Recent orders
Gorgias, Philosophical studies
Name:
Institution:
Course:
Tutor:
Date:
Gorgias
Introduction
Philosophical studies contend that Plato’s Gorgia is a representation of a very bitter dialogue that is characterized by uncompromising disagreement, anger and misunderstandings. Compared to other dialogues presented by the same author, it is indicted that this is the most hostile and is filled with a significant degree of tension. Of great reference however is the cutting rhetoric that is inherent in the dialogue. Plato indicates that rhetoric is at the core of human interactions. He asserts that it is intrinsic to human behavior and is ‘the source of freedom for humankind itself and at the same time is for each person the source of rule over others in one’s own city” (Plato 52). Indeed, it can not be disputed that rhetoric is an inherent characteristic of human as well as societal wellbeing. This study agrees to the fact that it is a source of freedom for both individuals and the entire society.
To begin with, Socrates challenges Gorgias to provide a distinct definition of rhetoric and provide relevant illustrations that indicate that he indeed engages in rhetoric. At this point in time, it is worth acknowledging that rhetoric explores and seeks to underscore the aspects of blame as well as praise in a bit to provide a concise definition that enables others to understand and appreciate the subject under review. Initially, Gorgias had a superficial understanding of rhetoric and only considered it to be associated with certain words that are specifically associated with art. Notably, this consistent probing by Socrates enabled him to understand and appreciate that rhetoric is an all inclusive word that denotes human freedom too.
Socrates exhibits the implications of this freedom by being happy rather than sad that he had been refuted. He posits that being refuted enables him to attain “understanding and wisdom as opposed to reputation and fame” (112). The latter is more desirable because it gives the important ‘others’ the freedom to actively participate in one’s life. In this consideration therefore, it can be ascertained that freedom improves the quality of the lives of not only individuals but also the society at large.
Thus, it can be deduced that humans are considered to be free individuals, courtesy of rhetoric. Freedom in this respect is perceived in light of the right to be wrong, rather than the right to do wrong. This freedom enables humanity to overcome various challenges that they face with ease. With it, both the guardians and prisoners exercise considerable concern and power over other individuals found in a city. Plato contends that freedom is a kind of power that is presumably employed in persuading other individuals to participate in a particular bidding. In this regard, he contends that “rhetoric is a producer of persuasion. Its whole business comes to that and that is the long and short of it” (131).
Fundamentally, persuasion is comprised of producing knowledge and instilling certain vital beliefs. It is believed that rhetoric is usually concerned with instilling vital beliefs in human lifestyles. With this, an individual has the capacity to pursue different forms of knowledge and employ the same in survival. Notably, freedom to explore this is fundamental in human survival. This is augmented by the different beliefs that do not only encourage one to engage in the search for knowledge but also encourages the same to utilize the knowledge for the improvement of the quality of human life. From this point of view, Plato ascertains that a rhetorician is responsible for “making beliefs in his auditor’s souls” (138).
In addition, Plato seeks to ascertain that various forms of poetry are a portrayal of rhetoric. This is because of the fact that the person that relays these to the audience is not the composer of the same. As such, s/he does not pass on the fundamental knowledge to the intended audience. In this respect, poetry is considered a form of flattery that seeks to please and gratify the audience rather than educate the same. In this regard, poetry is considered an art of public speaking that is rhythmic in nature. Thus when devoid of the meter and the rhythm, it plays a similar role as prose. Irrespective of this, it is still employed in education. This is an illustration of the freedom that rhetoric provides to the population. At this point, it is certain that the population has the opportunity to employ various artistic forms in passing on the information to different parties. However, it can be argued that by highlighting this, Socrates sought to underscore the fact that perception of rhetoric as an art does not effectively address all forms of knowledge that are central in the same.
Seemingly, rhetoric plays a fundamental role in enhancing the freedom of individuals and enabling the same to utilize the freedom in improvement of their lives as well as the lives of other individuals. In addition, it is certain that the art is also comprehensive and multifaceted. However, in order for it to yield optimal results in the society, it should not be employed against other individuals. A classic example of this as cited by Plato is the skills in boxing. Notably, these are instrumental in boxing as a game but can have far reaching implications on the wellbeing of the opponent if used inappropriately or outside the boxing domains. The relative freedom of rhetoric has been likened to these boxing skills. Plato ascertains that irrespective of the fact that the rhetorician teaches the students to use the skills in a just manner, there is a possibility that some may choose to misuse the same. In addition, the rhetorician is responsibility of teaching the ignorant students about the notions of justice and injustice. Likewise, the choice or decision to further either of this is depended on the students. This illustration also implies that the freedom perpetuated by rhetoric is indeed a complex notion that involves various intricate factors.
In this consideration, a rhetorician needs to assume the attributes of a competent philosopher. Considering the fact that s/he participates in enlightening the society regarding fundamental issues of justice, s/he needs to understand the dynamics of the same. In order to attain this status, one needs to make viable choices with regard to the freedom s/he is accorded. In this regard, Plato posits that the ability to make viable choices would enable the philosopher to attain vital skills in a timely manner and rise above the rest of the population.
Basically, the rhetorician is also expected to “exhibit exemplary behavior and act in a just manner” (Plato 162). This is because of the fact that s/he understands all the facets of justice. Notably, this issue has raised various controversies since historical times. These stem from the recognition that philosophers are also humans and it is therefore possible for them to be controlled by the various external powers that mold human behavior. As such, it is argued that the ability of the philosophers to uphold justice is largely depended on an individual’s personality.
