Triumvirate Leadership at Google

For a company that isn’t even a teenager yet, the tangible success and future optimism of
Google point directly to the visionary leadership of its core leadership team composed of its two
founders, Larry Page and Segey Brin, along with Eric Schmidt, the chief executive officer (CEO)
who joined their team in 2001. Rather than relying on one visionary leader, or a disciplined task
master to set the course for the company, the team uses a unique triumvirate leadership style to
determine strategy, lead change, and manage operations. As a result, the conscious synergy that
is created by the individual talents and strengths, as well as compensating for individual
weaknesses has served the company very well.

Google's founders, Larry Page and Sergey Brin, met while students at Stanford
University in the summer of 1995. Then, in 1996, they began to experiment with creating an
online search engine. In 1998, they officially launched Google, working out of a friends garage
(Ritson, 2008). They named the search engine “Google” as a play on the word “googol”, which
is the mathematical term for a 1 followed by 100 zeros (Google, 2009). Page and Brin served as
co-leaders until 2001. Recognizing the need for someone to provide organizational and
operational expertise, the cofounders recruited Schmidt, and formally made him CEO.

At the time Google was founded, Yahoo, Excite, and Alta Vista dominated the still
relatively new online search market. In fact, for a short period of time, Google had performed
contract work for Yahoo. However, due to its visionary leadership and technological success,
Google quickly became the dominant player in the online search market (Viney, 2007). Google
is well positioned for continued success and market leadership in the future, since the online
search marketplace is now more mature, and Google’s proprietary database has a strong
understanding of webpage content and user search history. As a result, the threat of new market
entrants, or a viable direct threat to Google’s dominance is relatively low.

Google’s business model is based on selling targeted advertisements to companies based

on identifying user search preferences. The company does this by using Google AdWords and
Google AdSense, where advertisers create ads to drive traffic to their sites and generate leads.
When a user clicks on the ads, the advertising publishing generates revenue (Google, 2009). For
the year end 2008, Google reported earnings of $21.8 billion (Google, 2009). Google’s mission
statement is, “to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful”
(Google, 2009). Due to this mission statement, Google has not restricted itself to focusing only
on online search, and has much bigger and broader aspirations. Additionally, they are seeking
ways to expand beyond the internet’s current form.

Interestingly, one of the key differentiators between Google and its primary competitors,
the search engine’s minimalist homepage reflects the cofounders leadership vision. While most
search engines feature significant advertising in order to generate advertising revenue from
screen space, the Google home page can only contain 28 words as a policy established Brin and
Page, based on their philosophy that “advertisements should not be an annoying interruption”
(Google, 2009).

2
This case study will analyze Google’s triumvirate leadership style from various perspectives.
First, we will explore the leadership versus management approach of the triumvirate (question
one). Then we will discuss the nature of followership developed at Google (question two).
Next, we will explore the triumvirate’s leadership orientations according to Blake & Mouton’s
Leadership Grid (questions three). Then we will analyze the leadership styles of the three
(question four). Finally, we will identify leadership skills that the three present which can help
others be more effective (question five).
1. According to John Kotter, leadership and management are separate, but complementary
systems within organizations (Nelson & Quick, 2009). At a high level, the difference between
the two is that leadership drives change within organizations, while management controls
complexity. For a company to be truly successful, it needs both. The friction between the two is
one of seeking innovation and change through leadership, and advocating stability and efficiency
through management. Based on different company lifecycles and business models, companies
may require greater leadership than management at different times, and vice versa.

As original company founders, Brin and Page demonstrate much more leadership than
management when they founded Google in 1998. Recognizing their need for a stronger
management focus, the two recruited Schmidt in 2001. He was brought in to serve as “adult
supervision” for the two visionaries (Battelle, 2005). As a former CEO of Novell, Schmidt
added the much needed management dimension to the triumvirate. As the company grew
significantly between 1998 and 2001, the vision and personal leadership styles of the founders
needed to be harnessed, and business processes and systems put in place to fully leverage their
creative visions.

