Google ranks best in industry salaries — They’re also hiring

By Christopher Lazley

In the digital revolution, few companies carry as much clout as Google. Although its physical headquarters can be found in Mountain View, California, the Google ideation is more than anything an approach to life, a way of doing things, a signifier of innovation of technological initiative and, according to yet another survey released recently, a very nice place to work, too, despite the bad fudge brownies.

The survey, conducted by Payscale, reports that Google employees earn on average about 23 per cent more than their industry counterparts in other companies. The average Googler earns US$141 000 per year , and while it’s tempting to think of an HR ethic solely in terms of pay scales, the true value of the Google organisation is its own brand of off-beat corporate culture.

In January this year, Google awarded all its employees a US$1 000 tax-free bonus as part of an incentive scheme to discourage staff from defecting to principal rivals such as Facebook. It also provides a host of less traditional amenities like gourmet meals, massages, exercise equipment, video games, billiard tables, and snack rooms. The company is clear about the need to catalyse new modes of thinking in an ultra-competitive market segment.

Just recently, Mashable reported that Google is now embarking on its largest hiring scheme to date. In an interview with Bryan Power, a people operations manager who oversees all of Google’s hiring in North and South America, it was made apparent that there’s no one-size-fits-all policy about staff recruitment and retention. “Google knows the world changes quickly,” said Power, “and we need people who can adapt and take on different challenges. A lot has changed in the last five years, and the next five years will [change] too. We need people who can adapt and take on different challenges.”

Power says that some interviewees will even arrive in board-shorts and T-Shirts, but manage to impress the company with their sharp intellect. Others, decked in their sartorial best, just weren’t prepared. Part of Google’s corporate philosophy, in fact, is that “you can be serious without a suit.” In this way, it has tended to make some pioneering steps toward fostering truly creative throughout that stretches the more traditional mold of corporate doppelgangers in grayscale suits and black briefcases.

One of the challenges that some multinational corporations face is trying to attract an industry-leading workforce amidst competition from ostensibly more attractive companies like Google. Who doesn’t want free lattes and recreation during working hours? It’s critical to keep in mind that no single company is perfect.

In an anonymous staff survey thread at Google, one employee said, “A common problem [at Google] is that it’s easy to become spoiled by all the perks. Several offices have developed distinct cultures of entitlement, and people whine about the quality of the fudge on the free brownies. It’s embarrassing to be around people who’ve become like spoiled children.”

Other staff pointed to patent management-line problems and inefficiencies. Google seems as plagued by staff politics as almost any other organisation out there. So while you may regard Google at the holy grail of your career (and perhaps in some ways it is), they aren’t the working man’s utopia. They’re damn close though.

Photocredit: jobsbump.com

Why most startups fail… and here is how not to

By Brett Commaille

Every couple of days we hear about a new start-up jumping onto the public stage with much fanfare. After that they’re a bit like a pimple in the middle of your forehead — every time you open your eyes it’s all you see.
But then one day, for no specific reason… it’s gone.
“Anyone know what happened to whatchamacallit?” After some enquiry, we’ve got a handful of rumours with a bucket of spin. All we know is: “it’s over”. Truth is, most of the time, it’s one or more of the same basic reasons.
There will always be those special individuals who find exceptional ways to kill their business — like setting fire to mom and dad’s garage and destroying the code (and backups). But the majority of startups fail in far more mundane ways. Being in the venture capital game for a number of years, I’ve seen it all. Here’s a number of key reasons I’ve seen startups fail… and here are some ways to avoid them:
1. Not understanding the user: Your plans are based on what you think the user wants, and maybe you even have a few buddies who thought that was cool. Make sure you take the time to find out exactly what the user wants and how they like doing things. Be careful about telling them how they should act, this usually backfires.
2. To in love with the tech: You love adding features — “Wouldn’t it be awesome if we could also let them Skype with the dead?”. You’re building an elephant, but haven’t tested any of it. Maybe users only need the trunk. Keep it to the core and market-test before you go wild on features. Getting this wrong has massive knock-on effects.
3. Launching to slow: If you’re building that elephant, you’ll keep holding back on the launch until everything is perfect. So it’s never fully ready or tested and now the competition has hit the market with a good basic solution. So keep it lean, get to market fast and add functions as user demand warrants it.
4. No real sales strategy: Capturing 20% of the market is not a strategy! Who will the first customers be? How do you reach them? What does it require to close the deal? How many sales people do you need to do this? What will the sales number look like based on all of this. Brush past this and you will have drastically overestimated your revenue.
5. Market too small: It’s easy to pick a niche that doesn’t seem too challenging. Remember you may face competition, even in that niche, and end up with a potential market which is just too small to support a sustainable business. Make sure your market is big enough and growing.
6. Basic copycat: Enter the many thousand Groupon clones around the world. Working international concepts have been launched successfully locally, but only if you’re the first to do it locally. Doing this into a busy market because you see the current players making tons of money is a sure recipe to burn cash and stay small. I learnt this far too well, having launched a super cool sunglasses brand … one of hundreds in the market (just before a recession too – damn!). We sold some of course, but the big boys in the market sold millions. Might as well have sold Chappies on the Metro. Be different, not “the same but better!”
7. Fast burner: You ramp up your costs as you grow a big developer team to match those massive revenues you expect. The revenues don’t happen and you’re suddenly burning money faster than a new MP planning Gala dinners. Again, get into the market with the basic product and start generating revenue. When the conversion metrics show you’re getting it right, then you can grow the spend.
There are more reasons why startup businesses fail, but these are the most important. Bear them in mind and you may avoid some of the most common pitfalls. Of course, the easiest way not to fail, is to not start. Fortunately you’re not scared, (else you would have closed your browser after seeing the word “start-up”) — and now you’re just a little a little more likely to make it.
Good luck!

