• This forum contains old posts that have been closed. New threads and replies may not be made here. Please navigate to the relevant forum to create a new thread or post a reply.
  • Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

Sundar to be CEO of Google

Status
Not open for further replies.
tks

tks

0
[h=1]Microsoft and Google - Giants of Silicon Valley headed by two South Indians ..


Google Renames Self Alphabet, Gives Sundar Pichai Better Title[/h]
sundar-pichai.jpg
Asa Mathat
Sundar Pichai is now The Man at Google .
​
[h=4]MEDIA[/h]






August 10, 2015, 2:10 PM PDT

[/COLOR]




SHARE:

Google Inc. is now Alphabet Inc.
In a letter to shareholders on Monday, Google’s current CEO Larry Page spelled out what seems like a seismic change in the Internet search giant: The incorporated company now falls under a new holding company, called Alphabet, run by the two co-founders, Page and Sergey Brin. Omid Kordestani, Google’s current chief business officer, will be an adviser to Alphabet.
And Google, as it stands today, falls under the purview of Android SVP Sundar Pichai. Google shares rose 5 percent in after-hours trading.
Page wrote: “Sergey and I have been super excited about his progress and dedication to the company. And it is clear to us and our board that it is time for Sundar to be CEO of Google. I feel very fortunate to have someone as talented as he is to run the slightly slimmed down Google and this frees up time for me to continue to scale our aspirations.”
The company will trade under a different name, but little else has changed. This structure has been in the works for some time, beginning last October when Page restructured the organization, putting Pichai at the head of all Google products. In recent years, Page has been pushing the company to operate like Berkshire Hathaway, as a constellation of companies tied together through investments.
As CEO of Google, Pichai now controls the suite of existing Google products and services. The moonshots — the drone delivery program and unannounced Google X projects — fall under Alphabet, along with Google’s two investment arms, Ventures and Capital.
We will add updates as we find out more.
Update: All right! We have a little more clarity, but not much. As Kara Swisher wrote, many of the changes are about segmenting off Google’s profitable business from its moonshots, or investment and incubation arms, as Google/Alphabet puts it.
For more than a year, Page and his lieutenants have tried to convince Wall Street that they could make big expensive bets on grand projects without threatening the margins at their core, money-making ad business. This split makes it easier to make that argument.
Google told us that the overhaul is coming for two reasons: 1) Giving more transparency to Wall Street (particularly for the investors clamoring for tighter governance and clarity around capital allocation). 2) Giving more autonomy (and fancier titles) to the Google’s chieftains. Here are those chiefs who now sit under Alphabet:

  • Tony Fadell, of Nest Labs, who Page is relying on to lead hardware efforts
  • Arthur Levinson, of Calico, the longevity research division
  • Craig Barratt, of Fiber, the high-speed broadband service
  • Dan Doctoroff, of Sidewalk Labs, the new company for cracking urban problems
  • Sergey Brin, now president of Alphabet and still overseer of X, which includes Project Loon, Wing (drones) and self-driving cars
  • David Lawee, who runs Google Capital
  • Bill Maris, who runs Google Ventures
The nascent robotics division, and the litany of robotics companies Google has acquired, will live within Alphabet.
Google’s new CFO, Ruth Porat, will serve double duty as financial lead of both Alphabet and Google. Only those two entities will report revenue lines — that means no further disclosure for the other divisions. When Alphabet first reports its earnings, Google warned us not to expect a whole lot of financial granularity. We likely won’t see individual product sales, i.e. Nest thermostats sold.
So how will Wall Street, which sent Google shares up six percent in after-hours trading on Monday, feel tomorrow when it discovers just how little it really knows?
Update II: An earlier version of this post said that A.I. team Deep Mind would operate within the search unit of Google Inc. That’s not necessarily the case, according to sources familiar. Clearly, some things are still being sorted out.

 
Does he belong to Tamil Nadu? Can anyone spare details about him?
 
