Company Background
Google LLC. is a global technology corporation from the United States of America that focuses on Internet-related products and services comprising search engine, online advertising services, cloud computing, hardware, and software. The company ranks among the top four technology firms in the United States information technology sector, alongside Microsoft, Apple, and Amazon (Frue, 2020). 1 Sergey Brin and Larry Page founded Google in 1998. They were pursuing Ph.D. degrees in computer science at Stanford University, California. Both Brin and Page own approximately 14 % of Google's shares. They also control about 56 percent of the firm's stockholder voting stake via supervoting stock. The two incorporated the corporation as a privately held firm in California on September 4, 1998 (Pratap, 2018). The reincorporation of Google took place on October 22, 2002, in Delaware. Google's initial public offering (IPO) occurred on August 19, 2004, before the company shifted to its present headquarters situated in Mountain View, California, commonly referred to as Googleplex (Frue, 2020). On August 2015, Google restructured its diverse operations to become a conglomerate, which is identified as Alphabet Inc. (Alphabet). Google presently serves as the principal subsidiary to Alphabet and it will remain the umbrella firm for Alphabet’s Internet interests (Vault, 2020). Sundar Pichai is the present CEO of Google and Larry Page is the current Alphabet's CEO.
The significant growth that Google has achieved since its incorporation has translated into a chain of acquisitions, products, and partnerships past the core search engine (Google Search). It provides services designed intended for productivity and work (Google Sheets, Google Docs, and Google Slides), time management and scheduling (Google Calendar), email (Gmail), cloud storage (Google Drive), and video chat and instant messaging (Hangouts, Duo, and Meet). Google also offers navigation and mapping (Waze, Google Maps, Street View, and Google Earth), video sharing (YouTube), podcast hosting (Google Podcasts), note taking (Google Jamboard and Google Keep), blog publishing (Blogger), and photo editing and organizing (Google Photos). The firm heads the creation and improvements of Chrome OS, Google Chrome web browser (a lightweight operating system revolving around the Chrome browser), and Android (smartphone operating system) (Vault, 2020). Between 2010 and 2015, Google shifted to hardware increasingly by collaborating with major electronic companies from to manufacture its Nexus android devices. In October 2016, the company released manifold hardware products such as Google Home smart speaker, Google Pixel smartphone, Google Daydream (virtual reality headset), and Google Wi-Fi (mesh wireless router). Moreover, Google has experimented with becoming an Internet provider and carrier with Google Fi, Google Fiber, and Google Station. Worldwide, Google.com is the most visited website. Google's additional services, which also rank among the top 100 visited websites, include Blogger and YouTube. In 2017, Google ranked as the most valued brand worldwide before Amazon surpassed it in the subsequent years (Pratap, 2018). However, the company has been criticized for issues involving tax avoidance, privacy concerns, censorship, antitrust, and search neutrality.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Company’s Vision, Mission, Goals, and Business Model
Google’s vision is to offer its users immeasurable access to information worldwide in one click. The current nature of the company's business is a direct portrayal of its vision statement since the Google Search service is its most popular offering. Regarding its mission, it relates to Google serving as the most beloved and best-known companies worldwide. In this sense, the company's mission states to organize information globally while making it universally useful and accessible. The primary goal of the Google Search service is to offer users the most relevant and highest quality results depending on users' queries, such as their needs and wants when searching online (Pratap, 2018). The company needs to trust a business or website before ranking it organically. The firm's business model revolves around a concealed model pattern. A hidden business model is exciting since the users do not pay for the services they receive. Instead, third parties, particularly enterprises, pay (Thompson, 2019). 2 In this case, the vision, mission, goals, and business model of Google would experience significant implications with the growing regulation of the Internet and email by China's government, which might hinder the company from accomplishing its goals of ensuring acceptance of its products and services virtually worldwide.
