Sundar Pichai’s Leadership at Google and Alphabet
Visionary Leader
Despite the criticism, Pichai is a leader with various admirable leadership qualities. One of his leadership attributes is that he is a visionary leader. Pichai transformed Google into the company many people wanted it to be.
The leader is concerned not only about the fast-growing and trending industries but also considers the lowest-ranking individuals (Adam & Alarifi, 2021). According to one of his senior executive managers, although Pichai is slow to make decisions, he can see the vision of Google that others cannot see. This demonstrates that he is a visionary leader who has ensured that Google remains competitive despite all criticism.
Transactional Leader
Pichai is a transactional leader who focuses on the financial aspect of all of Google’s activities. As many senior executives have stated, Pichai is not quick to approve new projects because he is very cautious of risks. Under the Google graveyard project, Pinchai came up with a new idea: retiring products that did not generate any profits. Although the company was initially retiring the products quarterly, he asked the executives not to wait until the end of the quarter to discard the projects. Instead, they should do it as soon as possible(Adam & Alarifi, 2021).
In addition, when Pichai ascended to power, he quickly halted funding for expensive, unconventional products and allowed outside investors to take over. An example of such a product is Waymo LCC, which he gave to investors because it was not yielding a return. Additionally, he abandoned the Sidewalk project to develop a smart city in Toronto, costing $900 million, because it was too expensive (Agnihotri & Bhattacharya, 2022). Pichai has proved to be a transactional leader by closing unprofitable businesses and boosting the successful ones to make significant profits for the company.
Fearless Leader
Pichai is a fearless leader because, despite the dynamics surrounding him, he remains committed to his leadership style. Pichai is criticized heavily for being a risk-averse leader who does not allow senior executives to implement their projects. By June 2021, over 400 senior executives had left the company due to Pichai’s risk-averse decision-making style (Wakabayashi, 2021).
Pichai was accused of playing it too safe, which caused the company to miss significant opportunities. Baker, a senior executive at Google, stated,” The more Google has become financially stable, the more risk-averse it has become”(Agnihotri & Bhattacharya, 2022).
However, despite all this, Pichai has not changed his leadership style because he believes it is the best for the company. This demonstrates that he is a fearless leader, as other leaders might have succumbed to the pressure of over 400 senior executives leaving the company (Agnihotri & Bhattacharya, 2022). In addition, Pichai is known to be slow in making decisions, which has not changed, indicating that he is a fearless leader.
Smart Dealmaker
Pichai is a shrewd dealmaker, and he has proven this on several occasions. In one instance, he negotiated for Google’s Chrome application to be pre-installed on Dell computers worldwide (Agnihotri & Bhattacharya, 2022). This move ensured that Chrome became one of the most significant search engines worldwide, and Pichai succeeded. Wesley Chan, the developer who presented the Google toolbar, also stated, “He has this amazing, almost twelve-year track record of being this guy that always launched things that people wanted” (Agnihotri & Bhattacharya, 2022).
In 2013, Pichai oversaw the process of making the Android mobile software, primarily used by phone brands internationally. Besides, he restructured Android to include a virtual assistant, which later became a central feature that the Android team had previously refused (Wakabayashi, 2021). This demonstrates that Pichai is a skilled negotiator, allowing Google to focus on mutually beneficial deals.
Slow Decision-Maker
Despite all the positive traits, Pichai also has negative leadership traits. First, he is considered a slow decision-maker, as some of his decisions have cost the company significant losses. For instance, Pichai has shown slow decision-making skills when hiring senior executives.
An example is when Pichai took a whole year to appoint a successor for Kent Walker after being promoted from General Counsel to Senior Vice President of Global Affairs (Adam & Alarifi, 2021). A year later, Halimah DeLaine Prado, a member of the company’s legal team, was appointed to the post (Agnihotri & Bhattacharya, 2022). However, most executives complained, saying the decision would not have taken so long.
