??
谷歌（Google）已經(jīng)站在了行業(yè)的巔峰,，該公司首席執(zhí)行官拉里o佩奇正在追尋越來(lái)越多充滿野心的“探月計(jì)劃”,，這些前沿項(xiàng)目有望改變運(yùn)輸、醫(yī)藥,、互聯(lián)網(wǎng)以及其他行業(yè),。佩奇懷抱的堅(jiān)定信念，以及谷歌傲人的財(cái)務(wù)業(yè)績(jī),，讓他成為今年的《財(cái)富》（Fortune）年度商業(yè)人物,。
在文章發(fā)表前就一系列話題接受《財(cái)富》專(zhuān)訪時(shí)，佩奇暢談了為何霸主級(jí)的科技公司會(huì)走向衰敗,，谷歌準(zhǔn)備如何避開(kāi)這一命運(yùn)等問(wèn)題,。以下內(nèi)容摘錄自這次采訪，為了表述清晰,，文章進(jìn)行了一定的編輯,。
為何霸主級(jí)的科技公司會(huì)失敗,？
谷歌最初僅有100位員工，一路走來(lái),，我一直在詢(xún)問(wèn)一個(gè)問(wèn)題：“我愿意為谷歌工作嗎,？”我想總體來(lái)說(shuō)，我的答案是：“愿意,。”而我關(guān)注的重點(diǎn)之一,，就是要確保我們?yōu)槟切┰敢鈫?wèn)這些問(wèn)題、想要保持好奇心和創(chuàng)業(yè)精神,、并且希望做些事情來(lái)改變世界的人營(yíng)造一個(gè)良好的環(huán)境,。
如果去看看大部分我覺(jué)得已經(jīng)達(dá)到瓶頸,，甚至已經(jīng)開(kāi)始衰敗的科技公司，我想我的答案都會(huì)是：“不愿意,。”對(duì)懷抱上述理想的人來(lái)說(shuō),，這些公司并不是好的歸宿。一般說(shuō)來(lái),，這類(lèi)公司總是在重復(fù)同樣的事情,，他們可能想竭力擴(kuò)大規(guī)模，但并不適合那些真正想不斷做大事的人,。
谷歌如何把自動(dòng)駕駛汽車(chē),、診斷癌癥的納米顆粒這類(lèi)前沿項(xiàng)目納入公司的規(guī)劃？
和以前做的事情相比,，我沒(méi)覺(jué)得這些計(jì)劃有那么特別,。我記得當(dāng)我們啟動(dòng)Gmail項(xiàng)目時(shí)，每個(gè)人都對(duì)我們表示了疑惑,，包括公司的同事,，他們會(huì)問(wèn)：“我們?yōu)槭裁匆プ鲭娮余]件？我們是搜索公司,。”最初做Gmail時(shí),，我們公司只有不到250人，而甚至在那之前我們就開(kāi)始討論這個(gè)計(jì)劃了,?？紤]到當(dāng)時(shí)公司的規(guī)模，我認(rèn)為那真是雄心勃勃的計(jì)劃,。
現(xiàn)在我們已經(jīng)有4萬(wàn)人了（編者注：實(shí)際上谷歌目前有5.5萬(wàn)員工）,，所以著手做自動(dòng)駕駛汽車(chē)，在我看來(lái)并沒(méi)那么雄心勃勃,。
如何抓住移動(dòng)產(chǎn)品的機(jī)遇,？
我認(rèn)為作為首席執(zhí)行官，就是要推動(dòng)所有谷歌人不斷前行,?？纯次覀児疽苿?dòng)部門(mén)的員工比例，他們并不占公司全部員工人數(shù)的100%,，當(dāng)然這個(gè)比例也不應(yīng)該是100%,。但是移動(dòng)部門(mén)的員工比例應(yīng)該比現(xiàn)在更高些才是。
我想如果你問(wèn)華爾街的人,，他們最擔(dān)心的應(yīng)該是怎么通過(guò)移動(dòng)產(chǎn)品掙錢(qián),。而我覺(jué)得我們?cè)谶@方面做得很棒。我們總有很多事情可以做。我認(rèn)為搜索與移動(dòng)產(chǎn)品契合得很好,，在搜索引擎中植入廣告的效果很棒,。
不過(guò)，這個(gè)階段的工作在本質(zhì)上可能更具顛覆性,。我們真的需要說(shuō)：“好吧,，如果你使用移動(dòng)設(shè)備，也許你打電話會(huì)更方便,，或者可以更容易地拜訪某地,，或者做這些事的時(shí)候能更輕松地獲得幫助。”所以,，廣告也許要看起來(lái)有所不同,，或是應(yīng)該采取不同的運(yùn)行方式。
為什么要在最近的管理結(jié)構(gòu)重組中讓后起之秀桑德?tīng)?span id="bryztqjovn" class="hcdict" word="o" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">o皮采負(fù)責(zé)大部分谷歌產(chǎn)品,？