Strategic Management
The strategic choices that Google makes relate to the current state of its operations and the characteristics that drive the industry directly. The company’s generic strategy is an all-encompassing stimulus on the different activities the company undertakes and its competitive advantages, which allow it to outdo other firms in the technology sector (Pratap, 2018). By contrast to its generic strategy, Google's concentrated growth approaches play a critical role in aiding the company in maintaining its position in the marketplace as among the most valuable brands worldwide. For instance, continuous product improvements allow the business to maintain its share in the technology segment. Via the company's generic strategy, Google has grown to become a key player in determining the competitive landscape and expanding Internet-related products and services (Thompson, 2019). Combining the intensive and generic competitive approach is crucial to meeting the company's needs in meeting its requirements that would allow it to realize unending growth together with allowing the organization to sustain its leadership position in the global Internet products and services sector.
Google utilizes its generic strategy to allow it to deal with external factors that affect the industry environment. The approach plays an essential role in determining how the enterprise realizes its goals. The Porter’s Five Forces analysis reveals that the competitive climate of Google imposes a sturdy force on the company. The organization emphasizes intensive strategies for growth intensively to penetrate the market, ensuring it realizes gain irrespective of competitive pressures. Additional methods the company deploys are market infiltration, product growth, market expansion, and diversification, which are also essential in driving its growth. The generic strategy Google applies is differentiation. An all-purpose economical approach allows an organization to gain a wide scope of the market. Google provides products people who utilize informational technology services worldwide. The generic competitive tactic of differentiation entails having unique capabilities, which allow an enterprise to become competitive (Pratap, 2018). 3 Google separates itself from its rivals by ensuring its products are unique, which it realizes through emphasizing innovation. The numerous product and service varieties, such as operating systems, search, mobile applications, desktop computers, and hardware, depict the innovativeness that characterizes Google's differentiation strategy. For example, the algorithm that Google Search uses keeps evolving and this ensures that the company maintains its competitive advantage against its rival. The generic differentiation strategy means that Google should continue providing its competitive advantage by emphasizing on delivering unique products and services to its users. It is of vital significance that the company keeps directing its focus on innovating new products. A conforming strategic objective would entail continued improvement of existing products or the development of new products (Thompson, 2019). In this manner, the firm would maintain its competitive advantages in utilizing the generic differentiation approach, especially due to the widespread aggressive and robust competition from other technology corporations.
When it comes to intensive approaches to growth, market penetration is the primary strategy. Google mostly depends on market infiltration as a strategy that would allow it to realize intensive growth significantly beyond the United States. In this case, the strategic objective entails acquiring increased customers from the company's existing markets. Regarding the United States, for instance, Google has already attained a leadership position. For example, in nations like China, Google faces direct competition against other giant advertising firms and search engines. Hence, Google keeps striving to attain a larger share of the international Internet-related services and products segment regarding the market penetration growth intensive strategy. The approach plays a significant role in determining how Google utilizes its marketing mix to ensure that its business operations continue growing (Pratap, 2018). Moreover, the generic differentiation strategy results in competitive products, facilitating competitiveness in accessing markets, and increasing its market share, particularly in online platforms utilized for the purposes of digital advertising.
Product development is the secondary intensive growth strategy, which Google uses via innovation. In this case, the premeditated objective is to create products that would boost revenues significantly. Design is at Google's core, owing to its technical nature. The organizational culture of Google LLC encourages innovativeness among its workforces. The intensive growth approach entails new product lines or products, such as when Google launches new mobile applications. Moreover, the company utilizes an innovative tactic to increase its revenue when introducing new products, such as laptops, tablets, and Pixel smartphones. The corporation continues developing new products, including mobile applications, cloud services, and new Pixel gadgets. Via the rigorous growth approach in the area of product development, Google develops additional avenues for generating income (Vault, 2020). 4 The diversification of the generic competitive process integrates product development and design to support its competitive advantage.