This is another news about restructuring of Google...The new company is now being called as Alphabet...Google will be a subsidiary of Alpahabet...So the search engine business will be headed by Pichai...Rest by Larry Page and Sergey Brin
 
A facebook freiend mentioned that Pichai studied in SIES school...That is then Matunga, Mumbai...Mystery of school deepens
 
The core business of Google given to Pitchai is the revenue producing one.
The holding company Alphabets is playing ground for new ideas (e.g., driverless car etc) which mostly spend money.
By limiting risk of loss in new pie-in-the-sky ventures (which is now financially accountable) and by separating the core business of Google (with its own CEO) the company stock went up by 5% which is a big deal


Here are some facts that many may already know. I came across this, so I am sharing it
It seems some months ago Sundar was thinking of moving to Twitter, but he was paid $50 million in stocks to stick around.
I know there was a discussion about him in the forum and I wanted to reiterate that he is no push over.

Also Microsoft seriously considered of making him their CEO

=================================================================

Sundar Pichai​, New CEO of Google: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know

Published 5:57 pm EDT, August 10, 2015 Updated 1:09 pm EDT, August 11, 2015 2 Comments By Stephanie Dube Dwilson 21.5k
Share
530​
 Tweet Share Email Follow



gettyimages-4749847521.jpg
Sundar Pichai was just named the new CEO of Google. (Getty)​

Sundar Pichai has been named the new CEO of Google. Google is now a subsidiary of Alphabet, Inc., according to a blog posted by Larry Page, the new CEO of Alphabet and former CEO of Google.
Here is what you need to know.
1. Sundar Pichai Has Been Named the New CEO of Google

googleexecheader.jpg
Sundar Pichai is the new CEO of Google.​

In Page’s blog, he said that he picked Pichai to become Google’s new CEO because Page has enjoyed working with Pichai and Pichai has been saying many of the same things about Google’s future that Page believed. Page said that Pichai especially stepped up and impressed him and Sergey Brin, President of Alphabet, after Pichai was given charge of product and engineering for Google last October. He said that Pichai will continue to focus on innovation and pushing the boundaries:
I feel very fortunate to have someone as talented as he is to run the slightly slimmed down Google and this frees up time for me to continue to scale our aspirations.
​
2. Pichai Joined Google in 2004 and Has Been a Superstar Ever Since

gettyimages-174342060.jpg
Sundar Pichai in 2013. He’s been a superstar since joining Google. (Getty)​

Pichai joined Google in 2004. At first, he worked behind the scenes developing the Google toolbar. He then helped launch the Chrome browser in 2008, Fortune reported, which despite skepticism originally became the No. 1 browser in the world. Fortune referred to Pichai’s meteoric rise through Google’s ranks as “one of the fastest corporate ascents in the technology industry.”
After launching Chrome, Pichai was promoted to vice president and then senior vice president at Google. He oversaw many of Google’s applications, including Gmail and Android. He was added to Google’s exclusive L-team of executive who reported directly to Page, Fortune reported. Pichai made many great moves for Google, including trying to convince the WhatsApp not to sell to Facebook and helping convince Nest to join Google, Business Insider reported.
In 2014, Pichai was given free rein for overseeing products like Google+, ad products, and commerce products. The only exceptions were independent units like Calico and YouTube. This came after years of proving to be drama free and willing to do what it takes to move forward. According to Business Insider, Pichai was adept at avoiding drama that many Google executives succumbed to. When he reported to Marissa Mayer, he was willing to wait outside her office for hours on end in order to make sure his team got good performance reviews. Pichai is definitely willing to put in the hours in order to succeed.
3. He Is Married and Has a Daughter and a Son

gettyimages-474969320.jpg
Sundar Pichai at a Google I/O conference in 2015. He’s been named the new CEO of Google. (Getty)​

