Google Faces Employee Retention Challenge 339
prakslash writes "60% of Google's 1900 employees now hold stock options worth at least one million dollars. According to experts in this Reuters article, it is now imperative for Google to maintain its sense of mission. If it fails to do so, a whole slew of employees facing post-IPO burnout and boredom will leave the company to go back to school, start a new company, or join the ranks of high-tech early retirees. Such a mass cashing-out could lead to a decline in Google stock price and intellectual brain-drain. Oh how I wish I worked for Google."
Total percentage? (Score:0, Interesting)
Not facing it, in reality (Score:4, Interesting)
Now they probably need to keep the servers up and running, and that can probably be done with a few colos located in various countries with cheap labor and moved around as necessary.
So cut the workforce, move all essential server capacity to India, China, and Eastern Europe, and let those millionaires go off and start other companies. God knows they've probably got some good ideas for other products, better to see them deliver those ideas from their own small company than to see it bastardized by a large Google (product placement and marketing and all that).
Braindrain at Google could be just what our ailing tech sector needs.
*Maintain* it's sense of mission? (Score:5, Interesting)
Another challenge they need to get a grip on is a release culture. Up to now, most of their products and services have been in perpetual beta. If they want to expand, they need to get a mentality that sets targets, and makes releases. Right now they look like Netscape did. Their most visible product, the Google search engine, has way more features, many of which are useful, than any competitor. In terms of search quality, though, I think they already fall behind the new MSN search. If all they do is tack more features on and add new beta products they will fall behind. Granted, they have a long time to make it work, with that mountain of cash, but that won't sustain them forever.
Google needs to decide on a new vision that is grand, but reachable with the money they have now. Then they need to execute their new plan successfully. Neither staying where they are, or growing at their current rate, is a viable option. They need big changes. They may well be up to it, but we won't know for certain for a few more years.
Re:It's a problem, but it's already solved. (Score:2, Interesting)
Harder to recruit? (Score:2, Interesting)
Salaries were not competitive with the market as recently as 4 months ago. Of course, back then they were still "Pre-IPO." IMHO, You'd have to be foolish or a huge gambler to take a meager salary in lieu of options at the current strike price.
So once the brain-drain starts... there may be no way for Google to staunch it... unless they start hiring very competitively (and presumably, retro-compensating current employees).
yeah, nice to have options that actually mature... (Score:1, Interesting)
I've worked in numerous companies and had lots of stock options in them but none of them ever panned out. Being Canadian and working in IT in Canada just sucks this way
Re:You wish you worked for google? (Score:5, Interesting)
Right, we must not waffle or send mexed missages even if presented with new facts.
Google is now a public company. Many
Let's hope that Google continues to change the way things are done. If they become myopic about short-term profits, they will be screwed in the long run.
Re:Total percentage? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:You wish you worked for google? (Score:3, Interesting)
Maybe in 3 - 5 years, when most of the millionaires have left, but I would certainly NOT join Google right now, unless my stock options strike price was at pre-IPO levels (which it won't).
Re:Maybe not that bad... (Score:4, Interesting)
CASH OUT NOW ! (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:It's a problem, but it's already solved. (Score:5, Interesting)
All the option apologists say options are necessary to motivate employees.
And yet, when successful, it seems options just motivate them to leave.
Funny.
Just remember where all the money to create those millionaires comes from - the shareholders. If existing shareholders are willing to suffer dilution and buyback expenses just to "motivate" talent, why not just pay them the equivalent in cash? It would save a whole lot of paperwork & accounting nightmares.
oh right I forgot, that doesn't let them move billions of compensation expenses out of the expense column and into the "financing activites" column.
Re:Not facing it, in reality (Score:2, Interesting)
Servers cost pretty much the same in the US, China or Eastern Europe - in hardware terms (and are perhaps cheaper after import taxes etc). The manpower requirement isn't a large part of ongoing expenses - manpower 'costs' Google in the development areas (direct in these workers, plus indirect from their assistants, people running the canteen etc; I'm sure they also have a strong finance/legal team but doubt this tops 100), where the brightest from India, China, Eastern Europe could well apply and be successful (as the people they're after are in such a limited supply).
As for let those millionaires go off and start other companies... these people are not slaves of Google, if they wanted to leave they could, and could take most of their stock options with them. These people stick around because they have the freedom to.
The tech sector is not ailing - it is doing pretty well, not as well as 98, but who wants morons with cr4p ideas who never make them work, to get paid by (money wasted by) pension and saving plans - real people's investment in the future?
