Mount Everest 1996
Preparation Assignment
POTENTIAL CAUSE: OVERCONFIDENCE
One of the potential causes of the tragedy on Mount Everest in May, 1996 was the cognitive bias
of overconfidence. Overconfidence occurs when leaders believe that their experience, abilities,
skill, or maybe even luck, will allow them to overcome any challenge they face. Research has
shown that such overconfidence can lead to poor decision making as leaders substitute their own
personal skill for careful analysis of the situation and planning.
Hall, in particular, may have been prone to overconfidence. He had reached the summit four
times and had guided 39 clients to the top of Everest.
As you read and prepare for our discussion of this case, please focus on this element of
overconfidence. Put together no more than 4 PowerPoint slides that cover the following
elements:

Provide a definition or description of the concept of overconfidence

Give 3-5 factual examples from the case where overconfidence was evidenced in the case

How did this element contribute to the tragedy on Everest?

Assess and justify the contribution this element made in the tragedy. 0-15%--minor role, 1540% significant role, 40-75% major contributing factor, 75-100% overwhelming factor.
You will be asked to present and summarize your analysis for about 5 minutes during the
discussion.
Mount Everest 1996
Preparation Assignment
POTENTIAL CAUSE: SUNK COST EFFECT
One of the potential causes of the tragedy on Mount Everest in May, 1996 was the cognitive bias
of the sunk cost effect. This effect refers to the tendency for people to escalate their commitment
to a course of action in which they have made a substantial prior investment of time, money, or
other resources. Sunk costs may keep decision makers from recognizing and heading
environmental danger signals, or signals of failure.
During these expeditions to Everest, both Hall and Fischer spoke of the importance of the “Two
O’Clock rule;” However, turnaround times were ignored. Was this an example of sunk cost
effects?
As you read and prepare for our discussion of this case, please focus on the sunk cost effect.
Put together no more than 4 PowerPoint slides that cover the following elements:

Provide a definition or description of the concept of the sunk cost effect

Give 3-5 factual examples from the case where sunk costs were referenced and evidenced in
the case

How did this element contribute to the tragedy on Everest?

Assess and justify the contribution this element made in the tragedy. 0-15%--minor role, 1540% significant role, 40-75% major contributing factor, 75-100% overwhelming factor.
You will be asked to present and summarize your analysis for about 5 minutes during the
discussion.
Mount Everest 1996
Preparation Assignment
POTENTIAL CAUSE: RECENCY EFFECT
One of the potential causes of the tragedy on Mount Everest in May, 1996 was the cognitive bias
termed the recency effect. This effect occurs when decision makers over-emphasize information
and evidence that is readily available and place undue emphasis on recent events, rather than
basing decisions on a complete sample of past episodes or statistical averages computed over a
long time horizon.
The expedition leaders, Hall in particular, had experienced unusually good weather during his
ascents.
As you read and prepare for our discussion of this case, please focus on the recency effect. Put
together no more than 4 PowerPoint slides that cover the following elements:

Provide a definition or description of the concept of the recency effect

Give 3-5 factual examples from the case where recency effects were evidenced in the case
and contributed to decision making

How did this element contribute to the tragedy on Everest?

Assess and justify the contribution this element made in the tragedy. 0-15%--minor role, 1540% significant role, 40-75% major contributing factor, 75-100% overwhelming factor.
You will be asked to present and summarize your analysis for about 5 minutes during the
discussion.
Mount Everest 1996
Preparation Assignment
POTENTIAL CAUSE: PERCEIVED STATUS DIFFERENCES WITHIN THE GROUPS
One of the potential causes of the tragedy on Mount Everest in May, 1996 was the group
dynamic of perceived status differences. Perceived status differences occur when individuals
perceive that there is a “pecking order” or authority status hierarchy within a group that precludes
or discourages open communication or dissent. Perceived status differences threaten what is
known as “group psychological safety,” which is the shared belief that the team is a safe place for
interpersonal risk-taking such as voicing dissent or questioning a course of action. Research has
shown that teams with high degrees of psychological safety are more likely to make better
decisions and learn more effectively as a team.
As you read and prepare for our discussion of this case, please focus on this element of
perceived status differences. Put together no more than 4 PowerPoint slides that cover the
following elements:

Provide a definition or description of the concept of perceived status differences.

Give 3-5 factual examples from the case where this perception was evidenced in the case
and factored into decision making.

How did this element contribute to the tragedy on Everest?

Assess and justify the contribution this element made in the tragedy. 0-15%--minor role, 1540% significant role, 40-75% major contributing factor, 75-100% overwhelming factor.
You will be asked to present and summarize your analysis for about 5 minutes during the
discussion.
Mount Everest 1996
Preparation Assignment
POTENTIAL CAUSE: LEADERSHIP STYLES OF HALL AND FISHER
One of the potential causes of the tragedy on Mount Everest in May, 1996 was the negative
dynamic created by the leadership styles of Hall and Fischer. Leaders can signal, through words
and actions, either the willingness or unwillingness to entertain challenging questions, to listen to
and consider dissenting view, or to hear others express valid concerns. Leaders who are
unwilling to foster real communication destroy or weaken what is known as “group psychological
safety,” which is the shared belief that the team is a safe place for interpersonal risk-taking such
as voicing dissent or questioning a course of action. Research has shown that teams with high
degrees of psychological safety are more likely to make better decisions and learn more
effectively as a team.
As you read and prepare for our discussion of this case, please focus on the leadership styles of
Hall and Fischer. Put together no more than 4 PowerPoint slides that cover the following
elements:

Provide a definition or description of the concept of leadership style.

