Mr. Everest Case Analysis

The leadinghip, the acquits and the Sherpa assistants observed the blood line opportunity in guiding thickenings to the teetotum. Since Mt. Everest is the highest mountain in the military man and is a symbol of overcoming difficulties to fulfill the dream, most of the clients wanted to conquer it, oddly when some of them (mountain climbers) failed to push to the summit ahead. Jon Krakauer, from Outside magazine, had a special symmetricalness with residency. He regarded the opportunity as a free lunch. blonde Pittman, as well worked in the media industry, joined the expedition in pronounce to stimulate daily web reports to NBC. Gammelgaard wanted to become the first Scandinavian woman to reach the summit. Other clients like Adams and Madsen, chose it because they enjoyed the struggle of the upward of conduct and they believed that this was what life mean and what life was for. b. What type of person tries to ascend the worlds tallest mountain? The type of person who tries to ascend Mt. Everest with extremely strong leaveingness to dispute themselves, nifty physical fitness, well-trained upgrade skills and perseverance. c. What personal Qualities does it take to succeed? loyal willingness to reach the summit, perseverance, good group spirit, problem solving skills, positive attitude, and debar making the said(prenominal) mistakes. d. Do you see any similarities amongst a high-altitude mountain climber and an MSB? Yes. The personal qualities listed above are also important for an MSB bookman if he/she wishes to achieve business advantage in the future. But strong willingness should be the willingness to help enterprises achieve sustainable growth and leverage business as a powerful stopcock to contribute to society. e. Based upon this abbreviation, can you draw any conclusion almost the dangers that may lie ahead for you in pursuit of your career purpose? The dangers that may lie ahead include making ravish decisions over ag ain and again, encountering unexpected spays or crisis, failing to deal with conflicts, lacking aggroup spirit, declining good advice. 2. Causes of the Tragedy a. What caused this cataclysm? Human errors, including recruiting clients without high-altitude experience, ordering insufficient oxygen supplements and victorious antiquated radios, caused the tragedy.Flawed characteristics in human nature caused this tragedy. Having many experiences in climbing Mt. Everest do Hall and Fischer unwilling to accept others advice. Each client thought and acted for his/her throw. Unexpected weather changes also caused this tragedy. b. What types of mistaken judgments and choices did the climbers make? The leaders recruited climbers with no high-altitude experience. The leaders and the clients were non well fig upd for the expedition. Fischer did not order enough oxygen supplements and did not pick up a plan B for the logistics problem of his order.Many clients did not get high-altit ude climbing training before the experience. The leaders did not admit opportunities for guides to participate in decision-making. Fischer preferred Halls suggestion instead of Boukreevs. Did not accept the advice from others. Topche ignored Fischers suggestion and insisted to climb. Fischer did not listen to the advice of Boukreev about the possible weather change on the way from Camp 2 to Camp 3. Made the wrong decision again and again. Harris do a critical error in assuming that at that place was no supplemental oxygen remained at the federation Summit. Bad while direction skills. Hall and Fischer stressed the importance of number back but neither settled on an direct verso time. Some clients only thought about themselves.Pittman should convey turned most instead of placing an overwhelming burden on Jangbu. c. Consider your own business experiences for a moment. What causes volume to ignore rules in organizations? Why do individuals witness it so difficult to ign ore sunk cost? Not beingness cognisant of rules, lack of supervision, lack of appropriate punishment, insufficient education causes lot to ignore rules in organizations. Because individuals already have spent time and money on a project. It is so difficult for people to ignore their efforts until now though the efforts are invalid or the dream cannot come true. d. Did these teams assist effectively? Why or why not? No. They didnt work as a team. Each client acted for his/ her own goods. team up leaders made repeating wrong decisions.By Halls requirement, the guides waited over an hour for the clients before moving to the Balcony. That made them late for the timeline. When the guide Harris made a critical error, no one paid management to his physical condition and gave him help. Team leaders had bad time management skills and didnt stick to the turn around time. e. What is your evaluation of Fischer and Hall as team leaders? I would consider them as unsuccessful team lea ders not because they failed to lead the team to reach the summit, but because they made some(prenominal) critical errors. A successful team leader should run opportunity for others in decision-making, accept constructive advice, have good time management skills, good conversation skills and be able to lead his team members. Despite this, Fischer and Hall both have high-altitude experience and are responsible for(p) for their clients and teammates. . atomic number 18 we being a bit too hard on Hall and Fischer? Might tragedies much(prenominal) as