Pichai was born Pichai Sundararajanin 1972 in Tamil Nadu, a southern state in India. Pichai’s dad was an electrical engineer with the firm GEC and worked hard to raise Pichai and his brother, working long hours and doing whatever it took, according to VC Circle. They lived in a two-room apartment in India without a TV or a car, Bloomberg reported. They would sometimes all ride on one scooter when they needed to go somewhere. They got their first phone, a rotary, when Pichai was 12.
Pichai’s father, Regunatha, managed a warehouse that made electrical components and often talked to his son about his job. He told Bloomberg:
“I used to come home and talk to him a lot about my work day and the challenges I faced. Even at a young age, he (Pichai) was curious about my work. I think it really attracted to him to technology.
​
He first went to college in India and then received a master’s degree from Stanford in engineering and material sciences, along with an MBA from Wharton School. Adjusting to American life wasn’t always easy. Bloomberg reported that when Pichai first arrived in Stanford in 1993, he was shocked that backpacks cost $60. Pichai is married to Anjali Pichai and they have a daughter and a son, according to Siliconindia. Pichai loves to play chess in his free time.
4. Google Paid Millions to Keep Him From Leaving

gettyimages-474978494.jpg
Sundar Pichai in 2015. Google reportedly paid him millions not to leave and join Twitter. (Getty)​

Pichai was reportedly offered a chance to leave Google and become the product head at Twitter in 2011, according to Death and Taxes Magazine. Google reportedly offered Pichai $50 million in stocks to turn Twitter down. TechCrunch reported that Google made this offer before Twitter even revealed its proposed compensation package. Business Insider reported that Microsoft was considering Pichai as its new CEO when it was looking for a replacement for Steve Ballmer.
5. His Net Worth Is in the Multi Millions

gettyimages-474978498-e1439243778632.jpg
Sundar Pichai is the new CEO of Google. (Getty)​


Pichai’s net worth is not known exactly, but it is in the multi-millions. He was given $50 million in stock by Google to keep him from jumping ship and joining Twitter.
 
I would like to share with members here the Editorial published in 'The Hindu' today:

Writing a new script

On Tuesday, India woke up to the news of Sundar Pichai, an engineer and executive hailing from Chennai who has made it big in Silicon Valley, becoming the CEO of Google. Far bigger in import was the news of the reorganisation of the internet behemoth Google itself, which propelled Mr. Pichai to the top slot. Larry Page, who along with Sergey Brin started the search engine in 1998, announced a corporate structure in which Google will be part of a new umbrella organisation, Alphabet. This organisation will also have a collection of other ventures, many of which are big bets that Google terms ‘moonshots’. This seems a drastic change for one of the most successful companies of the information era, a bellwether technology enterprise, a constant innovator, and one which has billions of people using its products. The company, which started off nearly two decades ago with the seemingly modest ambition of providing an organised gateway to all of the world’s information, proved hugely effective, popular and successful. Starting as a search engine and achieving success in producing a weighted ranking of webpages, it moved on to become a market leader in webmail (Gmail), browsers (Chrome), video hosting (You Tube), news aggregation (Google News) and mobile operating systems (Android), among other products. It has been so successful in its constant ownership of the latest trends in the internet that it has even created a fear of the monopolisation of the space, as a result getting embroiled in anti-trust cases in Europe.

Read more at: http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/editorial/writing-a-new-script/article7527066.ece
 
hi

still the core ALPHABET is main company....google is its subsidary....main CEO still holds main powers...
 
Meritocracy, not mediocrity, is way ahead:
Lessons from Sundar Pichai's rise
R Jagannathan
The First Post Online
Published on August 11, 2015​
The elevation of Sundar Pichai to CEO of tech giant Google marks a triumph for four ideas we in India are uncomfortable with: giving meritocracy its due, allowing people to rise regardless of age, valuing diversity, and inviting talented immigrants to work for the country.

Stuck as we are to politically-driven social justice systems where quotas and reservations dominate the agendas of political parties and have become an end in themselves, we have paid inadequate attention to meritocracy. Any society that places such a low value on getting the right talent into the right job and giving him or her opportunities for growth will pay a huge price on several fronts – innovation being one of them.Mediocrity, whether in government or in corporations or in academics, can provide only incremental gains for society. Multi-bagger gains come from promoting meritocracy.

