Magoosh GRE

Recruitment process of Google

| October 28, 2015


In each organisation the structure of recruitment process has to meet a critical term: it should be aligned with the organisation’s ‘line functions, such as finance and marketing’ (Anyim et al., 2012: 69). In other words, a successful recruitment process should be able to promote the achievement of organisational objectives, as incorporated in the organisational strategy (Girard and Fallery, 2013). For achieving the above target a recruitment process has to be periodically updated according to the changes in the internal and external organisational environment. An example of such practice is presented in this paper: the changes made on Google’s recruitment process especially as of their effect on the organisation’s employees.


Recruitment process in Google


At its first level, the recruitment process of Google seems to be similar with those used by other organisations: initially, the candidate passes a phone interview where general issues related to his/ her curriculum are checked (Google, 2014). If this interview is successful then a meeting with one of the firm’s managers is arranged (Google, 2014). The rest of the recruitment process has a series of unique features: successful candidates are asked to participate in a series of interviews and projects so that they verify their knowledge in regard to the role involved (Google, 2014). Also, through these activities the firm’s managers are able to check a candidate’s leadership and team-working skills but also his ability to respond quickly to emergent tasks and to unexpected problems (Google, 2014). The recruitment process of the firm, in all its phases, is monitored by ‘independent committees of Googlers’ (Google, 2014), so that subjectivity in evaluating a candidate’s skills is guaranteed.


How the organisation’s recruitment process has changed over the years?

In the past Google has emphasized on online tests, as a critical part of recruitment process (Friedman, 2014). Candidates who managed to reach the highest score in the relevant tests were most likely to be hired (Friedman, 2014). However, through the years the firm’s senior managers realized the importance of other factors, such as character, leadership, team-working ability and negotiation skills, when having to evaluate the appropriateness of a candidate for Google (Friedman, 2014). As noted by L. Bock, the ‘vice president of the firm’s people operations’ (Friedman, 2014) the firm has decided to focus on a candidate’s personal skills and characteristics rather than on his professional or educational background. Indeed, today, about 14% of the firm’s employees have not graduated from college (Friedman, 2014); still, these employees have managed to meet the requirements related to their roles (Friedman, 2014). Also, the score in online tests is no more considered as the key criterion for hiring a candidate; rather, a series of interviews is employed for evaluating a candidate’s ‘cognitive ability’ (Friedman, 2014).

One of the firm’s senior managers in Australia noted that Google’s employees need not, necessarily, to have exceptional academic or professional background; but they have to ‘be smart’ (Tay, 2006). The identification of a candidate’s ‘Googliness’ (Halzack, 2013), i.e. the alignment of a candidate’s skills/ characteristics with the firm’s culture, has also become a critical part of the firm’s recruitment process. The particular potential of candidates could not be effectively diagnosed through online tests, a fact that led to the elimination of most of these tests from the firm’s recruitment process (Halzack, 2013). Interviews, as indispensable part of Google’s current recruitment process, help the firm’s managers to identify individuals who can respond to the demands of the firm’s roles (Harper, 2013).


Effect of the changes of the firm’s recruitment process on employees

The changes made on the recruitment process of Google have resulted to the increase of the value of organisational culture, as a factor influencing the hiring decision. In regard to the firm’s employees different effects of these changes can be identified. In general, the implementation of change in an organisation is expected to lead to oppositions unless the organisation has been appropriately prepared. This is the case of ‘readiness for change’ (Weiner, 2009: 2). In Google such condition seems to exist. In fact, the specific firm despite its demanding recruiting process is one of the most popular workplaces, in terms of working conditions and employees’ rewarding (Halzack, 2013). In such environment the willingness of employees to support the enhancement of change, as part of organisational culture, would be expected to be high.

At this point, reference should be made to the following question: how the effects of recruitment process on employees could be revealed? According to Waiganjo et al. (2012) the HRM strategy of a firm is directly related to its performance. The above relationship is reflected in the graph presented in Figure 1. In the case of Google this relationship could be interpreted as follows: the success of the firm’s recruiting process would be evaluated if checking the organisational profitability, as depended on employees’ performance. Also, the competitiveness of Google in the global market would be a key indicator of the effectiveness of the firm’s recruiting strategy. Using these two criteria the recruitment process of Google can be characterized as quite successful. Such recruitment process would result to the hiring of people who would be able to perform high and to cooperate effectively.





Being hired in a popular workplace, such as Google, is a critical perspective for candidates in the global job market. The success of Google, as an employer, is closely related to the organisation’s culture. Indeed, in Google employees have the potential to be creative, to take initiatives and to continuously increase their personal and professional skills. Fair rewarding is also highly evaluated in Google, as a practice for showing the recognition by the firm’s of employees’ efforts and commitment. The limitation of traditional recruitment techniques such as online tests and the emphasis on communication and discussion with candidates, as achieved through interviews, have helped Google to build a strong and proactive relationship with its employees.



Anyim, F., Ekwoaba, J. and Ideh, A., 2012. THE ROLE OF HUMAN RESOURCE PLANNING IN RECRUITMENT AND SELECTION PROCESS. British Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 6(2), pp.68-78.

Friedman, T., 2014. How to Get a Job at Google. The New York Times. Available at <>. [Accessed 20 November 2014].

Girard, A. and Fallery, B., 2013. E-recruitment: new practices, new issues. An exploratory study. Human Resource Information System, pp.39-48. Available at <>. [Accessed 20 November 2014].

Google, 2014. Careers. Google. Available at <>. [Accessed 20 November 2014].

Halzack, S., 2013. An inside look at Google’s data-driven job interview process. The Washington Post. Available at <>. [Accessed 20 November 2014].

Harper, M., 2013. Google Rethinks Its Hiring Process: Less Emphasis on Test Scores: More on Personal Experience. Redorbit. Available at <>. [Accessed 20 November 2014].

Tay, L., 2006. Google’s recruitment process revealed. ComputerWorld. Available at <>. >. [Accessed 20 November 2014].

Waiganjo, E., Mukulu, E. and Kahiri, J., 2012. Relationship between Strategic Human Resource Management and Firm Performance of Kenya’s Corporate Organisations. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 2(10), pp.62-70.

Weiner, B., 2009. A theory of organisational readiness for change. Implementation Science, 4(67), pp.1-9.

Category: Essay & Dissertation Samples