Last week news broke of Eric Schmidt leaving the CEO post at Google. He’s replaced by Larry Page. Speculation is that Schmidt no longer felt he was in control of the company. The triumvirate of Sergey Brin, Larry Page, and Eric Schmidt had become a duopoly of Brin and Page, the founders. The genesis of their relationship is rooted in the need for someone who knew how to run a big company – Schmidt. Around 2000 when Google was preparing to go public it was growing at an immense rate. The size of the company had surpassed the experience level of 20 somethings. The founders would concentrate on a start up atmosphere of constant disruption. Disruption is where money is made.
At some point, every successful company grows out of it’s novelty state. The disruption becomes the norm. Competitors look for weakness and stagnant ideas. Being a perpetual start up is the dream of people like Brin and Page. But how do you do it?
Intelligent continual employee turnover.
The enterprise must become a train with no known destination, just stops letting people get on and get off. When the enterprise becomes “the destination” then protection ensues. People can be very good at their jobs, but if they are doing the same thing for more than three years then you have to wonder why? Why isn’t the job evolving? Why isn’t it automated? Why is it needed?
Many large companies, including Google, want to be smaller. Being nimble is key. But wanting a start up mentality and structurally building it in to the culture is not the same. There are a lot of tough conversations to be had. For instance, Netflix has a running practice of “adequate performance gets a generous severance package” and they apply a keeper test which is pretty simple: which people would you fight to keep, at any cost, if they told you they were leaving in two months? This is supplemented by honest conversations about the employee’s commitment and ability to deliver. No surprises.
The NY Times in their weekly section called The Corner Office interviewed Jeremy Allaire, chairman and chief executive of Brightcove. He talked about his conversations with his work force. He said he asks them “What are you trying to do? Where are you trying to head?” This survey reinforces the need to be ever improving.
When the culture of the company is to evolve the job, to morph it, to leave it, or to destroy it (automate) then, as an employee, you know when it’s time for a change. Just ask Google.
One response to “The Train with No Known Destination”
Will reduce too big to fail issue. Most mergers and acquisitions are not very successful operationally. The reason they take place is for monetization gains for the top management and the board. Over time they become bureaucratic and slow.