1.Why did this tragedy occur in Mount Everest? What is the root cause of the problem?

Everest climbing is a dangerous activity and is the goal of all professional climbers. The power
of nature and the mountains seem undefeated. But every year, the very best try to prove it wrong.
You find yourself fighting elements in Nepal and climbing to the top of the world.
 
However, reaching the peak is still not assured. Mountain guides and firms are willing to take
clients with less climbing expertise. This they do even though it is evident that they will have no
chance of reaching the peak.

The most common causes of such disasters on Mount Everest include health issues caused by
avalanches, storms, falls, a lack of oxygen, and frostbite. However, the 1996 disaster was mostly
due to human error from expedition leaders Rob Hall and Scott Fisher, who were unprepared to
oversee such a climbing trip.

Three major contributing factors culminated in the tragedy:

1. issues regarding leadership styles of Hill and Fischer
2. topics dealing with the clients and their lack of cohesiveness and the team mentality
3. failure to abide by the set rules and procedures

Along with the above-mentioned factors, other elements included inadequate amounts of oxygen
equipment were purchased in preparation for the Mountain Madness trip. There were also old-
fashioned radio sets that didn't work on a regular basis, making it impossible for guides to stay
connected to the base camp during the climb.

Tour guides were even disregarding the precautionary steps and proceeding with the scheduled
summit on a day when the weather was not supposed to be favorable. They also did not follow
instructions when it was agreed to start descending at 2 PM, and they did not turn back for those
who were running late.

2. Are tragedies such as this simply inevitable in a place like Mount Everest?

This sort of tragedy can easily take place in a place like Everest. Climbing is a dangerous and
risky activity, especially when the summit is that of almost 8000 meters above the sea level,
since the human body cannot sustain on its own at that altitude. Even the smallest mistake can
cost one’s life. Every individual who decides to summit Mount Everest knows the risk and
understand that this might as well be their last summit.

The only thing in the hands of the climber is to prepare physically and mentally for the
challenges that lie ahead, plan the schedule of acclimatization and summiting, observe the
weather forecast, acquire necessary equipment and follow regular instructions of hiking an 8000-
meter peak. This however, still won’t provide any guarantee but will significantly reduce the
chances of any fatality.
3. What is your evaluation of Scott Fischer & Robert Hall as leaders?

In 1996, Rob Hall and Scott Fischer both led commercial expedition teams aiming to climb
Mount Everest. Each group had a leader, several guides, and eight paying customers. 
Although several team members reached the peak on May 10, they faced tremendous hazards on
their way down.

Five people, including two highly gifted mountaineers, died as they attempted to climb down the
mountain during a stormy night.
Scott Fischer and hall both failed badly in leading a team towards the same goal, instead of being
very good at climbing mount Everest and experienced in climbing high altitudes.

1. Both had individual expertise and skills for climbing such high altitudes but didn't have
sufficient knowledge and abilities to organize and lead a team.
2. There is bad leadership highlighted through poor decision-making. Hall's poor decision-
making is reflected in many of his decisions, such as by not adhering to the 1 pm
turnaround time rule.
3. Hall's leadership style left no opportunity for disagreement, discouraging dialogue
between members and leaders.
4. Fischer lacked leadership experience, which was prominently visible in his lack of
attention towards many safety aspects, which were a pre-requisite for the expedition. For
instance, Fischer was reaching the top without supplemental oxygen because he was
overconfident about his aim, which caused his health to deteriorate and rendered him
weak during the journey.

Poor decision making was evident in almost every decision made by Hall and Fischer, as they
paid no attention to team selection, security measures, developing teamwork and improving
communication among team members, adhering to the rules that were established, and, most
importantly, failing to develop a plan B.
4. What are the lessons for General Managers in Business Enterprises?

The Everest case analysis provides a framework for understanding, diagnosing, and recognizing
how leaders may shape and influence the processes through which their companies make and
implement high-stakes choices.

According to the Everest case study, leaders must pay particular attention to how they plan for
the best usage of resources in their businesses, distribute work among team members, and weave
numerous complicated aspects into a plan to achieve an overarching goal.

Furthermore, the example gives the following insights and lessons for General Managers in
Business Enterprises.

i) Balancing Competing Forces

The Everest example illustrates that leaders must perform a tricky balancing act when
fostering confidence, dissent, and dedication inside their businesses.

ii) Changing Perceptions and Beliefs

The Everest instance also highlights how leaders may influence the opinions and attitudes
of their organization's members.

iii) Taking lessons from failures

This study shows a more comprehensive method to learn from large-scale organizational
failures. It implies that we cannot consider failures at the individual, group, and
organizational levels in isolation. Instead, we must grasp how these factors combine to
influence organizational processes and outcomes.