Reflective Journal 2: Reflect on the working culture and management style in Google and Lenovo.
(You may choose to explore how far their working cultures and management styles reflect their respective societies, share your personal experiences and opinions on your preference of working culture and management style, etc)
.
Google made US$ 29.3b in 2010 and its website is one of the most visited worldwide. On the other hand, Lenovo made US$ 21.6b in 2011, and is the world's second largest PC maker. Despite these two multinational companies holding key positions in the IT industry, their working culture and management styles are vastly different, and I believe this to be partially due to the country they operate the company from.
Google gives its employees autonomy, and is concerned with their welfare. It uses extrinsic motivation to hopefully spark off intrinsic motivation within its employees, which the company is heavily dependent on. In my opinion, this management style brings out the best in its employees, as it encourages motivation and freedom of speech and will.
In school, Oral Participation attempts to motivate students to speak up more in class by expressing constructive questions and starting meaningful discussions. An aim of this system is to provide the student with multiple POVs in addressing an issue, while developing his passion in learning. This is similar to Google's approach in embracing candour and dissent, which I feel has played an important role in its success. Its employees are comfortable in sharing ideas and opinions with each other, which allows for them to build upon each others' ideas, and create a product that combines the individual skills of every employee. After all, two brains are better than one. Google employees also feel more motivated to work and pursue their interests in the 20% work time allocated to them.
Lenovo, though, is an organised institution where there is a laoban who gives orders to his employees, and they are expected to follow his orders without raising questions. The disadvantage of this system is that it discourages employees to propose ideas to their superiors, which might stifle their creativity and result in a lack of motivation. However, the advantage is that it is extremely effective, as there is only one person calling the shots. In my opinion, such a company will not be able to sustain good performance in the global market consistently, as creative and innovative products are what sell in the modern day.
In the American society, citizens are more open in voicing their opinions on issues, and are given more freedom in certain areas in comparison to China's society. This freedom covers a wide spectrum of rules and practices, but one simple example would be school uniforms, in which most American schools only have a dress code, while Chinese schools have a fixed set of school uniform. This simple practice might seem insignificant, but this inculcates the value of obedience into students from a young age, which will affect their future work ethos.
Another example would be the freedom of speech in America, where citizens can openly criticise the government and advocate unconventional ideas. China, though, has been recognised as one of the top countries to have the strictest censorship on its people. The government blocks anti-government websites, and prevents its citizens from coming into contact with undesirable ideas which could create anti-government sentiment among its people by banning certain forms of media like Facebook and Youtube. Political activists like Ai Weiwei have also been arrested by the government. The government instils among its citizens a sense of hierarchy, where it encourages its citizens to follow orders and not oppose the government.
One other difference between the two societies is how each culture views values differently. Take respect as an example. In America (based on articles including the two below), there is no strong emphasis on showing respect to a senior because one feels inferior and that it is an expected behaviour. America rather, emphasises more on mutual respect between people, regardless of their social status. However, in China, respect to elders is taught from a very young age, and Confucian teachings strongly emphasise respect towards parents, teachers and seniors. Thus, it is not surprising that the two companies have very different working cultures.
I would prefer Lenovo’s management style, since its culture is closely associated to Singapore’s. As a student, I have been used to following the teachers’ instructions. The school curriculum has stifled creativity in many areas with its over-emphasis on academic grades. However, I would not like to work in a company where employees do not voice their opinions and ideas over issues. I believe that in encouraging dissent and candour, the employees can provide alternative suggestions that can truly benefit the company. This freedom of speech might be seen as an impediment of efficiency in Lenovo, but rather I feel that this instead promotes it, along with the necessary traits a company needs to survive in today’s economy, like innovation.
In conclusion, I prefer the structure and hierarchy of Lenovo, while combined with the openness and forthrightness of Google.
800 words.
.
Resources:
Farid, Sana. "Respect." Beyond Intractability. Eds. Guy Burgess and Heidi Burgess. Conflict Research Consortium, University of Colorado, Boulder. Posted: July 2005 <http://www.beyondintractability.org/bi-essay/respect/>.
Pant, Rajiv. “Respect and the American Way.“ Web Site of Rajiv Pant. Posted: October 15, 2003 <http://www.rajiv.com/blog/2003/10/15/respect/>.
Hi, I am Darrel.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoy your post as you are able to link your stand to our curriculum. For example, you explained how our school's OP relates to Google's success, in your Point of View. I also like how you explain about your preferred management style, as you acknowledge the kind of work which suits the system which we, Singaporeans have been going through, but also state how much you dread having to work in a company which is exactly like Lenovo, where you do not have a say. Fortunately, most companies in Singapore encourage their employees to propose new ideas on how to improve the company and they also have someone who gives instructions on what to do, which suits your working style! Also, I like the many examples you quote in your journal and also both sides of an argument in every of your point. Thanks for sharing your journal with me!
Hello Ivan, I enjoyed your journal entry as it provides many examples to support the points you have stated, like the example of Ai Wei Wei and blocking out of anti-government websites in China a portrayal of how it views a country should be run.
ReplyDeleteYou have mentioned about the school's Oral Participation system as well. Indeed, this particular system encourages 'candor and dissent' in the students, as they provide their own different personal views during class discussions. I agree with you that it opens up many pathways of thinking and that is essential to creativity as one does not stay fixated to only one idea. However, you have mentioned that in Google, this would 'create a product that combines the ideas of every employee'. I was just wondering whether it is possible to do that, because I feel that embracing different ideas does not necessarily mean merging these ideas together. It would bring improvement, definitely, as people provide different criticisms and ways to improve the product, but I think that the sole initial idea remains the same, and it is a little impractical to combine every idea of every employee. Perhaps what you wanted to bring across was what I mention about improving the product with everyone's opinions?
I would love to hear your experiences in class as well. As you have mentioned, the Oral Participation system incorporates Google's working style in it. I would like to hear about the different lessons you have that are able to bring this idea out, or are the discussions not effective because of unresponsive classmates? Even though it is said that the system brings creativity through dissent, is this method working in Hwa Chong in your opinion?
Lastly, I agree that it would be the best if Google's working style of speaking up can be incorpated into Lenovo's working style and I am glad that you wish to start on this! But could I know in which areas are you going to try this out? Project's Day or during class work?
Thank you for the journal entry, I enjoyed it.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHello Ivan, I like your reflective essay as it is very interesting. Usually, other classmates will say which company they prefer to work in, but instead, you pointed out the advantages and disadvantages about Lenovo and Google, and combined both advantages together to create your preferred style of management. Sadly, there are very little companies with such a way of management.
ReplyDeleteAlso, i like your journal as it is very systematic. You have very clearly stated the pros and cons of Lenovo and Google, and shared your personal experience, along with your opinions of why these 2 companies have different management style.
On your personal experience where you mentioned that Oral Participation motivates one to speak up in class. However, many students still do not speak up as they feel shy and would rather sacrifice OP points. This is certainly not working. In our class, there are only the same students, about 10 who speak up regularly, which is not even 50 percent of the class. Is Google's approach in embracing candour and dissent really effective?
I would also like to disagree with your point on Google encouraging dissent, and encouraging workers to express their views because the American society gives the citizens freedom of speech. However, there is another American company which does not encourage dissent, Apple. Is Google’s style of management really based on the American society?