1

Cultural Change and Transformation for Google Company Introduction Culture exists on a deeper level as well, embedded in the core principles, and reflects in the visible acts of organization. It is an invisible, an unarticulated dimension that people in organization shares with one another. A study of Google where knowledge sharing is exhibited found that culture change is consistent to match the knowledge management initiatives and take the timeless dimension of public space to entirely appreciate the full scope of opportunities offered by the web environment. Globalization has led to the unparalleled interconnection of nations, people, and cultures. Analysis of the respective innovation of information and communication technologies of Google diffused from global centers of technology and institution to the border of the world, these technologies have been reinvented and espoused in myriad contexts of linguistic, political, economic, social, and culture. The purpose of this study is to explain the cultural change and transformation in Google Company and how this affects the organizations performance. Cultural change transforms the core elements of business to focus on the substantial system configuration issues covering the strong commitment to knowledge management, espousing the shared values, philosophy and practices in organization. It also provides literature review discussing cultural change and innovative transformation needed by firm as well as the kind of leadership that management needs to practice. From traditional view, leader controls all roles of employees, now the role of a corporate manager shifted to the role of a coach who encourages, stimulates, advises, and builds up employees through priorities, standards, and goals. These new changes in the organizational structure transform business into a more flexible, inspired, and empowered setting, a situation that is the exact opposite of what was applied nearly a century ago a hierarchical and controlling leadership system. A good leadership can be an impetus to instigate positive changes within an organizational setting. It can serve as fire in motivating and attracting positive cooperation of organizational members in company activities that concern and touch their interests. Literature Review Hoshino-Browne et al. noted that individuals come upon a myriad of choices everyday ranging from simple decisions such as which cereal to eat for breakfast to more difficult ones such as which of two jobs offers to accept [2005, p. 294]. Some decisions depend on the cultural variation which exists in the experience of cognitive conflict and the consequent tendency to substantiate or rationalize decision making of individual. The important perspective of cultural variable in decision making is called to demonstrate a constructed phenomenon holding interdependent self-concepts such as connectedness, closeness, and interpersonal relationships. Cross-cultural differences have impact the socio-economic status of individuals exposed to the greater diversity, complexity, and availability of resources. The context of cross-cultural underpins the economic and psychological assumptions to which people choose to infer the exercise of free choice or from the expression of preferences.

In the pace of globalization, cultural change is an important source of competitive advantage for firm, or organization diffused in other countries of different culture. Several multinational corporations (MNCs) directly influencing international assignment of organizational competence in increasing and sustaining corporate culture, facilitating broad synchronization and control, and transferring knowledge and skills for global development opportunities. The competence of organization to develop, adapt, and improve itself to the cross-cultural management perspective is folded with extensive and wellintegrated knowledge of practical application as regards effective working and managing in existing resources to operate in growing complexity of inter and intra-operations of organization. In the study of Oyserman et al. [2009], the main contention of culture is that organization differs in levels of continual individualism and collectivism and that these disparities have reflection in shared values, ideas, and practices. Individualism considers people in organization are rational and selfcentered, and reliable with individual preference as well. In this theory, individuals have option to which they rely on their self-conviction. On the other way, collectivism particularly highlights the group decision or reliance of decision making through the majority decided upon by the agreement of the group. The corporate culture established values as reflected through their missions and visions, and by upholding operational innovations management reconcile certain barriers to create significant difference in business context. The existence of cultural change in organization plays a role in driving operational innovations, to a certain extent improve quality, create new markets, and reduce costs [Diong & Cho, 2008]. However, cultural change does not always mean success; it could likewise lead to failure of operational performance. That provides several latent culture-related barriers that threaten global managers anticipate failure, and empathize effectively to amputate impediments that can lead to a collapse in cross-cultural negotiations [Oyserman et al., 2009]. Competence, therefore, is an indispensable quality tool in inter-cultural negotiations. As more and more firms operate internationally, grasping the effects of cultural diversities, decision making of management becomes progressively more critical to evade potential business pitfalls and for effective global marketing management plans. Although several articles have generally addressed this point, the differences along particular cultural approaches have not been completely examined. For example, though there is emerging difference between the crosscultural management between United Kingdom and China; such that, the diversity may be turned positively to establish a better choice of organization to financial risk and management. International business encompasses a large and rising segment of the worlds aggregate trade. The growth of global trading has acquired impetus faster than formerly documented, and relatively surpassing domestic business. Such growth is observed to impact local markets, as domestic trading is now hastening to become insiders in international markets they once given little consideration to, or absolutely overlooked. Global markets, as believed to recommend companies of opportunities to market their products and services on an all-inclusive range and accrue the advantages of the remarkably high ventures involved, has dealt with trading connections or negotiations which extent national and cultural borders. Pitfalls of intercultural business exhibit under the label of customs,

