1 of 9

MGT200 - Group 3

Aarev Rawalh | Devender Singh Bohra | Johnason Lee

Kyle Owens | Stephanie Jimenez | Weijie Chen

Yu Ting Wang (Ina)

2 of 9

Background of the Organization

Google's vision statement is “to provide access to the world's information in one click”

3 of 9

Background of the Organization (revenue..)

81.6%

of total revenue

4 of 9

Background of the Organization (Growth over time..)

5 of 9

Organizational Problem: Retention

Individual level problem:

Job attitudes & Motivation

Organizational level problem:

Culture issue

6 of 9

Assessment: Associated Theories

Discrepancy theory
Motivation Hygiene Theory (Hertzberg, 1964)
McClelland’s Theory of Needs (McClelland, 1987)
Goal Setting Theory (Locke & Latham, 2019)

7 of 9

Assessment: Strengths & Weaknesses

Strengths:

Recognition of employee value
Provide excellent benefits
Organization culture based on data

Weaknesses:

Dissatisfaction with Promotions
Dissatisfaction with Compensation

8 of 9

Recommendations

Handling promotions

Exit Interviews

Compensation

Aarev - There are 3 recommendations that our team suggests. Firstly, Google needs to hire different managers for the promotion progress because the direct reporting manager being the promotion manager can have personal preferences irrespective of the work quality the individual members have done. This introduces the concept of favoritism where the managers can be biased about the members to be promoted and that can make the hard working employees face many challenges for promotion and leadership opportunities.

Stephanie - Another recommendation is to go deep with exit interviews and implement changes on the issues they see mentioned frequently, get feedback from current employees regarding any improvements they would like to see as well, and follow through with the adjustments.

Also, benchmark compensation with that of the potential competitors in the market. Maintaining compensation standards will prevent employees from being tempted by external offers.

Thank you.

�

9 of 9

Team Effort Evaluation

S. No.	Team Member	% Score	Brief explanation
1	Aarev Rawalh	100%	Active participation in discussion & articulation
2	Devender Bohra	100%	Active participation in discussion & articulation
3	Johnason Lee	100%	Active participation in discussion & articulation
4	Kyle Owens	100%	Active participation in discussion & articulation
5	Stephanie Jimenez	100%	Active participation in discussion & articulation
6	Weijie Chen	100%	Active participation in discussion & articulation
7	Yu Ting Wang (Ina)	100%	Active participation in discussion & articulation