Comments on: The Real Value of the Google 20% http://parand.com/say/index.php/2006/01/27/the-real-value-of-the-google-20/ Parand Tony Darugar: A Cruel and Petty Dictator Tue, 17 Jan 2012 23:10:42 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: 20% Time | tratzlaff.com http://parand.com/say/index.php/2006/01/27/the-real-value-of-the-google-20/comment-page-1/#comment-312471 20% Time | tratzlaff.com Sat, 12 Mar 2011 20:03:16 +0000 http://www.parand.com/say/index.php/2005/10/08/the-real-value-of-the-google-20/#comment-312471 [...] parand.com/say/index.php/2006/01/27/the-real-value-of-the-google-20/ [...] [...] parand.com/say/index.php/2006/01/27/the-real-value-of-the-google-20/ [...]

]]> By: Think Less and Experiment More: Lessons from an Entrepreneur and Former Engineer of Google, Apple, and Microsoft | Women Grow Business http://parand.com/say/index.php/2006/01/27/the-real-value-of-the-google-20/comment-page-1/#comment-239647 Think Less and Experiment More: Lessons from an Entrepreneur and Former Engineer of Google, Apple, and Microsoft | Women Grow Business Tue, 19 May 2009 11:59:21 +0000 http://www.parand.com/say/index.php/2005/10/08/the-real-value-of-the-google-20/#comment-239647 [...] A fancy spreadsheet can’t predict the future, nor can a room full of MBAs. Sometimes you just have to experiment and see what happens. [...] [...] A fancy spreadsheet can’t predict the future, nor can a room full of MBAs. Sometimes you just have to experiment and see what happens. [...]

]]> By: Shop floor thinking. Are you missing out? http://parand.com/say/index.php/2006/01/27/the-real-value-of-the-google-20/comment-page-1/#comment-134654 Shop floor thinking. Are you missing out? Wed, 23 Apr 2008 21:24:29 +0000 http://www.parand.com/say/index.php/2005/10/08/the-real-value-of-the-google-20/#comment-134654 [...] that Google, nutures their employees to do just that, and rewards them for doing so. The real value of 20% time is that Google gets ideas for free, and at the same time employees feel they can express their [...] [...] that Google, nutures their employees to do just that, and rewards them for doing so. The real value of 20% time is that Google gets ideas for free, and at the same time employees feel they can express their [...]

]]> By: michael http://parand.com/say/index.php/2006/01/27/the-real-value-of-the-google-20/comment-page-1/#comment-32303 michael Fri, 05 Jan 2007 07:08:44 +0000 http://www.parand.com/say/index.php/2005/10/08/the-real-value-of-the-google-20/#comment-32303 at my company, one that just IPOd and double its share price in less than 2 months, QA takes more than 1/3 of the total release cycle time. moreover, i encourage 20% of a QA engineer's time during the scheduled project to be devoted to side projects. but unlike google's "do whatever the hell you feel like doing, because we're a Great Place To Work", i request that each project somehow benefit the company. beyond that, you're on your own. it's worked out great. the entire engineering team uses a couple of our products, we've boosted automation and implemented ideal engineering practices that other companies dream of. i'd like to make the point that google had the start of a good idea, but from what i hear from my google friends, they really need to control it a little better; people slack off during 20% time, or work on completely irrelevant projects. oh, and spend more time testing! at my company, one that just IPOd and double its share price in less than 2 months, QA takes more than 1/3 of the total release cycle time. moreover, i encourage 20% of a QA engineer’s time during the scheduled project to be devoted to side projects. but unlike google’s “do whatever the hell you feel like doing, because we’re a Great Place To Work”, i request that each project somehow benefit the company. beyond that, you’re on your own.

it’s worked out great. the entire engineering team uses a couple of our products, we’ve boosted automation and implemented ideal engineering practices that other companies dream of.

i’d like to make the point that google had the start of a good idea, but from what i hear from my google friends, they really need to control it a little better; people slack off during 20% time, or work on completely irrelevant projects.

oh, and spend more time testing!