behaviors, language pragmatics and customary social norms. And this has been the key goals of Google to culture change and transformations. Google is consistently able of carrying the huge data system. From the simple web pages, the largest search engine has expanded its services for businesses in a theatrical way [Diong & Cho, 2008]. Across the determinants of information system in the integration to business, Googles services have led to determine whether technology has dealt reasonably for prospective consumption of the company into optimal profitability and efficiency of users. Today, users are given choices from the menu to customize their preferred services according to their alternative. These set of services reflect the major actions of management to better off in responding to full range of opportunities in the market. Walton [1986] argued, the problem of Western firms is not the competition, nor the Japanese, but the self-inflicted system rests exclusively on management. As the 21st centurys growth and development enters business organizations, the pace of changes occurred in fast synergies emphasizing connectivity of people to leader and leader to the organization. In this sense, the viability of various leadership roles to connect programs, policies and activities in highlighting the challenges achievement of organization has set to focus in the way how leader would create strategic operations and systematic approaches to relative modification of the traditional organization behaviors. Hamilton, Knouse, and Hill [2008] noted that despite a largest homogeny in business practices resulting from globalization, Googles business practices remain different from the practices of host country. It is for the reason that multinational managers make the decision processes to address conflict situations, covering the local and international contexts and considering the laws and practices of the host country. As globalization comes into view, firm experiences a global business citizenship in which produce innovations in practice. Google is no longer start-up. Management designs corporate synergy and sustains optimal performance to improve growth of profits and productivity. Significantly, it projects quality that significantly helped its operations perform viably in competitive markets, which particularly provides high edge of success to firm that relates itself in high quality service and innovative technological environment. Cultural sharing approaches the targets perception rather than purpose conditions as the preliminary point for a breakdown of organizational problems, and spotlight on how firm and people determine situation as conflict. To date, as management and staffs share the values to reconcile problems that emerge in organizations interaction with international market such that the natural history of such problems is uncertain and contingent. Thus, this approach concerned with development rather than structure and significance rather causality. These theoretical approaches impart different characters and principles to which firm stand in accordance to resolution and approaching solutions and creative strategy. The value of the cultural change is that it draws consideration to the evolving function of business to meet the demands and satisfaction of customers. While conflict highlights the structural factors of crisis in organization and stresses the consequence of clash of interest between groups with contradictory ideas and values, cultural change and innovative transformation helps information and process be shared with people of organization interestingly. Lastly, the emphasis of a normative and value consensus of people in organization overwhelms the contradicting difference of information.

Kouzes and Posner note that leadership is not contained in a gene anymore, or any less, than other abilities. Leadership is not a place, its not a position, and it is not a secret code that cant be deciphered by ordinary people. Leadership is an observable set of skills and abilities (2002, p. 8). It is one which appear naturally from an individual, an innate characteristics that makes the best from the brightest, and discovers the potentials in an approach of development process. A rational and proper leadership exists from the time a particular organization is conceived up to the time of its termination or closure [Kouzes & Posner, 2002]. In this regard, the best element of positive change in this kind of setting is leadership. Otherwise if there is no effective leadership approach, then what managers can only expect is failure or the total closure of the organization. Significantly, the five practices are practical applications in leading challenges in organizational transformations: - Model the Way. A leader is someone who embeds deep credibility in saying and doing something. In this sense, leader must stand for something, believe in something, and care about something. He is called as such because he influences people around him by what he says and does, and builds a consensus on a set of common principles. - Inspire a shared vision. Leadership never overlooks the long term. A good leader exercises presentiment with reason, and highlights the requisite for ideas. Other terms that rally round describing this characteristic are originality, conceptualizing, and right-brain activity. Simply put it, people without a vision perish, for thinking and imagination rules the world. This attribute is the most appealing, and the most extensive of leader holding constructive attributes that could help industries. It has allowed people to turn dreams into realities, literally to the point where anyone can soar through the air, across the ocean, and reach another continent in a matter of hours. - Challenge the process. Status quo or futile management of organization challenges leader to pursue development. Growth in practices and outcome are the primary focus of leader. He seeks every detail to come up with the best strategy and methods in order for organization to gain excellent operations and perspectives. - Enables others to act. A leader does not make all things, but inspires all to do things altogether. He does not create great people within his organization but encourage great people to know and understand themselves ad bring out the best not only for their sake but for the organization at large. - Encourage the heart. As a leader, he does not judge people but deeply know them by heart what their differences and similarities or their strengths and weaknesses for he knows that by helping these people know and understand themselves, the competitiveness and efficiency of organization is charted. Consequently, as individual behaviors may arrive at certain conflict and problematic situations, the call of leadership is undeniably important. A great leader motivates members and showed the ways not only directs them. Both transformational and transactional forms of leadership have been proven to increase the motivation and performance of the members of the team. The attributes of

