5 Lessons Learned from Working at Google for 3.5 years
I worked at Google for over three years, helping to create several career certificates, especially in Digital Marketing and E-commerce, where I served as a writer, SME, and content manager. Although it did not feel that long, the project was only supposed to be for six months but got extended six times.
During my time at Google, I learned a lot of valuable lessons, five of which come to mind:
1. Be Speedy (respond quickly)
I believe I heard on a podcast, or possibly read in a book, that the highest performing founders are typically the ones that respond the quickest.
For example, if an investor sends them an email, they respond quickly. Much more quickly than you anticipated they would.
I noticed the speedy response from the Google employees I worked with. The Program Managers responded exceptionally fast to requests. The communication could have occured through chat or email or within docs. Wherever it was, they were speedy.
How did that quickness affect me?
Early on in the project, I decided that if they were responding fast, then I needed to respond fast too. I would silence/ignore chat and email when doing deep work. However, when not doing deep work, I was very available on chat and email. I tried to reply as quickly as possible.
My takeaway is high performers respond fast. Of course, this isn't 100% always true. But in general, yes, it is true.
Speediness has many benefits for a team. One benefit I noticed, especially important in a startup-like environment, or really, anyone creating something difficult, a lot of decisions need to be made and leaders need to provide direction. Making decisions (quality, informed decisions) quickly helps keep the project buzzing at a smooth pace.
2. Be Kind (which requires empathy)
Let's go wayy back to the initial interview.
The interview was with a group of eight candidates. During the interview, I asked the project lead what type of skills they needed for the project aI worked at Google for over three years to help them create several career certificates, particularly in the area of Digital Marketing and Ecomm, where I acted as a writer, SME, and content manager. Although it did not feel that long, the project was only supposed to be for six months but got extended six times.
During my time at Google, I learned a lot of valuable lessons, five of which come to mind:
1. Be Speedy (respond quickly)
I believe I heard on a podcast, or possibly read in a book, that the highest performing founders are typically the ones that respond the quickest.
For example, if an investor sends them an email, they respond quickly. Much more quickly than you anticipated they would.
I noticed the speedy response from the Google employees I worked with. The Program Managers responded exceptionally fast to requests. The channel could have been chat or email or within docs. Whatever it was, they were speedy.
How did that quickness affect me?
Early on in the project, I decided that if they were responding fast, then I needed to respond fast too. I would silence/ignore chat and email when doing deep work. However, when not doing deep work, I was very available on chat and email. I tried to reply as quickly as possible.
My takeaway is high performers respond fast. Of course, this isn't 100% always true. But in general, yes, it is true.
Speediness has many benefits for a team. One benefit I noticed, especially important in a startup-like environment, or really, anyone creating something difficult, a lot of decisions need to be made and leaders need to provide direction. Making decisions (quality, informed decisions) quickly helps keep the project buzzing at a smooth pace.
2. Be Kind (empathy required)
Let's go wayy back to the initial interview.
The interview was with a group of eight people. During the interview, I asked the project lead what type of skills they needed for the project and what they were looking for in potential candidates?
I was expecting a response stating a specific skill or software experience. Her response surprised me greatly.
She paused, took a deep breath, and said, "What we are looking for is...kindness."
Kindness? What a surprising response!
With all these intelligent, hardworking people at Google, you'd think she wants more of that, right? We're Google, we're doing big things, we need talent talent talent.
But, no, the response, was a skill or a talent, but a softer response, kindness.
I found that response interesting because in my mind, aren't all employees kind? Isn't that a requisite for working long-term in a company?
It had been around eight years since I worked in a larger, corporate environment. I forgot that often people get promoted on analytics and performance. Not every time, but I noticed that by promoting through mainly performance can put people in management positions requiring people and social skills that don't have.
I'm not saying that's what happened at Google. And to be clear, everyone at Google I worked with was exceptionally kind and considerate of others when providing information.
I always appreciated the "pre-suasion" involved when providing information. We'll have to cover pre-suasion in another article. The gist of it is what you say before the info is just as important as the info itself.
So, if someone was delivering negative information, they put consideration into framing the information positively before providing it. That takes empathy and kindness.
3. How to Tame Organized Chaos
The projects I worked on at Google resembled a startup environment, particularly when I first started and there were few systems in place. Work structures and style guidelines changed almost daily as we tried new things and learned as we built.
I really enjoy that type of changing environment. I like to stay flexible and open to change.
Being open to change is a concept you learn in improv. Whatever you think may happen changes in an instant based on what another person may say.