]]> By: ETech@Work http://parand.com/say/index.php/2006/01/27/the-real-value-of-the-google-20/comment-page-1/#comment-6486 ETech@Work Wed, 31 May 2006 15:42:18 +0000 http://www.parand.com/say/index.php/2005/10/08/the-real-value-of-the-google-20/#comment-6486 <strong>A License to Pursue Dreams: Google’s Innovation Equation...</strong> I’m not sure if it’s because I was recently asked to chair a panel on “driving innovative thinking ...... A License to Pursue Dreams: Google’s Innovation Equation…

I’m not sure if it’s because I was recently asked to
chair a panel on “driving innovative
thinking ……

]]> By: Yaa101 http://parand.com/say/index.php/2006/01/27/the-real-value-of-the-google-20/comment-page-1/#comment-2756 Yaa101 Sun, 29 Jan 2006 15:34:51 +0000 http://www.parand.com/say/index.php/2005/10/08/the-real-value-of-the-google-20/#comment-2756 This is about a culture change that has to take place in various companies, the current culture at most companies today is predominantly one of: "Sales people and management are assets as they brin in the money, all others within the company are costs that need to be reduced". For 50 odd pluss years whole carreers of management people are based on reducing the costs of the company instead of making up new ideas to help the company to get further in time. The results of that are pretty much obvious as one can see how high profile companies like GM and Ford, so lean when it comes to the quality and room for it's employees that most people feel bad at their workplace and because of that is only able to produce rotten products. Why should they care for getting the last buck in and why should they care about a smooth production flow if management only see them as pesky costs and underfund these parts of the company in yet another restructuring round. It's all about apathy created by arrogant management, when making cars and other goods it takes a while for the public to react on that and replace these goods for other brands, in the 80's it was uncool to drive a Japanese car, now most people drive them and most people start to admit that American cars really drove crappy and unsafe. In software and services people will notice apathy with companies almost instantly because all lines between seller and buyer (I hate the word consumer, it's a degrading term used to depict the stupid mass by arrogant managers) are shorter, often even seller and buyer team up to get the best service for the buyer. So good for Google that they do this, not only good but also essential for the long term survival of this company. But there is more, because the world is rapidly getting smaller, ethics of a company will get more important in the perception of the world. So decisions like Google made entering the chinese market will definite hurt their corporate face with the market resulting in being worth less on the longer term. This is about a culture change that has to take place in various companies, the current culture at most companies today is predominantly one of: “Sales people and management are assets as they brin in the money, all others within the company are costs that need to be reduced”. For 50 odd pluss years whole carreers of management people are based on reducing the costs of the company instead of making up new ideas to help the company to get further in time. The results of that are pretty much obvious as one can see how high profile companies like GM and Ford, so lean when it comes to the quality and room for it’s employees that most people feel bad at their workplace and because of that is only able to produce rotten products. Why should they care for getting the last buck in and why should they care about a smooth production flow if management only see them as pesky costs and underfund these parts of the company in yet another restructuring round.
It’s all about apathy created by arrogant management, when making cars and other goods it takes a while for the public to react on that and replace these goods for other brands, in the 80’s it was uncool to drive a Japanese car, now most people drive them and most people start to admit that American cars really drove crappy and unsafe. In software and services people will notice apathy with companies almost instantly because all lines between seller and buyer (I hate the word consumer, it’s a degrading term used to depict the stupid mass by arrogant managers) are shorter, often even seller and buyer team up to get the best service for the buyer. So good for Google that they do this, not only good but also essential for the long term survival of this company. But there is more, because the world is rapidly getting smaller, ethics of a company will get more important in the perception of the world. So decisions like Google made entering the chinese market will definite hurt their corporate face with the market resulting in being worth less on the longer term.

]]>