However, other executives consider this leader’s strength; for instance, a former Google vice president, CeasarSengupta, said, “I am happy he gets nearly all of his decisions right.” Therefore, the slow decision-making style can be seen as both a strength and a weakness of the leader, depending on the perspective from which it is viewed (Adam & Alarifi, 2021). For those who consider taking risks, Pichai’s slow decision-making process has cost the company many opportunities for innovation. For those who are risk-averse, it is a wise method of evaluating all possibilities and making the right decision.
Effectiveness of the Leadership
Based on the leadership qualities mentioned above, I would consider Pachai an effective leader. He is a visionary leader who can help Google reach its goals by forecasting the future. In addition, Pachai provides a vision that the employees adopt, although senior management is against him. Being a transactional leader, Pachai has been able to deliver its financial goals (Adam & Alarifi, 2021).
Although the company conducts ethical business and gives back to society through corporate social responsibility, it allows them to focus on their profits because the company would not survive without them. Pichai is fearless, a trait essential for a leader. Despite the pressure, he remains strong and makes his decisions without succumbing to it, which is why most of his decisions are correct. Pichai is considered a shrewd dealmaker, which has helped Google save a significant amount of funds that would have been used on risky, innovative developments.
On the contrary, Pichai is considered a slow decision-maker, which has ruined his relationship with many executives. However, this can also be a strength because he gets most of his decisions right. Therefore, upon critical analysis, I consider Pichai an effective leader, but he is diverse in his decision-making skills.
Since rival companies make their decisions fast, it does not mean all companies should act similarly. Additionally, Pichai does not need to authorize the development of each project idea, as he is responsible for overseeing the entire company as the chief executive officer. If he deems something ineffective, he has the right to reject it. In terms of the acquisition, Pichai should only acquire firms that he considers beneficial to Alphabet.
Flaws in Sundar Pichai’s Decisions for Google
Appointment of a General Counsel
Pichai made several critical decisions that would have a significant impact on the business. One of the decisions was to appoint a successor to Kent Walker after he was promoted. Pichai took one year to complete this process, which may have significantly impacted business operations.
Despite being given the list of favorable candidates for this position, he still requested to see more candidates, even though he had not yet made a final decision (Adam & Alarifi, 2021). This decision may have impacted the company’s operations, as staying for a year without some senior staff suggests that serious business operations were not conducted. In addition, this delay significantly impacted the department’s performance because it lacked a leader to negotiate on its behalf.
Missed Acquisition Opportunities
Another critical decision he made was to decline the acquisition of Shopify. He was more cautious and risk-averse than most of the other senior executives in the company. However, since the final decision was his, his will prevailed.
Despite the other senior executives agreeing to buy Shopify Inc., an online commerce service to compete with Amazon, Pichai rejected the offer because he thought the acquisition would be too expensive for Google (Council, 2020). The other executives felt that the price was convenient and realistic for Google. After Google’s interest in acquiring Shopify was over, the business proved to be worth the investment, as its shares increased almost tenfold (Agnihotri & Bhattacharya, 2022). This shows that this decision was wrong and that Google could have acquired it to compete effectively with one of the e-commerce tech giants, Amazon.
In addition, Google missed an opportunity to acquire Twitter, which would have been a good move to complement YouTube(Agnihotri & Bhattacharya, 2022). According to the case study, Google would have had to pay $30 billion to acquire Twitter (Council, 2020). The decision might have negatively impacted Google’s revenues because, through the two acquisitions, the company could have potentially doubled and diversified its income.
Delayed Innovation
Under Pichai’s leadership, Google adopted the pantry mode, which most executives thought was wrong. Pichai opted to hold back the development teams until the arrival of rival companies, which created something that Google had to react to. This process has flawed Alphabet by slowing down Google’s innovation process. On the other hand, Pichai hurried to the opposite project, known as the Google Graveyard. This is retiring Google’s less profitable or inconvenient products (Council, 2020).