While Schmidt was brought in to address some of the management weaknesses of Brin
and Page, it’s not fair to assume that Schmidt is not a leader in his own right, and Brin and Page
are not managers. In addition to enforcing a rule for their engineers on time management, the
triumvirate also maintains a 70/20/10 split in their time management as well. This means each
will spend 70% of their time on core business of search and advertising, 20% on off-budget
projects related to core business, and 10% of their time pursuing far-out ideas (Battelle, 2005).
This enables all three to demonstrate leadership as well as management skills.

Google was not immune to the economic downturn that affected most of the global
economy. Demonstrating leadership, Brin, Page, and Schmidt, maintained their commitment to
work for $1 this year, even as their combined stakes in Google dropped by $26 billion (La
Monica, 2009). As they announced first ever layoffs for Google, the three leaders showed that
they would share in the negative financial impact themselves.

2. The culture that the triumvirate has created is focused on empowerment, as well as
followership. Their approach to followership has sought to create self-led followers within the
ranks of the “googlers”. Self-led followers perform naturally motivating tasks, as well as tasks
that may not be naturally motivating, but must be done (Nelson & Quick, 2009). The triumvirate

3
has achieved this through a combination of rigid hiring practices geared towards hiring only the
best, empowering employees, and providing unequaled employment perks.

Recognizing that their success hinges on the innovation that springs from the most
talented employees, Brin, Page, and Schmidt are committed to bringing only the best on board
the company. Even before the economic recession, every month, Google would receive up to
150,000 resumes from prospective Googlers. Interviews for technical positions at Google begin
on the telephone, and if successful, applicants are invited for face-to-face meetings with up to 10
interviewers. Candidates describe questions as being about software code or business, but also
requiring brainstorming and role playing to demonstrate their thought process (Kopytoff, 2005).
This creates a creative business environment, where highly intellectual and innovative employees
have a very compatible and competitive peer group to help challenge and collaborate with.

Employee empowerment is another key element of developing followership, and

dynamic employees at Google. The 70/20/10 rule applies to technical employees, and its had a
good return on investment. About half of Google’s new product launches (including the highly
popular Gmail) occurred as a result of that non-core time, according to Vice President of Search
Products & User Experience, Marissa Mayer (Guynn, 2008). Additionally, employees cherish
the culture which emphasizes bottom-up decision making, creativity, rapid product development
and the opportunity to fix problems themselves (Dudley, 2007).

The third way Google seeks to nurture followership and dynamic employees is through
their unique and unparalleled employee perks. The company offers perks, including free meals
and snacks, free use of laundry facilities , child care center, an annual one-night ski trip, and an
on-site doctor. While the perks create a fun and committed employer-employee relationship,
leaders say that many of the perks are designed as a convenience so that employees can stay
closer to campus, for longer periods of time. For example, having food available at the office is
convenient and fosters a more cohesive culture because coworkers converse over meal time
(Guynn, 2008). Due to the economic recession, however, some of these perks are being reigned
in. Despite cutting back on some of their perks, Google’s leaders are committed to maintaining
the Google culture (Morrison, 2008).

3. The underlying behaviors of Blake and Mouton’s Leadership Grid are a leader’s focus on
initiating structure within the organization, and demonstrating consideration for employees.
Initiating structure emphasizes defining and organizing work relationships and roles, along with
establishing patterns of organization, communication, and ways of getting things done.
Consideration is targeted at nurturing friendly, warm working relationships, while encouraging
mutual trust and respect within the team (Nelson & Quick, 2009).

By placing these behaviors on a two dimensional grid, leader behavior can be categorized
from low to high for each behavior, with the result being an overall assessment of the leadership
style. For example, if the leader is low in concern for initiating structure, and high for

4
consideration – the leadership style is considered a “country club manager” since he has a strong
concern for people, and little concern for production. Conversely, a leader who is high in
concern for initiating structure and low for consideration is considered a “authority-compliance
manager”. This leader focuses on tight control and accomplishing tasks, while considering
creativity and human relations unnecessary (Nelson & Quick, 2009).

