I’m wrapping up my first two weeks at Google here. It’s been a jam-packed time, with lots of stuff worth talking about. However, I’ll pick the one related to my previous post, “The Cost of the Moral High Ground“, and run with that.

Google has this amazing thing they call the “TGIF” – it’s an hour-long all-hands at the end of every week where, Larry, Sergey, and Eric (2 founders & CEO respectively) get up on stage in front of all the employees, and discuss the weeks events. Last Friday’s was my first one, and the topics ranged from the weekly introduction of new hires (myself included), to the goals for the coming year, to the hubbub surrounding their decision to filter search results in order to gain access to the Chinese market.

I won’t dwell on the China issue – it’s really too complex to discuss here, but I will say I was very impressed with the sincerity and passion these three guys showed. And with the openness they displayed in their discussion.

What I do want to discuss is another ethics .vs. business issue. Google tries to be very environmentally friendly by establishing a number of “carbon-neutral” goals and policies. These range from trying to use carbon-neutral power, to reimbursing employees (to the tune of $5,000!) when they purchase a hybrid vehicle. And yet, none of these “ethical goals” ever seem to make it into their business model.

Now, if I’d had bigger cohones, I would have questioned them about this during the Q&A period. But, as a new hire, that seemed a bit much, especially since there were ~1,000 people in the audience who may have already heard discussion on the topic previously. But as the TGIF was ending, and people were strolling back to their offices, I found myself walking next to Eric and took the opportunity to introduce myself. I then asked him if he’d ever considered giving preferential treatment to advertisers of “environmentally friendly products”, like hybrid vehicles. His answer was probably what you would expect, basically that they tried not to meddle with their golden goose (ad revenue) and instead used the Google Grants program as the vehicle for their charitable work.

Which I can respect, I guess. But, boy, what an interesting thought exercise! Here you have one of the most influential and effective advertising systems on the planet, serving B’s of ads. What if they decided to promote environmentally friendly businesses – manufacturers of wind and solar power generation equipment, fuel-cell technology, bio-diesel producers – either by reducing their ad rates, or just sponsoring their ads alltogether? What would it cost them in revenue? (Would it cost them???) What impact would it have on these industries? Is such a model sustainable or are they displaced by a more aggressive, less-ethical, competitor?

This is a company that is shaping industries and, if they choose to, the very air we breath. Staggering!

P.S. And, yes, this whole entry was just an excuse to point out that I topped off my first week at Google strolling the halls in conversation with the CEO. Can you blame me? 🙂