|
Billionaire Google sales exec’s in-house romance [Breakups]November 1st, 2007 at 3:59 pmSource:Valleywag
Notice the Flixster app installed on this profile, part of the Ask a Ninja socia network by Ning: Here’s a DubPages profile with an iLike app installed. Check out the “activity stream,” very similar to Facebook’s news feed:
Looks cozy, no? Better be. If Facebook intends to keep all of Madison Avenue locked up for the entire afternoon, as I’ve been told, they better bring the key to the liquor cabinet, too.
Loft Eleven is usually rented for wedding receptions and so the same rules apply. Clink! Clink! Clink! Pucker up, Zuck, here comes big daddy Ballmer! Yes, you have to dance the first dance with him!
See, it’s still a 360 view of a New York, cause that building 5 feet from the window? It’s in New York. OK? Shut up; eat your food; buy ads.
Enough with the soft lighting. This one’s for the engineers.
Before you commenters say it, allow me: Yes, her last name is singularly unfortunate. But since Hiscock joined Google in 2003, before its lucrative IPO, it’s unlikely that she’s after Kordestani for his money. One imagines she might be more interested in obtaining a new surname. But back to business. One tipster describes Hiscock’s role as “sales finance,” a group that now reports to Google’s CFO, not Kordestani. Hiscock, however, has been at Google since 2003, and at one point sales finance reported to Kordestani. It’s not clear when the affair began, but it’s possible that Hiscock was Kordestani’s employee at the time. And Kordestani, given his importance to the company, holds unspoken authority within Google that reaches beyond his direct line of command. Even then, Google’s published code of conduct is silent on the propriety of romantic relationships between employees, even when there’s a reporting relationship. So it’s possible Kordestani and Hiscock did absolutely nothing against the rules. Except for this part: One way to consider whether a given action, relationship, gift, etc. constitutes a conflict of interest is to imagine you are at a company meeting. Could you justify your actions in front of your peers? Imagine if Kordestani were ever called on to explain his relationship with Hiscock? CEO Eric Schmidt, Google’s adulterer supervision, might be all too understanding. But the rest of Google?
|





Affairs of the heart are never easy for outsiders to understand. But when they stray into the office, they, alas, become everyone’s business. Which is why we asked, a while back, which Googler had put his marriage at risk over an affair with a coworker. As commenter notelling
Kordestani’s new love, as is widely known within Google, is 