Conclusion
From the analysis, it is certain that rhetoric is an important aspect that defines the wellbeing of humanity. It is a complex issue that is also characterized by freedom. Freedom is an intrinsic attribute of human behavior that determines the various activities that they engage in. The dynamism and multi faceted nature of freedom demands a considerable level of enlightenment and maturity for an individual to be able to utilize the same in a sustainable manner. This is attained through education and awareness creation. According to Plato, philosophers are the only individuals with this ability in the society.
As such, they are responsible for teaching the rest of the population important ideals. Nevertheless, freedom accords every individual an opportunity to make personal decisions and therefore, effective inculcation is highly depended on the personality of the same. More over, philosophers are expected to pursue justice in order to act as role models to the ignorant population. However, it is contended that attainment of this is also greatly influenced by an individual’s personality. It is in this consideration that this paper concludes that effective decision making that is augmented by freedom is fundamental for enhancing viable human interactions at different levels.
Work Cited
Plato. Gorgias. Oxford: University Press, 1998.
Google.com Company Analysis
Running Head: Google.com: Company Analysis
Name
Course
Tutor
Date
Company Summary
Classified as one of the five most popular sites in the internet, Google.com was visited by a unique user base of over 380 million visitors in May 2008. It is the world’s leading search engine and is additionally considered one of the fastest and largest growing technological companies in the world. The company was started as a research project by two Stanford graduate students Sergey Brin and Lawrence Page in 1996. The two sought to develop a search engine that produced better display for search results. The domain name, Google.com, was registered in 1997 and Google Inc. incorporated on September, 1998, (Bifet, Castillo, Chirita, & Weber, 2005).
As a result of better display in search results, and the simple approach that was incorporated in the searching process, Google has grown in popularity and acceptance the world over. Presently, the company employees are in excess of 10,000 people from all the continents of the world. It is the largest company offering Search related advertising yet Search Related advertisement are the fastest growing of all the online ad businesses with an estimated annual growth rate at 41%, (Pringle, Allison & Dowe, 1998).
Google displays almost twice as many search ads in comparison to its major competitor, Yahoo. It is estimated that, in December 2007, Google had a total of 16.5 trillion ad clickthroughs compared to Yahoo’s 9 trillion. Google earned an estimated $3.64 billion from the United States online ad revenue, an estimated 69% of all paid search related advertising. Its market cap has overtaken that of IBM and even Chevron with an estimated value of $132 billion. It has a surplus of over $7.6 billion all of which are lacking any defined usage, has its stock being predicted to reach $600 billion by the end of this year (2008) and is one of the top 10 web brands in the United States. The above summary is an indication of a model company, its success of which is attributed to its management, wide line of product, market domination, favorable financial position, favorable business strategy, strong competitive advantage, excellent organizational control and innovative research and development strategies.
Google Product Summary
Google offers a wide range of products a reflection of its technologically sound and alert team of innovators. Continuous intensive research is undertaken in the Google laboratories, online text locations or in the Google.com website itself. Products are generally of high quality and utility. The extensive list of Google’s products can be categorized into five major classes which include; Google Search, Ads, Application, Enterprise, and Google Mobile. Most of its products are free with a large proportion of its revenue (99%) accruing from advertisement, (Google, 2008).
Google Search, the best known of its products offer extensive range of products. The long list of its products covers over twenty products with product range including; Alerts, Gears, Web Search, Images, Blog search, Book search, Catalogs, language tools, Finance, Earth, Web Accelerator, Toolbar, Custom Search Engines, Product Search, Personalized Search, Google Maps, Desktop, Directory, Scholar, SketchUp and Google Toolbar, (Google, 2008).
Google Alerts is a Google product that automatically emails individuals in cases of new information on either the web or the globe. Classified into 3 types; News Alert which automatically notifies a subscriber on any news articles that appear in its top ten list, Web; an automatic notification for all the new web pages that appear on its 20 paged list and News and Web which offer an automatic notification on the basis of the above two presented products; news alert and web alert. Alerts have been most important in monitoring the development of a news story, staying alert on current events such as a major sporting event, enabling individuals to keep current on matters of industry and competition, and even tracking medical advances. The choice of the number of times one wishes to receive the alert together with the category of the alert, are matters of individual decision’ (Google, 2008).
Book search, a product under the search category enables individuals to search for book indices and contest hence persons can be able to trace books of interest. Book search is tailor-made in collaboration with the authors, publishers to avail millions of books instantly for the benefit of its potential audience. Blog Search enables individuals to find blog websites on the web. Owing to the relatively important position that bogging is progressively adopting in the global scene, Google Blog Search enables the display of millions of blog search and other feed enabled blogs including; blog names, blog posts, authors, date and other related products. Similarly, catalogs, classified under its search products enables access to full content of hundreds of mail order catalogues’ (Google, 2008).
The Custom Engine search is a specialized product built on the basis of Google ordinary search engine. It however offers a restriction on the search results of web pages displayed consequent to a given search. Desktop as a search product enables individuals to search texts over previously viewed files, music, web pages, chats and photos within the individual’s personal Computer. It generally enables an individual’s computer to be searchable therefore easening the manual organization of files. Google Directory is designed to enable people to search and browse only through the web pages that are categorized. Developed in the Open Directory Project, Google Web Directory is available in over 75 languages.
One of its most relevantly applicable products is Google Earth. It uses a combination of Google search with satellite imager; integrated with 3 Dimensional mapping technology thereby making geographic information accessible, interpretable further making it useful. Google Finance is another most important of Google products. It is created to enable access to business and financial information on public and private companies together with mutual funds. These are displayed through user friendly graphical interfaces such as charts, symbols and Google analylitics information. Gears as a product under the search category is a specialized browser extension. It enables individual web developers to create web application that can run offline. Images similarly offer services that are exclusively concerned with the search and display of imagers present in the web’ (Google, 2008).
