Mount Everest Tragedy 1996 - Case Study Example

 Mount Everest Tragedy 1996 1. Why did this tragedy occur? What is the root cause of this tragedy? The Mount Everest tragedy unfolded on the treacherous slopes of Mount Everest in the Spring of 1996. Ninety-eight men and women climbed successfully to the Summit but 15 people lost their lives. The group that climbed the mountain consisted of climbers who were clients and also guides who were supposed to guide the climbers throughout the whole exercise. However, the endeavor was a difficult and treacherous one even to the guides themselves and this explains the fact that those who died included the guides who were considered to have a better chance of their own survival as well as improve the survival of the clients. The causes of the tragedy cannot be tied to one single cause because it was a myriad of issues that caused it. First, the leaders (guides) chose to cling to goals instead of considering whether these goals were attainable. This started from the onset of the climbing adventure because the leaders of the expedition cited doubts on the level of preparedness of the climbers. Some of the people in the group like Dale Kruse who was Fischer’s friend had a history of becoming sick at high altitudes but the team chose not to act on this (van Dyck, 2009). Even though several guides expressed concern on the level of preparedness of the clients to make it a success, they did not do anything about it and instead chose to ignore. Another reason was clinging to rules. Hall’s death was caused by clinging to the rule of not leaving anybody behind even when it was clear that Hansen would not survive. Another cause of the tragedy related to poor and erroneous judgments. Harris mistakenly concluded that there was no supplemental oxygen at the south summit and convinced others to believe so, yet there was supplemental oxygen at the south summit. Another mistake was the failure to question others’ judgment along the way because this would have saved several people. In addition, nobody was ready to make an appropriate decision or even inquiry to others health when it was clear that some of the guides mental and physical strength was deteriorating and would cause problems for the group. Therefore, the causes of the tragedy were several (van Dyck, 2009). 2. Are tragedies such as this simply inevitable in a place like Everest? Tragedies such as this are not simply inevitable especially in a place like Everest. Preventing such tragedies is difficult because it does not entirely depend on the planning of the people who want to climb the mountain. It also encompasses other issues and factors which are not at the control of man. For instance, tragedies in a place like the Everest can be caused by things such as storms, avalanches and collapses of large chunks of ice which would definitely cause deaths. These are things that can catch people by surprise no matter the preparation and readiness that has been done because they are outside the control of people. In addition, this are high altitude areas where the survival of man is not an assured thing. There are several things that people can do to prevent such tragedies and this entails things such as planning effectively logistically and ensuring that all the requirements are ready before such an expedition can be started. Secondly, safety measures must be taken. This entails training those who are to participate in all the essentials to ensure that they do not entirely depend on guides but can offer help to the guides and themselves if need be. This is what the organizers of the Everest tragedy failed to do (van Dyck, 2009). 3. What is your evaluation of Scott Fischer and Rob Hall as leaders? Did they make some poor decisions? If so, why? Scott Fischer and Rob Hall were the leaders of the Everest climb that ended in tragic deaths of 15 people. Despite the fact that the deaths were not entirely their fault, they contributed to the tragedy by failing to take their responsibilities as leaders. Hall’s decision-making was particularly at fault for the tragedy. First, Hall helped set the 1pm turn-around time but he failed to adhere to the decision. This contributed to the tragedy. Other climbers such as Huthison, Taske and others adhered to it and went back even though they were close to the summit and they survived. Secondly, Hall’s decision to accompany Doug Hansen made Hall focus lose focus on priority for the other members and put them at risk when the storm started and could not find their way back to the tent. Thirdly, as a leader Hall did not allow anyone to dissent his methods, which made people fear to question his actions or point out a problem. This broke down the communication between the members creating more errors (van Dyck, 2009). Scott Fischer competed with Hall to get to the summit for bragging rights. This made him ignore safety aspects and failed to undertake his duties as a leader. He instructed Lobsang, his head Sherpa to short-rope a client Pittman to the summit, yet Lobsang did not have supplementary oxygen. This placed the lives of others in danger. Fischer’s decision to climb without supplementary oxygen was also a wrong decision because it led to his deterioration of physical condition resulting in his own death and also putting the lives of his clients at risk. Together, Hall and Fischer were accomplished climbers but failed to use their expertise to adequately prepare their clients or create a team that would support each other when they knew that the climb was a very difficult endeavor. This resulted in an unhealthy competition by members who only had self-interest instead of moving as a group. 4. What are the lessons from this case for general managers in business enterprises? There are several lessons that managers in business enterprises can learn from the Mount Everest tragedy. The first lesson for managers is that while goals are significant for every business, the passion for goals should not blind them to oversee other important issues that will help in the realization of these goals. Leaders and the team that participated in the Mount Everest climb had goals of reaching the summit and descending successfully. However, they were overly focused on these goals that they failed to plan on how they can achieve them as a team. Therefore, goals should not make managers shift their attention away from important processes. Secondly, the tragedy helps managers to learn that coordination, team work and communication are essential attributes that must work together for success. The Everest tragedy was brought about by selfish ambitions, lack of coordination lack of communication and lack of team work spirit. If they had communicated properly, coordinated their actions and activities and worked as a team, the tragedy would have been averted. Thirdly, the tragedy offers a lesson to managers that leadership is about making appropriate decisions even in difficult times. Leaders such as Hall and Fischer failed to make appropriate decisions required of them, yet this was their responsibility. The failure to make those decisions brought about problems and confusion that led to the disaster. Instead of working as leaders they made decisions as individuals not as leaders. Therefore, managers should make appropriate decisions for their business enterprises rather than for personal gain. Lastly, the tragedy offers a lesson into effective preparedness before undertaking major ventures. The Mount Everest climb was a major event that required adequate preparedness that was to take a lengthy time. However, the leaders failed to prepare and even train their clients even when they had doubts over their ability to successfully ascend and descent the mountain and this led to the tragedy. Therefore, business managers should adequately prepare for major events and address all the major and minor issues before embarking on them. This will help avert possible tragedies or disasters. Reference van Dyck, C. (2009). The tragic 1996 Everest expedition: A tale of error culture. Netherlands Journal of Psychology, 65(1), 22-34. Read More