Here's an analogy I've learned in improv of someone being able to adapt to change. As new information comes in, they're like a tall sandbag that gets pushed around. The sandbag may move from one direction to the other, but because it has a strong base, it doesn't fall over.
The shifting sandbag is more immediate in improv than in a startup, but the principle still applies.
I enjoy the shifts.
I appreciated how the PgMs and IDs at Google shielded the team from much of the upper-level chaos. By the time information or direction came down to us, it was typically well organized and communicated clearly. Sometimes changes were made quickly with our input.
The environment was very much chaotic but organized. The projects could have easily been more chaotic. Trackers and docs were always created to try and keep the chaos organized.
I don't think I understood the importance of planning and appearing to have the chaos under control. But I do know now that clear documentation and communication is a way to lasso and tame the chaos.
4. Didn't Micro-Manage but Did Check-in
My most productive period of content creation came when the Program Manager implemented a simple way to keep track of what we were working on.
When I first started, contractors had weekly assignments and needed to check in at the end of the week. Typically, we selected drop-downs on a custom tracker.
This issue was some contractors weren't getting their work done within the week. So, to better understand what work was completed when the Program Manager had us email her at the end of every day about what we accomplished. A sentence summary was fine.
This simple check-in really got me focused on the project quickly. It also felt good to communicate what I got completed at the end of the day.
Yes, I could keep my own to-do list, or update the tracker, but the act of communicating to another person felt more real.
After writing the summary for a couple weeks, I decided to make a small alteration to my summary.
In addition to what work I completed, I also wrote what I would do the next day in a sentence.
A very simple change. The clarity of framing the work I was going to do.
One aspect I think the PM did well was to respond positively to the email at the end of every day. I think that added a human aspect to the emails and also since I know she was reading the email, accountability from me.
While not measurable, I think the positive response provided a quick dopamine hit. Receiving positive feedback every day does feel good.
Maybe, eventually, the positive response would lose its luster and I wouldn't feel a benefit for a year. But when we're working hard on a chaotic project for three months, it worked. If she just read the email and didn't respond, I don't think the check-in would have been as effective.
Additionally, because this feedback happened early in the project, it made me feel more secure in the role rather than the uncertainty of not knowing if I was living up to the expectations of the project.
I think this confirmation is extra important when there's a threat of losing a job. If someone learns that contracts are being ended early, or if you're replacing a vendor that didn't work out, the employee needs additional positive feedback.
People in many ways aren't complicated. We do like frequent positive feedback.
Maybe you're thinking that a daily email check-in sounds a little micro-managey. I don't think so, and it didn't feel that way, especially until trust is built up that you're going to do your tasks.
5. Encouraging "Open Communication"
When collaborating on content, an important mindset I picked up was using open communication instead of closed communication.
It's difficult to put into words because it's somewhat of an intuitive feeling. I'll try to explain with an example:
Let's say I'm collaborating on a piece of content and offering a suggestion.
Instead of directly stating the suggestion, I'd use a phrase such as "My first thought is..."
This phrase opens dialogue because it indicates that it's more of a first-draft thought than something I'm fully attached to.
It's my first thought but that thought can change!
Another open communication strategy was to make the suggestion less about me and more about the end user. For example:
"xyz would be best for the user."
Rather than,
"I think xyz is the best choice."
The wording is a subtle change, but making the recommendation more about the user rather than the person making the suggestion, places less emphasis on the ego.
The ego likes closed communication. I think people speak from the ego without even knowing it. It's a subconscious process.
Focusing on the end user subtly lessens the ego from the suggestion.
If every contributor writes from the ego, closed communication happens. In writing and content, people can often get attached to their writing. This attachment can lead to closed rather than open communication.
Wrap-up
Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed my time at Google. I don't think I could have been treated better as a contractor and I'd certainly work there again in the future.nd what they were looking for in potential candidates?
I was expecting a response stating a specific skill or software experience. Her response surprised me greatly.
She paused, took a deep breath, and said, "What we are looking for is...kindness."
Kindness!? What a response.
With all these intelligent, hardworking people at Google, you'd think she wants more of that, right? We're Google, we're doing big things, we need talent talent talent.
But, no, the response, was a skill or a talent, but a softer response, kindness.
I found that response interesting because in my mind, aren't all employees kind? Isn't that a requisite for working long-term in a company?
It had been around eight years since I worked in a larger, corporate environment. I forgot that often people get promoted on analytics and performance. Not always, but often, promoting primarily based on performance can place individuals in management roles who lack necessary people and social skills.