Google maps, are well accepted product in the market, is primarily a mapping technology. The mapping technology has integrated satellite imagery, graphically generated maps and content with a functionality that describes geographical locations. This product has been most beneficial in providing satellite and aerial images of major cities, businesses, prime locations in addition to offering guide’s individuals. Google language tool is a search product that offer web search based on language preferences. It has the capacity of offering custom search of more than 40 languages in addition to providing Google with links to over 100 languages.
Personalized search is a search product that enables restricted display of search results that are most relevant to individual user. Product search on the other hand enables shoppers to find available product through the use of Google technology. Individuals are able to locate products from both real and virtual stores, sort products by prices or location, see products reviews and compare prices and view Google products. Google scholar is also a criticalGoogle search product that enables the search and finding of scholarly literature. Individuals are enabled to locate essays, reports, abstracts theses, dissertations from a wide range of academic and professional groups and publications.
SketchUp enables the creation and modification of 3 dimensional models through the integration of pencil sketching and digital technology. Google toolbar enables the addition of Google search box to the browser, irrespective of the browser in use. It improves the efficiency of the browser through the introduction of features such as web form filler, spell checker, word translator and by extension, pop-up blocker. Other search products such as web accelerator enables the fast loading of web pages, and ultimately, Google Web Search which is the most used of the Google products. It simply enables easy access to billions of web pages through the integrated of a wide ranging assortment of Google web search features’ (Google, 2008).
Ads, Application and Google Enterprise
Apart from the extensive list of Google search products, the Ads category of Google’s products has also been a large product of the Google Company. Since its introduction to the company, it has continued to bring untold success, with the present estimated 99% company revenue base. The various Ads programs enables the assistance of other interested companies advertise their products through the World Wide Web. Products under Google Ads include Google Ad Sense, Google AdWords and Google Analytics’ (Google, 2008).
Companies pay Google for their products to be advertised online. Through Ad Sense the display of text and graphic image advertisements are enabled on websites. The proceeds earned through the advertisements are shared between Google and website owners. Google AdWords is also an advertisement program in which the individual has absolute control over the content to display. Google analytics is a free advertisement program to advertisers, website owners and publishers that enables the identification of key words enabling the location of where individuals who access your website are located.
Under Google Applications Category there exist; Google Apps which is basically constituted of Google application programs such as Gmail services, Google calendar, Google Talk. Google blogger is under Google Apps and offers a web based free publishing tool that enables individual creation of websites. The Calendar as a product of Google Applications enables individuals to organize their schedule through addition of expected events, keeping track of ones agenda, gathering calendar information and even adding not only TV listings, but public events as well’ (Google, 2008).
Other applications include: Checkout which makes shopping faster and more secure by creating a purchases forum; Google code which enable website developers to offer news, downloads, documentations and tutorials relevant for the development, modification of existing and new products; Docs & Spreadsheets which enables access to free web based word processing and spreadsheet application programs: Gmail which is a Webmail Service Group which enable individual access to either public or private groups of interest, and Labs which enables innovative individuals to undertake online experimental testing and search. Other products offered under the application category include; News, Notebook, Orkut, Pack, Picasa, Picasa Web Albums, Reader, Talk, Translate, Video, Webmaster tools, and YouTube an online video entertainment medium, (Evans, 2007) .
Under the Enterprise category, products such as Earth for Enterprise otherwise known as Google Earth pro enables businesses and organizations to publish their organizational data make reports and decision based on location data. Maps for enterprise enable web-based mapping technology for internal websites. Google Mini is also a Google product under the Enterprise category that enables the identification of technology applicable to small and medium sized enterprises, (Evans, 2007). The search appliance is a technologically advanced system that integrates hardware and software with Google’s advanced fields to offer products. SketchUp Pro enables 3-Dimensional modeling thereby facilitating the communication of complex concepts, importation and exportation of complex files all of which enable effective sharing of information within enterprises.
Google Mobile as a product category incorporates products that are built for mobile devices. The Google mobile products enable individuals to use their mobile phones in location of virtually any piece of information worldwide. It has similar features with other Google products such as search, maps, Gmail, SMS, YouTube, Callender, News, Blogger, Picasa Web Albums, and Checkouts.
Geographical distribution of Google services
Google’s products and services are distributed globally. It is reported that its offices are strategically located with the geographical location of its major markets, Khaki-Sedigh, A., Roudaki, M. (2003). It therefore has an extensive global network of offices. This enables regional coordination thereby ensuring market domination. It has over 20 offices in the US with its head office located in Mountain View, California. Other offices across the United States are in Atlanta, Austin, Boulder, Ann Arbor, Cambridge, Chicago, Coppell, Detroit, Irvine, Pittsburgh, Reston, San Fransisco, Santa Monica, Seattle, Kirklant and Washington DC. It further has two offices in New York City. Across the Australian Continent, Google has headquarters in Melbourne and Sydney. In Mainland China it has headquarters in Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou. It further has headquarters in Hong Kong. In the Indian Subcontinent, Google has offices in Bangalore, Gurgaon, Hyderabad and Mumbai.
In Japan its offices are located in Osaka and Tokyo, in South Korea Seoul, in Taiwan Taipei. Across Europe Google’s offices are located in Prague Czech Republic, Aarhus and Copenhagen in Denmark, Helsinki in Finland, Paris in France, Hamburg in Germany, Budapest in Hungary, Dublin in Ireland, Milan in Italy, Amsterdam in Netherlands, Oslo and Trondheim in Norway, Kraków and Wroclaw in Poland, Moscow and St. Petersburg in the Russian Federation, Madrid in Spain, Luleå and Stockholm in Sweden, Zurich in Switzerland, London and Manchester in the UK, Toronto, Montreal and Waterloo in Canada, Buenos Aires and Sao Paulo in Brazil, Lomas de Chapultepec in Mexico. Other management offices are located in Heliopolis Cairo, Haifa and Tel Aviv Israel, Istanbul Turkey and Dubai in the United Arab Emirates’ (Google, 2008).