It should thus come as no surprise that India has invented almost nothing since the humble “lota” of centuries ago, even while Indian techies dominate Silicon Valley’s startup culture, accounting for 15 percent of the total. Our belief in “jugaad” may be useful when resources are scarce, but “make-do” is a poor substitute for “make something new.”Support for meritocracy, effective mentoring, and an ability to discriminate in favour of talent (as opposed to just seniority and age) is vital for innovation.

Consider Sundar Pichai (the name is actually a shortened version of his original name Sundararajan Pichai). He joined Google in 2004, and in 11 years he is holding the top job at age 43. It is difficult to visualise any Indian company giving this kind of opportunity to a talented foreigner. To be sure, we do have the occasional foreign talent heading Indian companies (the Tata group has some examples in this area), but the cases are few and far between as most Indian companies tend to be family-dominated or narrowly based in terms of their talent pool. And the talent we get from abroad is usually past its prime.

Even Infosys, our home-grown tech pioneer in offshoring, fell into the trap of giving the founders first right of refusal to the CEO’s job till bad performance and a changing operating environment finally forced them to get new blood in the form of a Vishal Sikka last year.A Satya Nadella would have been languishing at some middle-level position in an Indian tech company if he had sought to make his career here, but at 46 he made it to the top at Microsoft as CEO in early 2014, a successor to Steve Ballmer.

Sundar Pichai was also not made by accident. Before he became CEO, he worked closely with CEO Larry Page, and played major roles in creating the Google Toolbar, the browser Chrome, and in managing the growth of Android, the world’s largest mobile phone operating system. Page did not hand over his job to Pichai because he liked the guy. He watched Pichai’s progress from close quarters, and after handing him one assignment after another, decided that he was the man to take over his own job.

Page wrote in his Google blog yesterday (10 August): “I have been spending quite a bit of time with Sundar, helping him and the company in any way I can, and I will of course continue to do that. Google itself is also making all sorts of new products, and I know Sundar will always be focused on innovation - continuing to stretch boundaries. I know he deeply cares that we can continue to make big strides on our core mission to organise the world's information.”

Note the degree of supervision and support Page gave Pichai. He also wrote this about Pichai: “Sundar has been saying the things I would have said (and sometimes better!) for quite some time now, and I’ve been tremendously enjoying our work together. He has really stepped up since October of last year, when he took on product and engineering responsibility for our Internet businesses. Sergey (Brin) and I have been super excited about his progress and dedication to the company. And it is clear to us and our board that it is time for Sundar to be CEO of Google. I feel very fortunate to have someone as talented as he is to run the slightly slimmed down Google and this frees up time for me to continue to scale our aspirations.”

Now, why wouldn’t a Pichai kill for such a strong vote of confidence, support and faith from the bosses of Google?Unfortunately, the Indian DNA is about losing talent. India produces tech talent by the thousand, but still loses them by the hundred (if not the thousand) to Ivy League schools or tech companies in Silicon Valley. This is because we are unwilling or unable to give our talent the kind of support and mentoring, not to speak of challenge and opportunity, they need.

The recent incident, where IIT Roorkee had to expel 72 students for failing to make the grade, is instructive. Most students who get into IITs are, by definition, hard and talented workers. They would have spent years in coaching classes and worked hard to crack the IIT-JEE exams. The question is: why then would 72 of them fail to make the grade?Answer: we fail to give them the support they actually need – or not enough of it - after they get into the institution. As this Indian Express story points out, “90 percent of the IIT-Roorkee students who were expelled were from reserved categories (SC, ST and OBC) and scored average to high ranks in their respective categories in the 2014 IIT-JEE (Advanced). Once on campus, however, several factors pull them back, prominent among them a lack of fluency in English.”Consider the sheer loss of talent we face if students have to be turfed out not for lack of engineering talent, but lack of proficiency in English.

