Individualism And Negolectivism In The Mount Everest Simulation

In essence this dimension deals with the relationship between the individual and the collectives in a given society. It is reflected in the way in which people live together. For example, nuclear families, extended families, tribes and other larger communities. It directly effects peoples values and behaviours. In some cultures individualism is sometime to be sought after but in others it is seen as alienation.

Collectivism is doing something not just for yourself but for the good of everyone involved. It has nothing to do with the individual and everything to do with the overall group’s success. This is what the Japanese value highly. They always reinforce this throughout the movie about how they will do whatever it takes for the company to do good. One of many examples of this is when the Japanese show up to play the softball game. Before the game starts you see the Japanese team working together and participating in a team warm up. The Americans make fun of this and think of it as something that makes them weaker. When the game starts you are able to see exactly how this hurts the Americans. The Japanese play a “small ball” game and worry about getting runners on base and relying on everyone working together to get runs on the board. The Americans, who are less team oriented, try to do everything themselves and try to hit the ball as far and hard as they can every time they come up to bat.

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.

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

Students enrolled in MGTS1301 participated in a three-hour Mount Everest Simulation which involved a team of five people. Each team consisted of a team leader, physician, photographer, environmentalist and marathoner with a common goal of reaching the summit and avoiding rescue. On our team, I was the team leader and completed 40% of my personal goals while our team achieved 44%. After the simulation, I realised I lacked in developing managerial efficiency such as strategic thinking and decision making which led to poor task-structure related to task clarity and the means of leading my team as we progressed through the simulation.

Success in the Mount Everest Simulation was not defined as reaching the summit of a mountain, but rather in terms of strong leadership, positive team work, logical decision making, and effective communication and dispute resolution to accomplish a specific task. Based on my personal experience, I realize the importance of knowing and understanding all team members. Fluid, open communication and positive feedback are key factors. Active listening, motivating, engaging, and valuing each team member’s contributions create an effective work environment. Mistakes happen, but valuable learning comes from the mistakes and our understanding of the challenges and opportunities to overcome them. If we, as team members, learn from our mistakes and are fully committed to the success of the team, we all

Lack of psychological safety within the team members failed to fix cognitive bias of irrationality. If members developed trust within the team, cognitive bias could have been prevented or at least minimized. The truth that climbers might make irrational decisions and find it hard to turn back when they are so closed to the summit was obvious, but teammates seeing this problem did not speak up since they did not feel that their thoughts were welcome and felt uneasy. More cognitive biases could also been prevented to lessen the complex system of the expedition. Since climbing Mt. Everest is already a high risk venture, any additional problems such as irrational decisions can cause a crisis. Using the early sign of issues with Hall’s team’s progress, it was obvious that the probability of failing the expedition was high before the team even started. Hall could have used the issues as a sign of the complex systems that exist, and could have used this knowledge to prevent any irrational decisions. The complex systems and the lack of psychological safety also contributed to the tragedy. The team members failed to communicate and trust each other, which then added more problems to the complex systems. For instance, Boukreev’s could have spoken up to his team leader, Fischer, about his concerns regarding his team members lacking experience to begin with. By speaking up, he could have prevented more chain reaction due to lack of communications and feedback within the

This report discusses the Everest simulation in relation to important management concepts. Particularly the report explores the role of leadership, communication and team work in task success, where success is defined in terms of task accomplishment, team member satisfaction and dispute resolution. Moreover, the requirement to eliminate communication barriers through changing mediums, cohesive and coherent team work and democratic leadership styles is explored throughout the report.

The Everest simulation was a unique experience. Before the actual simulation started, my team discussed the approach we would take and how we will deal with situations wherein the personal goals collided with the team goals. We shared our character profile information with each other and began the exercise with excitement and a firm resolve to do our best.

While in storming stage all the team members shared opinions and ideas of what to do during the simulation. Furthermore due to the limited amount of time given and clash of timetable for some of our team members, we had to rush through the first Everest simulation which resulted many decisions made thoughtlessly. For the first Everest simulation, two hour was allocated for it to be completed. Furthermore many important decisions such as allocating oxygen tanks and whether to proceed to next camp were made without much discussion. On the other hand it was observed that the marathoner in our group was the follower as she conformed with the fast moving pace of the simulation when she actually needed more time to forecast the weather of whether to proceed to next camp or not.

1. Relying on the book chapter for perception and decision making, describe the role of the perception biases, “shortcuts”, and errors that the climbers — as individuals and as a group— made during the 1996 expedition to Mount Everest. Describe at least 5. How these biases, “shortcuts,” and errors did contribute to the tragedy?

The greatest is that individuality is removed as a group -think mentality is instituted. In every organization, there are stronger personalities who claim to speak for the team; those who are less charismatic but gifted often see their ideas blocked or co-opted into the work of another. Additionally, as many epistemic systems feel pressured to show results, the significant work of an individual may not be included in the mission and some work may be left behind.

| The fundamental issue addressed by this dimension is the degree of interdependence a society maintains among its members. It has to do with whether people´s self-image is defined in terms of “I” or “We”. In Individualist societies people are supposed to look after themselves and their direct family only. In Collectivist societies people belong to ‘in

First, Individualism vs. Collectivism. Individualism is the social function of the relative likelihood of a free and individual means only take care of themselves and their families. By contrast, collectivism is the tendency of social functions relatively tight where each individual to identify themselves as a group with loyalty not need to be asked. The main problem of this dimension is the degree of interdependence of individuals in a

In light of the above, an exploration into the mind-set of unionised employees towards collectivism and individualism is therefore useful. This study attempted to explore the attitudes and perceptions of South African unionised employees toward collectivism. In this regard the study endeavoured to investigate the extent to which the 21st centuries human resource and industrial relations practices are capable of reducing unionised employees‟ collectivist work orientations. It aimed to firstly unpack and understand the perceptions and attitudes of unionised employees toward their trade unions, second to determine the factors that affect an individual‟s preparedness to involve themselves in and partake in the daily activities of the union‟s internal organisation and thirdly the underlying reasons of union members‟ willingness to partake in industrial action.