Market development supports the intensive growth strategy of Google. When it comes to market development, Google sets objectives for attracting consumers in new market segments by introducing new products. For instance, Google applies intensive growth tactic by ensuring that the existing online services can be put into new uses, such as availing cloud services, including new applications for programmers to use, in addition to the existing service uses. Hence, utilizing the market development growth intensive approach allows Google to provide its products to additional areas globally (Thompson, 2019). The differentiation generic competitive approach offers the product competitiveness required for backing effective market development implementation.
Diversification is also crucial to backing the intensive growth strategy by Google. In this case, the objective is to attain growth via new enterprises, particularly in industries or markets where Google lacks or has insufficient operations. An example of this relates to the acquisition of YouTube by Google in 2006 to allow the company to develop a considerable presence in video hosting in line with growing its online presence. Additional business diversification affects the organizational structure of Google. For example, new acquisitions require a company to change its corporate culture to facilitate seamless integration (Pratap, 2018). The generic differentiation strategy supports diversification intensive approach, which translates to increased competitive advantage in entering or establishing a new business.
Overall, the generic differentiation strategy by Google results in the company emerging a leader in the market, which remains devoted to the provision of astounding Internet products and services. For instance, highly effective products and services contribute to increased share in the digital marketing and advertising segment. Such a form of leadership is crucial to realizing the vision and mission statement of Google. The merging of intensive approaches to growth of market expansion, market infiltration, diversification, and product development also aids in enhancing the ability of Google in allowing it to maintain its spot in leadership, which then translates to an empowered financial situation. An ideal recommendation for the company is to direct its efforts, particularly to the product development area (Thompson, 2019). The organization has received immense criticism for engaging in apparently different product development initiatives in distinct markets and industries. Via its generic competitive approach and intensive growth tactic, Google’s various products and services help grow its dominance globally. Nonetheless, to enhance its strategic alignment, the company can start by ensuring its existing products are profitable before venturing into new business undertakings (Pratap, 2018). Such measures would allow it to cope with China's government's rising regulations relating to the Internet and email, in which Google is a key player.
Internal and External Environment
As one of the most valuable companies worldwide, Google serves as a success and profitability case via business diversification, innovation, and strong branding strategies. The internal and external forces influence the competitive positioning and strategic planning for Google LLC via SWOT analysis. On strengths by Google, they relate to communication and information technologies and their implications on a company's competitiveness. Google's strengths allow it to realize profitable operations and growth irrespective of aggressive rivals existing in the global market. In the event of computing technologies, the online environment, innovation, and market conditions, Google realizes specific strengths that add to its continued successes. The Google brand features a strong image and strong brand while the company can engage in novel innovations rapidly (Frue, 2020). Also, the company diversifies it's business considerably, which is coupled with its substantial organizational size. However, irrespective of its strengths, Google has specific weaknesses, which limit its business development. The weaknesses serve as internal forces responsible for preventing growth, reducing efficiency, and creating issues in a technology company's operations. For example, the high reliance on online technologies is a significant force implicating Google's processes (Jurevicius, 2020). 5 The organization also lacks sufficient control on consumer electronics that utilize the Android operating system. Moreover, Google lacks adequate brick-and-mortar establishments to allow it to distribute and sell consumer electronics.
Google has several opportunities for realizing growth and improving its operations. Opportunities serve as external forces that provide avenues for improvement and development in a technology company's performance. For example, Google can leverage market and industry opportunities, such as developing new products, which would complement the current online services. It can also expand the global utilization of Chrome books and other consumer electronics and hardware and consider developing brick-and-mortar establishments. On threats, the existence of many companies and their instant technological innovations serve as key risks surrounding the technology industry. The threats are external forces, which hinder or reduce technology enterprises (Frue, 2020). Regarding the case of Google, competition against innovative and huge enterprises is the main threat. Regulations can also restrict the operations of Google while at the same time subject to product counterfeiting and imitation.
