When No One "Owns" Decisions and Managers Fail to Lead, It's Easy for People to Coast - Non-engineer Google Employee Review

2.0
5 Feb 2010
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

-Great food -Internal transparency when it comes to what projects are being worked on (not transparent on things like promotions) -Lots of stuff going on -Always changing -Fun people -Great location in NYC -Speakers and authors visit Google--great perk! -Concierge team helps arrange discounts, etc. -In-house massage (I will miss that!) -Good for the resume -Great place to meet future start-up partners. Cool techie environment. Learn the latest and greatest in the tech world as it develops.

Cons

-Biggest problem at Google = poor managers who lack leadership skills. My manager never once created an annual or quarterly strategic business plan. He (actually *I*) filled in the template given by management, but he never created a plan we could work toward. As a result, people did what they wanted, which was not always most profitable (in part because short term incentives don't align with long term profitability). This created a lot of problems. In 2007, the company created a new layer of middle-manager jobs and hired people internally...without training them to be managers! Disaster. Lots of inefficiency and broken promises. Horrible decision that continues to plague employees. There are some good managers, I just didn't work with any. -No career development. Minimal worthwhile training. You can take a course here and there, but when it comes to moving around the company, watch out. Sales, Engineering, and Enterprise are silos---you can't move between them. *Everyone* complains about this. Smart people have for years been talking about leaving. -They fired most of HR in 2009 (the others have always been contract workers without benefits); what remains of HR is really weak. HR is never helpful anyway. -No one "owns" decisions (not even managers or their managers!), but everyone gets a say...so few risks get taken and greatness rarely evolves beyond the idea stage -There's a lot of mediocrity; why improve when improvement might require you or teammates to work a little smarter or harder? Lots of resistance to change that requires more work. -Flat organization is bad for people whose work shows skill beyond job level / area & typical promotion cycles (senior management encouraged national sales team to think of lateral moves as promotions...even though you don't make more money, get better titles--and then must start the promotion journey afresh as if you had never worked there before) -Salary. When Google offered me the job, a well-known, respected web property with a similar job did as well. The latter offered me TWICE as much money as Google. Twice! And all the good benefits. -Salary increases over time. When you're promoted, you don't make all that much more. Bonuses are small (and taxed at 50%). Options are not worth as much as you think. And you don't get as much stock as you think, either. (These are taxed at 50%, too, so you don't really get very much!) All of this relates to the non-engineering side. I always really liked the engineers and when I worked with their projects found great synergies. Unfortunate the sales side made it so hard to move over!

Explore other reviews about Google

5.0
18 June 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Positive experience overall with good lessons learned

Cons

Slow progression over the whole progress

4.0
21 June 2013
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

1) Food, food, food. 15+ cafes on main campus (MTV) alone. Mini-kitchens, snacks, drinks, free breakfast/lunch/dinner, all day, errr'day. 2) Benefits/perks. Free 24:7 gym access (on MTV campus). Free (self service) laundry (washer/dryer) available. Bowling alley. Volley ball pit. Custom-built and exclusive employee use only outdoor sport park (MTV). Free health/fitness assessments. Dog-friendly. Etc. etc. etc. 3) Compensation. In ~2010 or 2011, Google updated its compensation packages so that they were more competitive. 4) For the size of the organization (30K+), it has remained relatively innovative, nimble, and fast-paced and open with communication but, that is definitely changing (for the worse). 5) With so many departments, focus areas, and products, *in theory*, you should have plenty of opportunity to grow your career (horizontally or vertically). In practice, not true. 6) You get to work with some of the brightest, most innovative and hard-working/diligent minds in the industry. There's a "con" to that, too (see below).

Cons

1) Work/life balance. What balance? All those perks and benefits are an illusion. They keep you at work and they help you to be more productive. I've never met anybody at Google who actually time off on weekends or on vacations. You may not hear management say, "You have to work on weekends/vacations" but, they set the culture by doing so - and it inevitably trickles down. I don't know if Google inadvertently hires the work-a-holics or if they create work-a-holics in us. Regardless, I have seen way too many of the following: marriages fall apart, colleagues choosing work and projects over family, colleagues getting physically sick and ill because of stress, colleagues crying while at work because of the stress, colleagues shooting out emails at midnight, 1am, 2am, 3am. It is absolutely ridiculous and something needs to change. 2) Poor management. I think the issue is that, a majority of people love Google because they get to work on interesting technical problems - and these are the people that see little value in learning how to develop emotional intelligence. Perhaps they enjoy technical problems because people are too "difficult." People are promoted into management positions - not because they actually know how to lead/manage, but because they happen to be smart or because there is no other path to grow into. So there is a layer of intelligent individuals who are horrible managers and leaders. Yet, there is no value system to actually do anything about that because "emotional intelligence" or "adaptive leadership" are not taken seriously. 3) Jerks. Sure, there are a lot of brilliant people - but, sadly, there are also a lot of jerks (and, many times, they are one and the same). Years ago, that wasn't the case. I don't know if the pool of candidates is getting smaller, or maybe all the folks with great personalities cashed out and left, or maybe people are getting burned out and it's wearing on their personality and patience. I've heard stories of managers straight-up cussing out their employees and intimidating/scaring their employees into compliance. 4) It's a giant company now and, inevitably, it has become slower moving and is now layered with process and bureaucracy. So many political battles, empire building, territory grabbing. Google says, "Don't be evil." But, that practice doesn't seem to be put into place when it comes to internal practices. :(

3865
See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All