??
谷歌（Google）已經站在了行業的巔峰，該公司首席執行官拉里o佩奇正在追尋越來越多充滿野心的“探月計劃”，這些前沿項目有望改變運輸、醫藥、互聯網以及其他行業。佩奇懷抱的堅定信念，以及谷歌傲人的財務業績，讓他成為今年的《財富》（Fortune）年度商業人物。
在文章發表前就一系列話題接受《財富》專訪時，佩奇暢談了為何霸主級的科技公司會走向衰敗，谷歌準備如何避開這一命運等問題。以下內容摘錄自這次采訪，為了表述清晰，文章進行了一定的編輯。
為何霸主級的科技公司會失敗？
谷歌最初僅有100位員工，一路走來，我一直在詢問一個問題：“我愿意為谷歌工作嗎？”我想總體來說，我的答案是：“愿意。”而我關注的重點之一，就是要確保我們為那些愿意問這些問題、想要保持好奇心和創業精神、并且希望做些事情來改變世界的人營造一個良好的環境。
如果去看看大部分我覺得已經達到瓶頸，甚至已經開始衰敗的科技公司，我想我的答案都會是：“不愿意。”對懷抱上述理想的人來說，這些公司并不是好的歸宿。一般說來，這類公司總是在重復同樣的事情，他們可能想竭力擴大規模，但并不適合那些真正想不斷做大事的人。
谷歌如何把自動駕駛汽車、診斷癌癥的納米顆粒這類前沿項目納入公司的規劃？
和以前做的事情相比，我沒覺得這些計劃有那么特別。我記得當我們啟動Gmail項目時，每個人都對我們表示了疑惑，包括公司的同事，他們會問：“我們為什么要去做電子郵件？我們是搜索公司。”最初做Gmail時，我們公司只有不到250人，而甚至在那之前我們就開始討論這個計劃了。考慮到當時公司的規模，我認為那真是雄心勃勃的計劃。
現在我們已經有4萬人了（編者注：實際上谷歌目前有5.5萬員工），所以著手做自動駕駛汽車，在我看來并沒那么雄心勃勃。
如何抓住移動產品的機遇？
我認為作為首席執行官，就是要推動所有谷歌人不斷前行。看看我們公司移動部門的員工比例，他們并不占公司全部員工人數的100%，當然這個比例也不應該是100%。但是移動部門的員工比例應該比現在更高些才是。
我想如果你問華爾街的人，他們最擔心的應該是怎么通過移動產品掙錢。而我覺得我們在這方面做得很棒。我們總有很多事情可以做。我認為搜索與移動產品契合得很好，在搜索引擎中植入廣告的效果很棒。
不過，這個階段的工作在本質上可能更具顛覆性。我們真的需要說：“好吧，如果你使用移動設備，也許你打電話會更方便，或者可以更容易地拜訪某地，或者做這些事的時候能更輕松地獲得幫助。”所以，廣告也許要看起來有所不同，或是應該采取不同的運行方式。
為什么要在最近的管理結構重組中讓后起之秀桑德爾o皮采負責大部分谷歌產品？
我每天只有24個小時，因此應該盡可能把工作委派出去。我與桑德爾共事了很長時間。我不久前開始意識到，由于公司的組織結構所致，每天我都得處理大量產品決策的問題，而他可以在其中幫上很大忙，這可以把我解放出來，我就能做更多事情了。
曾經擔任福特（Ford）和波音（Boeing）首席執行官的艾倫o穆拉利加入谷歌董事會，出任佩奇的新一任首席管理顧問，這種安排出于何種考慮？
我很激動能試著和他共處更長時間，并真正學到一些他在高效順暢地運營公司上的經驗。我覺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習。
為何谷歌為移動設備開發的新款電子郵件應用Inbox擁有提醒這類特色功能，可以讓特定信息在不同時段自動彈出？
你知道，這個團隊正在試著做的事情之一，就是真正讓用戶方便地關注自己要做的事情。日常生活中我們會用到便利貼（Post-It）。為什么要有這個？我的意思是，這有點荒謬。我們用它，是因為軟件這方面的功能做得還不夠好。實際上在許多時候，人們還會發郵件給自己。仔細想想，這真令人抓狂。這真的不是設計郵件的本意，隨著時間的推移，這款產品似乎有些迷失。我覺得這就是一個例證，說明當你在考慮移動產品時，需要解決的可能會是其他問題。
請你回顧一下谷歌最初的使命：“整合全球信息，使人人皆可訪問并從中受益”。
我覺得這個使命的范圍有點狹隘，我們正試著看如何拓展它。不過我確實認為，我們就這個問題已經討論了一段時間，我們在做什么已經很明顯了。
我們也在試著做一些其他人不太會嘗試的事情，在一些重要的領域押下重注。我們想真正實現那些創想，并保證它們是偉大的產品，能夠對用戶、對世界產生積極的作用。
我感覺我們是在未知的領域探索，因為我們嘗試的事情不太一樣。你知道，我不能去看其他公司然后說：“噢，我們也做個類似的東西。”
對我來說，世界作為一個整體是相當精彩的。當我看見一些重要事物，比如自動駕駛汽車，又甚至是搜索本身時，我就會問：我們真的有足夠的資源來進入這些領域嗎？我不覺得有。我們還需要更多的資源才能改進這些產品。（中國進出口網）
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.