The problem is not the quotas themselves, but the assumption that quotas by themselves are enough. In fact, excessive dependence on quotas to deliver social justice does damage by, first, marking such students out as somehow untalented, and then ensuring their failure by not giving them the support they need to cope with the rigours of an IIT academic session. We have conveniently forgotten that quotas have to be supplemented by effective mentoring and help by mentors. Without this, quotas will become self-defeating and divisive. (Some IITs do this effectively, but not all).One can be sure that the same thing is happening in other areas of reservations and quotas, where the successes are vastly outnumbered by failures due to the lack of mentoring, including in our government.Quotas are useful only if they succeed in reducing the need for quotas, not if they end up perpetuating and extending it by promoting mediocrity and a sense of victimhood among the beneficiaries.

We need to learn how to do things right from the elevation of Pichai, a first-generation immigrant to the US who rose to the top because their system favours meritocracy even while encouraging affirmative action and social diversity in institutions and corporations.For now, though, we should see Pichai’s and Nadella’s rise as slaps in the face of our mediocrity-driven culture.
 
Last edited:
Vaagmi said:
Meritocracy, not mediocrity, is way ahead:
Lessons from Sundar Pichai's rise
R Jagannathan
The First Post Online
Published on August 11, 2015​
The elevation of Sundar Pichai to CEO of tech giant Google marks a triumph for four ideas we in India are uncomfortable with: giving meritocracy its due, allowing people to rise regardless of age, valuing diversity, and inviting talented immigrants to work for the country.

Stuck as we are to politically-driven social justice systems where quotas and reservations dominate the agendas of political parties and have become an end in themselves, we have paid inadequate attention to meritocracy. Any society that places such a low value on getting the right talent into the right job and giving him or her opportunities for growth will pay a huge price on several fronts – innovation being one of them.Mediocrity, whether in government or in corporations or in academics, can provide only incremental gains for society. Multi-bagger gains come from promoting meritocracy.

It should thus come as no surprise that India has invented almost nothing since the humble “lota” of centuries ago, even while Indian techies dominate Silicon Valley’s startup culture, accounting for 15 percent of the total. Our belief in “jugaad” may be useful when resources are scarce, but “make-do” is a poor substitute for “make something new.”Support for meritocracy, effective mentoring, and an ability to discriminate in favour of talent (as opposed to just seniority and age) is vital for innovation.

Consider Sundar Pichai (the name is actually a shortened version of his original name Sundararajan Pichai). He joined Google in 2004, and in 11 years he is holding the top job at age 43. It is difficult to visualise any Indian company giving this kind of opportunity to a talented foreigner. To be sure, we do have the occasional foreign talent heading Indian companies (the Tata group has some examples in this area), but the cases are few and far between as most Indian companies tend to be family-dominated or narrowly based in terms of their talent pool. And the talent we get from abroad is usually past its prime.

Even Infosys, our home-grown tech pioneer in offshoring, fell into the trap of giving the founders first right of refusal to the CEO’s job till bad performance and a changing operating environment finally forced them to get new blood in the form of a Vishal Sikka last year.A Satya Nadella would have been languishing at some middle-level position in an Indian tech company if he had sought to make his career here, but at 46 he made it to the top at Microsoft as CEO in early 2014, a successor to Steve Ballmer.

Sundar Pichai was also not made by accident. Before he became CEO, he worked closely with CEO Larry Page, and played major roles in creating the Google Toolbar, the browser Chrome, and in managing the growth of Android, the world’s largest mobile phone operating system. Page did not hand over his job to Pichai because he liked the guy. He watched Pichai’s progress from close quarters, and after handing him one assignment after another, decided that he was the man to take over his own job.

