Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google CEO Sundar Pichai Brings in Less Egotistical Leadership

recode.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 100 posts

Re: Google CEO Sundar Pichai Brings in Less Egotistical Leadership

#71

Post by david-given »

jonas21 wrote: post #65
hueving wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, one of the most annoying things you can encounter is a conversation at dinner with multiple Google employees. They will constantly mention that Google is working on something and then after confirmation with each other that it is still private, refuse to tell anymore details. It seems like it's encouraged in Google culture to brag but in a secretive manner to remind outsiders of what they are missing.

... or maybe they're really excited about whatever it is and want to talk about it, but also don't want to get fired for leaking something?

This is precisely it.

Plus, Google's huge and has very few internal communication barriers --- nearly everything is open to everyone. So it's really easy to get into the habit of casually talking about internal products when talking shop.

Then you notice someone nearby who isn't a Googler, and you go oh shit and stop talking.

Re: Google CEO Sundar Pichai Brings in Less Egotistical Leadership

#72

Post by gaius »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #68
gaius wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Praise in public, criticize in private. Rule 1 of management. Also, give credit to your team, take blame yourself. That's s rule 2. Any industry, any job, these rules hold, and anyone who doesn't follow them is dysfunctional.

Some people still don't want to hear that their idea sucks, even in private. I don't get why people are so attracted to this idea that the manager is the only party with any agency or ability to influence outcomes, while underlings are merely mechanical cogs to be properly organized by appropriate managerial incantations and social engineering. As an underling it's great to be responsible for nothing negative, but th…

Nothing false about it. If I'm in a management role, and things go hatstand, well the buck stop with me, that's why managers get paid the big bucks. I may have to take measures later with the individual in question if it was negligence on their part, but ensuring the success of the team and the project is what the manager is for. If I have given someone more responsibility than they are ready for, that's on me. If I have failed to implement a failsafe process/procedure that's on me. If my team aren't doing code reviews that's on me. If they are taking on unmanageable technical debt, that's on me. Etc etc.

Re: Google CEO Sundar Pichai Brings in Less Egotistical Leadership

#73

Post by r00fus »

jonas21 wrote: post #65
hueving wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, one of the most annoying things you can encounter is a conversation at dinner with multiple Google employees. They will constantly mention that Google is working on something and then after confirmation with each other that it is still private, refuse to tell anymore details. It seems like it's encouraged in Google culture to brag but in a secretive manner to remind outsiders of what they are missing.

... or maybe they're really excited about whatever it is and want to talk about it, but also don't want to get fired for leaking something?

So that's a lack of EQ... So much so that it's a lack of common decency. Yes, it's a big deal, yes it's exciting but when in mixed company you need to talk about other things if it's indeed secret stuff.

Re: Google CEO Sundar Pichai Brings in Less Egotistical Leadership

#74

Post by yummyfajitas »

gaius wrote: post #72
yummyfajitas wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some people still don't want to hear that their idea sucks, even in private. I don't get why people are so attracted to this idea that the manager is the only party with any agency or ability to influence outcomes, while underlings are merely mechanical cogs to be properly organized by appropriate managerial incantations and social engineering. As an underling it's great to be responsible for nothing negative, but th…

Nothing false about it. If I'm in a management role, and things go hatstand, well the buck stop with me, that's why managers get paid the big bucks. I may have to take measures later with the individual in question if it was negligence on their part, but ensuring the success of the team and the project is what the manager is for . If I have given someone more responsibility than they are ready for, that's on me. If I…

If I'm in a software development role, and the software doesn't work, well the buck stops with me. I may need to shut down a box and spin up a larger one, but ensuring that hardware is adequate is what the developer is for. If I have given an EC2 instance more load than it is ready for, that's on me.

With this mental model, of course it's false praise, just like it would be false praise for me to give credit to my hardware.

Now I don't buy this model. But this is the logical implication of it - success is the flip side of failure.

Re: Google CEO Sundar Pichai Brings in Less Egotistical Leadership

#75

Post by oldmanjay »

gaius wrote: post #35
simula67 wrote: post #26

"Page was known as a tough manager inside the search giant, peppering his team with pointed questions and cutting (though usually accurate) observations. “He could come off as very harsh,” said one person who has had many encounters with Page over the years. “Until you realize it was more that he was completely lacking in EQ. I mean, zero.”" How is asking pointed questions and making cutting observations equate to be…

"I'm just an unpleasant person, therefore you must overlook my unpleasantness" isn't actually a thing, y'know.

Well sure it is. There are many possible responses as well, depending on personality and incentives.

There is no universal definition of an asshole, and no one is safe from being an asshole in someone's eyes, so moving right past it is definitely a valid, useful strategy.

Re: Google CEO Sundar Pichai Brings in Less Egotistical Leadership

#76

Post by SixSigma »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #62
tobtoh wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are a manager, your job is to get your team to produce the right outcome - the right outcome being not just a good product but a good sustainable team. If your team feel insulted/humiliated/upset, they are less likely to produce the right outcome in the short or long term. Any decent manager can ask the right questions and make accurate observations whilst still making their team feel positive and valued.

For some people, it's the content rather than the presentation which makes them feel insulted/humiliated/upset. The only way to prevent the negative feelings is to fail to communicate the "your work sucks" or "your idea won't work" message. Blaming their feelings on the manager, rather than their own egos, is wrong and harmful.

I prefer a "recognize and reward" management style to "insult and humiliate"

Re: Google CEO Sundar Pichai Brings in Less Egotistical Leadership

#77

Post by pshc »

littletimmy wrote: post #27
simula67 wrote: post #26

"Page was known as a tough manager inside the search giant, peppering his team with pointed questions and cutting (though usually accurate) observations. “He could come off as very harsh,” said one person who has had many encounters with Page over the years. “Until you realize it was more that he was completely lacking in EQ. I mean, zero.”" How is asking pointed questions and making cutting observations equate to be…

It is possible to be pointed and direct with tact. It is called manners.

Reminds me of a classic generalization: Normal people apply tact to what they say; nerds apply tact to what they hear.

(Robust people ask why not both?)

Re: Google CEO Sundar Pichai Brings in Less Egotistical Leadership

#78

Post by kraknahs »

_nedR wrote: post #61
d_welsman wrote: post #2

Ego is essential to breaking through those tough barriers and new opportunities. Disregard for risk. Is this really what is needed when Google is being criticized for falling behind its competitors in innovation.

I wouldn't conflate lack of ego with lack of drive or ambition or an averseness to risk. Especially for someone who went from a lower middle class family in one of the poorest states in India to becoming the CEO of Google. When a group of very smart people get together, there is a tendency for them to try to show themselves as being the smartest. This can lead to less-desirable situations where people don't share or…

"Especially for someone who went from a lower middle class family in one of the poorest states in India to becoming the CEO of Google."

Not to take anything away from Sundar Pichai's accomplishments, but Tamil Nadu, from where he hails, is decidedly not "one of the poorest states in India." It has the second largest gross state domestic product in the country. [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Tamil_Nadu

Re: Google CEO Sundar Pichai Brings in Less Egotistical Leadership

#79

Post by dang »

jsprogrammer wrote: post #30
tomhoward wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No - it's clickbait.

And the new one isn't? At least the original was from the article, instead of editorialized by the poster/moderator.

No, it's the HTML doc title, which makes it a legit original—indeed, it's what the HN bookmarklet selects by default. So adidash didn't editorialize anything. Also, no moderator touched this post.
Post reply on HN