Want to be the next Google? Create enduring values

[Editor's note: This is an op-ed piece by Bernard Moon, vice president of holding company The Lunsford Group.]

Last week I was having lunch with a senior person involved with Facebook and asked him about the recent departure of some of their key people. His response: “Facebook just doesn’t have the right culture. They’re not a Google or Microsoft.”

This statement kicked off an interesting conversation. My lunch companion argued that a company’s culture and founding values are significant factors in a startup’s march towards long-term success. We also touched on the importance of leadership in a startup, and whether Facebook has the right team running it to become the next Google.

Later that week, my colleague, Dan Wooldridge, who provides leadership consulting to established enterprises when he’s not busy with the operations of our various entities, brought up the founding of Sony. Dan told the story of how in 1946, as Japan was rebuilding itself after World War II, Masaru Ibuka and Akio Morita started Sony with just a mission, before an actual product was made. Ibuka wrote:

The first and primary motive for setting up this company was to create a stable work environment where engineers who had a deep and profound appreciation for technology could realize their societal mission and work to their heart’s content.

They also stated that they wanted to:

• Establish an idea factory that stresses a spirit of freedom and open-mindedness, and where engineers with sincere motivation can exercise their technological skills to the highest level.
• Reconstruct Japan and elevate the nation’s culture through dynamic technological and manufacturing activities.

It is amazing that Ibuka and Morita had the fortitude and long-term perspective to accomplish these founding goals. Although it took decades, Sony did eventually elevate Japan’s national reputation in the world as a leader in technology and consumer products. This was a reflection of Ibuka and Morita’s strength in leadership, of their values, and of how they created a corporate culture where stated values led to tangible behavior and results.

These two discussions made me think about various companies I’ve encountered over the years, and how their core values, leadership, and related factors drove them to become the titans of their industry.

Cultivate your core values. What enduring core values do you want your startup to live by? How do you plan to execute on them? One of Google’s core values was having the smartest, most competent people working there. Google executed on this by requiring job applicants to submit their college transcripts and standardized test scores (i.e., SAT, GRE, GMAT), and having minimum standards for GPAs. Google even requires this for senior hires, when most companies stop asking for transcripts above the middle manager level.

I always thought this was impractical—since some talented and successful executives do not have the best GPAs—but Google sticks with this measurement as a method to execute on its core value. I admire that, even though I don’t completely agree with Google’s implementation. (Yes, Google makes some exceptions to this guideline, but generally stands by these requirements.)

Another value is being “Googley.” When Googlers interview a candidate, they have to ask themselves, “Is this person Googley? Are they nice? Is this someone I want to work with?” It’s rare for companies to ask such questions, but this is something the founders wanted to be a part of Google’s culture. Of course the company has experienced tremendous growth over the years—from approximately 3,000 in 2004 to over 19,000 in 2008—so it is more difficult to execute on this value (I’ve met a fair amount of Googlers who aren’t so Googley), but it’s still commendable to stick to this philosophy.

Being Googley might not have helped Oracle grow into one of the largest software companies, since its market probably needed the hyper-aggressive sales culture that the company is known for. Oracle valued the characteristics that make up its sales-oriented culture, so it hired people who were very competitive and hard-charging throughout the company.

Apple’s Steve Jobs created a company that values creativity and an intense pursuit of perfection. Apple has become a unique force in the consumer electronics market by rejecting the common value of listening to its customers and believing that Apple knows what people really want. So you have to create core values that reflect not just the founding team’s values, but also what is needed to succeed in your target market.

Venture capitalists make a difference.
While some entrepreneurs don’t want to hear this (and a disclaimer — I’m not a VC), VCs can make a difference. When my wife joined Google in 2004, some of their operational processes, such as performance reviews, were presented to her as “John Doerr, one of Google’s investors, helped establish this process based on his previous experience….” I thought it was interesting that his lore and impact were still proffered five years after Google’s founding, and how this shows the effect a great VC can have on your company. Sequoia’s legendary Don Valentine is known for his tremendous influence on the founding of Atari, Apple, Cisco, and Oracle. There are also relative newbies like Bessemer Venture Partners’ Dave Cowen, whose 45 early-stage investments have produced 19 public companies and 18 acquisitions. So getting smart money is important.

Not everyone will be funded by Kleiner Perkins, Sequoia, Benchmark, DFJ, or other top firms, but as an entrepreneur you really need to do due diligence on potential investors. What is their track record? How hands-on are they? Is that the right level for you? Do prior entrepreneurs endorse them? Would they work with these VCs again on their next startup? Do you trust this person?

Don’t compromise on hiring. Truly making your core values tangible within your startup really begins with the founding team and early employees. Assuming that you and any other founders are effective leaders, the rest of your path to execution will be far easier when you work with outstanding people who completely believe in your core values and vision. In the “Letter from the Founders” written by Larry Page and Sergei Brin for Google’s IPO filing, they emphasize the core of Google’s values:

Our employees, who have named themselves Googlers, are everything. Google is organized around the ability to attract and leverage the talent of exceptional technologists and business people.

