SEU Organizational Behavior Google Inc Employee Motivation Case Study

User Generated

Yrra13

Business Finance

Saudi electronic university

Description

Case: Google

Please read the case “Google” from Chapter 6 “Motivation.” Page: - 187 given in your textbook – Organizational behaviour: Improving performance and commitment in the workplace (6th ed).by Colquitt, J. A., LePine, J. A., & Wesson, M. J. (2019) and Answer the following Questions:

Assignment Question(s):

Part:-1

1.Do you agree with Bock that star performers should get a lot more—not just a little more—than average performers? If someone earning a 3 on Google’s evaluation system gets a 2 percent raise, what should employees earning 4’s and 5’s get?

2.Given the budget issues created by giving star performers more, should someone earning a 3 get a 2 percent raise—or should they get less? What are the arguments for and against a 2 percent raise level for average performers?

3.Consider all the things Google’s People Operations group does to motivate its employees. Which motivation theories do they seem to be leveraging, and how?

Part:-2

Discussion question: Page: -167, please see the table and read carefully and then give your answers on the basis of your understanding.

4.Which of the outcomes in Table 6-2are most appealing to you? Are you more attracted to extrinsic outcomes or intrinsic outcomes? Do you think that your preferences will change as you get older?



Guidelines for the assignment: ((Follow the instructions in the attached file carefully))

  • Use font Times New Roman, 12 font size
  • Ensure that you follow the APA style in your project and references.
  • Each question should not be less than 120 words
  • Plagiarism is forbidden



Unformatted Attachment Preview

5:21 PM Sat 3 Oct 17% Done Organizational_Behavior_Improving_Performance_and_Commitment_in 6.5 Think about a job that you've held in which you felt very low levels of psychological empow- erment. What could the organization have done to increase empowerment levels? CASE: GOOGLE One motivational issue that Google pays particular attention to concerns its star performers. Most organizations treat performance evaluation ratings-and accompanying compensation differences-much like grades in a college course. Just as a distribution of grades might have a few A's, more A-'s, B+'s, B's, and B-'s, and a few C's, so too do performance evaluations wind up with a few 5's, more 4's, 3's, and 2's, and a few l's. Thus, scores and rewards have a "bell curve" distribution, with fewer people in the tails and more in the middle. Moreover, just as an A is only a bit more rewarding than an A-, so too does a 5 get just a bit more than a 4. Although there's a logic to that view of evaluation and compensation, it misses an important insight from scientific work on performance. That work suggests that the top 1 percent of performers contribute 10 percent of the firm's productivity all by themselves. Similarly, the top 5 percent of performers contribute 25 percent of the productivity all by themselves. Put differently, stars aren't just a little bit better than typical employees-they're worlds better. This is especially true in white collar jobs where there are no equipment or process constraints on what employees can do. As Bill Gates once argued, “A great lathe operator commands several times the wage of an average lathe operator, but a great writer of software code is worth 10,000 times the price of an average software writer." Laszlo Bock, the former head of Google's People Operations group, followed such advice when rewarding star performers. He argues, "Internal pay systems don't move quickly enough or offer enough pay flexibility to pay the best people what they are actually worth. The rational thing for you to do, as an exceptional performer, is to quit." Thus, Google prac- tices what he calls "paying unfairly"-where "unfairly" means a rejection of the notion that 5's should only get a little more than 4's or 3's. "If the best performer is generating ten times as much impact as an average performer, they shouldn't necessarily get ten times the reward," Bock notes, "but I'd wager they should get at least five times the reward." He continues, "The only way to stay within budget is to give smaller rewards to the poorer performers, or even the average ones. That won't feel good initially, but take comfort in know- ing that you've now given your best people a reason to stay with you, and everyone else a reason to aim higher." * case assigunt of Asper the CHAPTER 6 Motivation 187 6.1 Do you agree with Bock that star performers should get a lot more-not just a little more- than average performers? If someone earning a 3 on Google's evaluation system gets a 2 percent raise, what should employees earning 4's and 5's get? 6.2 Given the budget issues created by giving star performers more, should someone earning a 3 get a 2 percent raise-or should they get less? What are the arguments for and against a 2 percent raise level for average performers? 6.3 Consider all the things Google's People Operations group does to motivate its employees. Which motivation theories do they seem to be leveraging, and how? Sources: L. Bock, Work Rules! Insights from Inside Google that Will Transform How You Live and Lead. New York: Twelve. 2015: E. O'Boyle Jr. and H. Aguinis. "The Best and the Rest: Revisiting the Norm of Normality of Individual Perfor mance." Personnel Psychology, 65, 79-119.
Purchase answer to see full attachment
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

Attached.

Running head: ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR

Organizational Behavior
Name:
Institution:
Course Code:
October 7, 2020

1

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR

2

Part:-1
1.Do you agree with Bock that star performers should get a lot more—not just a little
more—than average performers? If someone earning a 3 on Google’s evaluation system
gets a 2 percent raise, what should employees earning 4’s and 5’s get?
I agree with Google's performance management strategy and Bock 's opinion that more should be
charged to star performers. If an individual with a rating of 3 on the evaluation system gets a 2
percent increase, a 10 percent increase should be given to star performers with a rating of 5.
Someone with a rating of 4, on the other hand, can possibly get a 4% boost. This is a simple
differentiation, so that the top performer would be able to see that their hard work and
commitment are both acknowledged in a concrete and significant way and compensated
monetarily. In addition, the differentiation between the employee earning a 3 and the employee
earning a salary of 4 is significant enough to inspire 3 to bring in the additional effort to earn a 4.
With the disparity in pay between the employee receiving a 4 and the one receiving a 5, the same
holds true. As the experience of top performers with the organization increases, they become
much more valuable assets for a corporation. While the large wage raise...


Anonymous
Super useful! Studypool never disappoints.

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Similar Content

Related Tags