我每天只有24個(gè)小時(shí),，因此應(yīng)該盡可能把工作委派出去。我與桑德?tīng)柟彩铝撕荛L(zhǎng)時(shí)間,。我不久前開(kāi)始意識(shí)到,，由于公司的組織結(jié)構(gòu)所致，每天我都得處理大量產(chǎn)品決策的問(wèn)題,，而他可以在其中幫上很大忙,，這可以把我解放出來(lái)，我就能做更多事情了,。
曾經(jīng)擔(dān)任福特（Ford）和波音（Boeing）首席執(zhí)行官的艾倫o穆拉利加入谷歌董事會(huì),，出任佩奇的新一任首席管理顧問(wèn)，這種安排出于何種考慮,？
我很激動(dòng)能試著和他共處更長(zhǎng)時(shí)間,，并真正學(xué)到一些他在高效順暢地運(yùn)營(yíng)公司上的經(jīng)驗(yàn)。我覺(jué)得我在這方面做得很棒,，但我的意思是,，他在這方面更加出色，有一些地方值得我學(xué)習(xí),。
為何谷歌為移動(dòng)設(shè)備開(kāi)發(fā)的新款電子郵件應(yīng)用Inbox擁有提醒這類(lèi)特色功能,，可以讓特定信息在不同時(shí)段自動(dòng)彈出？
你知道,，這個(gè)團(tuán)隊(duì)正在試著做的事情之一,，就是真正讓用戶方便地關(guān)注自己要做的事情。日常生活中我們會(huì)用到便利貼（Post-It）,。為什么要有這個(gè)？我的意思是,，這有點(diǎn)荒謬,。我們用它,，是因?yàn)檐浖@方面的功能做得還不夠好。實(shí)際上在許多時(shí)候,，人們還會(huì)發(fā)郵件給自己,。仔細(xì)想想，這真令人抓狂,。這真的不是設(shè)計(jì)郵件的本意,，隨著時(shí)間的推移，這款產(chǎn)品似乎有些迷失,。我覺(jué)得這就是一個(gè)例證,，說(shuō)明當(dāng)你在考慮移動(dòng)產(chǎn)品時(shí)，需要解決的可能會(huì)是其他問(wèn)題,。
請(qǐng)你回顧一下谷歌最初的使命：“整合全球信息,，使人人皆可訪問(wèn)并從中受益”。
我覺(jué)得這個(gè)使命的范圍有點(diǎn)狹隘,，我們正試著看如何拓展它,。不過(guò)我確實(shí)認(rèn)為，我們就這個(gè)問(wèn)題已經(jīng)討論了一段時(shí)間,，我們?cè)谧鍪裁匆呀?jīng)很明顯了,。
我們也在試著做一些其他人不太會(huì)嘗試的事情，在一些重要的領(lǐng)域押下重注,。我們想真正實(shí)現(xiàn)那些創(chuàng)想,，并保證它們是偉大的產(chǎn)品，能夠?qū)τ脩?、?duì)世界產(chǎn)生積極的作用,。
我感覺(jué)我們是在未知的領(lǐng)域探索，因?yàn)槲覀儑L試的事情不太一樣,。你知道,，我不能去看其他公司然后說(shuō)：“噢，我們也做個(gè)類(lèi)似的東西,。”
對(duì)我來(lái)說(shuō),，世界作為一個(gè)整體是相當(dāng)精彩的。當(dāng)我看見(jiàn)一些重要事物,，比如自動(dòng)駕駛汽車(chē),，又甚至是搜索本身時(shí)，我就會(huì)問(wèn)：我們真的有足夠的資源來(lái)進(jìn)入這些領(lǐng)域嗎,？我不覺(jué)得有,。我們還需要更多的資源才能改進(jìn)這些產(chǎn)品。（中國(guó)進(jìn)出口網(wǎng)）
Google is at the top of its game, and its chief executive, Larry Page, is pursuing a growingnumber of ambitious “moon shots” that could transform transportation, medicine, theInternet itself, and more. Page’s intensity of purpose and his company’s GOOG 1.13% stellarfinancial results earned him recognition as Businessperson of the Year in Fortune. (See thecover story of our Dec. 1, 2014 issue, “Larry Page–The most ambitious CEO in theuniverse.”)