transformational leadership such as clear vision and empowerment are frequently known as critical elements for job satisfaction and commitment. The effects of leadership style on the various stages of the creative process with the utilization of this model. In the first stage that entailed the brainstorming of the group, transactional leadership was deemed to be most capable in increasing the productivity of generating ideas while transformational leadership is known to have a positive impact on the quality of written report produced for the ideas that are generated. As such, by means of participating in the decision making process and team work development, members of organization are enabled to grasp the possible outcomes of their actions. The inevitability of internet services in contemporary has provided customers and professional business entrepreneur to satisfy the demands of this era. Das, Datar, and Ashutosh [2007] noted that Googles attainment of maximum operations are set to the performance of transformation server that advance and facilitate for better improvement of knowledge and information management. In extent, data systems constitute an integral to the system that helps firm to practically generate large depositories of data streams that creates an automatic recovery of the networking and power data (Das, Datar, and Ashutosh, 2007). Effective approach of leadership style of management provides and generates organizations internal and external capabilities in making productive increase and market strategies that uplift market position in the industry not only on local market but as well as in global perspectives. Effective leadership of management directs cultural change to break through the fear and negative signs of failures. Moreover, it is also through effective leadership that innovative transformation established group interaction with the team guided plans, certain factors that shift organization growth and development. With the step-by step work processes and performance, team groups are able to determine their strengths and opportunities that may add up to organizations growth. As leader plays great role in leading people, team members have also felt the shared values, principles, and actions require carrying out in operations. Hand in hand, great leadership enables the immediate needs of firm despite of emergence of problems, the interdependence of the team, and consolidation of work performances to meet the design plans of business strategy. Results Google, the global leader in internet search and the chief single access point to an unbounded range of electronic collections, juggles a number of conflicting realities and resolve a number of contradictory expectations. Exploring Googles business model structure showed that the company does business from the perspectives of business system. This business model design is emerging unit of dynamic environment that explains the system-level of firm to approach a transformative framework for sustainable innovations in practice. Important issues learned in the principles of cultural change and transformation is to analyze and understand the grounded theory of success despite the struggles of Google with extensive competition in the market, such as Microsoft and Amazon. In this case, cultural change has transformed Googles advanced interface into (1) dynamic business, which concern on maintaining quality, match output to sales, budget, employment, profits, service, public relations, and forecasting that increases the probability of better financial results and customer loyalty [Diong & Cho,