Give 3-5 factual examples from the case where leadership style was evidenced in the case
and how it factored into decision making.

How did this element contribute to the tragedy on Everest?

Assess and justify the contribution this element made in the tragedy. 0-15%--minor role, 1540% significant role, 40-75% major contributing factor, 75-100% overwhelming factor.
You will be asked to present and summarize your analysis for about 5 minutes during the
discussion.
Mount Everest 1996
Preparation Assignment
POTENTIAL CAUSE: GROUP FAMILIARITY AND PRIOR INTERACTION
One of the potential causes of the tragedy on Mount Everest in May, 1996 was the group
dynamic that the groups of climbers, aside from the leaders, lacked sufficient time and practice
needed to develop an understanding of each others skills and limitations, mutual trust, and
mutual respect. When this level of familiarity has not been achieved, people will be reticent to
admit their concerns, speak candidly about the situation or their own feelings, and express
dissenting views. The lack of familiarity, trust, and respect inhibits what is known as “group
psychological safety,” which is the shared belief that the team is a safe place for interpersonal
risk-taking such as voicing dissent or questioning a course of action. Research has shown that
teams with high degrees of psychological safety are more likely to make better decisions and
learn more effectively as a team.
As you read and prepare for our discussion of this case, please focus on the element of group
familiarity. Put together no more than 4 PowerPoint slides that cover the following elements:

Provide a definition or description of the concept of group familiarity and trust.

Give 3-5 factual examples from the case where this element was evidenced in the case and
factored into decision making.

How did this element contribute to the tragedy on Everest?

Assess and justify the contribution this element made in the tragedy. 0-15%--minor role, 1540% significant role, 40-75% major contributing factor, 75-100% overwhelming factor.
You will be asked to present and summarize your analysis for about 5 minutes during the
discussion.
Mount Everest 1996
Preparation Assignment
POTENTIAL CAUSE: COMPLEX INTERACTIONS WITHIN A COMPLEX SYSTEM
One of the potential causes of the tragedy on Mount Everest in May, 1996 was a feature of the
overall system of climbers, business, and the mountain: taken together they represented
elements of a complex system. As a complex system, there may not have been one single cause
of the tragedy, but rather a series of interconnected breakdowns, each serious but not fatal in
themselves. It was the combination of these small breakdowns, however, that summed up and
created multiplier effects that contributed to the overall catastrophe. One element of a complex
system is a set of complex interactions, where different elements of a system interact in ways that
are unexpected and difficult to perceive or comprehend in advance.
For example, the Mountain Madness team experienced a series of interconnected problems
before they even arrived at base camp. The had customs problems at the Russian border,
problems with the charter flight, poor weather during the trek to Base Camp, labor unrest among
the Nepali porters, and difficult negotiations trying to recruit a journalist. The net effect of these
logistical problems was to burden Fischer, disrupt his acclimatization routine, speed his
exhaustion and the deterioration of his health. His unhealthy condition then became a critical
factor during the summit push.
As you read and prepare for our discussion of this case, please focus on this element of complex
interactions. Put together no more than 4 PowerPoint slides that cover the following elements:

Provide a definition or description of the concept of complex interactions.

Give 3-5 factual examples from the case where complex interactions were evidenced in the
case and how they factored into decision making.

How did this element contribute to the tragedy on Everest?

Assess and justify the contribution this element made in the tragedy. 0-15%--minor role, 1540% significant role, 40-75% major contributing factor, 75-100% overwhelming factor.
You will be asked to present and summarize your analysis for about 5 minutes during the
discussion.
Mount Everest 1996
Preparation Assignment
POTENTIAL CAUSE: TIGHT COUPLING WITHIN A COMPLEX SYSTEM
One of the potential causes of the tragedy on Mount Everest in May, 1996 was a feature of the
overall system of climbers, business, and the mountain: taken together they represented
elements of a complex system. As a complex system, there may not have been one single cause
of the tragedy, but rather a series of interconnected breakdowns, each serious but not fatal in
themselves. It was the combination of these small breakdowns, however, that summed up and
created multiplier effects that contributed to the overall catastrophe. Tight coupling reduces the
margin for error that may spell the difference between success and failure of an endeavor.
Tightly coupled systems have four characteristics:
1. They have time dependent processes, such as a window of good weather that allowed
ascents of Everest to only occur during a brief period in May.
2. They exhibit a rigid series of activities that are tightly scripted and must follow each other
in proper sequence. Failure in one activity compounds during later activities.
3. They have a single dominant path to the goal. Few, or no, options exist for creating a
success through alternative paths.
4. They allow for very little slack. Elements of the system are overburdened and their
supply of critical resources is limited. For example, climbers could only bring a certain
amount of supplemental oxygen with them, which dictated the tight eighteen hour
schedule on summit day.
As you read and prepare for our discussion of this case, please focus on this element of tight
coupling. Put together no more than 4 PowerPoint slides that cover the following elements:

Provide a definition or description of the concept of tightly coupled systems.

Give 3-5 factual examples from the case where this element was evidenced in the case and
factored into decision making.

How did this element contribute to the tragedy on Everest?

Assess and justify the contribution this element made in the tragedy. 0-15%--minor role, 1540% significant role, 40-75% major contributing factor, 75-100% overwhelming factor.
You will be asked to present and summarize your analysis for about 5 minutes during the
discussion.