Page wrote in his Google blog yesterday (10 August): “I have been spending quite a bit of time with Sundar, helping him and the company in any way I can, and I will of course continue to do that. Google itself is also making all sorts of new products, and I know Sundar will always be focused on innovation - continuing to stretch boundaries. I know he deeply cares that we can continue to make big strides on our core mission to organise the world's information.”

Note the degree of supervision and support Page gave Pichai. He also wrote this about Pichai: “Sundar has been saying the things I would have said (and sometimes better!) for quite some time now, and I’ve been tremendously enjoying our work together. He has really stepped up since October of last year, when he took on product and engineering responsibility for our Internet businesses. Sergey (Brin) and I have been super excited about his progress and dedication to the company. And it is clear to us and our board that it is time for Sundar to be CEO of Google. I feel very fortunate to have someone as talented as he is to run the slightly slimmed down Google and this frees up time for me to continue to scale our aspirations.”

Now, why wouldn’t a Pichai kill for such a strong vote of confidence, support and faith from the bosses of Google?Unfortunately, the Indian DNA is about losing talent. India produces tech talent by the thousand, but still loses them by the hundred (if not the thousand) to Ivy League schools or tech companies in Silicon Valley. This is because we are unwilling or unable to give our talent the kind of support and mentoring, not to speak of challenge and opportunity, they need.

The recent incident, where IIT Roorkee had to expel 72 students for failing to make the grade, is instructive. Most students who get into IITs are, by definition, hard and talented workers. They would have spent years in coaching classes and worked hard to crack the IIT-JEE exams. The question is: why then would 72 of them fail to make the grade?Answer: we fail to give them the support they actually need – or not enough of it - after they get into the institution. As this Indian Express story points out, “90 percent of the IIT-Roorkee students who were expelled were from reserved categories (SC, ST and OBC) and scored average to high ranks in their respective categories in the 2014 IIT-JEE (Advanced). Once on campus, however, several factors pull them back, prominent among them a lack of fluency in English.”Consider the sheer loss of talent we face if students have to be turfed out not for lack of engineering talent, but lack of proficiency in English.

The problem is not the quotas themselves, but the assumption that quotas by themselves are enough. In fact, excessive dependence on quotas to deliver social justice does damage by, first, marking such students out as somehow untalented, and then ensuring their failure by not giving them the support they need to cope with the rigours of an IIT academic session. We have conveniently forgotten that quotas have to be supplemented by effective mentoring and help by mentors. Without this, quotas will become self-defeating and divisive. (Some IITs do this effectively, but not all).One can be sure that the same thing is happening in other areas of reservations and quotas, where the successes are vastly outnumbered by failures due to the lack of mentoring, including in our government.Quotas are useful only if they succeed in reducing the need for quotas, not if they end up perpetuating and extending it by promoting mediocrity and a sense of victimhood among the beneficiaries.

We need to learn how to do things right from the elevation of Pichai, a first-generation immigrant to the US who rose to the top because their system favours meritocracy even while encouraging affirmative action and social diversity in institutions and corporations.For now, though, we should see Pichai’s and Nadella’s rise as slaps in the face of our mediocrity-driven culture.
Click to expand...

A different perspective from Jaggi as usual! Thanks Vaagmiji for sharing this!
 
sangom said:
Why are we then making such a hullabaloo about this one person's promotion as division head?
Click to expand...

Sangom Sir...He is handling everything that the world knows about Google..He will look after Search, Android platform and You tube etc...This is the real cash cow of Google...Rest are all incubating businesses which will be managed by Page & Brin..They may or may not yield revenue
 
Vaagmi said:
Meritocracy, not mediocrity, is way ahead:
Lessons from Sundar Pichai's rise
R Jagannathan
The First Post Online
Published on August 11, 2015​
The elevation of Sundar Pichai to CEO of tech giant Google marks a triumph for four ideas we in India are uncomfortable with: giving meritocracy its due, allowing people to rise regardless of age, valuing diversity, and inviting talented immigrants to work for the country.

