencing the changes. Teams can be formed at and below the executive level to analyze internal and external events and predict what effects these will have on the corporate culture, business model and......

Words: 741 - Pages: 3

Railway Herald Issue 307 20 March 2012 | Obelisk rated German Angst 9 / 10 | Active BootDisk Suite v7.1.