hhh

1448 Words3 Pages

Rob Hall’s Adventure Consultants and Scott Fischer’s Mountain Madness consisted of four guides, sixteen clients, and a number of Sherpas who together formed the groups with the goal of climbing to the Summit of Mount Everest. Every group member had an individual personal motivator for climbing Mount Everest. Some were wealthy individuals and paid thousands to check the climb off their bucket list, others joined the groups to record the experience in their respective travel magazines, while the leaders Hall and Fischer previously reached the Summit and wanted to increase the number of clients they led to the top. The members were not interdependent of one another in completing the task. Each member could have climbed the mountain individually, but decided to join the groups with one common goal to reach the Summit. Their task force groups were temporary as they would only last until the members returned from climbing the mountain. The Adventure Consultants and Mountain Madness witnessed positive and negative effects of their groups’ formation throughout their time on the mountain. The diversity of the group members was a strength for their success on the mountain. The members ranged from doctors, journalists, Sherpas, to professional climbers. They came from different backgrounds and past experiences in high altitude climbing and possessed a variety of mental capacities while on the mountain. This is apparent in some members’ decision to return to Base Camp as their health deteriorated. Other members also questioned proceeding to the Summit when the weather turned for the worse. The diversity in decision making of the members was an asset to the groups’ overall experience on the mountain. Their diversity also led to com... ... middle of paper ... ...evelopment process as they descended from the mountain. Everyone began to break off into smaller groups as they raced down the mountain to Camp V. The members were no longer focused on the task, but how they could join together to successfully make it down the mountain. Even though the groups possessed positive characteristics, their disadvantage was the lack of group development. The leaders could have taken more time to develop the team and encourage open communication. While it was important for members to have an authoritative figure on the mountain, it would have benefited them to rely on each other resources early on in their journey. Identifying and acknowledging the assets of their co-members could have played a factor in members creating support groups early in the ascent and ultimately led to more informed decision making while completing the task.

Open Document