Mount Everest Case

The features of effective team performance is set up through positive leadership, this is something which is developed and nurtured. An effective team will work together, be focused and all the time supporting each other along the way to achieve and reach goals. For a team to be effective, each team member needs to be clear on their roles and responsibilities relating to their job. Team performance will be more effective if there is respect for the leader/manager and each other. They must have a good understanding towards their job role and responsibility.

The features of effective team performance is set up through positive leadership, this is something which is developed and nurtured. An effective team will work together, be focused and all the time supporting each other along the way to achieve and reach goals. For a team to be effective, each team member needs to be clear on their roles and responsibilities relating to their job. Team performance will be more effective if there is respect for the leader/manager and an understanding towards their job role and responsibility. The leader/manager should also be aware of the skills or weakness within the team and be able to provide support were necessary and also utilise their strengths. Training and support will enable staff to improve

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

Being responsible is a huge factor in guiding a mountain climbing team. There are a lot people on each team, and some are more experienced then others, so it takes a lot of coordination and cooperation from everyone. Rob Hall, because of his experience, knew he was responsible for making sure that everyone on his team was prepared for the summit of Everest. With that knowledge Rob Hall utilized his organization skills and "he'd fine-tuned a remarkably effective acclimatization plan" (p.74) that would enable all members of the team to adapt to the scarcity of oxygen in the atmosphere. Along with making sure he had an arrangement for how to acclimatize his team he also managed to consult "with the leaders of all the expeditions planning to climb Everest in the spring," and they agreed on which team "would be responsible for establishing and maintaining a route through the icefall" (p.80). Rob Hall had a very heavy load that he was responsible for as a guide in 1996 and he demonstrated how reliable he was in the way he took care of business using his ability to plan ahead and stay organized.

o Poor team building- A cohesive team unit wasn’t formed by Fischer Hall or the guides. The root cause of some of this decision may have been the selection of team members and the Fischer and Hall overlooking Booukreev’s advice. According to Roberto and Carioggia[1], “experience is overrated, it’s not the altitude, that’s important, it’s your attitude. Throughout the journey to the base camps, the team’s input wasn’t solicited. rs. Kraukaer[2] bonded with Hansen but, didn’t feel comfortable with the others. When embarking on any event, team building is essential, so that “strangers can become comrades.” Fisher and Hall should’ve engaged the team or collaborated to the guides regarding a spirit of inclusiveness and togetherness. One alternative could’ve been for Fischer and Hall to combine both teams and build on the strengths and weaknesses within. The expedition featured world-class guides however the lack of team building led to an inability for team members to feel valued.

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

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

| “The top 10 features of an effective team are: * clear purpose; * open communication; * constructive conflict; * effective problem-solving and decision making; * defined roles, responsibilities and accountability; * strong relationships; * systems and procedures; * experimentation and creativity; * measurement and self-assessment; * shared leadership.” For a team to be effective, they need to have clear

One of the most important qualities that an elite climber must have is leadership. The elite climbers and guides must be able to meet a number of new people that are strangers to each other and build some sense of a team. Krakauer does not have a strong background in leading groups or building comradery, which is key for a climb like Everest. Krakauer says himself, “In climbing, having confidence in your partners is no small concern” (40). He also mentions how the actions of one climber can “affect the welfare of the entire team” (40). The type of group he climbed with on

The future of Mount Everest looks bright once again now that there will be people who will care for and maintain this beautiful giant. The Swachh Mount Everest Mission, as seen at Explorers Web (http://www.explorersweb.com/everest_k2/), is determined to ensure that the future of Mount Everest looks

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.

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.

And they got one climber off, and they crashed attempting to rescue the second man” (Helicopter Rescues Increasing on Everest 7). It is a rescuer’s job to know the risks for saving a climber but if the climber is a professional, they shouldn’t be easily be making mistakes. When there are rescuers who come pick you up fast when you can’t complete the climb, it is like having a safety net behind you. But where is the safety net behind the rescuers? There isn’t one, once they make a mistake, there won’t be someone to save them, so there shouldn’t be rescuers saving climbers when they are risking their own lives but also the

Both teams had members with a wide range of experience. There is no evidence that either expedition leader spent any time on evaluating the teams created to understand the ability of team members or how they would perform within the context of the task they were undertaking. Further complicating this was the fact that the teams did not make the best use of their expert Sherpas. Sherpas are the locals of Khumbu, a region of Nepal. They live in the mountains and are intimately aware of the conditions the teams would be facing, and arguably have more expertise than any other members of the

Description of Problems: As the Mount Everest Simulation progressed everyone was excited as how the climb would be and what decisions would the team make to progress the climb. There were total 5 camps in which the 5th camp was the Mount Everest. The leader and the whole team had to decide at whether on which camp we should rest and when to go up. Since I was the Environmental Scientist and I had a bit of anxious medical history while climbing the mountains which no one ever knew till yet that I would be needing the medical assistence as well.