Based on research of Google’s triumvirate leadership style, they clearly demonstrate

behaviors that are high for both initiating structure, and consideration for employees. This is
defined as the “team manager” approach, and works to motivate employees to high levels of
productivity, while being flexible and responsive to change (Nelson & Quick, 2009). Google’s
emphasis on only hiring the best and empowering employees, while maintaining great employee
perks points to this.

4. Four leadership concepts exist which describe different ways leaders influence subordinates
to perform: transactional; transformational; charismatic; and authentic leadership. Transactional
leadership is rather impersonal, and focuses on rewards and punishments to engage in deal
making, and compel subordinates to produce. The other three concepts are considered
inspirational theories because through their behavior and interaction with followers, these leaders
inspire subordinates to perform well. Transformational leaders inspire and excite followers to
high levels of performance. Charismatic leaders use force of personal abilities and talents to
have extraordinary effects on followers. The new concept of authentic leadership includes
demonstrating one of the previously mentioned styles as the situation dictates, while combining a
strong sense of values (Nelson & Quick, 2009).

Based on the description above, the triumvirate clearly displays transformational

leadership, and potentially authentic leadership. Their leadership styles clearly go beyond the
transactional level, focusing on engaging employees through personal commitment and sense of
individual value. Additionally, neither member of the triumvirate (Brin, Page, or Schmidt) are
considered particularly charismatic. When conducting a Google search with their names and the
keyword “charisma”, very few results appeared, none of which appeared credible. While the
triumvirate has broad support from their employees – it is not the result of personal charisma or
personalities, but rather from the confidence the employees have in the leaders vision, strategy,
and business decisions.

A case can be made that the triumvirate display qualities of both transformational and
authentic leadership. I believe they demonstrate more of a transformational leadership style than
an authentic style, and will discuss that first.

When considering the case for transformational leadership, transformational leaders

display charisma, individualized consideration, inspirational motivation, and intellectual
stimulation (Nelson & Quick, 2009). While neither leader necessarily exudes charisma, they all
have strong and forceful personalities, which have enabled them to confidently pursue major

5
challenges and succeed in the face of adversity. For individualized consideration, the leaders
have committed to each employee, and developed a sense of loyalty, and many of their early
hires are still with the company ten years later (Guynn, 2008). Inspirational motivation is
achieved through conveying to employees what the impact of their work is about. Principles
such as "never write an application that relies on holding an end-user's data hostage in order to
build loyalty" and "always think about 'are we serving the end-user' and not 'are we thinking
about how to make money”, enable employees to feel empowered, accountable, and like they are
truly focused on meeting customer needs (Dudley, 2007). Finally, transformational leaders
provide intellectual stimulation. Through their 70/20/10 time management system, as well as
emphasis on hiring the best and brightest, the triumvirate ensures that employees are highly
stimulated in an intellectual sense.

Next, I’d like to discuss the concept of authentic leadership, and why Google’s leadership
team may be considered authentic, and why they may not. At face value, it would appear to be a
strong argument that they are authentic leaders. For example, the company motto of “Don’t be
evil”, points to a strong value system of the two cofounders and the CEO (Battelle, 2005). The
company has embraced the concept of corporate social responsibility, and is considered very
earth friendly. These arguments could lead to a sense that the leaders have a much more
altruistic sense of leadership, and are authentic leaders.

Based on the research I’ve conducted however, I don’t believe the triumverate’s senses of
moral values have been the key drivers of their business decisions, and therefore, I would
consider them more transformational than authentic. Rather, I think the two key drivers of their
business model are a desire to innovate, as well as a desire to make money. Personally, I think
both are very legitimate motivations, and I don’t believe Brin, Page, or Schmidt are immoral, or
unethical. However, one decision that cast a serious question on their sense of values over
business practicality was the decision to support the Chinese government’s demand in 2006 that
they censor search results based on political sensitivity (Ritson, 2008). Additionally, I believe
some of their other initiatives such as providing free wi-fi in San Francisco are more directed at
generating more Google search traffic than a philanthropic effort to ensure the masses receive
free wireless internet.

