Comparing Everest And Shackle Ton Events

Have you ever wanted to take on an enormous task, but thought you couldn't succeed? Well, John Krakauer, as well as Erik Weihenmayer, had these same thoughts. In the two memoirs “The Devils Thumb” and “Everest” John and Erik both had numerous doubts about succeeding, what they’re going to do when it’s all over, therefore hoping that one like themselves could take on something that big. Seeing both perspectives from the authors, you come to a conclusion that taking on the Mountain solo or having a group of people that helps you reach the climax doesn't matter because you all got there the same way, also by similar strengths. Organizational structures come into play while progressing through the story, in which, one author uses flashbacks while the other uses chronological. Which when all brought together brings John and Erik’s tones in the memoirs to reality.

In order to continue climbing Everest, many aspects of climbing need to be improved before more people endanger their lives to try and reach the roof of the world. The guides have some areas that need the most reform. During the ascension of Everest the guides made a plethora mistakes that seemed insignificant but only aided in disaster. The guides first mistake is allowing “any bloody idiot [with enough determination] up” Everest (Krakauer 153). By allowing “any bloody idiot” with no climbing experience to try and climb the most challenging mountain in the world, the guides are almost inviting trouble. Having inexperienced climbers decreases the trust a climbing team has in one another, causing an individual approach to climbing the mountain and more reliance on the guides. While this approach appears fine, this fault is seen in addition to another in Scott Fischer’s expedition Mountain Madness. Due to the carefree manner in which the expedition was run, “clients [moved] up and down the mountain independently during the acclimation period, [Fischer] had to make a number of hurried, unplanned excursions between Base Camp and the upper camps when several clients experienced problems and needed to be escorted down,” (154). Two problems present in the Mountain Madness expedition were seen before the summit push: the allowance of inexperienced climbers and an unplanned climbing regime. A third problem that aided disaster was the difference in opinion in regards to the responsibilities of a guide on Everest. One guide “went down alone many hours ahead of the clients” and went “without supplemental oxygen” (318). These three major issues: allowing anyone up the mountain, not having a plan to climb Everest and differences in opinion. All contributed to the disaster on Everest in

A team is something more than a collection of individuals. Teamwork is a group of people working together to achieve the same goal. The whole is more than a sum of the parts. A team can be identified by evidence of some or all of the following:

The Everest simulation used the dramatic context of a Mount Everest expedition as related to management concepts exploring the role of leadership, effective communication, and team work to achieve success. The simulation required students to work in cohesive teams consisting of five members, where each individual was assigned a specific role and a goal. The roles included the team leader, physician, environmentalist, photographer, and marathoner. Some goals were contradictory in order to assess how the team reacted to complex and sometimes conflicting situations. Before the actual simulation started, the group discussed the general approach and how to deal with

(STATE THESIS) When it comes to the leading their respective teams, Ernest Shackleton and Reinhard Heydrich’s approaches to leadership could not be more contradictory. This is not to say that their differences make either of them a good or misleader. Each individual demonstrated qualities that would classify him in either category. However, it is ultimately the intentions of the leader and the presence of or complete disregard for humanity that categorizes each man where he falls.

The topic of this leadership case study is Ernest Shackleton. This paper will identify the development of Shackleton's leadership skills, provide examples and reflections of his abilities, and relate how he played an essential role in one of history's greatest survival stories. This study of Shackleton's leadership is set loosely within the framework of the five practices of exemplary leadership set forth in The Leadership Challenge by Kouzes and Posner, and will focus on the benefits produced by his management of team morale and unity (13).

Comparing Shackleton’s leadership principles to Kouzes & Posner’s Leadership Challenge Model, it is clear that he embodied many of the same ideals of

The Harvard Business School case Mount Everest – 1996 narrates the events of May 11, 1996, when 8 people-including the two expedition leaders— died during a climb to the tallest mountain in the world (five deaths are described in the case, three border police form India also died that day). This was dubbed the “deadliest day in the mountain’s history” (at least until April 18, 2014). The survivors and many analysts have tried to decipher what went wrong that day, find an underlying cause, and learn from the event.

On May 10, 1996 six people died trying to reach the summit of Mt. Everest. These people were parts of two expeditions that were in the Himalayas, preparing to ascend the summit for six weeks. The first group was under the direction of Rob Hall, who had put 39 paying clients on the summit in five years. Hall was considered the leader of the mountain and the man to see no matter what the discrepancy. Group two, headed by Fisher, who like Hall, was trying to start a profitable business in providing the experience of climbing Mt. Everest to all for the price of 60 to 70 thousand dollars. Unfortunatly, neither man would live to tell the tale of this expedition.

Leadership failure is rarely discussed, and yet often represents the greatest potential risk to an organization or group in an unfamiliar situation. For the Everest Simulation, I held the role of team leader, in which I was required to achieve goals relating to a combined ascent and maintaining team safety. At completion, 13 of 20 individual goals, and 65% of overall team goals were accomplished. The lower rate of success was due to several ethical and leadership related failures, resulting in a team member being evacuated on the final ascent. Although the simulation could have been more successful, the team dynamics witnessed were enlightening as to what constitutes effective leadership and ethical decision making in a high-intensity situation.

Mount Everest, as the highest mountain in the world, is famous for the enormous challenge of reaching its summit. This analytic essay is an analysis of the management involved with the Everest Simulation created by Harvard Business School. During this 3hour simulation I was the team doctor and achieved all ten of the possible ten points available, therefore 100% of goals were achieved. This score is related to the goals I accomplish as an individual and as a team. I enjoyed the simulation and expanded upon my knowledge as it taught a profound understanding of team dynamics, the capability to accept change, a stronger ability to analyse available information and create effective communication. Our team as a whole obtained 94% of our goals.

The case of Mt. Everest focuses on two commercial expeditions, Adventure Consultants and Mountain Madness, and the tragic event on May 10, 1996. These two commercial expeditions were lead by Rob Hall and Scott Fischer, and were consisted of 20 members. Both leaders were experienced climbers, but due to several factors, the expedition resulted into five deaths including Hall and Fischer. The event has thought managers to evaluate the importance of leadership together with its internal and external factors that managers should consider to survive in the high risk business world.

How does a leader overcome conditions of great adversity? What enables a group of people to work together to overcome the obstacle? What characteristics should a leader have to create a cohesive team? These are some of the questions that Shackleton’ addressed when he and his crew got stranded in Antartica a little more than 100 years ago and these are the very same questions that a leader today of any culture can address using the explorer’s leadership behavior when faced with ambiguity and uncertainty.

Sir Ernest Henry Shackleton was an Irish-born British explorer who led an unsuccessful trans-Antarctic expedition that nearly cost him and his crew of 27 their lives when his ship, the Endurance, was trapped and eventually crushed by ice. The Endurance party repeatedly faced what were surely going to be fatal situations; yet each time they beat the odds and survived. While their survival may be in some part due to luck or providence, Shackleton’s leadership is widely credited with tipping the scales in their favor. This historic journey, documented in the WBGH film Shackleton’s Antarctic Adventure (2001), reveals some examples of Shackleton 's transformational and transactional leadership behaviors and traits.

What is a team/group? A team/group is a group of people who form together to complete a mutual goal such as a presentation, paper, discussing a topic or creating a new design. How does a team/group become a high-performance group/team? A high-performance group/team comes from a knowledgeable group of individuals working together to complete a common goal or task. These group/team members must use the