Stuck as we are to politically-driven social justice systems where quotas and reservations dominate the agendas of political parties and have become an end in themselves, we have paid inadequate attention to meritocracy. Any society that places such a low value on getting the right talent into the right job and giving him or her opportunities for growth will pay a huge price on several fronts – innovation being one of them.Mediocrity, whether in government or in corporations or in academics, can provide only incremental gains for society. Multi-bagger gains come from promoting meritocracy.

It should thus come as no surprise that India has invented almost nothing since the humble “lota” of centuries ago, even while Indian techies dominate Silicon Valley’s startup culture, accounting for 15 percent of the total. Our belief in “jugaad” may be useful when resources are scarce, but “make-do” is a poor substitute for “make something new.”Support for meritocracy, effective mentoring, and an ability to discriminate in favour of talent (as opposed to just seniority and age) is vital for innovation.

Consider Sundar Pichai (the name is actually a shortened version of his original name Sundararajan Pichai). He joined Google in 2004, and in 11 years he is holding the top job at age 43. It is difficult to visualise any Indian company giving this kind of opportunity to a talented foreigner. To be sure, we do have the occasional foreign talent heading Indian companies (the Tata group has some examples in this area), but the cases are few and far between as most Indian companies tend to be family-dominated or narrowly based in terms of their talent pool. And the talent we get from abroad is usually past its prime.

Even Infosys, our home-grown tech pioneer in offshoring, fell into the trap of giving the founders first right of refusal to the CEO’s job till bad performance and a changing operating environment finally forced them to get new blood in the form of a Vishal Sikka last year.A Satya Nadella would have been languishing at some middle-level position in an Indian tech company if he had sought to make his career here, but at 46 he made it to the top at Microsoft as CEO in early 2014, a successor to Steve Ballmer.

Sundar Pichai was also not made by accident. Before he became CEO, he worked closely with CEO Larry Page, and played major roles in creating the Google Toolbar, the browser Chrome, and in managing the growth of Android, the world’s largest mobile phone operating system. Page did not hand over his job to Pichai because he liked the guy. He watched Pichai’s progress from close quarters, and after handing him one assignment after another, decided that he was the man to take over his own job.

Page wrote in his Google blog yesterday (10 August): “I have been spending quite a bit of time with Sundar, helping him and the company in any way I can, and I will of course continue to do that. Google itself is also making all sorts of new products, and I know Sundar will always be focused on innovation - continuing to stretch boundaries. I know he deeply cares that we can continue to make big strides on our core mission to organise the world's information.”

Note the degree of supervision and support Page gave Pichai. He also wrote this about Pichai: “Sundar has been saying the things I would have said (and sometimes better!) for quite some time now, and I’ve been tremendously enjoying our work together. He has really stepped up since October of last year, when he took on product and engineering responsibility for our Internet businesses. Sergey (Brin) and I have been super excited about his progress and dedication to the company. And it is clear to us and our board that it is time for Sundar to be CEO of Google. I feel very fortunate to have someone as talented as he is to run the slightly slimmed down Google and this frees up time for me to continue to scale our aspirations.”

Now, why wouldn’t a Pichai kill for such a strong vote of confidence, support and faith from the bosses of Google?Unfortunately, the Indian DNA is about losing talent. India produces tech talent by the thousand, but still loses them by the hundred (if not the thousand) to Ivy League schools or tech companies in Silicon Valley. This is because we are unwilling or unable to give our talent the kind of support and mentoring, not to speak of challenge and opportunity, they need.

The recent incident, where IIT Roorkee had to expel 72 students for failing to make the grade, is instructive. Most students who get into IITs are, by definition, hard and talented workers. They would have spent years in coaching classes and worked hard to crack the IIT-JEE exams. The question is: why then would 72 of them fail to make the grade?Answer: we fail to give them the support they actually need – or not enough of it - after they get into the institution. As this Indian Express story points out, “90 percent of the IIT-Roorkee students who were expelled were from reserved categories (SC, ST and OBC) and scored average to high ranks in their respective categories in the 2014 IIT-JEE (Advanced). Once on campus, however, several factors pull them back, prominent among them a lack of fluency in English.”Consider the sheer loss of talent we face if students have to be turfed out not for lack of engineering talent, but lack of proficiency in English.