5. There are two leadership skills that the triumvirate demonstrates that I would like to better
develop in order to become a more effective leader – strategic vision and risk taking. Since its
founding, Google’s leadership team recognized that as a company grows and fulfills its original
business model promise, it hits a peak, and risks becoming stagnant. Therefore, the mission
statement and vision they outlined provides the ability to continually be challenged and pursue
innovation that cannot be satisfied in the short term. The ultimate test of any management team
is not how fast it can grow its company in the short-term, but how consistently it can grow it over
the long-term (Hamel, 2006). The triumvirate, and more specifically Brin and Page developed
an aspirational vision early on, and have remained true to it ever since.

6
 Another leadership skill they demonstrate is embracing risk, and tolerating well
intentioned failure. Recognizing that innovation is critical to their success, the triumvirate
actively seeks to try many things, identify what works, and improve on it. Many of the ideas that
engineers develop during their 20% or 10% time gets tested, which has led to many of Google’s
most innovative and success products (Battelle, 2005).

Ultimately, I hope to start my own small business. I hope to learn from the leadership
lessons that Brin and Page have modeled. First, I would like to emulate their confidence in
developing a business model, creating their vision, and relentlessly pursuing it. Through
development of their vision, many other key leadership behaviors served as enablers, such as
creating the right culture and hiring excellence. Through confident risk taking, they were able to
challenge the status quo, and deliver true innovation.

7
 References

Battelle, J. (2005, November 28). The 70 percent solution. Retrieved December 5, 2009, from
CNN: http://money.cnn.com/2005/11/28/news/newsmakers/schmidt_biz20_1205/

Dudley, B. (2007, June 11). The lure of great Google perks. Retrieved December 6, 2009, from
The Seattle Times:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2003742730_brier11.html

Google. (2009). Company Overview. Retrieved December 4, 2009, from Corporate Information:
http://www.google.com/corporate/index.html

Google. (2009). Google Management. Retrieved December 4, 2009, from Corporate

Information: http://www.google.com/corporate/execs.html

Google. (2009). Our Philosophy. Retrieved December 4, 2009, from Corporate Information:
http://www.google.com/corporate/tenthings.html

Guynn, J. (2008, September 7). Marissa Mayer talks about Google at 10 -- and 20. LA Times.
Retrieved December 6, 2009, from The LA Times:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2008/09/marissa-mayer-t.html

Hamel, G. (2006, April 26). Management a la Google. Retrieved December 6, 2009, from The
Wall Street Journal: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB114601763677436091.html

Kopytoff, V. (2005, December 18). How Google woos the best and brightest. Retrieved
December 5, 2009, from San Fransisco Chronicle: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?
file=/c/a/2005/12/18/GOOGLE.TMP

La Monica, P. R. (2009, March 25). Google’s top bosses keep their dollar salaries. The Sydney
Morning Herald. Retrieved December 6, 2009 from:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/technology/biztech/googles-top-bosses-keep-their-dollar-
salaries/2009/03/25/1237656979514.html

Morrison, J. E. (2008, December 4). Google gears down for tougher times. Retrieved December
6, 2009, from The Wall Street Journal:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122826503489174369.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

Nelson, D.L. & Quick, J.C. (2009). Organizational science, the real world, and you (6th ed.).
Ohio: South-Western Cengage Learning.
Riston, M. (2008). What Google can teach us. Marketing. September 10, 2008. 21-21.

8
Viney, D. (2007, September 14). Search Engine History - Web Search Before Google. Retrieved
December 5, 2009, from: http://www.seo-expert-services.co.uk/blog/posts/search-engine-history-
%11-web-search-before-google.html