Google Competitor analysis
Google’s biggest competitor is Yahoo followed by Microsoft, Ask.com and American Online respectively. Based on the variety of Google’s products and services, it is difficult to exactly determine its competitors. Yahoo provides similar products such as e-mail services, maps, financial analysis, advertising, search and yahoo toolbar but still its products are not similar in many ways to those of Google.
Comparing Microsoft to Google, Microsoft offers search and other few online services similar to those offered by Google though its main line of business is the design and sale of software and operating systems. Competition comes into focus due to the recent launch of Google Docs & Spreadsheets and Google Gears, presentation software that challenges the dominance of Microsoft Windows.
In terms of Sales, Products and Geographical distribution, Google accounts for over 50% (Estimated 58.4%) to be exact of market share in nearly all its products. By market share Google beats its competitors by far. With the stated estimated market share of 50%, Yahoo, Microsoft, Ask.com and AOL each have an estimated market share of 28.5%, 10%, 5%, and 4% respectively, (Khaki-Sedigh, & Roudaki, 2003).
Financial Analysis
There has been an exponential growth in Google’s revenues within the past decade. This growth is attributed to the increase in advertising revenue that has been witnessed within the past five years and the fact that the company went public in 2004. In its Initial Public Offer, the company offered 19,605,052 shares at the price of $85 per share. Its stock has steadily been on the rise averaging $500 in the 2007. In terms of market value estimation, its value has risen from the IPO value of $1.7 billion in 2004 to over $157 billion.
Further estimates show that Google’s net income grew from $100 million in 2002 to $ 3.077 billion in 2006. Its cost of goods sold was generally constant being maintained at approximately 40% of sales. Earnings before interest and taxation have been relatively constant at an estimated 33% of total sales. On common base analysis, Google had a 2,412% increase in sales in the five year period between 2002 and 2006 with a net income increment of over 3,088% within the same period.
This is a remarkable growth within such small periods of times. Growth in sales over the five year was 233%, 117%, 92% and 72% in 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006 respectively. The downward trend should not be seen as a reduction in income or negation in growth but rather as relative responses to increases in economies of scale, (Decuir, 2007). There has been a considerable cash surplus resulting from balances in short and long term investments. Google has neither short nor long term debt though the IPO offered an increase in capital surplus in 2004. With the continued rise in its share prices, Google’s capital surplus has continued to rise over the years furthermore being a service oriented company, Google has no looming inventory.
On the basis of ratio analysis, Google’s sales increased from 1.2 in 2002 to a whooping 29.05 in 2006. (Decuir, 2007) notes that, over the past five years, Google has had more money at hand than they know what to do with, an attribute that has been seen on its rather many acquisitions. Google’s profit margin fluctuated between 2002 and 2003 but increased steadily to an estimated 60.2% in 2006.
R&D Budget for Google and for its competitors
Driven by large revenues from advertisement, Google.com has invested massively in its Research and Development Budget. Varied sections of Google have had different approaches to attaining solutions to various world problems such as new technological advancement, pharmaceutical research and online advertisements, (Pringle, Allison & Dowe, 1998).
Google has invested massively in research and development though it was not classified under the top ten R&D spenders until 2007. This followed from massive increments in the company’s spending on Research and Development when spending increased by over 73% to a record breaking $2.1 billion in the year 2007 compared to the budget in 2006.
HYPERLINK “http://labs.google.com/” http://labs.google.com/Since 2007, it is estimated that Google’s R&D spending has stayed above 13% of its total revenue which is a representation of more than double the amount spent prior to the year 2002. Massive research is being undertaken on how Google can enter into other business projects such as Android, TV Ads, and other projects to further boost its growth.
Google’s business strategy
As listed on the company’s website, Google’s operations have been guided by the philosophy of not settling for the best. Google’s mission is to be a world leader in information provision. This is to make information accessible and useful. It has displayed continued innovativeness with the introduction of multiple products into the markets. Certain products, such as Google Ad Sense, were without doubt, a success for the company, advertisers and web owners in general, (Lohr, 2007) .
Google has managed to remain competitive through multiple acquisitions. To the present, the company has acquired more than 30 companies since its inceptions, a strategic step since most of the acquisitions have been advantageous to the company. Some of the acquisitions that have been instrumental to the growth of the company include the 2003 acquisition of Applied Semantics Inc. which enabled them to develop an advertising campaign that has earned them billions of dollars in advertisement revenue to the present. The 2006 acquisition of Writely, an online processing firm led to the development of Google docs which since its inception in 2006, has seen a rise in its revenue. Google further acquired YouTube, in 2006 for a record $1.6 billion which has seen it dominate the online video industry.
The Company has also made efforts to acquire competitors. An example is the 2007 acquisition of DoubleClick, an advertising competitor for a record $3.1 billion. It also acquired Tonic Systems which enabled it to acquire the capacity to convert Microsoft Power Point files into html and PDF documents. This boosted its competition with Microsoft which had gained a considerable market base based on its Microsoft Office product.
Control Strategy
Google has had a rather integrated approach in achieving organizational control, an approach applying both bureaucratic, market and clan control mechanisms. Google has a board of governors and a core management team together with specialized well documented rules and regulations implemented through a formal authority that serve to guide employee performances. This bureaucratic type of approach has been applied mildly and has served to regulate Google employee’s behavior thereby leading to better results, limited budgets, better performances as displayed in statistical reports and employee performance records.
