The Ghost of Steve Jobs Lingers Over Google’s Future

The 22nd anniversary of Google’s IPO marked a significant milestone in the company’s history, but it’s remarkable that a single conversation between Larry Page and Steve Jobs in 2011 continues to influence Alphabet’s trajectory. That meeting, where Jobs offered candid advice on focus, has been well-documented, but its implications extend far beyond the decision-making process of Google’s co-founders.

In hindsight, it’s astonishing that Jobs’ warning – “What are the five products you want to focus on? Get rid of the rest, because they’re dragging you down. They’re turning you into Microsoft” – resonated so deeply with Page. At the time, Google had become a company with too many irons in the fire, and its product lineup was starting to resemble that of its Silicon Valley nemesis.

However, as the years went by, Page seemed to forget his own advice. The creation of Alphabet in 2015 marked a significant shift towards embracing a broader ambition, allowing multiple ventures like Waymo and DeepMind to coexist under one umbrella. This decision has led some to question whether Google’s co-founders ever truly took Jobs’ counsel seriously.

Page frames his approach to focus as a deliberate choice to allow diversity and complexity within Alphabet’s structure. In a 2014 fireside chat with Khosla Ventures, he argued that large companies should not restrict themselves to only a handful of initiatives. This contradicts Jobs’ assertion that a sprawling organization like Google would inevitably suffer from dilution.

Page has been critical of Microsoft’s approach in the past, viewing it as an example of what happens when innovation is stifled by bureaucracy. Yet, under his own leadership, Alphabet seems to be moving toward a more decentralized structure. This raises questions about whether this is a deliberate design choice or simply an evolutionary process that mirrors broader trends in the tech industry.

Amazon and Facebook have expanded their reach, becoming increasingly complex companies with diffused focus. In contrast, Alphabet’s diverse portfolio might be seen as a deliberate attempt to hedge its bets, but it also runs the risk of diffusion. This dynamic raises questions about what kind of company Google wants to be in the long term: does it want to prioritize innovation and experimentation or streamline operations for greater efficiency?

The conversation between Jobs and Page serves as a poignant reminder that even the most well-intentioned leaders can struggle with their own priorities. As Alphabet looks toward the future, its trajectory will continue to be shaped by past decisions. Whether this means embracing complexity or rediscovering focus remains to be seen.