On the strategic issues surrounding Google, they relate to the weaknesses and threats existent in the internal and external analysis (SWOT Analysis). Google lacks adequate control on Android devices, especially when it comes to customer experience inconsistency, which implicates customer satisfaction, branding, and profitability. In such a scenario, the company can create agreements with manufacturers to develop higher consistency regarding user experience and design, particularly Google products and services. Also, regulatory restrictions risk Google benefiting from its data mining capacities and analytics. User content and privacy regulations require firms to restrict their collection and utilization of customer data. By considering the internal and external forces, Google would need to ensure it complies fully in line with improving its products to improve user experience. It can do this by providing that users are capable of controlling their data efficiently. Moreover, it should ensure that users understand the company is serious in observing data regulations, strengthening corporate image and brand (Jurevicius, 2020). In this case, the increase of rules of the Internet and email by the Chinese government would threaten Google's operations in the country further, mainly due to the stringent measures of complying with the company's laws.
Alternative Competitive Strategies
In coping with the growing issues surrounding the Internet services and products sector, especially the ever-increasing regulation of the Internet and email by the Chinese government, several alternative competitive strategies exist for Google. One area of focus would be to allow every unit to institute the appropriate method to strategy execution. Numerous tech companies, including Google, adopt engineering and innovation-driven cultures, usually of improvisatory and agile startups. Most have already established maturing, multi-billion dollar enterprises, nonetheless. As parts of the organizational portfolio increase and develop, Google might require distinct strategy and execution methods. As a leader in the online advertisement world, AdWords might need to follow a classical tactic to strategy while emphasizing scale economies, planning, and optimizing the business model (Zheng & Ryan Wang, 2020). 6 Pioneering enterprises might require instituting a proactive approach that would emphasize persistence and speed in identifying and addressing unmet requirements with the innovative business model or innovative product. Unpredictable, changing, and embryonic enterprises might require an adaptive strategy that would focus on instant iterative organizational flexibility and experimentation. Individual enterprises might also present openings for instituting a shaping approach that would allow an orchestrating organization to create a concerted ecosystem around a mutual platform (Stevens, Xie, & Peng, 2016). Efforts to institute a single tactic to strategy and execution to the diverse situations might compromise performance and competitiveness.
Google can also consider making it easier to develop the needed capabilities in every business. To implement the distinct strategic methods in diverse business operations, an organization would need the ability to support each with appropriately differentiated culture and capabilities. For instance, the efficiency and discipline emphasis on classical enterprises engender distinct needs compared to devolved and adaptive ones (Grogan & Brett, 2017). With the growing demand for employing computer scientists and engineers around 20 percent of the time and its campus-based community strategy, Google has established a unique culture. The modular approach to organization and design would allow the organization to vary its product and service provision to meet every enterprise's needs. For example, risk-takers, visionaries, and engineering professionals might fit with moonshot firms properly, disciplined optimizers, doers, and commercial forms due to their more mature enterprises (Yeo, 2016). It would also allow Google to institute distinct leadership styles, allowing it to develop particular disparities for each.
Furthermore, reducing the challenges for acquiring and growing companies would also serve as an alternative competitive strategy. Google makes establishing and purchasing new enterprises easer as well. Transparent reporting would allow stakeholders to get what they need. Also, a modular structure would facilitate minimizing integration challenges. Developing, purchasing and selling subsidiaries serve as experimental hallmarks by acquisition. An umbrella structure permits technology companies to have the agility and flexibility of reshaping their portfolios (Robinson & Tannenberg, 2019). Google, which is currently Alphabet, reorganized its organization to recognize an ambidextrous strategy to its enterprise, which led its core business, budding businesses, and moonshot projects to benefit. The approach by Google serves as part of a broader trend toward the 'splitting of a distended business structure, as evidenced by the rising cases of corporate spins and splits. Whereas other forces, such as capital allocation and allocation, have played a role, the requirement for instituting tailored tactics to strategy and implementation in a dynamic and diverse business setting has served as a significant driver. Separation does not serve as the only means of attaining ambidexterity, although it is quite useful for a business portfolio that features moderate dynamism and complexity (Brett, Pilcher, & Sell, 2017). Such initiatives would play a crucial role in guiding Google in dealing with the increasing regulations on the Internet and email in China to recommend the company on the appropriate approach to follow to benefit from the market.