Google was ranked as the best company to work for in the 2006 survey by the Fortune magazine in 2007, (Fortune, 2007) . It has succeed in creating a generally good working environment for all its employees though some critics see this as making them loose a considerable proportion of daily tasks. It has been characterized by offering its employees a large degree of freedom thereby tapping their creativity towards the improvement of both its products and services.
It has further served to ensure the health and safety of its workers through the implementation of a comprehensive heath protection scheme that ensures that all its employees have a comprehensive medical cover. This is based on its belief that healthy workers are more productive and can produce quality work, are regularly present to work since good health reduces the number of accidents and diseases thereby reducing duration of absence. The company has also ensured the optimization of the working environment.
A considerable proportion of the company’s control has also been governed by the aspect of market control mechanism. There has been the rewarding of well performing management team since 2002 with the managers who are underperforming being demoted or reshuffled. The organization has also adopted the clan control mechanism. Google’s employees have many things in common. They share many values, expectations and goals hence tend to work in harmony with one another. This has been displayed in the less formal approach in which the Google team approaches issues. The intergraded approach used by Google has ensured greater cost savings, increased efficiency, better product quality, enhanced customer service and a happier cohesive workforce who work in harmony to produce positive results.
Google: A continuously evolving corporation
Google is continuously evolving from a predominantly search engine to a media corporation. It formerly concentrated on being a search engine. Its evolution has been a long one. Its breakthrough came when it was contracted by Yahoo to offer its distribution services. Presently, Google has advantageously taken the lead both as a search engine and in advertisement’ (Wall, 2008). To maintain the lead, constant innovative change in its product through invariable introduction of new technology, strategy, structure and culture is required otherwise, the lead will slip.
Historically, Google became popular through the organization of web based on links via empirical analysis were performed by PageRank, (Brin, S. & Page, 1996). Google has introduced relatively stringent rules in order to protect some of its products and services. More recently, it introduced a trend that required all Ad Sense members to sign a gagging clause. The clause has restricted web owners from unfairly benefiting from the proceeds gained from advertising. Google has been continuously innovative, being innovative and the first to implement its strategies. For example it was the first company to implement the Ad Relevancy strategy, a strategy that ensured it provided broad matching on all search terms. It further went ahead to set a system in which a single price was set on all ads, (Moran, & Hunt, 2006).
A company set towards meeting its objectives
Will the organization manage to meet its growth objectives in the coming years while displaying sustained innovativeness in further differentiation of its products? So far Google has displayed significant growth rates since the onset of the 21st century. Its stock prices are currently above the $500 dollar mark, with predictions of better performance in future. Based on free cash flow estimates, its shares were estimated at $503.32 as at June 2007 though scholars estimate that conservative estimates could range anywhere between $100 and $30,000 per share’ (Decuir, 2007).
Through internal development and acquisition, Google has managed and will continue to expand its products and services so as to increase its competitiveness in different markets other than software and other web based services. Since web based advertising is the fastest growing advertisement portion, Google’s sales will certainly increase in the coming years. In fact on the basis of a logistic growth function presented by (Decuir, 2007), sales figures will reach $155.3886 billion by the year 2016. Based on its current largely favorable management team,
The Way Foreword
Since the future is uncertain, through based on the current results, it looks like it holds probable success prospects for Google, Google should innovatively continue sticking to its current products and services of largely providing free web-based services to users while at the same time diversifying into new markets. It should however, seek to keep other technology firms from overtaking its already established market base.
Google should not continue being too dependent on advertising. Presently, 99% of Google’s revenue comes from search related advertising. It is only the remaining 1% that comes from the sale of its many web based tools, (Wall, 2008). With it massive financial resources, Google should be able to diversify into other investments so as to not only increase its revenues, but to remain stable in the turbulent waters of the global business domain. The company management should be focused and rather than have massive financial resources lacking in usage, make wise investment decisions to use the resources to enter new markets such as the media industry.
Conclusion
As defined by Google’s philosophy, “Never Settle for the Best”, Google is surely one of the success stories of the 20th and 21st centuries in terms of technological investments. It has succeeded in providing relevant search results, offering advertisement on specific web pages, together with a variety of products and services. From the analytical presentation above, in overall, Google as a company has displayed strong financial growth, better management principles, better company philosophy, and decision making process displayed in its continued innovation and strategic acquisitions.
With a strong reputation and familiarity, good speed in its search procedures, user friendliness in its product output, relevance in ranking of its search results together with technologically advanced additional services which are multidisciplinary in nature, available multiple opportunities seen in the ever increasing online advertisement, higher usage volubility as it gains more customer base across the global domain, and the introduction of new products, Google will surely continue to dominate the market for certain undefined periods of time. Definitely, Google Inc. has been a role model to technological businesses and still has great potential as a company.
References
Brin, S. & Page, L. (1996) The Anatomy of a Large-Scale Hypertextual Web Search Engine.