Before his leadership, the process was done quarterly under Pichai, and managers were instructed to discontinue those projects at any time. This indicates that his decisions regarding the pantry mode and Google graveyard have led to significantly flawed innovation within the company. They slowed the innovation process while, on the other hand, they hurried the retirement of brands. This indicates that creativity and innovation have been compromised, resulting in insufficient time for products to establish themselves in the market and demonstrate their value.
Firing Dissenters
Another flawed decision Pichai often made was firing executives with divergent ideas. Pichai appears to be a leader who prefers to avoid controversy, so he has fired most of the executive officers who have challenged him (Council, 2020). For instance, in 2017, he fired James Damore, a Google engineer, for suggesting that men were more suited for tech jobs than women (Agnihotri & Bhattacharya, 2022). According to most of the other executives, he should have ignored the matter because, later, the engineer sued Google.
In another instance, Dr. Timnit Gebru, a Google Artificial Intelligence ethicist, was asked to resign in 2021 after he submitted a research paper that showed that Google had created a biased AI (Agnihotri & Bhattacharya, 2022). Google rejected the paper, leading to criticism within the company, where over 2000 employees signed a petition asking why the leadership rejected the report. These are examples of decisions that Pichai made that implied he was not likely to be engaged and opted to fire people with divergent views. Firing some of these people has led to lawsuits and criticism, which has affected how the company operates.
Controversial Slave Labor Statement
Pichai’s other controversial decision that impacted Google’s image was during public testimony. When Pichai went before the US House of Representatives, and did not answer whether Google would deny the use of slave labor in creating its products. While other senior executives believed that he would be cautious and answer the question, his decline was taken by the public as a matter of interest.
Having human rights associations against slavery, he should have had an obvious answer that Google cannot use slave labor in making its products. Pichai stated that he would need to “discuss it further,” implying that his company might reconsider using slave labor to develop its products (Agnihotri & Bhattacharya, 2022). On the contrary, Jeff Bezos could answer the same question quickly with a yes, implying that his company would deny using slave labor (Council, 2020). This shows that Pichai’s slow decision-making process, even on simple matters, could lead to flaws and tarnish the image of Alphabet Inc.
Innovation and Business Survival in Times of Uncertainty
Facing Uncertainty
Fast-moving companies, such as tech firms, need to innovate to ensure their businesses continue to meet the emerging needs of their consumers in the post-pandemic world. Therefore, their leaders must continue to innovate while facing uncertainty to enhance their survival. Companies can employ various strategies, including building flexibility (He & Harris, 2020). When leaders act uncertainly, they have to make decisions with incomplete information. This requires them to identify the unknowns and build a flexible plan that can be adjusted at any time.
In the case of Google’s Pichai, he does not have to wait until a competitor launches a product so that he can respond; while this may be effective, he needs to learn to take his own risks (Agnihotri & Bhattacharya, 2022). He does not need all the details to launch products because innovative companies predict what consumers may need, create it, and then modify it in case of any problems. It is much easier for a company to modify an existing product than to wait to make the perfect product for its consumers. Thus, leaders should adopt and build flexibility to allow innovation to continue while mitigating risks associated with uncertainty.
Implementing and Optimizing Ideas
Another strategy that leaders can use to ensure survival in these uncertain times is to implement and optimize their ideas. The first idea to action is not always the best, but it provides a path to innovation. This implies that leaders should take the path of imperfect ideas (He & Harris, 2020). If it fails, blame games will not be necessary because at least everyone will have seen that the leader tried.
However, rejecting every idea in a company because it involves high risks hinders its growth. For instance, Google should have acquired Shopify and Twitter to enter the e-commerce market and complement YouTube, respectively (Agnihotri & Bhattacharya, 2022). If the plans did not go as intended, they would have the opportunity to use the products for other reasons. This implies that leaders should be ready to implement and optimize strategies.