Ethical Principles and Socially Responsible Management
During the past few decades, the media and the public have directed considerable attention to business ethics due to the widespread and numerous organizational issues, such as the unethical behaviors, which big and diversified companies portray. Executive teams in such organizations have leveraged their corporate position to attain considerable financial advantages for themselves and their companies. Their unethical conduct has resulted in immense damage to organizations, careers, stakeholders, employees, and society. In this sense, boardrooms have faced significant pressures in Congress and American boardrooms in recent years to develop regulatory reforms and follow stricter guidelines. Corporate America needs to emphasize vital ethical standards to safeguard stakeholders' interests (Brett, Pilcher, & Sell, 2017). However, owing to the immense unethical behaviors, which emerge on front-page news periodically, it appears corporations have much to accomplish both corporately and culturally.
Business leaders are commencing to comprehend how they should link their professional behavior to the company code of ethics. Support for exercising good corporate citizenship has emerged. Firms are developing formal written statements, which target expressing their corporate values while at the same time distributing to diverse personnel across the organization. The institution of anticipated behavior has emerged a goal for famous enterprises and many Fortune 500, including Google. Google has taken the initiative of publishing the "Google Code of Conduct," that outlines the behaviors anticipated from board members, employees, and partners. The Code of conduct adopts the "Don't be evil" phrase while the company utilizes it as the foundation to institute it across the entire organizational mission. It serves as the fundamental belief, which describes Google's social, ethical, and environmental responsibility. Google users usually apply words based on how the company helps its users. However, the "Don't be evil" phrase goes beyond that. It emphasizes offering users with unbiased information access, emphasizing their needs, and providing them the best services and products it can (Stevens, Xie, & Peng, 2016). It is also about engaging in the right thing, including following the law, respecting each other, and acting honorably.
Furthermore, the Code of conduct offers most of the needed standard and corporate governance laws under which the company operates, controls financials, and follows government regulations. Google provides a structure aimed at benefitting all individuals, particularly board members and employees. The company sets expectations to make sure all stakeholders would follow fair laws and ethical standards. Google anticipates all its board members and employees to understand and exercise the Code while failure can lead to disciplinary action, such as employment termination. The company incorporates provisions for organizations and individuals who conduct illegal or unethical acts in Google's name. The Code specifically targets Google Board members and employees, Google consultants, contractors, and others who need to follow it based on their work (Grogan & Brett, 2017). The termination of a contract might be the outcome is consultants and contractors fail to follow the Code.
Nevertheless, regarding the scenario of China increasing regulations on the Internet and email, Google faced criticism in China about ethical principles, particularly relating to failure to follow the laws of the country, which indicated it failed to act honorably. The operations of Google in China raised concerns when the company acknowledged complying with the Chinese government's wishes and censored pro-democracy together with other websites. In 2010, Google moved its Chinese operations to Hong Kong, which placed it beyond China's censorship regime. The proponents of the move claim Google should not cooperate with the repressive policies in China. However, critics argue that Google's withdrawal from China cut off millions of people in China from its products and services while weakening its presence in one of the world's biggest markets (Zheng & Ryan Wang, 2020). However, Google's move indeed failed to respect its "Don't' do evil" phrase by failing to follow China's laws.