Paper presented to the Computer Science Department, Stanford University: Retrieved
Bifet, A., Castillo, C., Chirita, P.-A., Weber, I. (2005), “An analysis of factors used in search
engine ranking”, Proceedings of the Workshop on Adversarial IR on the Web, Chiba, 10-14 May, .Fortune, (2007) The 100 Best Companies to Work For,” Fortune Magazine, Accessed June 2007,
HYPERLINK “http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/bestcompanies/2007/” http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/bestcompanies/2007/
Moran, M., Hunt, B. (2006), Search Engine Marketing, Inc. – Driving Search Traffic to your
Company’s Web Site, IBM Press, Armonk, NY,Evans, P.M (2007) Analyzing Google rankings through search engine
optimization data. Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Journal of Internet Research Volume 17 Issue 1 Page 21 – 37 HYPERLINK “http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/ViewContentServlet?Filename=Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Articles/1720170102.html” http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/ViewContentServlet?Filename=Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Articles/1720170102.html
Google, (2008). Corporate Information: Quick Profile. Retrieved December, 6th,
2008 from: HYPERLINK “http://www.google.com/corporate/facts.html” http://www.google.com/corporate/facts.html
Khaki-Sedigh, A., Roudaki, M. (2003), “Identification of the dynamics of the Google ranking
algorithm”, paper presented at the 13th IFAC Symposium On System Identification, available at: www.iranseo.com/ studies/google_ranking_algorithm.pdf
Lohr, S. (2007) Google Deal Said to bring U.S. Scrutiny,” New York Times, May 29, 2007,
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/29/technology/29antitrust.html?ex=1181880000&en=c
3dae549fa6381ad&ei=5070
Moran, M., Hunt, B. (2006), Search Engine Marketing, Inc. – Driving Search Traffic to your
Company’s Web Site, IBM Press, Armonk, NY,
Pringle, G., Allison, L., Dowe, D.L. (1998), “What is a tall poppy among web
pages?”, Proceedings of the 7th International World Wide Web Conference, Brisbane, April, pp. 369-377Wall, A. (2008) Death Before Birth-The Life Cycle of a Search Engine. Retrieved
December, 6th,
2008 from: HYPERLINK “http://www.search-marketing.info/newsletter/fanbase.htm” http://www.search-marketing.info/newsletter/fanbase.htm
Google Strategy in 2010
Google Strategy in 2010
Student’s Name
Learning Institution
Discuss competition in the search industry. Which of the five competitive forces seem strongest? weakest? What is your assessment of overall industry attractiveness?
Porter was determined to provide organizations with a framework through which they could analyze the competition and also determine their strategies. The Porters five forces examine the power behind the five opposing competitive forces that usually determines the firm’s long-term successes as well as competition. The efforts of Porter with regards to the five forces are vital as far as the search industry is concerned. The following are the five competitive forces that can shape the attractiveness of the search industry; conflicting firms, threat of product substitutes, new market entrants and the ability of buyers and suppliers to exercise their bargaining power in the market.
Porter’s Five Forces
Source : 12manage.com
Competitive rivalry
Michael porter argued that the rivalry among firms inhibits an organization from achieving its objectives. New entrants in the search industry bring rivalry. According to him, rival firms normally allocates massive advertising budgets for their products and services, gives a high priority to innovation programmes, offer excellent services to their clients and give discounts in order to win the lace for market share and profitability. In the search industry, those firms that employ various competition weapons are more competitive and this enables them to enjoy a greater market share. Currently, there are more than 20 firms which compete for market share with Google. Google as one of the main search engine providers faces competition from five main companies that includes Yahoo, Ask, AOL, Baidu and MSN. These companies have continuously launched new strategies with a view of gaining a larger market share and creating more sales. Advertising is the main source of revenue for search engine providers. In the face of global competition, search engine providers have been forced to improve as well as expand their search advertising services in order to realize their financial goals. Clients are therefore switching to rival brands and this is a major threat for Google. Researchers predict that the search industry will be saturated in the near future due to new entrants. Some of the factors that heighten rivalry in the search engine include the following:
The increasing growth with regards to online actions is a major aspect that is strengthening rivalry.
Organizations such as Microsoft are providing customer responsive services through innovation.
Many new firms among them MSN have been issued with licenses and thereby heightening the rivalry significantly.
Also, rivalry in the Search industry revolves around such aspects as quality of services provided, relationship with various stakeholders, accessibility of information among others.
Generally, the level of competitive rivalry in the search industry is high.
Threat of Product Substitutes
According to Michael porter, the threat of product substitutes is dependent upon the availability of other products or services outside the realm of the common product or service boundaries (Porter, 1980, p. 48). The internet has recently become the main source of queries and information gathering driven by search engines that return the results or information needed. This commanding presence of the internet gives Google a guarantee for success. As Niu and Liu, (2010, p. 6)+ note, there is no foreseeable substitute for the internet at the moment. The closest substitute would be search of information physically through publications, which would be more involving, time consuming and much more costly. Therefore, the threat of new substitutes in the search market is weak.
New Market Entrants
Any market in which the existing firms are earning high levels of returns attracts new entrants (Porter, 1980, p. 47). When many new firms enter into such a market, the profitability of all firms in the industry decreases. Unless barriers to entry are put in place by the existing firms, the high levels of profits will tend towards zero. There is a high level of entry barriers in the search industry, making Google to have a low risk of market entry threat (Niu & Liu, 2010, p. 6). It would require too much capital to build up a new search company with the necessary network infrastructure to compete with Google. It would also require massive capital to market such a new company in the internet to the extent that it effectively competes with the well established Google online products. However, a new company may compete with Google if it focuses on only on one of the products or services offered by Google and strives to make it more appealing to consumers. If the new company has the necessary talent and information, it can develop a better product than one of Google’s products. This implies that in overall, the threat of new entry for Google is moderate (Niu & Liu, 2010, p. 6).
Bargaining Power of Buyers in the Market
The bargaining power of buyers refers to the ability for consumers to put pressure to a company and the effect it has on their sensitivity to changes in prices ((Porter, 1980, p. 48). The bargaining power of buyers in the search industry is high. As Niu and Liu, (2010, p. 5) explains, this industry is relatively new and there is potential for expansion for the Google and its numerous competitors. Most of the services offered by Google and its competitors are free and rely on advertising for revenue to be generated. If consumers may choose not to use one or more services of a given search engine, this could lead to a reduction in the number of advertising clients, affecting the ability for this search engine to generate revenue. In other words, buyers are able to switch easily from Google to other search companies, meaning that they can easily control pricing especially if they reach a consensus that the prices for Google services are too high.