The problem is not the quotas themselves, but the assumption that quotas by themselves are enough. In fact, excessive dependence on quotas to deliver social justice does damage by, first, marking such students out as somehow untalented, and then ensuring their failure by not giving them the support they need to cope with the rigours of an IIT academic session. We have conveniently forgotten that quotas have to be supplemented by effective mentoring and help by mentors. Without this, quotas will become self-defeating and divisive. (Some IITs do this effectively, but not all).One can be sure that the same thing is happening in other areas of reservations and quotas, where the successes are vastly outnumbered by failures due to the lack of mentoring, including in our government.Quotas are useful only if they succeed in reducing the need for quotas, not if they end up perpetuating and extending it by promoting mediocrity and a sense of victimhood among the beneficiaries.

We need to learn how to do things right from the elevation of Pichai, a first-generation immigrant to the US who rose to the top because their system favours meritocracy even while encouraging affirmative action and social diversity in institutions and corporations.For now, though, we should see Pichai’s and Nadella’s rise as slaps in the face of our mediocrity-driven culture.
Click to expand...
hi


We need to learn how to do things right from the elevation of Pichai, a first-generation immigrant to the US who rose to the top because their system favours meritocracy even while encouraging affirmative action and social diversity in institutions and corporations.For now, though, we should see Pichai’s and Nadella’s rise as slaps in the face of our mediocrity-driven culture.

i agreed this......our education system/country's values destroyed by politicians......every 5 yrs....different parties

spoiled our education system.....we never learned last 60 yrs....USA/western countries utilises our brain to progress

their country.....many IITian doing good in foriegn shore than our country....why this happened?....nobody cares...

these SC/ST RESERVATION needs to stop ....but politicians for the sake of vote bank....who cares?....so

private corporations are utilising them....for their benefits....
 
we can send plane loads of such people in india to US or any other place they are admired or cherished.

No sense in holding on to people we cannot use.

Those we have will build our country at a speed we are comfortable with.

what matters is gross national happiness not growth of a few super performers.
 
krish44 said:
we can send plane loads of such people in india to US or any other place they are admired or cherished.

No sense in holding on to people we cannot use.

Those we have will build our country at a speed we are comfortable with.

what matters is gross national happiness not growth of a few super performers.
Click to expand...
hi

for this status of india today...to whom we have to blame?....politicians?,,,,,ppl of india?......or the system?......there is sanskrit

sloka.....UDHYAMENA NAHI SIDDHYANTHI ....KAARYANI NAHI MANORATHAIHI...............NAHI SUPTHASYA SIMHASYA....

PRAVISHANTHI MUKHE MRIGAAHA....this is subhashithani in sanskrit.....MEANS THINGS WILL NOT HAPPEN JUST DREAMING..''

ONLY BY HARDWORK.......THE ANIMALS WILL NOT COME TO MOUTH OF LION....THE LION HAS TO HUNT THE ANIMALS...
 
Last edited:
CHANDRU1849 said:
Does he belong to Tamil Nadu? Can anyone spare details about him?
Click to expand...

This is the information from my son I drag the mail from my inbox Others are boys from Madurai who joined IITs

Madurai பையன் Google CEO

Vishak Nathan


Aug 12 (1 day ago)
cleardot.gif

to Siva, Kothandaraman, Jeyanandh, Kasyab, Paramesh, me, Raju, TN
cleardot.gif

Sundar was born in Madurai,but grew up in Madras though. Same batch as me in both btech and also mba, 89 & 02. He from IIT KGP and Wharton. Knew of him much earlier through common friends who were his batch mates at KGP and also Vana Vani school in IITM campus.

Regards,
Vishak
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest ads

Follow us on Social Media

Back
Top