Southern Africa: What has gender got to do with media freedom?

This 3 May marked 20 years of the Windhoek Declaration on Promoting Independent and Pluralistic Media, which was endorsed by UNESCO and the United Nations General Assembly in 1991. This endorsement ultimately led to the creation of 3 May as "World Press Freedom Day".
In 1991, heavy state control characterised much of the African media landscape. Following the Windhoek Declaration, things began to change. Acknowledging that media freedom is a necessary condition for democratisation, many African countries mainstreamed this into their constitutions in the first decade following the Declaration. At the Windhoek +10 conference in 2001, the right to press freedom was extended to include broadcasting freedom, which was brought about through the adoption of the African Charter on Broadcasting. The Charter in turn fed into the influential Declaration of Principles of Freedom of Expression, as adopted by the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights of the African Union.
However, the media landscape envisaged in the Declaration of 1991 is still far from being realised. This is due to various new laws and bills which ultimately threaten freedom of the media. For instance, in February 2011 the Malawi government enacted the Newspaper Ban Law which allows the information minister to ban publications deemed contrary to the public interest. In South Africa, a Media Appeals Tribunal was tabled in 2010 and, if approved, will be tasked with overseeing complaints brought against the press, which until now has been self-regulatory. These laws and others continue to infringe on the freedom of the media and undermine democracy.
The Declaration also addresses other pertinent issues such as freedom of information and expression, free flow of ideas by word and image, independent and pluralistic press, repression of media professionals, and establishment of associations that safeguard the fundamental freedoms in the Declaration and training of journalists. What strikes me when I read the Declaration today is that it puts women and men in the same bracket of media freedom.
Whereas media freedom has been understood to mean the absence of political censorship, there are many other ways in which citizens may be denied the right to be heard. As noted by the 2006 Gender Review of Media Development Organisations, women's voices may be excluded from the media. It is thus important to look at media freedom in a way that takes into consideration "gender-based censorship" which ultimately disempowers, silences and makes invisible certain people in society.
My point is that whilst the Windhoek Declaration has in many ways been successful at changing the overall African media landscape, the focus in the next decade should be on how citizens, both women and men, can be empowered by its provisions. This can only be realised if the Declaration clearly articulates the different ways media freedom impacts women and men.
Interestingly, the 20th anniversary of the Windhoek Declaration takes place when the 2008 SADC Protocol on Gender and Development is closer than ever to coming into force. The Protocol brings together and enhances international and African commitments to gender equality by setting 28 targets to be achieved by 2015. Specific provisions on the media include achieving parity in decision-making (rapid strides have already been made in the political realm); giving equal voice to women and men; challenging gender stereotypes; sensitive coverage of HIV and AIDS and gender violence. The Protocol also calls on the media to mainstream gender in all laws, training and policy.
Gender equality is entirely consistent with freedom of expression. Nothing is more central to this ideal than giving voice to all segments of the population. When women comprise about 52% of the population, but only constitute 24% of news sources (according to the 2010 Global Media Monitoring Project), censorship of a very real kind exists. The 2010 Gender Links Gender and Media Progress Study (GMPS) found that there has been a marginal increase in the proportion of women sources in Southern African media: from 17% in the 2003 Gender and Media Baseline Study to 19% in the GMPS.
These findings beg the question of what we really understand by freedom of expression, democracy and citizen participation. While more blatant forms of censorship may be subsiding, our media daily silences large segments of the population, notably women. Gender disparities in the news occur because of a lack of diversity in media ownership and "armchair" journalism, which results in the media seeking out a few voices of authority: often men.
Further, the media often applies double standards to men and women. Women are objectified and their physical attributes highlighted in ways that do not apply to men. The explosion of tabloid media has perpetuated these stereotypes.
Gender equality is implicit in the notions of a "pluralistic press"; "reflecting the widest possible range of opinion within the community"; "the fulfilment of human aspirations"; "freedom of the press" and "freedom of association" as espoused in the Windhoek Declaration. But the failure to state this explicitly has led to gross gender disparities in the media.
The Declaration encourages the establishment of professional associations that safeguard various freedoms. These associations should include women's media associations. Media development organisations have the opportunity, through the work they do, to lead by example in showing that gender is intrinsic to free speech, citizen participation, and progressive media practice and content.
Thus after 20 years of the Windhoek Declaration it is time to acknowledge these silent forms of censorship that daily occur in the media. The debates on mainstreaming gender in the declaration should be taken forward so that the next decade can see a region that truly exemplifies the freedoms espoused in the original document.

Saeanna Chingamuka is the Manager of the Gender and Media Diversity Centre. This article is part of the Gender Links Opinion and Commentary series on gender and press freedom.
http://www.genderlinks.org.za/article/Southern-africa-what-has-gender-got-to-do-with-media-freedom-2011-05-10

Print Media -- Self-regulation

By Reg Rumney

The proposal for a Media Appeals Tribunal last year caused a lot of agitation among the Press. Journalists have tended to see it as a way of controlling the bad publicity some individuals in the ANC and the Alliance have received.