Bargaining Power of Suppliers in the Market
The bargaining power of suppliers refers to the ability of suppliers of inputs such as raw materials, services (such as expertise), labour and components to refuse to work with a company for one reason or another (Porter, 2008). The bargaining power of suppliers is moderate. Search engines rely on talent people as suppliers. As Niu & Liu, (2010, p. 5) explains, it is not easy to find talented, knowledgeable and skilled persons. However, Google tries to provide a flexible working schedule and various benefits in order to attract and retain them. As well, Google uses an ad system where both the advertisers and receivers are its clients. Suppliers of items such as the Android phone system have achieved great success mainly due to the dominance of Google. Thus, they also want to associate themselves with this company. Thus, as long as dominance of Google remains high in the market, the bargaining power of suppliers will remain moderate.
This analysis shows that competitive rivalry and bargaining power of buyers are strong, the threat of new entrants and bargaining power of buyers are moderate and the threat of new substitutes is weak. In short, the analysis of Porter’s competition forces shows that the search industry somehow unattractive.2. Changes and forces expected to bring change in the search industry within the nest three to five years
The search industry is going through great changes. As Gamble (2010, p. 151) explains, search companies are innovating new ways that enhance smooth and faster transmission of content. They have been increasingly trying to maintain strong relationships with internet users, websites and advertisers. They have also been creating partnerships with companies from other industries in order to reach more customers. For instance, Google had entered into strategic partnership with numerous phone operators from different parts of the world by 2010. Search companies are also forming partnerships among themselves. Google formed relationship with yahoo in 2000 and has recently formed partnerships with many more online search companies. As Gamble (2010, p. 151) explains, many search companies are expanding their range of services in order to earn revenue from numerous sources.
This industry is likely to continue changing within the next three to five years. One of the forces that are likely to drive this change is increased competition among search companies. Major search companies such as Google, Yahoo and Microsoft are expected to continue innovating new styles of search and to continue forming partnerships among themselves and with companies outside search industry. There are many other players that are emerging. Changes in user behaviour are another force that is likely to cause changes in the search industry. By 2010, for instance, users were already putting URLs into Google toolbar search box to try and access specific sites (Gamble, 2010, p. 151). This meant that users had started using search engines, not only as data harvesting tools but also as navigation tools. This heightened the need for partnering among search companies and developing good relationships with websites. Emergence of hand devices such as cell phones which increase internet use is also a major force behind the changes in the search industry.
3. Key factors, key competencies, capabilities and resources of successful search engines
Success in the search industry is largely determined through profit as profit is the main goal of any business organization. The technological aspect of a search engine is another important factor in determining success of a search firm. According to Staudinger (2008), the quality of search results is also an important factor. As well, the amount of searches can be used to determine the success of a firm since it indicates the number of people using the product. A successful search engine must have built a strong consumer loyalty and should be having strong technical competencies. The aforementioned technical competencies and monetization comprise the key competencies of a successful search engine. 4. Google’s customer value proposition, profit formula and strategies to achieve competitive advantage
Value proposition refers to the promise given by a firm regarding the value that consumers will derive through consuming the firm’s product or service. Google promises users to provide a simple and clear interface, to ensure that pages load instantly and to ensure that advertisers provide relevant content. It promises to provide them with a wide range of products and services that suit their needs. As Gamble (2010, p. 139) notes, Google promises consumers to continue working on speed, to rank sites in terms of relevance during a search, to provide its products and services in and-held devices, to provide ways of making money online, to ensure that information is accessible in the language of the user and to address cases of dissatisfaction immediately as they occur. Google earns revenue through charging licensing fees to corporations, charging search capabilities on company websites and intranets and through placements on sponsored ads (Gamble (2010, p. 141). To build competitive advantage in the industry, Google has developed an infrastructure that enhances efficient and fast searching compared to competitors (Gamble 2010, p. 145). This company has also developed unique innovative tools such as Google earth, Google news, Google maps and Google toolbar which make it more competitive. As well, Google has expanded its products to wireless devices using its Android operating system.
5. Google’s business model and strategy are successful
Google’s business model can be said to be successful. According to Gamble (2010, p. 145), the net income of Google in 2007 was about 40 times as much as 2003. Table 1.0 presents a financial analysis comparing the performance of Google, Microsoft and Yahoo between 2006 and 2008.
Table 1.0: Financial analysis of Google, Microsoft and Yahoo between 2006 and 2008
Number Google Microsoft Yahoo
Revenues (2007) 16,593.99 51,122.00 6,969.27
Total Operating Expenses (in $m) (2007) 11,509.59 32,684.00 6,273.86
Operating Income (2007) 5,084.40 18,438.00 695.41
Net profit margin 2006 0.48 0.34 0.25
Net profit margin 2007 0.42 0.35 0.16
Net profit margin 2008 0.32 0.354 0.003
The above data indicates Google’s revenue can be located between Microsoft and Yahoo. The performance of Google is quite impressive given that it recorded an operating income that was much higher compared to that of Microsoft and Yahoo during the same year. Further, Google recorded positive change in Net Profit Margins in the years 2006, 2007 and 2008 while Microsoft and Yahoo recorded a negative change. Generally, the performance of Google is impressive and rewarding to investors.
7. Recommendations for Google’s top-management team
It is advisable for Google Inc. to strongly pursue growth and quality assurance initiatives for its search engine. For it to retain leadership in the search industry, it has to maintain the superior quality of its engine. It is advisable to include additional media and to increase searched document base. Google Inc. should continually monitor competitors and where possible, acquire them. It is also advisable for this company to come up with strategies to reduce its high operating costs. This can be achieved through making bulk deals with vendors of PC components and where possible, putting cables into the oceans to minimize traffic costs between regions or continents. The company should continually push for mobile search through making strategic alliances with cell phone contract providers and cell phone vendors in order to grow and secure a grater market share. Google Inc. should also ensure that its beneficial programs such as the Adsense have been continued by all means. The new services AdSense TV Ads in particular should be used to acquire more customers through the established advertising networks.8. Google vision statement.