Re:reminds me of... (Score:3, Interesting)
since you mention it - one guy put his money into a .com startup distributing sheet music. After the bubble bursted he had to accommodate to a quite moderate lifestyle. He's still running this company, but the server is in his basement and he had to fire his employees...
btw: who told you that clerical employees don't have aspirations?
google share are just hype (Score:1, Interesting)
Just think for a minute and ask yourself what is google worth? just ad selling doesn't justificate that price, they haven't created any mayor technology (they based their work and products on others ideas).
Somebody told me their real proce should be around $50 and I'm starting beleiving him.
Don't say you weren't warned.
Re:You wish you worked for google? (Score:5, Interesting)
Yeah, I can look in a dictionary for a difference, but this is one of those cases where 'one language, two meanings' really comes into play for the English language. Both words, of course, are not English, but French (resume - OK I can't be bothered to get acutes into slashcode) and Latin (CV ). Both words have been adopted by English common usage, but English does not have an acute on 'e' in its scope so 'resume' [raesumae] cannot be an 'English' word, and CV is just a couple of letters, not a word.
Curriculum Vitae: Loosely translated, this means "course of one's life" [Latin does not translate directly].
Resume: Summary [more or less]
BTW I'm not a great one for direct translation of languages as nuances and subtleties are often lost
But lanaguage is functional. A CV could be a one page document, if one were succinct, a resume could be a summary, but a summary of what (resume with no context means nothing), a document entitled 'John Doe - Resume' surely means a summary of John Doe (if one were to interpret in English), so what is the difference of 'John Doe - CV'?! Defining the difference between the terms is looking for a difference for a difference's sake.
A CV refers to what someone would submit for a job application, as would a resume. Someone would be mad to write a 10 page essay about their life [common interpretation of 'CV'] equally someone would be mad to submit a 2 line summary of their skills and previous position titles [possible interpretation of 'resume']. Drawing a distinction between the two, or saying one is better than the other is folly. I would be interested in what others think, but in the US a resume seems to be a 1-2 page document, a CV a long document, in the UK a CV is a 1-2 page document, the term resume is rarely used, what about Canada, Australia, countries for which English ios a second language?
Basically, adapt your resume/CV/description to what you apply for: list in descending chronological order (with some potential variation of importance), add some 'summary paragraph' that sells yourself near the top, stay relevant. Always include a covering letter.
Don't worry it's all bullshit (Score:3, Interesting)
On paper is one thing, real value is quite another. Millions of dotbombers know the reality of stock option accounting and if they were worth 'millions' from the get go they'd be warrants or gifts not options.
Re:It's a problem, but it's already solved. (Score:1, Interesting)
I was issued about $2m worth of SUNW when neared 70.
By vesting time it was under 3.
Re:You wish you worked for google? (Score:3, Interesting)
To take the analogy into the porn industry...I wouldn't want to work for a porn movie studio where all the other porn stars got penis enlargement treatment, and I did not, because you joined the studio after the "Enlarge Your Penis Day".
Not that I would need one, of course *grin*
Re:reminds me of... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:FOD (Score:5, Interesting)
Yesterday, I worked 19 hours.
The days before, I worked something on the order of 13-14 hours.
I'm working on a project that's pretty damn important to my company, and I've got to put lots of late hours in. My boss makes me do this.
She does this by working harder, and often longer, than I do. This morning, when I left at 4am, it was only about 45 minutes after she left.
She does this by telling me how much she appreciates what I do, and the impact I make.
She does this by providing me with all the snacks and soft-drinks I can drink, and by making sure that when I work late I'm well starbucked and fed.
She does this by paying me a pretty darn decent wage, and letting me know that when this company can afford to pay me more, they will.
She does this by looking at the fact I worked while on vacation and letting me determine how many days of vacation I really officially took, if any.
And so in return, I spend 70-80 hours at work during crunch times and make sure that what needs to get done gets done.
Everyone I know at Google is like this in this regard. I suspect their managers are like my manager in these regards. I suspect "FOAD" is not normally something a Googler ever considers wanting to tell their boss.
Re:Totally expected (Score:3, Interesting)
It's even more critical that you pay them well enough that they won't jump ship for a better salary at the first available opportunity.
Management 101, and a quick lession any hiring manager would learn if they didn't already know
Actually, I've taken Management 101, and you clearly haven't. Money is what behavioral psychologists call a "hygiene factor". Lack of a hygiene factor can make a person miserable, but once a basic threshold is reached, more of it won't make them happier.
Example: your employees might get upset if their wastepaper baskets were only emptied weekly, they'd be satisfied if they were emptied daily, but having them emptied twice daily wouldn't make anyone any happier. Same could be said for office kitchen cleaning. That's why they're called "hygiene" factors. Money's the same. If someone's struggling to pay for his kids, mortgage, etc then lack of money means that redressing the lack of money must take priority. If someone can pay for their lives without too many worries, then the motivation to look for more is reduced and such a person will be motivated by intellectual challenge, prospect of promotion, etc etc.