Management Styles in Companies: HP and Google (Alphabet) / Organizational Management in Giants: HP and Google (Alphabet) Change in Management Styles of HP and Google (Alphabet)

Senior Management Role in new Organizational Change

Management's decision on its use of vendors and spokespersons

Innovative Idea for HP and Google (Alphabet)

Ability to adapt to the changing needs of customers and the market environment and Need for Open Communication in implementing change

Incorporated on the 11th of February, 1947 as Hewlett-Packard Co., HP Inc. is an international provider of software, products, services, technologies, and solutions to individual clients, small-to-mid-sized firms, and large corporations. Its client base includes the government as well as educational and healthcare sectors. HP delivers the widest portfolio of services and products in the information technology (IT) industry to its customers. Its innovative offerings (software, services, and infrastructure) assist clients in creating value and solving business issues. The organization develops its solutions with the aim to provide a basis, in the fields of security, mobility, big data, and cloud computing, by leveraging its products/services' range, and capabilities and strengths of its distinct business units. HP's operations are categorized into 7 key business segments: Enterprise Services (ES); Enterprise Group (EG); Personal Systems; Software; Printing; Corporate Investments; and HP Financial Services (Reuters, 2015). On the other hand, Alphabet is a recently created parent corporation for Google. Under its new operational structure, the core business, Google, will incorporate search, apps, maps, ads, Android, YouTube, and connected technical infrastructure (Cnn, 2015).

Change in Management Styles of HP and Google (Alphabet)

Right from the start, the founders of HP -- William Hewlett and David Packard -- instituted a style of management never seen before in a large corporation. They created a new form of company culture that came to be known as "the HP way." The organization has always shunned the "hire-and-fire" approach, wherein several workers are employed for one large order, whose completion marks the termination of their job. Instead, the firm offered its staff near-ideal job security. The founders held a basic belief that for excelling, they had to develop a culture that promoted cooperation, rewarded loyalty, and inspired high achievement. This principle constituted the keystone of the culture and management style symbolizing HP since its establishment in a garage in Palo Alto. By the year 2013, with leadership changes, acquisitions, and the passage of several years since Dave and Bill worked for HP, its characteristic culture has evolved to have a unique meaning for each employee. Nevertheless, the corporate values of HP still retained incredible influence in the company. Its cultural code changed further, becoming "the HP Way Now," for supporting its present business environment. This reengineered and improved version of HP's original culture honors the past whilst tweaking it to suit the modern-day business scenario. The new culture of HP represents an environment that re-enunciates the key values and principles by which the company operates. Moreover, it outlines the behaviors and qualities necessary to be successful in the company (Keogh, 2015).

Google represents a standout corporation. The basic reason for Google's superiority is, perhaps, its noteworthy leadership style. Every employee of Google abides by the '70/20/10 rule', which states that employees are supposed to commit 70% of their workdays to the projects assigned to them by their superiors, 20% of the day to novel ideas or ventures connected to their main projects, and the remaining 10% of the day to practically any fresh idea(s) they wish to pursue, irrespective of their position, department or status. Google claims that this rule is the driver behind a large number new services and products it has introduced to the world, as it encourages creativity from all employees -- salespersons, programmers, and executives alike (Manimala & Wasdani, 2013). Following the integration of all Google businesses under Alphabet's wing, management of individual businesses, including robot-building, self-driving automobile development, disease cure businesses, nanoparticle development, and Internet connectivity extension through balloons, would become easy. The present leaders of Google -- Larry Page (CEO), Sergey Brin (co-founder), and Ruth Porat (chief financial officer (CFO)) -- will continue as heads of Alphabet. This enables the organization to handle increased management scale, since rather unrelated aspects would run separately. Such a style of management will be highly beneficial while dealing with complexities in future (Barr & Winkler, 2015).

Both HP and Google (Alphabet) have evolved appropriately to face the changing business environment, and have taken suitable steps for ensuring that they continue enjoying competitive advantage. The new system at HP has introduced...