Google’s vision statement states that this company believes in an open web that benefits all publishers and users. However, this does not mean that its products and services offered on the web are free (Nieman, 2010, p. 1). Google believes that there is need to support web content using various business models, including, content that is meant for users to subscribe in it. Though Google believes that the use of advertisement model will still remain the main source of revenue, there is also need to support it using a paid content model. However, the paid content model is not meant to replace advertisements opportunities but to enhance them.
Google acknowledges that the paid content model has two main challenges. First, the content provided must be valuable to users and this has to be addressed keenly by content creators. Secondly, the amount charged must be affordable and painless to the users. Google has experience in e-commerce products and services and has successfully developed appealing products and services to millions of users across the globe. Google also expects to use the same expertise to develop a successful and appealing e-commerce platform for publishers (Nieman, 2010, p. 1).
Google is committed to developing ways to ensure that users know and understand the existing products and services. It is also committed to continued innovation and discovery of better distribution ways of both free and paid content. As well, it is committed to giving support to publishers to develop a scalable e-commerce system through its Checkout product and establish better ways through which users access this content via search (Nieman, 2010, p. 1). Google’s premium content ecosystem has the five main features stated below:
It has single sign-on capability that enables users to manage subscriptions and access content.
Subscriptions from different tiles are easily combined together by publishers for one price.
Publishers are able to develop more than one payment option and include/exclude content behind a paywall with ease.
There are three main multiple tiers of access to search, namely, “first free click” access, access to preview pages and snippet views only.
Advertising systems with relevant and quality ads (Nieman, 2010, p. 1).
Google has made a step in realizing this vision as it is already working with several premium content providers. To allow for more flexibility for users and publishers, Google will ensure that its e-commerce system is well combined with advertising platform and search capability (Nieman, 2010, p. 1).
9. SWOT analysis for Google
The following are Google’s strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats
Strengths
Google is the leading search engine on the internet
Has a high speed, reliable, simple to use and user friendly (Gamble, 2010, p. 137)
It is the best known search engine among the public, making marketing process easy
It provides numerous products ranging from hardware, web products, Mobile products and desktop products (Gamble, 2010, p. 137)
The operating cost for Google’s products and services is low
It hires talented, knowledgeable and skilled persons to enhance search engine algorisms which make the search more efficient, faster and relevant.
Its search engine interface has more than 100 languages making it usable and helpful for locals in various parts of the world
Its state-of-art technology helps in updating outcomes to users.
Google has a page-rank technology which provides users with access to the most important information or pages first.
The results are marked in a differential scale. In other words, it separates regular links from sponsored links provided
It also provides localized searching which enables users to receive results according to their regions
It provides services such as Email, Citation, Directory, News and Groups (Gamble, 2010, p. 138).
It has come up with solutions regarding personalized toolbars, devices and indexes
Users are directly routed to WebPages without being required to access other sites for ad. revenues
Its integration with YouTube helps to provide video services to users, which is regarded as the leading online video portal.
It has AdSense and AdWords programs working as the main mechanism (Gamble, 2010, p. 144)
Weaknesses
Google is mostly dependent on its search-based advertising (Gamble, 2010, p. 154)
It does not have a clear focus regarding the service of the engine
Users often face dead ends. For instance, a user may find a citation but not find the whole text
Spammers are able to create sites containing numerous links which end up ranking high (Gamble, 2010, p. 154)
The cost for the data centre has been increasing
Google has no clear contraction strategy
Its presence in social-networking is weak
The integration between products and services is quite heterogeneous
It does not have ability to prevent YouTube from being monetized (Gamble, 2010, p. 154)
Its localized search leads to errors sometimes
Only about 50 percent to 60 percent of the queries answered by Google are accurate
The contextual advertisement of Google is less effective in terms of revenue generation (Niu, Z. & Liu, 2010, p. 12)
Opportunities
Google has a good opportunity for reaching new contents and for reaching new segments/groups
It has good opportunity for attracting experts
It has an opportunity to use high value content on the internet
Google has opportunity to increase its impact by acquiring other search companies
Increasing internet usage can help to increase the usage of google.com
It can offer more products and services on hand-held devices to capture more market
It can use localized vendors to advertise its products and services on the localized search (Niu & Liu, 2010, p. 13).
Threats
There are cases of legal trials
There are limits from indexing policies
Competition from companies such as MSN and Yahoo
Possibility of disappearance of informational skills
Users may not access institutional subscription
Library services are becoming less visible
Possibility of censorship, which may render many services to become less effective (Niu & Liu, 2010, p. 13)
References
Gamble, J. E. (2010), Case 9: Google’s strategy in 2010,
Nieman (2010). Google’s vision statement. Retrieved 3 July 2013 from,
HYPERLINK “http://www.niemanlab.org/pdfs/Google.pdf” http://www.niemanlab.org/pdfs/Google.pdf
Niu, Z. & Liu, Y. (2010), Google Inc. Retrieved 3 July 2013 from,
HYPERLINK “http://tippie.uiowa.edu/krause/spring2010/goog_sp12.pdf” http://tippie.uiowa.edu/krause/spring2010/goog_sp12.pdf
Porter, M.E. (1980) Competitive Strategy, , New York: Free Press
Porter, M.E. (2008) The Five Competitive Forces That Shape Strategy, Harvard business
Review, January 2008
Staudinger, U. (2008). Google’s strategy in 2008. Retrieved 3 July 2013 from,
http://ulrich.activequant.com/mba/2010/02/googles-strategy-in-2008.html