During the early days of Microsoft, when Bill Gates was asked who his greatest competitor was, he answered “Goldman Sachs.” He didn’t see Apple or IBM as his top competition—rather, it was Goldman Sachs which was competing with Microsoft for the top talent from colleges and graduate schools.

In many people’s minds, Google has recently taken over Microsoft’s mantle of technology’s top player, while maintaining its ability to attract top talent. For example, for as long as I can remember—until the last two years—the top destinations for MBA graduates have been either Goldman Sachs or McKinsey. But for the past two years, Google has been named the most desired company to work for by MBA students. Talent attracts talented people.

Naturally it’s easier to attract the best talent when you’re Google, Microsoft, or a hot company like Facebook. But they too started out as small companies, and no one knew if it would be good to work there. For early-stage companies, I cannot emphasize it enough: Don’t compromise on the skills, personality, and values you want in your hires. Do your reference checks thoroughly, ask probing questions, and don’t rush to judgment because you’re paddling upstream with a spoon in Startup River and your colleagues are begging for more help. In the early stages of your company’s growth, every hire—from top engineer to admin—really makes a difference.

Leadership holds it together. Founders need not just the talent, discipline, and fierce determination to succeed, but also the flexibility to create new paths for the company. Many successful companies have changed their business models mid-stream, so the founders must be determined and focused, yet open to the realities of the market. Those realities can include the fact that the product or service might be too early, that they need to be further developed, or, unfortunately, that the company needs to be shut down.

Sometimes the founding CEO isn’t the right person to take a company to the next level—and has to have the humility to recognize this. Google’s Page and Brin realized that they needed an Eric Schmidt to help grow their company, and I believe Google would not have been as successful without adding Schmidt to the mix. EBay’s Pierre Omidyar eventually needed Meg Whitman to take the CEO role for its next stage of growth. There are exceptions, such as Bill Gates, Larry Ellison, Jeff Bezos, and Steve Jobs—founders who continued or returned to lead their companies long past startup and IPO stages.

Yet most entrepreneurs won’t know whether they are able or want to lead their company through all of its growth until they’re there. Sometimes an unfortunate collision occurs with bitter emotions, an entrepreneur getting thrown out justly or unjustly, and a board hoping the next CEO will be the right leader. Other times an entrepreneur recognizes that he or she isn’t the right person for the next stage, and helps find the right person to maintain the company’s values while executing on a grander scale. And whether under old leaders or new, that is the most important outcome—having the core values endure through all stages of a company’s growth.

So, as you’re writing your business plan and slides, remember to have meetings about what you want your company’s core values to be and how you will execute on them. If you never had this critical discussion yet, take some time to do so. Who knows? If you’re bold, maybe the incredible will happen, and your company will become the next Google.

Bernard Moon
is vice president of the Lunsford Group, a private holding company consisting of entities in technology, media, research & consulting, health care, investment boutique, and real estate. Bernard blogs at Silicon Moon.

Next Story:
Previous Story:

Tags: , , ,

Photo of Bernard Moon

About the Author, Bernard Moon

Bernard Moon is Managing Director of the Lunsford Group, a private holding company consisting of entities in real estate, technology, media, research and consulting. He blogs at Silicon Moon.

  • Mike
    Bernard, I do agree with the business philosophy that it is very important to establish company core values when starting out. Values can or will dictate in the long run to the success of the company. Regarding Google's business style of only hiring the smartest based on SATs or GPAs, this decision is not always the most effective way to measure an individual's value. Nobody can argue with Google, in light of their success. However, when founders of a company come from an elite school such as Stanford, obviously there will be ample opportunities not only for education but for business connections. This is not to say, that Google's measurement philosophy was not key in their growth, but with the founders being from Stanford it is possible that the founders developed a sort of comfort within their own environement. A strong argument can be made that students from San Jose State, or other state colleges are just as capable as their piers from Stanford, Berkeley, or even the Ivy schools. However, here in Silicon Valley many of the startups are formed by students from elite schools such as Stanford. My experience with recruiters is that these individuals are not qualified to evaluate a door knob, much less evaluate the value of a qualified job seeker with additional tangible values. Again, nobody can argue with the success of Google but for the present and future startups, it would be wise for them to not risk their investments based on scores, or the names of affluent type schools.
  • going granular in this discussion, i know there are people at Google not from elite schools. of course they still had solid GPAs and good test scores. also remember that sergey brin went to undergrad at the University of Maryland - College Park, which is a good school but not elite, and larry page attended University of Michigan before Stanford.
  • Mike
    Bernard, good responding points. I think you get the jist of my prior comments, though.
  • yep, i agree with your primary comment. (i.e. http://insidework.net/resources/articles/hiring...)
  • Oliver
    great post.
  • Aiden
    Mike,
    Why do you think many of the startups are formed by students from elite schools (as you said) if students from other schools are as capable? (as you also said.)