Embracing Ambiguity
Leaders should learn to embrace ambiguity to thrive in fast-moving companies. Only mature leaders can lean on ambiguity. Companies need reusable methods that can bring clarity and order, even in chaotic and uncertain moments (Council, 2020). The leader can use Six Sigma and project management methodologies to bring data-driven and statistical approaches to the company’s problems.
Therefore, instead of sacking people with divergent ideas, Pichai should learn to embrace them and use data-driven methodologies for effective problem-solving (Agnihotri & Bhattacharya, 2022). For instance, in the case of the AI ethicist who was fired due to his research report on Google’s AI program, Pichai could have reviewed the data from the research study to determine if it accurately reflected the actual results. From there, he could learn where he should make changes and how those changes should have been implemented. This would have helped keep ambiguous ideas within the company, as diverse ideas lead to creativity and innovation.
Changing Personal Traits
Leaders in fast-moving companies should also evaluate themselves to ensure they are not hindering innovation. One of the most effective ways a leader can mitigate uncertainty is by changing themselves. First, they must know the negative traits that hinder innovation (Council, 2020). In the case of Google, Pichai should learn that his slow decision-making process and risk-averse nature are hindering the company from achieving its innovative goals (Agnihotri & Bhattacharya, 2022). Then, the other step a leader should take is reframing themselves to ensure that they get out of the way for innovation (Council, 2020).
Thus, Pichai should evaluate how his actions affect the company’s decision-making process and find a way to positively change that. One of the solutions he can take is giving his subordinate managers the ability to implement some projects without consulting the topmost senior management. For instance, giving regional managers autonomy to implement their development projects as long as they align with the company’s goals would ensure more creativity. This is because each region has different needs and needs unique solutions.
Innovation and Creativity
Another important post-pandemic strategy that leaders must enhance to ensure innovation and creativity in these uncertain times is transparency and communication. Communication is essential in an organization because people like getting information from credible and trusted sources (Council, 2020). Therefore, leaders must create trust with their employees by ensuring transparent communication within the organization.
For instance, a poll in Google showed that employees had reduced their trust in Pichai to drive the company toward future goals (Agnihotri & Bhattacharya, 2022). However, this may be due to miscommunication because Pichai has always been ahead of some tech companies, which shows his vision. However, when he does not communicate that to his employees, they will likely lose trust, resulting in poor implementation.
Besides, in times of uncertainty, communication is essential because it helps everyone know the company’s changing dynamics. For instance, if the company faces a new challenge and it is communicated to the employees, they may develop solutions faster than the management alone can, which can help with quick problem-solving. This shows that leaders need to enhance communication and transparency to foster innovation in times of uncertainty.
Risk Management Plan
Leaders need to have a risk management plan in times of uncertainty. They must evaluate all the potential risks in a given scenario to ensure they do not mess up with the company’s funds for irrelevant projects. Each project should have its risk measured as high, medium, or low based on profitability, impact, and likelihood (Council, 2020). This can give leaders an easy way to choose the projects to implement and the ones to hold on to.
In the case of Google, every project should be written with its risk, and all projects are plotted in a graph with X and Y axes. This makes it easier for the management to establish the most suitable project in times of uncertainty. In addition, it speeds up the decision-making process to ensure that Google does not lag. After evaluating the risks, the company should implement mitigation strategies that it can use to avoid the risks if they occur. This ensures that the company is profitable and minimizes risk; therefore, a person like Pichai, who is risk-averse, will not find it difficult to flag off various projects.
References
Adam, N. A., & Alarifi, G. (2021). Innovation practices for survival of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in the COVID-19 times: The role of external support. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 10(1).
Agnihotri, A., & Bhattacharya, S. (2022). Google’s chief executive: In need of a change leadership style?
Council, F. C. (2020). Council Post: 14 top tips for dealing with business uncertainty. Forbes.
He, H., & Harris, L. (2020). The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on corporate social responsibility and marketing philosophy. Journal of Business Research, 116(1), 176–182.
Wakabayashi, D. (2021). Google executives see cracks in their company’s success. The New York Times.