Key Issues from the Scenario
Need for Taking advantage of the Enormous Chinese market
The Chinese economy is growing while having a population of over 1.3 billion individuals, meaning that the country represents a significantly important market for the future of companies from the United States. The number of email and internet users has grown substantially during the last few years while presently anticipated to be over 700 million regular users. China currently ranks as the second-biggest Internet market worldwide. However, the government of China presents all Internet providers with difficult choices. The companies should either censor results or refrain from engaging in business in China. Baidu.com serves as the primary Chinese Internet search provider. The Chinese company owns around 48 percent of the search engine market in the country. Most China users rank Baidu as the fastest in terms of responsiveness rate (Stevens, Xie, & Peng, 2016). The website has realized acceptance as a clear leader for both usage rates and brand recognition.
Studies reveal that Google might have the capacity to transfer the competitive advantage it realizes in the United States to the Chinese market. Customers in China rank Google first, overcoming Baidu, MSN, and Yahoo in categories, such as image search, search quality, and reliability. Customers in China usually like their overall experience with Google better. Eventually, this might translate to an increased market share, owing to substantial resources by Google and emphasis on the market. Before the January 20, 2006 announcement, Google had a presence in China. However, the company's unwillingness to censor information on the Chinese government's behalf led its operations to deteriorate. The Chinese government would filter and remove objectionable material from the search request, which users initiated via the Google.com website (Brett, Pilcher, & Sell, 2017). 7 The process led research results by Google to slow down significantly, which hindered the company from competing effectively in the country.
China Internet Censorship Problem
Internet and email censorship in China affect both viewing and publishing of online content. The country censors controversial events from news coverage, hindering most citizens from knowing their government's activities, which restricts the press's freedom. These minds of measures led to the emergence of the 'Great Firewall of China" nickname. Internet Censorship in China is more advanced and extensive than any other nation worldwide. The government of China blocks website content while at the same time monitoring Internet access of individuals. The Chinese government requires critical Internet messaging services and platforms to establish intricate self-censorship tools. By 2019, the Chinese government had created over 60 online restrictions and instituted provincial divisions of state-owned companies, ISPs, and organizations. Some corporations hired thousands of teams and invested in authoritative artificial intelligence algorithms to oversee and suppress online content (Zheng & Ryan Wang, 2020). The methods utilized in blocking websites comprise packet inspection, blocking IP address access, DNS spoofing, resetting connections, URL analysis, and filtering.
Studies reveal that China has the most significant recorded number of cyber-dissidents and journalists worldwide. Between 2010 and 2012, estimates showed that China served as the most considerable prison globally for netizens. The commonly supposed offenses comprise interacting with groups overseas, advocating for government reforms, and signing petitions online. The Chinese government has intensified its efforts to neutralize commentary and coverage, which is typical of a regime after numerous anti-corruption and anti-pollution protests. People organized and publicized most of these protests using chat rooms, instant messaging services, and text messages. In 2013, state media reported the Internet police of China to be 2 million strong. Unique administrative regions of China, including Macau and Hong Kong, are beyond the Great Firewall. Nonetheless, reports reveal that the central government's authorities have closely observed the Internet in these areas (Stevens, Xie, & Peng, 2016). In this case, it is evident that the stringent regulations, which China the government of China institutes, would effectively pose issues for Google to operate in the country.
Google Should Not Enter China
Before Google enters China, it should emphasize the numerous threats it would encounter before entering the country. With more than 1.3 billion individuals, the Chinese Internet market is quite tempting for technology companies from the West. However, China is a dangerous place for doing business, especially for information technology companies, such as Google. The recent news of Google aiming to re-enter the country depicts a disturbing balancing act, which technology firms do business in China. The last time Google entered China was in 2006 when it had a censored search engine. However, it closed its operations four years later, after discovering Gmail accounts' hacking belonging to human-rights activists (Robinson & Tannenberg, 2019). Whereas Google would realize massive economic opportunities by re-entering China, the company or other firms would face actual dangers for underestimating the risks that Chinese meddling poses. Any Internet corporation undertaking businesses in the country should negotiate a key place as an ethical dilemma. The government of China institutes overbearing regulations, which censor speech while claiming to safeguard national security, although the actions violate human rights under the standard international norms' conceptions (Yeo, 2016). Reports reveal that Google has deliberated several re-entry plans with China's government officials, such as providing a search service, blacklist search terms, and websites about democracy, human rights, peaceful protection, and religion.