    I don't think anyone in their right mind would hire someone from San Jose State when given the choice to hire from Stanford, given the assumptions that there is no perceivable difference & both are willing to work for the same pay.

    Because, on the whole, students from elite schools are better: Elite schools attract elite students. If you are really good in computer science, mathematics (you know, have a gold in Math Olympics) and so on, you can choose where you want to go, and they want to go where there is the best faculty, which is, the elite schools.
  • Mike
    Aiden

    You miss my point entirely. My point is that people from Stanford have much more opportunity to progress, than people at a SJSU. Stanford is a much more affluent environment, thus potential entreprenuers have many more influential connections there. JFK Jr, when he was alive said when he was starting out his magazine, that because of his status he had enormous opportunities because of his status. The same philosophy applies to the Stanford environment. You, yourself, are proving my point. You don't know the people from SJSU, but you are assuming because the applicant has Stanford on their resume that the person must be of more value that the SJSU applicant. I understand the idea of coming from affluency and wanting to attend an elite school. However, there are many sharp minded kids, whose parents simply cannot afford the Stanford tuition. Thus, they are not exposed to influential connections in the way that Stanford students are. I'll go you one more; if venture capitalists would make attempts to reach students at state run schools, I'm sure they would meet just as many creative and intelligent students. Bottom line, the old saying, "it's not what you know, but who you know," is still very relative today.
  • Dave
    Bernard, great piece. Nice work. This one's a keeper, though I'm not keen on your lack of objectivity when talking Google, especially after reading that your wife is a Google employee. That deflates the impact of the article, so watch that.
    You say that Googlers ask of potential employees, " 'Is this person Googley? Are they nice? Is this someone I want to work with?' " and that it's "rare for companies to ask such questions, but this is something the founders wanted to be a part of Google’s culture."
    I disagree. Google may lay claim to a great many things but it certainly isn't the only company that asks these type of questions to themselves when considering job applicants. In fact, I'd argue that Google no longer believes in these values, since I know several Google employees that would laugh at such claims. Times are changing at Google at not necessarily for the better.
  • Thanks, Dave. My wife being at Google allowed me to provide a more detailed insight into the execution of their core values, and I'm not really biased towards Google which is shown in this op-ed and others (i.e. http://mashable.com/2008/07/18/google-lively-an...).

    Agreed. I never stated that Google was the first or only company to ask value-driven questions when hiring. Thanks!
  • Google is based upon their own technology for search and organizing computer systems.
    Additionally they got into advertising business in order to make money.

    The next Google needs to have their own technology too.

    As Brin says:
    "When it’s too easy to get money, then you get kind of a lot of noise mixed in with the real innovation and entrepreneurship. Tough times bring out the best parts of Silicon Valley."

    Thus thanks to the CreditCrunch and the following TechCrunch the new leaders will emerge soon from the dust.
  • Sean
    Big companies never really depend on tech to win in market -- not google, neither apple -- in stead, they depend on massive marketing resource and brand advantage.

    The article seemed to try to bring up issues on facebook (which you might think there is no much technology barrier, but as I said above, it's really not a problem for big company like facebook's current scale).

    But if what Bernard mentioned, but not explicitly elaborated in the article, is true, that is a real problem.
  • mc0123
    Bernard, a home run. Nicely architected article. Your retrospect on the fundamentals of the birth and growth of well-known companies is really a prospect for the aspirants. You've got me thinking hard about the "dotted-line" relativity of core values vs brand value, and how the right executive chef can harmonize that billion dollar secret sauce.

    And as for hiring elites, what works for one company may not work for another. It's obvious that there are many combinatorial factors that go into brewing success. Each of the cases fore mentioned are good examples to learn from...and they happen to have a pattern of strong core values plus the appropriate leadership. The important lesson I'm getting from this article is that you should have them than not.
  • thanks, mc, for the thoughtful reply!
  • I missed a thing here, what is "dotted-line" please explain anyone
  • mc0123
    Danish, I was referring to the relationship between core values and brand value. While core values are based upon an ideal, brand value is considered to be the expression of an organization. I suppose brand value is more of a perception than a goal/vision. Sometimes the two value systems are the same, other times they are not. Some may argue that it's directly related; nonetheless, there is definitely a dotted-line relationship between the two. ...didn't intend to be over complicated or make a philosophical statement. Thanks for pointing it out though~
  • Great post. Difficult to do.
  • edhardy622
    British law student sues Abercrombie-Fitch for disability discrimination.
    http://www.abercrombiefitchstore.co.uk
blog comments powered by Disqus