2008; Walton, 1986, p. 55]; and (2) highly competitive operations with respect to cross-cultural ethical conflicts [Hamilton, Knouse, & Hill, 2008]. Dynamic Business At the start, Google Corporation earned majority of its revenues from advertisements supported by searches done on Google.com. The companys growing network of web sites gave it the ability to display advertisements that it provided. It provided the search engine company the sustainable competitive advantage in terms of providing advertisements and partnership with the affiliates of a network [Vise & Malseed, 2005, p. 182]. Google Corporation experienced a significant increase of operating profit by 35.15 percent in 2009 or $185.61 billion from the decline of 25.41 percent in the last quarter of 2008 for its net income to reach to only US$382.4 million. As compared to US$1.2 billion in the same quarter of 2007 recording revenues of up to US$ 5.7 billion or a 30.64 percent increased. Other forms of revenues like licensing have risen to $196.3 million as compared to only US$69.3 million in the year 2008. Meanwhile, the worldwide revenues of the firm reached US$2.86 billion in 2009 that represented 50 percent of the companys total revenues as compared to only 48 percent in the previous year of 2008. Revenues from operations in the United Kingdom totaled to US$685 million, 12 percent of the total revenues of the firm as compared to its huge performance in 2007 of 16 percent. At the last quarter of 2009, the firm posted a charge of impairment of a total of US$1.09 billion that included charges of US$355 million and US$726 million linked to investments of the company on Clearwire and AOL [Vise & Malseed, 2005]. Meanwhile, for the fiscal year of 2008, the company only reported a small 0.6 percent increase in its net income to reached to US$4.22 billion as compared to US$4.20 billion in 2007 while revenues are up at US$21.8 billion or equivalent to 31.3 percent increased. As such, Google Corporation is considered to be growing at a significant rate. The primary source of income of the company came from the advertisements posted by its client businesses or individuals who believed with the efficiency and effectiveness of the web in selling or promoting their ads. Consequently, 2007 revenues of Google were recorded at $16.6 billion that grew at 115% yearly in the past five years. At present, Google is dominating in the Internet search market of the United States with a prevailing 57% market share [Das, Datar, & Ashutosh, 2007]. Another interesting strength of Google is its profitability as revenues grow at a quarterly rate of 110% and is steadily increasing since its inception as a public corporation in 2006. Due to the steady profitability of the company, it was able to save significant amount of cash reserves or war chest amounting to $ 7.6 billion that allows the company to expand or venture on new markets or generate new product and service offerings. Highly Competitive Operations In contemporary, Google is placing a greater emphasis on filling the gap between science and practice in the performance management appraisal system as a means of determining the key drivers of employee engagement into cohesive culture of workforce development and generating higher levels of job performance. As modern organizations seek to achieve competitive advantage, consistent learning is

an essential tool of company to keep people on the right track particularly in point of decentralization. Learning new ideas and concepts in this world provide people not just develop as human resource but as individuals as well. They compromisingly turn critical details into what it should be because except for the fact that human force has the apt skills and knowledge to discern things, through trainings the complexities of work are getting accessible. Conclusion Google is at present the largest search engine generating revenues from online advertising business. In the fast-paced global economy, the flexibility and interoperability of Google to meet the uneven needs of operational excellence in an on-demand environment is highly required. As such, the company has sought to adopt a cultural change, manifesting in its ideas, principles, and practices, to streamline business processes and reinvent business model. Googles strategy pinpointed the scope of its service and product offerings to current and potential customers in the host country it currently serves enhancing the ability to innovate more effectively and reconcile the conflicts to fuel its future success. In this regard, leadership approach of management does play an important role to secure organizational change appropriately without any resistance and crisis within an organization. Management method leads firm to further opportunities and generates significant growth not only with its financial report but also with human resource development, including management and staffs sharing of philosophies and experiences to better the company.

References Das, A., Datar, M., and Ashutosh, G. (2007). Google News Personalization: Scalable Online Collaborative Filtering. International World Wide Web Conference Committee (IW3C2), pp. 271-280. Diong, A.,& Cho, D. [2008]. Transformative innovation for growth. Industrial Management, 50 [3], 8-11. Hamilton, J.B., Knouse, S.B., & Hill, V. [2008]. Google in China: A Manager-Friendly Heuristic Model for Resolving Cross-Cultural Ethical Conflicts. Journal of Business Ethics, 86, 143157.

Hoshino-Browne E., Zanna A. S., Spencer, S. J., Zanna, M. P., Kitayama, S., & Lackenbauer S. (2005). On the cultural guises of cognitive dissonance: the case of easterners and westerners. Journal of Personal Social Psychology, 89 (3), 294-310. Kouzes, J. & Posner, B. [2002]. The Leadership Challenge. Jossey-Bass, A John Wiley Co. Oyserman, D., Sorensen, N., Reber, R., & Chen, S. X. (2009). Connecting and Separating Mind-Sets: Culture as Situated Cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97 (2), 217235.

Vise, D., Malseed, M., (2005). The Google Story. Hampton, NH: Thomas Arnold Publishing Walton, M. [1986]. The Deming management method. Hudson, NY: Penguin.