Learning Organizational Processes in Business

Organizational Development Activities in Google

Google is characterized as a progressive company that stimulates employees’ training and encourages the growth of their professional competencies due to the involvement in a continuous educational process. Among organizational development activities (ODAs) mentioned by Blau et al. (2008), in particular, seminars, workshops, and training courses, Google staff takes part in all possible types of knowledge and skills improvement. Constant conferences and thematic meetings contribute to team building and creating a favorable environment for the assimilation of knowledge related to different IT fields. Moreover, employees themselves are aware of the importance of various training programs and strive to increase their potential, which, as Kemper et al. (2020) state, is a crucial indicator of success. As a result, ODAs promoted by the corporation in question are numerous and are seen as essential to enhancing professionalism and increasing productivity. The analysis of the use of IT systems in these practices is an additional aspect to discuss in the context of Google’s learning mechanisms.

Organizational Learning Mechanisms and IT Systems

The mechanisms that Google’s management promotes to stimulate subordinate learning are the advanced methods of increasing professional competencies. In addition to the approaches mentioned by Blau et al. (2008), one should also pay attention to Clifford and Thorpe’s (2007) practices that involve facilitated and group training mechanisms. The Google team is large, and this is an indispensable approach to have mentors and others in charge of helping organize training courses. In addition, collective educational activities unite the team, which is one of the objectives of Google’s personnel management policy. With regard to the application of IT systems, this direction of learning is advanced. Google is one of the largest corporations working in the field of innovation and promoting the principles of introducing technology into everyday life. This explains the value of the company’s base in terms of the possibilities of using IT to train employees. However, the assessment of learning modes would be incomplete without discussing individual and organizational factors that deter from learning.

Personal Deterring Factors

Individual motivation and self-determination are significant aspects that explain the quality of learning. Ng et al. (2006) argue that employees’ job attitudes and behaviors are crucial factors that influence personnel aspiration for increasing professional qualifications. In Google, the organizational environment is structured in such a way that each employee can find the best tools and practices to strengthen individual professionalism. As potential deterrents, one can note wide access to various information channels and the freedom to choose resources for individual learning. However, the evaluation of Google’s activities provides an opportunity to ensure that the staff of the corporation is highly qualified and uses a variety of materials to the advantage. According to Orpen (1997), initiative plays an essential role in achieving high learning outcomes. Kushwaha, and Rao (2017), in turn, note that job satisfaction is a criterion that correlates with learning performance positively. As a result, from the perspective of individual deterrents, there are no significant obstacles in the company in question, but potential organizational constraints also deserve consideration.

Organizational Deterring Factors

Due to the prestige of working at Google and career opportunities, specific aspects of organizational learning can deter from productive training. For instance, as Ashforth and Mael (1989) argue, competition and distinctive values ​​can be obstacles, which may be applied to Google due to the diversity of its workforce. Power differences and group boundaries that Alderfer and Smith (1982) mention can also inhibit successful learning as factors that hinder employee empowerment and freedom. However, in the context of Google’s activities, there are no restrictions or constraints. According to Fink et al. (2017), targeted training and routine are negative manifestations of the learning process. Nevertheless, in Google, creativity and friendliness in employee engagement are promoted as valuable principles for maintaining a productive learning environment. Therefore, no organizational aspects are deterrents in the company in question.

Conclusion

The assessment of learning perspectives and conventions in Google confirms that this corporation has an advanced basis for organizing productive and successful staff training. The existing organizational development activities contribute to improving employe