Is Google’s Cafeteria A Competitive Weapon?

If you’re a Google fan, here’s yet another reason to love this provider of really useful, reliable, and not to mention free computer tools – they feed their employees well! This fact recently came to light a few weeks ago when the Internet was full of reports that Google is seeking to hire two gourmet chefs to prepare meals (free to employees) for its brainy staff. It turns out that the incumbent chef, Charlie Ayers, will soon be leaving to start a chain of natural foods restaurants. Google is seeking two executive chefs to replace him. The search has even garnered the attention of Google co-founder Sergey Brin who is quoted remarking, "These two chefs will play an important role in managing the company's growing appetites.”

The company posted sample dishes from the cafeteria menu on its web site that job finalists will need to prepare in an upcoming cook-off competition to be judged by a team of Google taste testers. A review of these menu items indicates that the tastes of Google’s employees are as diverse as their national and ethnic backgrounds. The company is known for employing some of the best and the brightest people in the world and its menu offers no less of a global all-star lineup.

It includes scrumptious-sounding dishes such as Ahi Tuna & Avocado Poke, Eggplant Ratatouille, Pollo en Huerto, Seared Day Boat Scallops in Green Coconut Curry Sauce, Arugula with Dried Apricots, Sautéed Wild Mushrooms, Spinach Lentil Dal and Tropical Shrimp Bisque soups, Hazelnut Shortcakes with Plum Compote, Chocolate Coconut Cheesecake and Creamy Lemon Macadamia Nut Cookies. Not exactly your typical corporate cafeteria fare!

At this point, you may be thinking, this all sounds nice and is even making me hungry but how in the world does offering such a menu of meals to employees confer a competitive advantage to a company? Well, let me assure you that this is by no means just another example of a big successful company heaping largesse on its lucky employees, but one with a solid business rationale behind it.

Now, I admit I’m a bit prejudiced on this topic since I am known for going to great lengths to sample gastronomic greatness. But the business researcher side of me has observed many seemingly unorthodox business practices that drive high performance in employees. In my view, feeding employees well is good policy and more companies should do it.

Providing good food in a corporate setting is not unusual. The executive dining room has been a fixture in many companies throughout this country for decades. What Google is doing is simply providing all its workers with the same top quality cuisine that other companies lavish on their top executives. If it’s good for the top brass why not do it for the rest of the company?

Food and dining in fact have long been a part of savvy competitive strategies. I have seen this work first hand on several occasions at two different consulting firms at which I was employed. Each one had their own kitchen, dining room, chef and wait staff. Lunches and dinners with prospects and clients proved to be quite an effective tool for building relationships. Sure we could have taken VIPs out to a restaurant, and sometimes we did. But there is nothing more intimate than dining in a person’s home. So, inviting clients, prospects and potential business partners to dine with us at our offices was like inviting friends to a dinner party at home. This rarely failed to seal a deal or jump start a potentially lucrative new business relationship.

Feeding rank-and-file employees in company cafeterias has long been a part of Corporate American life. But the fare offered at many of these facilities is more institutional than inspiring, greasy than gratifying, belly-busting than brain-building. Indeed, one suspects that most in-house eating establishments are deliberately designed to encourage diners to grab a quick bite and return to work. One poll by career Web site Vault.com found that one in four workers skip their lunch breaks daily and quickly eat a sandwich or snack at their desks.

But Google uses a strategic approach to feeding its employees. Its people-based business strategy makes sure that the company’s stable of big brains is literally well-fed and nurtured. This is not pampering – it’s a high-performance maintenance strategy. Would you think of filling up a Formula One race car with 87 unleaded? Of course not! Then why let your Formula One-type talent nosh on institutional food? Google’s big brains need healthy, natural and delicious food and lots of it. And the company makes sure they get it.

Food is even a part of Google’s recruiting strategy for top engineering talent. Google Lab’s for example, includes a witty two-page primer in its recruiting kit entitled, “How to Care for Your Big, Wonderful High-Performance Brain”. At the top of the list of recommendations it makes is eating foods rich in amino acids such as salmon, mackerel, walnuts, green leafy vegetables and cold-pressed sunflower oil (all regularly found in the Google Lab’s cafeteria).

Other tips offered include avoiding exposure to brain-cell killing lead (Google is a lead-free work environment), wiggling your toes frequently to activate nerves that stimulate the brain (sandals are de rigueur fashion at Google Labs), taking short naps to enhance the information processing capacity of the brain (Google Labs’ engineers can take cat naps whenever necessary as long as they “refrain from drooling on their keyboards”), exercising to increase blood flow to the brain (Google’s campus offers a weekly “Wetlands Walk” among other exercise opportunities) and sharing your big brain with the world (Google Labs allows staff to spend 20% of their time working on projects of their own).

So if you’re a CEO of a company whose competitive success is reliant on the brain power of your talent you would be well-advised to spend some time in your cafeteria and kitchen facilities if you have them. Do an eating tour of the local food joints and convenience stores as well. If food is fuel for the brain then make sure your best and brightest have ample opportunity to eat like champions not chumps.

