Big bets, or the dark side of Google’s interest in global projects

Original author: Jillian D'Onfro
  • Transfer


The x10 philosophy can be said to be embedded in Google DNA. What does this simple and at the same time strange name mean? Instead of improving anything by 10%, the company strives to work on projects that are 10 times better than anything else.

“Most of my work is getting people to focus on more than just things that are consistent,” said CEO Larry Page in an interview with Wired magazine in 2013.

According to company employees, one of the greatest benefits of working at Google is the ability to pursue high ideas instead of just trying to beat the competition. Adhering to this position, the company launched incredibly ambitious projects. Among them are unmanned vehicles, balloons for distributing the Internet, and magnetic nanoparticles, which can examine the human body for possible diseases.

In addition, the “x10” policy is noticeable in the development of already established products of the company. For example, Gmail initially gives users access to a repository that is 100 times larger than any other product can offer. To people who regarded Google solely as a search engine, such a move seemed like an unprecedented waste. Another example is Google Street View, which has captured over 11.27 million kilometers of roads.

If we return to the origins of the company, we will see that initially the Google search engine was a clear embodiment of the idea of ​​“x10” in the tool for web annotations and was developed by Page as a draft dissertation at Stanford. But, as it turned out, frantic pursuit of high goals can also have a dark side.

"Avoiding reality" is not always what you need


One of the company's former employees, who once held a high position in it, shared with the journalists of the Business Insider news portal that the “10 Google Commandments”, which are promoted by the company's senior officers, including CEO Larry Page, have two sides. He says that, on the one hand, it gives incredible energy, but on the other, it can be completely paralyzing. According to him, the work of Larry is to point out things that you did not think about before, so that he has to move away from reality to some extent. When it comes to embodying ideas like smart contact lenses, common sense runs counter to them. But, according to a former employee, applying logic to products that do not need this is dangerous.

For example, when Google was developing remote control for an early version of Google TV, Page believed that none of the prototypes was ambitious enough. Page asked: “Why doesn’t he have a screen, in case you need to go to the bathroom without looking up?” Why not add a tablet for your mouse or keyboard? ” When the team tried to object that the remote controls did not need such excesses, Page continued to promote more ambitious features that no other controller could boast.



The company developed its first Google TV-enabled device in partnership with Logitech, and Page failed to retake the display, but the controller was still equipped with a keyboard and a large navigation button. “It was monstrous,” says a former Google employee: “No one could understand this remote control. But Paige is the founder, and you can't just tell him he's crazy. ” As a result, Google TV was not successful until it was later redesigned into a simpler Chromecast device.

When there is too much good


And this is not the only example when the product was burdened with a number of unnecessary functions. Other former employees of the company gave some more examples:

  • Glass . The failure of the Google Glass project was partly because the management was not satisfied with the idea that it was a niche product. The leaders wanted to create something from it that everyone would be happy to buy and use daily. “People pay thousands of dollars for laser vision correction to avoid wearing glasses,” one of the company's employees said, hinting that even a chic fashion show dedicated to Google Glass will not change that. Google has withdrawn from the market the original version of Glass (although now support is still offered for corporate users - the only sector in which the device has had at least some success).
  • Helpouts. Google launched Helpouts in 2013 so that people can share their experiences and teach each other various useful things in real time in video chat. A wide list of categories was organized in which experts offered training sessions for everything in the world: from makeup lessons to ukulele training and therapy sessions. The site had a huge number of lessons that were difficult to attribute to any category. One consultant who used the services of the service shared his opinion with the VentureBeat website that, due to many categories, it is extremely difficult to find a suitable expert teacher. “Udi Manber led the Helpouts project and was asked to solve the problems of all people,” says one former employee. “And this in some way doomed the project to death.” When you try to cover a lot of things at once, there is little hope left to bring to mind a product that would be successful in any particular area. The company closed the project in February this year.
  • Express . One former employee of the company expressed concern that Google Express (fast delivery service) is waiting for the same fate, because the company is trying to serve too many trading partners at once. That is, Google is trying to catch a lot of rabbits at once, instead of exploring the market, working at first with fewer categories, as Amazon used to do with groceries through AmazonFresh or DoorDash - with food. “Google wants you to order party snacks and a TV at the same time. It’s not easy to bring it to life. ”
  • Google could beat Pinterest . According to the stories of the same employee, a Pinterest-like product was killed in the bud because Page did not find it ambitious enough. He noted that "Larry kills those things that seem to him not big enough." Now Google has missed the opportunity to create a service for the visual search of goods.
  • Google Plus social network started in the same way. Chris Messina, a former Google designer who worked on the well-known social network, which now breathes in the air, wrote on the Medium blog late last year that Plus was originally conceived as a completely unique service. It was based on the idea of ​​not so much creating yet another social network, but an offer of a way to make the search more personal and valuable. But the company set out to acquire its own Facebook. Messina claims that compromising Google made a mistake. In his opinion, it was necessary to be guided by the idea of ​​"x10". On the other hand, if Google began to work with a clearer and clearer approach to the project, then perhaps Facebook would really have a serious competitor, selecting profits. Alas, it all ended in a complete mess of functions: whether it was planned to create a service for storing images, Is it a single sign-on to Google services? Now the company again divided them all into parts.

But so far, competitors are far behind when it comes to Google’s core business - search and advertising still account for more than 90% of the company's profits. And sky-high projects require many more years of development in order to bring Google any reward calculated in banknotes. A bit of incrementalism would benefit the corporation of good.

“Often, the best progress is achieved precisely with those things that initially do not look grandiose,” says another employee. “That's why Google is having a hard time.” After all, there is always a risk of missing the next big boom, constantly paying attention to some monstrous ideas.

Unfortunately, Google did not respond to requests for comment on this material.

Also popular now: