
Google’s Real Problem – GTD? - lotusleaf1987
http://gigaom.com/2010/10/31/google’s-real-problem-–-gtd/
======
mkramlich
I think Google still attracts "algorithms & textbooks" sorts of software
engineers. I don't see how it would be as attractive to the kinds of engineers
that want to create products and businesses, and have a lot of power and
control and freedom over what they're doing. I keep hearing about how one of
the attractions of working for Google is knowing that your code will be used
by millions of people, and run on thousands of servers, etc. You know what? I
could give a shit. In reality, you will most likely only be writing a very
small portion of the system the endusers will interact with. I'd rather write
_the entire system_. And would you care inherently about how many machines it
will run on? Personally I care more about creating lots of cool products that
real people use, that make me money (ideally, a ton of money), and honestly, I
don't really care whether it's running on millions of servers or merely a
single or a dozen machines. Whatever. I also don't necessarily care about
working with other "smart" people, at least as Google defines them. I do care
a heck of a lot more about making new stuff, and learning new stuff, and
getting to apply it, especially closer to the bigger picture end of the
spectrum, and the product or business level of abstraction.

As a user of Google's services, I love 'em.

As a potential employee -- totally not interested and hard to see the
attraction.

~~~
allenp
Don't be so eager to give up on working with "smart" people - it sure beats
alternative!

~~~
Tamerlin
That was why my phone interview with Google turned me off to it... the
interviewer and the recruiter had different DAYS on their schedules to talk to
me, and the interviewer proved to be... well, not exactly the sharpest tack in
the box. Or he wasn't paying attention, because he asked me questions that I
had already provided answers to...

(Him: Wait, how will you swap those two entries? You can't just move them back
and forth. Me: using the "swap" function that I described immediately after
you described the problem?)

------
vog
I find it always somewhat odd when a person with only superficial knowledge
about a topic (e.g. "Google", "Apple" etc) claims to be able to spot their
"Real Problem" or their "Biggest Issue". While the article might be a well-
reasoned guess, it is still just a guess, based on a very small number of
facts.

I could have taken the article seriously if it had been written by a former
employee, or by someone who actually interviewed people working at Google. But
that way, the title seems to be just link bait. Nothing against link bait, but
above all, the essential purpose of a title is to reflect the content, isn't
it?

"My personal quick guess about a problem at Google: GTD" would have been a
more honest title. It wouldn't be as sensational, but it would at least
reflect the real substance of the article.

~~~
2arrs2ells
Supporting evidence for the author's thesis:

"So we’re adding a new process to our existing review system, in which every
engineering project leader will be required to maintain a privacy design
document for each initiative they are working on. This document will record
how user data is handled and will be reviewed regularly by managers, as well
as by an independent internal audit team."

This sounds awfully like the dreaded reviews (security, perf, globalization,
internationalization, accessibility, etc.) at MSFT that gobbled up the time of
PMs + devs. That's not to say that Google shouldn't have privacy design docs,
just that they're an unfortunate consequence of scale.

Quote from [http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/10/creating-stronger-
pri...](http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/10/creating-stronger-privacy-
controls.html)

~~~
vog
In how far does this affect the criticism?

Even if GTD was a real issue with Google, how will the author know that they
don't have much bigger issues?

------
Dylanlacey
I think inertia is a problem that all organisations face, eventually. It's
really hard work to keep a company flexible, professional and profitable as it
grows.

Given time, Facebook will have this issue. Your company will have this issue.
Beauracracy grows organically unless you keep paring it back, especially if
you hire people who are afraid of taking risks, and many people are.

~~~
frossie
I don't think that is what the OP is saying.

The problem is not associated with risk taking but its opposite - _finishing_
things after the primary risk has been tackled. I have no idea what happens
inside Google, but as a user of their products I am often shocked (given their
resources) at the lack of polish, at the seeming unwillingness to tackle that
infamous last 20% that takes the 80% of the time. I can only assume this is
policy of some sort since it is so pervasive.

In my experience running software projects, getting things done (as in DONE
DONE) is a skill that is loosely correlated with sheer smarts if at all. The
best project managers/geek herders I know could never survive a technical
interview with Google, but they have this ability to focus things so it all
clicks together. I have always wondered whether Apple is the kind of company
that seeks those kind of skills.

As an example, think of some hyper competent PAs - they might not have higher
degrees in mathematics, but they have an uncanny ability to create order out
of chaos. Good software project managers are like that - the eye of calm in
the storm of smartness.

If you are the kind of person who is bothered on a personal level by unfinshed
stuff (what some personality analysts call a "completer finisher"), I can
imagine working at a place where the organization is always on the lookout for
the next shiny could be very frustrating. That could be plausible reason for
these departures, though that is only speculation.

~~~
robryan
I think it's down to designing an interview process that minimizes the chance
of bad hires which has been written about before. The qualities you mention
and more subjective and thus there is more chance someone hired based on those
qualities could be a bad hire.

~~~
frossie
I agree that it is hellishly difficult to hire for that kind of GTD ability.
However I put it to you that if you have 25,000 employees, you must have
fluked some of these personality types even with just technical interviews.
Ergo if these people are not being leveraged, it says that your culture does
not value those skills, and that you have some very frustrated people.

------
adolph
Misleading title: GTD generally refers to a productivity management system;
the article doesn't actually refer to the system in any way.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Getting_Things_Done>

~~~
avk
Thank you. I was hoping someone would bring attention to this. Complete misuse
of "GTD."

------
krschultz
As an outside observer Google appears to slow down on the development of new
projects very noticeably. Why hasn't Google Docs been evolving at the rate a
company with the resources of Google can afford?

~~~
eru
When have great resources ever helped rapid evolution in computing?