The bind by Google is a typical one. In the case of Apple Inc., for instance, it gave in to privacy-impinging data security regulations of China when the company accounted for that it would construct a data center in Guizhou. Apple also claimed it would collaborate with a service provider from China and accommodate the demands of the government of China to allow it to examine the data Apple held. Apple would have sustained potential loss if it had not ignored the numerous compromised human rights interests. It would have lost the vast Chinese market for gadgets together with its manufacturing establishment there. The departure by Google from China in 2006 and the efforts by other technology corporations trying to access the Chinese market indicate the complex decisions their executives have to have (Brett, Pilcher, & Sell, 2017). Since companies must maximize their shareholders' value, concerns arise about whether the executives should ignore human rights issues and leverage economic opportunities. They should follow the ethics course while forgoing profits to be realized.
Whereas ethical considerations are critical areas of emphasis, it is crucial to emphasize the prospective risks an Internet company, such as Google, would face. These issues are worth thinking through while seeking to balance the opportunities and costs of entering China. Intellectual theft is a crucial area of concern. The government of China is famous for engaging in Intellectual property (IP) theft extensively. For an Internet company, such as Google, which collects personal data while monetizing it utilizing proprietary algorithms, the state stealing corporate secrets and their potential exploitation by competitors in China connected to the government would present an immense threat (Stevens, Xie, & Peng, 2016). Also, the organization would need to need to cope with the escalating demands by the government. Firms operating in China remain on a short leash irrespective of their compliance with requests by the government. The government might overtime make progressively invasive demands. For instance, despite Qualcomm's compliance, it has received hefty regulatory fines, which major merger blocks have succeeded (Stevens, Xie, & Peng, 2016). Apple also faced threats of the government shutting labor market access despite complying with Chinese regulations due to the continuing trade war with the United States.
The political backlash against the primary Internet firms is growing. Governments in countries such as the United States, India, and Brazil have embarked on regulation and novel rhetoric. Internet firms prefer opening markets and unrestrained Internet services. However, by making concessions to regulatory demands and censorship in China, firms will surely lead other governments to institute their sector restrictions (Robinson & Tannenberg, 2019). 8 In this sense, companies will need to maintain stronger communication lines with policymakers to address any regulatory concerns surrounding them. Moreover, until the last several months, Google's plans concerning China mostly served as a secret (Stevens, Xie, & Peng, 2016). 9 When the organization's workforces considered censoring China's search platform, most employees signed an internal condemning letter. The CEO relied on arguing Google does not have instant plans for introducing a censored search service in China. In this case, employees' influence is growing significantly in technology companies (Zheng & Ryan Wang, 2020). In this sense, the establishment of Google in China would lead the organization to lose its employees' trust for failing to follow the existing Code of Conduct.
Recommended Action Plan
China has instituted stringent restrictions on media and information regime for a long time. It is improbable that the policy framework by the country will change soon. The ethical scenario for resisting regulations in China is evident. However, Internet companies, such as Google, should think carefully concerning the business costs of conceding to the Chinese government's rules (Brett, Pilcher, & Sell, 2017). In addition to reputation threats, other material risks are also equally dangerous. However, despite the challenges posed by the increasing regulation of the Internet and email by China's government, Google needs to devise a means of continuing its operations in China due to the enormous growth potential that the Chinese market promises (Yeo, 2016). 10 Google should emphasize identifying the solutions to the issues it faces in China to allow it to take the right action in solving the problems. The initial phase toward solving the problems would relate to determining the impact that self-censorship would have on its search results. To allow the company to increase its share in the Chinese market, Google should look for the topics that China's government already censors, particularly those related to religion and politics. On political matters, it might comprise issues, including democracy, while Dalai Lama should feature religious topics (Grogan & Brett, 2017). In doing so, Google would lead the people in the country to develop an interest in the company, allowing the company to increase its market share significantly.
