Choose one case study to summarize from the chapter, adding relevant references and comments.

This is the case study,

When it comes to gathering data and analyzing it to build new and better products, few companies handle that challenge as well as Google. Recently Google decided to use its info-tech expertise to answer an important question: Since people make the differ-ence between good and great companies, could a data-driven, analytical approach be used to improve Google's HRM function? Such an approach worked for Billy Beane, so surely it could work for Google, couldn't it? Recall from Chapter 1 that Beane, the manager of the baseball's Oakland A's, dramatically improved players and the team using data and statis-tics. (Actor Brad Pitt dramatized Beane's efforts in the movie Moneyball.) One thing Google wanted to know was if it could "build" better bosses. Why? Despite the many job perks enjoyed by Google's workers, the company's employee turnover rate was surprisingly high. It's been said that the number 1 reason people leave their jobs is because of their bosses. Could this be true at Google? And if so, could the behaviors of good bosses be pinpointed and used to improve the performance of not-so-good bosses? The researchers at Google wanted to find out. They also wanted to answer these questions using data from their own organization to find out precisely what would work for Google rather than other organizations. To answers these questions, a team of 25-plus Google researchers and scientists began studying the company's supervisors using their performance reviews, surveys from their employees, interviews, and observations of their behaviors. More than 10,000 observations were collected on 100 vari-ables to determine how well the supervisors were performing. Initially, not all supervisors were thrilled to be evaluated by their subordinates and "put under the microscope." Consequently, the effort took some "selling" to Google's top manage-ment. The fact that the researchers could point to dramatic differences in the overall ratings employ-ees gave different managers and that some teams performed much better than others helped fuel the fire to get "Project Oxygen" off the ground. (Pre-sumably a good boss gives you room to breathe, whereas a bad boss can suck the life right out of youhence the project's name.) Once concluded, Project Oxygen yielded a wealth of information, some which mirrored con-ventional wisdom and some which did not: Teams with higher-rated managers performed better, the employees in them were happier, and they stayed with the company longer. Their managers had more impact on how the employees felt about their jobs than any other factor. However, it turned out that the best bosses weren't the ones with the greatest techni-cal expertise, as Google had anticipated. Instead, the truly great bosses were those who were even tem-pered, helped their employees think through prob-lems without micromanaging them, and cared about them as people. Google then used the information it gathered to implement training and coaching pro-grams to quickly improve the managerial skills of its worst-performing managers Specifically, Google identified eight behaviors you should engage in if you want to be a good bossat least at Google: 1. Be a good coach. 2. Empower your team and don't micromanage. 3. Express interest in team members' success and personal well-being. 4. Be productive and results oriented. 5. Be a good communicator and listen to your team. 6. Help your employees with career development. 7. Have a clear vision and strategy for the team. 8. Have key technical skills so you can help advise the team.

Chapter 8

Snell, Scott, and Shad Morris. Managing Human Resources. Available from: VitalSource Bookshelf, (19th Edition). Cengage Learning US, 2022.