On the other hand, management style modification at Google following its conversion into Google (Alphabet) aims to aid with independent management of various functions; it can be concluded that Google effectively altered its management style.
Senior Management Role in new Organizational Change

Both the organizations have taken several steps for preparing their employees for change. In HP's case, the organization's chief operating officer, Bill Veghte assumed a new role of general manager and executive vice president of HP Enterprise Group. In his current role, Bill Veghte is in-charge of coordinated growth of its cloud solutions portfolio. A fresh role has also been assumed by Dave Donatelli; his focus will now be identification of embryonic-stage technologies, owing to his success with 3 Com and 3 PAR. In another organizational move, the company has integrated its Communications and Marketing organizations under Chief Communication Officer, Henry Gomez's leadership. The evidence of success of these organizational transformations can clearly be witnessed in the company's success, with its workforce appearing satisfied and preparations being made for launching new models (Keogh, 2015).

In Google's (Alphabet) case, the novel management structure of Alphabet Inc. has been effectively hijacking the entire older management structure of the company. Alphabet is headed by Larry Page (CEO), Sergey Brin (President), Ruth Porat (CFO), Eric Schmidt (Executive Chairman), and David Drummond (Senior VP, Corporate Development, Secretary and Chief Legal Officer); Sundar Pichai is the new CEO of Google, a post occupied only by two other people so far. The first Chief Executive of Google was co-founder Larry Page, and the second was Eric Schmidt; Page, later, resumed his role as CEO. Pichai has received wide praise as a shrewd and practical leader who makes sure that the assigned work is done. Besides Pichai, another executive who continues to hold a post at Google is its CFO, Porat, who also holds the same post at Alphabet. Formerly Chief Business Officer at Google, Omid Kordestani is now the advisor to Google as well as Alphabet (Barr & Winkler, 2015). The aforementioned changes, including separate management of different departments, were easy to adopt.

Management's decision on its use of vendors and spokespersons

In HP's case, management decisions do not appear to overly impact the Spokesperson; the spokesperson's role has merely become greater, with increasing questions pertaining to separation. In case of vendors, however, Chief technology officer and Chief information officer must now select a vendor as a component of a more long-term, strategic partnership, which would positively impact the company in times of change.

No alterations in routine operations will be required in Google (Alphabet), either. The spokesperson's role remains unchanged, while the role of vendors will increase; in other words, there will be increased association of the company with vendors. Thus, the effect on the organization will be positive, growing and developing over time.

Innovative Idea for HP and Google (Alphabet)

Since both Google and HP are IT companies, they can employ identical strategies. The organizations are known for their proficiency in extremely advanced, specialized software; therefore, they can earn by passing on their knowledge to professionals and amateurs seeking to enhance and fine-tune their skills. While there are technical manuals available for Final Cut Pro, QuickBooks, and other such programs, they tend to be expensive and are not easily understood by average users. The companies can organize private sessions or group workshops, charging hourly fees for a complete program tutorial. The best aspect of this is: it may be performed part-time. Such a strategy can positively influence the client base of both companies, as well as employees, who will gain an opportunity to share the knowledge they possess and hone their skills through participation in the sessions. The companies, for this purpose, can establish a team for collecting information on various contexts. Videos that explain difficult concepts can be utilized, as well (Fallon, 2015).

Ability to adapt to the changing needs of customers and the market environment and Need for Open Communication in implementing change

Both Google (Alphabet) and HP are highly capable of adapting to changing market environment and customer needs. HP's novel management style helps in providing employees with a refreshing workplace, increasing efficiency. Google (Alphabet), on the other hand, can manage market and client needs by employing a strategy of individual divisional management. Open communication aids companies with implementing change, since there is no information filtering through various management layers. Open communication ensures more direct information flow from lower to upper levels of a company, and vice versa. When stakeholders at all…