Is Outsourcing Reaching Its Limits Or Simply Pausing For Breath? – Part II

In my last column, I reviewed some of the key findings of a study conducted by Deloitte Consulting of the experiences of 25 of the largest practitioners of outsourcing in the world. In this article, I discuss the findings from another study conducted by the consulting firm DiamondCluster of over 400 buyers and providers of IT outsourcing services. The complete report can be downloaded at:
http://www.diamondcluster.com/press/PressRelease.asp?src=pressreleases331.asp.

This is the third consecutive year that DiamondCluster has polled companies about their IT outsourcing experiences. The results of their latest survey were released in June 2005. Like the Deloitte study, the findings from this survey present an intriguing snapshot of outsourcing practices and experiences that shed welcome light on some of the popular beliefs and thinking about this latest business mega-trend. The DiamondCluster report suggests that overall IT outsourcing activity is robust and seems poised to continue apace for the foreseeable future. But a closer look at the benefits and costs of IT outsourcing provides insights that challenge some conventional wisdom about this pervasive practice.

Take offshore outsourcing for example. It has aroused enormous passion among workers, stirred up much controversy in the media and engendered a great deal of criticism of top managers of corporations. The practice even emerged as a political issue in last year’s presidential election and was addressed in numerous state legislatures - a number of which passed laws to limit its growth, at least in the public sector.

The lead headline of DiamondCluster’s study is that “growing numbers of companies are dissatisfied with offshore outsourcing providers.” The percentage of companies dissatisfied rose from 21% last year to 38% this year. And for the first time since the survey was started in 2002, a small number of respondents (7%) indicated that they would decrease their level of offshore outsourcing.

Before you think about writing obituaries for offshore outsourcing, read on. The report also suggests that this silver cloud has a dark lining. It attributes the main cause of increased unhappiness to the explosion of demand for offshore services. Apparently so many companies are sending work offshore that the providers simply have not been able to keep up with the demand and thus service and quality have suffered. Overblown expectations may be a contributing factor as well – providers said that one of their greatest concerns is meeting unrealistic or immeasurable buyer expectations. Despite these difficulties, 70% of respondents indicated they intend to increase their levels of offshore outsourcing over the next twelve months, up from 32% in 2002. And forty percent of respondents indicated they expect to outsource some IT functions to China in the next 3-5 years.

So offshore outsourcing presents a paradox - overall growth is expected to continue even though the number of problems and level of dissatisfaction with this practice are forecast to increase as well. I guess all the companies planning on sending IT work and jobs overseas feel that the potential benefits to be gained outweigh the risks. Or perhaps they think they are smart enough to avoid the problems and pitfalls that a growing number of companies are expected to encounter.

Other key findings of the DiamondCluster study also present a mixed picture of outsourcing experiences. The number of buyers that have ‘abnormally terminated’ an outsourcing relationship soared to 51% from 21% last year. The primary reasons for these mass terminations were poor provider performance (36%), a change in strategic direction of the buyer (16%), deciding to move the function in-house (11%), and not achieving cost savings (7%).

But once again, opponents of outsourcing shouldn’t get too excited by these findings. Despite this growth in contract terminations, 81% of respondents indicated that they were still satisfied with onshore outsourcing, up from 74% last year.

The Deloitte study reported great disappointment over the level of cost savings actually achieved through outsourcing. The DiamondCluster study shows similar results. It found that the benefits of reallocating resources freed up by outsourcing IT overwhelmingly trumps the amount of cost savings that companies have actually been able to realize through this practice. Less than 50% of respondents say outsourcing either exceeded (9%) or met (37%) their expectations regarding cost reduction. But, 83% of respondents cited re-allocation of internal resources to more critical functions as the main benefit of outsourcing.

Risk is a critical issue for IT outsourcing. The top three risk factors associated with it were increased management complexity, reduced operational effectiveness and lower quality of output. And employee backlash remains a big concern for 88% of the outsourcing buyers polled.

The bottom line take away of the DiamondCluster study is that IT outsourcing will continue to grow despite all the hiccups (or chronic indigestion depending on your point of view) associated with this practice. The good news is that companies seem to be learning something from their experiences. They are getting smarter about what, why and how they outsource and are more realistic about the benefits they expect and the challenges they must overcome if they are to achieve their goals.

These conclusions about IT outsourcing will of course provide little comfort to the legions of IT workers across the country hoping their job isn’t the next one to get a one-way ticket overseas. If you are one of them, take heart. There are several things you can do to avoid being put out on the street as a result of the growth in outsourcing activities that companies indicate they intend to continue. Work to ensure your skills are not generic. Take time to learn about the business. Take a user to lunch. Make some customer visits with the sales force. Take calls in the customer care center. Visit the distribution center. Have a stroll around the factory floor. The more you know about how your company uses IT, and what it needs to do to get more value from it, the better off you’ll be. Learn to speak the language of the business. Appreciate the problems that your co-workers in other departments face and how IT can solve them or make them worse.

Doing these things will not only diminish the chances of your job being outsourced in the first place, it will also help you become one of the critical resources that so many companies in these studies say they intend to redeploy to more critical activities as a result of outsourcing.