Explore BrainMass
Share

Google's Global impact on strategic knowledge management

This content was STOLEN from BrainMass.com - View the original, and get the already-completed solution here!

Examine the affect of cultural, global, and legal factors on that organization's strategic knowledge management (infringement actions, federal laws, organizational structure, etc.) on Google's Global impact on strategic knowledge management.

© BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com October 25, 2018, 5:13 am ad1c9bdddf
https://brainmass.com/business/business-management/googles-global-impact-strategic-knowledge-management-411269

Solution Preview

Global Impact on Strategic Knowledge Management

Cultural Impact

Cultural factors affect the organizational structure and strategies of the organizations. Google is the largest search engine and USA origin firm (Martin). At the same time, it is also true that culture of USA and other countries influences the strategic knowledge management practices of Google, because the services of this search engine are availed by global users for information collection. Organizational structure of Google is flat to share knowledge. The company has bureaucratic structure due the impact of its USA culture. In 2005, the company hired two important persons for managing technology and sales and development departments in China that assisted it to ensure the alignment of its strategic knowledge management practices effectively in China (Martin). This was a great decision took by Google that also modified the current organizational structure of the company in a positive manner. This assisted the search engine to get rid of the reduced market share and adapt to different Chinese culture. It can be argued on the basis of this data that ...

Solution Summary

Google's global impact on strategic knowledge management is examined. Infringement actions, federal laws and organizational structures are examined.

$2.19
See Also This Related BrainMass Solution

Short Global Questions

Could you provide your feedback to these questions below?

1. You mentioned in your post that you believe strategic alliance is most constructive because "they are able to gain wealth through multiple partnerships." Here is my question, how constructive would the same approach be if you discovered six years into your alliance that two of your partners were practicing unethical procedures? Another question, although strategic alliance has its place in effective expansion of global organizations, how would you say such an approach affects the viability of knowledge management, especially when entering an emerging market that requires substantial infrastructure renovation or creation?

2. I personally find there are many instances where matrix management will not work well because of the cultural and language differences with the different managers. China works will on a solid functional and local management scheme. In most cases Chinese managers don't like taking direction from non-Chinese individuals which is a requirement of matrix management. Does anyone else see any positive or negative impacts of matrix management in a global environment?

3. The role of an organization's talent, capabilities, competencies and attention to core values greatly impact the business when it comes to global competition. This is because qualified individuals need hired who are creative and able to think out of the box. They need to have the skills to communicate, remain sensitive, and to strive to do their best to meet others needs effectively (even if it means doing theirs later). By keeping in mind the firms purpose, they are able to stay focused and to do everything possible to make sure that people are chosen correctly within their target market. Management has a strategy, and they do not stray from it unless they are able to adapt to surroundings. However, if the wrong people are hired, then they face much difficulty. They will struggle to gain a profit and the other culture could easily become offended if employee's actions were unethical. This does include laws and regulations getting broken, and for a lack of college education and expertise in the field. All of these are reasons and implications to make sure that the right people are hired that can do global management effectively. Sometimes giving them a chance is worth it, even if it is their first time, but with much caution and direction.

While yes is a good answer, the question remains is one more important to a company than another? For instance does talent count for more in a technically oriented company than core values? Do capabilities matter more that financial stability at a large bank?

4. Having performance metrics is something every business enterprise needs. However, the vast majority of global expansion activities come with a strategy for expansion but no metrics to determine how well the opportunity is being exploited. My view is every strategy has to come with measurements of success or failure built right into the strategy. Given this thought what are some of the fundamental metrics you think an expansion strategy should contain?

View Full Posting Details