I'm not saying that's what happened at Google. And to be clear, everyone at Google I worked with was exceptionally kind and considerate of others when providing information.
I always appreciated the "pre-suasion" involved when providing information. We'll have to cover pre-suasion in another article. The gist of it is what you say before the info is just as important as the info itself.
So, if someone was delivering negative information, they put consideration into framing the information positively before providing it. That takes empathy and kindness.
3. How to Tame Organized Chaos
The projects I worked on at Google were very similar to a startup environment. Especially when I first started, there were few systems in place. Work structures and style guidelines changed almost daily as we tried new things and learned as we built.
I really enjoy that type of changing environment. I like to stay flexible and open to change.
Being open to change is a concept you learn in improv. Whatever you think may happen changes in an instant based on what another person may say.
Here's an analogy I've learned in improv of someone being able to adapt to change. As new information comes in, they're like a tall sandbag that gets pushed around. The sandbag may move from one direction to the other, but because it has a strong base, it doesn't fall over.
The shifting sandbag is more immediate in improv than in a startup, but the principle still applies.
I enjoy the shifts.
I appreciated how the PgMs and IDs at Google shielded our team from much of the upper-level chaos. By the time information or direction came down to us, it was typically well organized and communicated clearly. Sometimes changes were made quickly with our input.
The environment was very much chaotic but organized. The projects could have easily been more chaotic. Trackers and docs were always created to try and keep the chaos organized.
I don't think I understood the importance of planning and appearing to have the chaos under control. But I do know now that clear documentation and communication is a way to lasso and tame the chaos.
4. Didn't Micro-Manage but Did Check-in
My most productive period of content creation came when the Program Manager implemented a simple way to keep track of what we were working on.
When I first started, contractors had weekly assignments and needed to check in at the end of the week. Typically, we selected drop-downs on a custom tracker.
The issue was that some contractors were not completing their work within the week. So, to better understand what work was completed when the Program Manager had us email her at the end of every day about what we accomplished. A sentence summary was fine.
This simple check-in really got me focused on the project quickly. It also felt good to communicate what I got completed at the end of the day.
Yes, I could keep my own to-do list, or update the tracker, but the act of communicating to another person felt more real.
After writing the summary for a couple weeks, I decided to make a small alteration to my summary.
In addition to what work I completed, I also wrote what I would do the next day in a sentence.
A very simple change. The clarity of framing the work I was going to do.
One aspect I think the PM did well was to respond positively to the email at the end of every day. I think that added a human aspect to the emails and also since I know she was reading the email, accountability from me.
While not measurable, I think the positive response provided a quick dopamine hit. Receiving positive feedback every day does feel good.
Perhaps, over time, the positive responses might lose their impact, and the benefits could diminish. But when we're working hard on a chaotic project for three months, it worked. If she just read the email and didn't respond, I don't think the check-in would have been as effective.
Additionally, because this feedback happened early in the project, it made me feel more secure in the role rather than the uncertainty of not knowing if I was living up to the expectations of the project.
I think this confirmation is extra important when there's a threat of losing a job. If someone learns that contracts are being ended early, or if you're replacing a vendor that didn't work out, the employee needs additional positive feedback.
People in many ways aren't complicated. We do like frequent positive feedback.
Maybe you're thinking that a daily email check-in sounds a little micro-managey. I don't think so, and it didn't feel that way, especially until trust is built up that you're going to do your tasks.
5. Open Communication vs Closed Communication
When collaborating on content, an important mindset I picked up was using open communication instead of closed communication.
It's difficult to put into words because it's somewhat of a feeling. I'll try to explain with an example:
Let's say I'm collaborating on a piece of content and offering a suggestion.
Instead of directly stating the suggestion, I'd use a phrase such as "My first thought is..."
This phrase opens dialogue because it indicates that it's more of a first-draft thought than something I'm fully attached to.
It's my first thought but that thought can change!
Another open communication strategy was to make the suggestion less about me and more about the end user. For example:
"xyz would be best for the user."
Rather than,
"I think xyz is the best choice."
The wording is a subtle change, but making the recommendation more about the user rather than the person making the suggestion, places less emphasis on the ego.
The ego likes closed communication. I think people speak from the ego without even knowing it. It's a subconscious process.
Focusing on the end user subtly lessens the ego from the suggestion.
If every contributor writes from the ego, closed communication happens. In writing and content, people can often get attached to their writing. This attachment can lead to closed rather than open communication.
Wrap-up
Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed my time at Google. I don't think I could have been treated better as a contractor and I'd certainly work there again in the future.