this one simply be inevitable on the slopes of Everest? Yes, I think we are being a bit too hard on Hall and Fischer. Multiple elements caused the tragedy, such as weather, human error and unexpected crisis. People cannot imagine what will happen during the summit bid. People can never be fully prepared for the unexpected changes. That is why climbing Mt. Everest is so dangerous. g. Having conducted all this analysis what would you conclude is the calm down cause of the catastrophe? I think the root cause of the catastrophe was human error.Although unexpected weather change was another(prenominal) key cause of the tragedy, team members, especially the leaders and the guides, should have been aware of the possible weather change and make the right decision. When they failed to follow the summit timeline, they should have turned around instead of continuing. h. Can we identify a root cause? Why or why not? Yes. In any drive, there must be some factors that have much influence on the result than other. So we can identify a root cause. i. Does the vox populi of system complexity apply in this case? In what ways did complex interactions and slicked coupling characterize these expeditions? Yes, the notion of system complexity applies in this case. Each small mistake made by the leaders tended to relate with each other and finally came to a chain reaction that led to the tragedy. These are the complex interact ions that happened in these expeditions. both leaders set up a rigid timeline and did not provide opportunity for other experienced guides to participate in decision-making. When an unexpected crisis came, there were no flexible areas to change the plan in the timeline. These are the tight coupling characterize in these expeditions. 3. Constructive Dissent and Psychological galosh a.What factors created a climate in which people felt uncomfortable expressing withstand and engaging in a candid exchange of ideas and opinions? The leaders did not provide opportunity to others in decision making. Other teammates did not have professional experience in high-altitude mountain climbing. Lack of teamwork and trust surrounded by team members. b. Moving beyond Everest, what factors might inhibit constructive remonstration in organizations? The manager does not provide others an opportunity in combat-ready in decision-making. The manager treats people unfairly. Bad teamwork and lack of trust between colleagues inhibit good advice. . Is differ always appropriate? Under what conditions do leaders want to encourage dissent? When should they strive to monish dissent? No. The dissent is constructive and is raised to the managers at a seemly time and place. When the dissent has destructive effect on employees and company, the leaders should discourage it.4. Lessons for Business Leaders a. What are the lessons for business leaders from our analysis of this tragedy? Business leaders should avoid being bossy and inaccessible to employees. It is of import to encourage and accept constructive dissent from others. They should be aware that their nomenclature and actions might have great influence on the employees. They should provide bear on opportunities to employees. They should avoid making the same mistakes again and again. b. Drawing on your own experiences, can you identify a event in which some of the factors contributed to an organizational failure? H ow might you take corrective action to prevent that situation from occurring once again? We failed to organize a graduation trip for the all in all college. We did not do research in a large scale, prepare a practical plan or to provide several options. If given over the second chance, I would take several steps to avoid the organizational failure. First, I would stress the importance of this trip to everyone, and find out an exact date that would work for everyone. Then I would do a quite a little on the place, the period and the price preferences of the students. After that, I would list several options for students. Lastly, I would try to find out the reason that a student declined the offer and improve the travelling plan. c. What qualities make Hall and Fischer great mountaineers? Are these the same attributes required to lead an effective team?Does this same tightness exist in business organizations? Lots of practice, perseverance, good physical fitness, well-trained cli mbing skills and strong willingness make Hall and Fischer great mountaineers. These are not the same attributes required to lead an effective team. In order to be a good team leader, a person should provide others with an opportunity in decision-making, be accessible to others, have good time management skills and communication skills. d. Can we train people to become better team leaders and more effective high-stakes decision-makers? If so, how? Yes.Introduce to people how those effective high-stakes decision-makers perform, so that people can pay attention to how their words and actions have an influence on others. Moreover, people will realize that it is important to build confidence and swerve the conflicts within the team. More importantly, they can understand and learn from the failures in the past. get down different exercises to train people, including group projects, case studies, brainstorm training and crisis answer practice etc. Practice makes perfect. After each p ractice, people should have a self-assessment on their performance and list aspects that need improvement.