In a wide-ranging interview ahead of the article’s publication, Page discussed with Fortune whydominant technology companies fade and how Google hopes to evade that fate, among otherthings. Here are a few excerpts of his words from that interview, edited for clarity.
On why dominant tech companies fail:
I’m always asking the question, as the company has grown from a hundred people, “Would Iwant to work for Google?” I think in general the answer is “yes.” Part of my focus has also beenmaking sure that we’re creating an environment for people who want to ask those questionsand want to be curious and want to be entrepreneurial and want to do things that are reallyimpactful for the world.
If I look at most of the tech companies that I felt have kind of reached a plateau or havegenerally atrophied or something like that, I would say “no,” they weren’t a good home forpeople who wanted to do those things. In general they kind of kept doing the same thing, kindof eking out a little bit more scale but not really being a place wher people want to continue toreally do impactful things.
On how Google’s fabled moonshots—self driving cars, nano-particles for cancerdetection—fit into the arc of the company:
It doesn’t feel all that different than it’s felt before to me in the past. I remember when westarted Gmail. Everyone was upset with us, including people in the company, like, “Why are weworking on email? We’re a search company.” [We were] less than two hundred and fifty people Ithink when we started Gmail, and we were talking about that even before that. I think that waspretty ambitious, given the scale of the company.
So given that we have forty thousand people now [Google employs about 55,000 people,actually. —Ed.], the fact that we’re working on the [self-driving] car doesn’t feel that ambitiousto me.
On seizing the opportunity in mobile:
I think my job as CEO, it’s always to be pushing people ahead. If I were to look at thepercentage of people [working] on mobile, it’s not 100% in the company. And nor should it be100%. But it should probably be larger than it is.
I think externally if you asked people on the Street, they’re going to worry mostly aboutmonetization [on mobile]. And I think we’re doing pretty well there. There’s always more workto be done. I think that search is working well on mobile, the ads on search are working well onmobile.
But the work at this stage is probably more disruptive in nature too. We really need to say, “Well, if you’re on mobile, maybe it’s easier to call someplace, or it’s easier to visit the place, orit’s easier to have help with those things.” So maybe the ads should look a little different orwork differently.
On the recent reorganization that put the fast-rising Sundar Pichai in charge of mostGoogle products:
I only have 24 hours in a day, and any time I can delegate some things, I should. I’ve beenworking with Sundar for a long time. And I just started to realize that a lot of the stuff thatcame to me because of our organizational structure around some of the product decision-making that happens day-to-day, he could do a tremendous job of, and that would free me upthen to do more things.
On former Ford and Boeing CEO Alan Mulally, Google’s newest board member, whohas become Page’s latest go-to advisor on management issues:
I’m excited about trying to spend more time with him and really learn the lessons he’s learnedabout how to run organizations well and efficiently. And I think I do a pretty good job of that,but I mean, he’s like an A+ on that scale, and I think there are things I can learn from him.
On why Inbox—the company’s new, mobile-first email application—has features likereminders that make certain message pop up at different times:
You know one of the things they’re trying to do is really make it easier to keep track of tasks.We have Post-It notes. Why do we have those? I mean it’s kind of ridiculous. We have thembecause the software is not that good yet. A lot of times people actually will send an email tothemselves, which is kind of insane when you think about it. It’s not really designed for that,and it gets lost after a while. So I think that’s one of the examples, when you’re really thinkingabout mobile, the kind of problems you need to solve are different.
On Google’s original mission to “organize the world’s information and make ituniversally accessible and useful”:
I think the mission statement is probably a little bit too narrow and we’re thinking about howto do that a little more broadly. But I do think we’ve been talking about it for a while and I thinkit’s pretty obvious what we’re doing.
We’re also trying to do something that not many other people seem to be trying to do, which isto make some big bets on some important areas. To make those things really real and to makesure they’re great products for people and they have real positive impact on people and theworld.
I feel a little bit we’re in uncharted territory. Because I think that what we’re trying to do, youknow I can’t just look to another company and say, “Oh, we should do roughly what anothercompany is doing.”
To me it feels like the world as a whole is very subscale. When I see important things like theself-driving cars or even search itself, and I say is there really enough resource going into that.And I don’t think that there is. It could use a lot more resource to make those things better.