Additionally, Google needs to reintroduce services specifically tailored for the Chinese market while complying with all the censorship requirements, including cloud, news, and search. Complying with the strict data-sharing and censorship policies would allow Google to establish agreements with the government to let it operate in optimal capacity. For example, the company needs to create a censored search app meat for the region (Stevens, Xie, & Peng, 2016). The app should automatically recognize and block search results and queries, which the Chinese censorship guidelines prohibit. Moreover, Google should work on a censor-friendly app for aggregating news. The app should customize news feeds based on the profile of each user. The introduction of cloud services would also be a vital undertaking for Google in China (Grogan & Brett, 2017). The company should take with necessary Chinese companies, such as Inspur Group and Tencent, to deliver Internet-based services, such as Drive and Docs, to customers in China via their servers and data centers.
The return of Google in China and continued operations in increasing Internet and email regulations would serve as a stepping stone of bringing official versions of Google Play to the area. Manufacturers in China ship their smartphones with Android versions, which strip away Google's proprietary services, while they usually have an alternative app store. Since China is the biggest consumer app market worldwide, this serves as a missed revenue opening. However, Google might encounter challenges past censorship in its efforts to penetrate China. Domestic rival companies have continued to realize gains in market share due to Google's absence, which might make the eventual introduction of Google services and products less impactful. However, Google's initiative would play a crucial role in driving the growth of Google's global operations (Grogan & Brett, 2017). 11 Targeting China would serve as one of the critical milestones toward emerging a successful global brand, mainly due to the vast potential the Chinese market has for the technology sector.
References
Brett, J., Pilcher, L., & Sell, L. C. (2017). A new approach to china: Google and censorship in the chinese market. Kellogg School of Management Cases.
Frue, K. (2020, October 1). SWOT analysis of Google (Alphabet). PESTLE Analysis: https://pestleanalysis.com/google-alphabet-swot-analysis/
Grogan, C., & Brett, J. (2017). and the government of China: A case study in cross-cultural negotiations. Kellogg School of Management Cases.
Jurevicius, O. (2020, ocotber 1). SWOT analysis of Alphabet (Google). Strategic Management Insight: https://strategicmanagementinsight.com/swot-analyses/google-swot-analysis.html
Pratap, A. (2018, December 14). Google corporate strategy analysis. Notesmatic: https://notesmatic.com/2018/12/google-corporate-strategy-analysis/
Robinson, D., & Tannenberg, M. (2019). Self-censorship of regime support in authoritarian states: Evidence from list experiments in China. Research & Politics, 6 (3), 2053168019856449. doi:10.1177/2053168019856449
Stevens, C. E., Xie, E., & Peng, M. W. (2016). Toward a legitimacy‐based view of political risk: The case of Google and Yahoo in China. Strategic Management Journal, 37 (5), 945-963. doi:10.1002/smj.2369
Thompson, A. (2019, December 5). Google’s generic strategy (Porter’s) & intensive growth strategies. Panmore: http://panmore.com/google-generic-strategy-intensive-growth-strategies
Vault. (2020, October 1). Google LLC. Vault: https://www.vault.com/company-profiles/internet-social-media/google-inc
Yeo, S. (2016). Geopolitics of search: Google versus China? Media, Culture & Society, 38 (4), 591-605. doi:10.1177/0163443716643014
Zheng, Y., & Ryan Wang, Q. (2020). Shadow of the Great Firewall: The impact of Google blockade on Innovation in China. Strategic Management Journal . doi:10.1002/smj.3179
