Google\'s Dilemma in Organization

Google's Dilemma In China:

Google is the largest search engine across the globe, which has significantly transformed the use of the Internet as an information source. The influence of Google in Internet use as information source is evident in the fact that by June 2010, it accounted for more than 70% of total Internet searches in America. In addition to its success and profitability in the global market, Google is renowned as a highly ethical company as demonstrated in its corporate philosophy features. However, the firm's behavior during the launch of its China-based search engine in 2006 generated huge skepticism from the United States government and several human rights organizations (Baker & Tang, p.2). Since the launch of Google's Chinese search engine, the company complied with China's censorship regulations by deciding to filter out terms that are considered politically sensitive. This decision attracted criticism from political leaders and human rights activists who accused Google of betraying its adopted ethical standards by ignoring the essence of freedom of expression and information access. As a result, Google faced a dilemma involving the clash between law and ethics. In the subsequent years, Google reacted to the dilemma by changing its rhetoric strategies in efforts to respond to the changing needs.

Goal of this Analysis:

This paper focuses on examining Google's dilemma in light of the challenge it faced when its compliance with the law contributed to several ethical concerns. This analysis examines whether Google made the right choice to launch the Chinese search engine and censor search results and whether its rhetoric on ethics, human rights, and business changed with time. The other issues examined are perspectives on ethics with which Google's decisions are founded, whether its rhetoric match its behavior, and the implications of its decision, especially for Chinese users of its services.

Google's Choice to Launch Google.cn:

The launch of google.cn was fueled by Google's publication of a blog on January 27, 2006, which explained the difficulties Chinese users of Google.com were experiencing in terms of slow and usually unavailable service. In the publication, the firm stated that it was not proud of the service and demonstrated the need for developing a local search engine that is based in China i.e. Google.cn. However, Google recognized that Chinese censorship laws would necessitate that some search results in the local version be censored, which would infringe its commitment and practice of free access to information. Notably, the publication of the blog was a means for supporting the decision to introduce Google.cn as part of fulfilling its corporate mission (Baker & Tang, p.2).

Google made the right decision initially to launch Google.cn and censor the search results as part of its dedication to fulfill its corporate decision. The suitability of its initial decision for the launch is evident in the fact that the Chinese search engine was to help alleviate the difficulties the Chinese users of Google.com were experiencing. The local version would help ensure that these users do not have a slow and usually unavailable service. In addition, censoring some search results was also right because failing to offer the service to China was far more severe to fulfillment of Google's corporate mission than filtering the search results. In essence, these decisions would help address the serious quality problems faced by Chinese users and make substantial ongoing investment in Chinese people and infrastructure.

Google's Rhetoric on Human Rights, Ethics, and Business:

As alluded to in its blog regarding the launch of Google.cn, a local-based Google search engine for Chinese users, the decision to filter some search results attracted huge criticism across the globe because it compromised its corporate mission and ethical standards. The decision to censor some search results was against its official stance towards making money without being evil. Following accusations that it has betrayed its espoused ethical standards, Google responded to the dilemma by shifting its rhetorical strategies in order to address changing needs. Since then, Google's rhetoric regarding business, ethics, and human rights have continued to change over time in order to respond to various situations and changing needs. One of the major ways in which the firm's rhetoric changed over time is the need to balance between its corporate mission and responding to particular situations. In this case, the company is forced to examine whether it should compromise some of its business standards without affecting its business practices. Secondly, the firm has changed its rhetoric to comply with various legislations at the expense of espoused ethical standards (Heineman, par 2). Third, Google's rhetoric on ethics, business, and human rights have changed to reflect specific legal, cultural, and social contexts rather than using standards developed in the context of its own home country in the global platform.

Perspectives on Ethics that Informed Google's Decisions:

Google's decision to launch the Chinese search engine was an attempt to increase the firm's integration into the global marketplace. Similar to other organizations in the global marketplace, Google's launch of Google.cn was coupled with increased scrutiny of the ethics applied in the practice by the government, employees, customers, and nongovernmental organizations across the globe. The applied ethics is an issue under extreme scrutiny because the concept of ethics is a major topic in globalization since different cultures have varying concepts of ethics. The decision by Google to introduce a local search engine in China was influenced by various issues including ethics.

Notably, the firm made its decision based on various perspectives on ethics i.e. its considerations regarding the right and wrong of its launch. One of the major perspectives on ethics that influenced Google's decision is the Utilitarian Perspective, which focuses on generating the greatest balance of benefits for all people who are directly or indirectly affected by a policy or action. Through this perspective, Google.cn would help Chinese firms to avoid severe quality issues that they experienced when using Google.com. On the other hand, the decision to filter search results would enable the company to comply with governmental regulations. As a result, the launch would promote the good of the firm's Chinese users and the good of the government. The second ethical perspective is the results perspective, which focuses on the consequences of an action in light of benefits to the majority. Google's decision was based on comparing the benefits of introducing a local search engine in China while filtering search results with the impact of failing to introduce it at all.

Google's Rhetoric and its Behavior: