Leadership And Team Simulation: Everest V2 I Was The Leader

Leadership and Team Simulation: Everest V2 I was the leader and I did well

In this reflective paper, I analyze my experience as the leader during the Everest Leadership and Team Simulation: Everest V2. The purpose of this exercise was to examine how leadership, group dynamics, and organizational behavior manifest in a high-stakes, team-based simulation. My engagement with the team members, their roles, interactions, and the overall group functioning are critical to understanding my leadership experience and identifying areas for improvement.

The simulation involved a six-day climb of Mount Everest, requiring strategic decision-making in face of challenging weather, altitude sickness, resource allocation, and team health. As the leader, I was responsible for guiding the group through various critical stages, making strategic choices, and managing relationships among team members. The roles within the team included Sam as the photographer, Kevin as the doctor, Alex as the environmental expert, and Ayoub as the marathon runner, each contributing unique skills and perspectives.

Group Functioning and Dynamics

Throughout the simulation, our team functioned with limited cohesion and communication challenges. Initially, we attempted to make collaborative decisions; however, each member's strong personality and desire for leadership created a competitive environment. The group's culture was informal and somewhat chaotic, characterized by individuals wanting to take charge, which often led to conflicting ideas and delayed decision-making. This reflects organizational behavior theories emphasizing that a clear leadership structure and defined roles are essential for effective team functioning (Katzenbach & Smith, 1993).

In the simulation, decision-making was shared among group members, but without clear leadership, it often resulted in indecision or conflicting directives. This aligns with Tuckman's (1965) model of group development, indicating that our group was in a storming phase, marked by competition, disagreement, and lack of cohesion. Such dynamics are common when teams lack established leadership and clear role definitions.

My Role and Leadership Style

As the designated leader, I aimed to facilitate consensus and ensure the safety of team members. However, I struggled with asserting authority, preferring to accommodate everyone's opinions to maintain harmony, which inadvertently reduced the efficiency of decision-making. My leadership approach aligns with participative and transformational styles, aiming to involve all members and motivate them (Bass & Avolio, 1994). Nonetheless, my reluctance to impose decisions diminished the group's overall effectiveness in critical moments, such as resource allocation and emergency responses.

My interactions with team members were empathetic and collaborative, trying to foster open communication. Yet, the high levels of competition among members, each eager to lead, created barriers to cohesive collaboration. For example, during the oxygen allocation decision, multiple members advocated for their needs, leading to disagreements and delays. This highlights the importance of assertive leadership and clear authority structures, especially in high-pressure settings (Yukl, 2012).

Group Culture and Communication

The group’s culture was shaped by diverse personalities and a shared goal of summiting Everest, but it lacked formalized communication protocols. Despite sincere efforts to communicate effectively, misunderstandings arose, particularly in high-stress situations such as adverse weather predictions or health crises like Alexandra's asthma attack. Effective communication, as emphasized by Robbins and Judge (2019), is vital for successful team performance, and our experience demonstrated that open, transparent communication reduces errors and enhances trust.

Team members contributed different perspectives, with some sharing expertise more influenceably. Kevin, the doctor, often provided critical health insights, affecting team decisions. Conversely, some contributions, such as over-optimistic weather predictions, sometimes created false confidence, illustrating how individual biases may impact group judgments (Janis, 1972).

Challenges and Resolutions

Several issues emerged during the simulation. A notable challenge was balancing decision authority with team consensus, especially when urgent decisions were needed. My decision to not enforce strict authority led to delays and ambiguity. This experience mirrors organizational behavior research indicating that transformational leaders who adapt decision styles to situations are more effective (Goleman, 2000).

To resolve conflicts, I attempted to mediate and encourage participation but recognized that my approach could have been more assertive. In future scenarios, I would adopt a more directive style when necessary, providing clear guidance while still valuing team input. Additionally, establishing explicit roles at the outset can help manage expectations and streamline decision processes (Hackman & Wageman, 2005).

Lessons Learned and Future Directions

This experience has highlighted the importance of decisive leadership, clear communication, and understanding team dynamics. I learned that in high-pressure environments, leaders must balance participation with authority to ensure timely and effective decisions. Furthermore, fostering an environment where team members feel their contributions are valued can improve collaboration and morale (Northouse, 2018).

Moving forward, I intend to enhance my leadership skills by practicing assertiveness, setting clear roles and expectations early, and developing strategies for conflict resolution. Recognizing the iceberg of organizational behavior—that much occurs below conscious awareness—I will also focus on understanding unspoken motivations and emotional undercurrents that influence team performance.

Conclusion

Leading the Everest simulation provided invaluable insights into the complexities of organizational behavior in a team setting. Effective leadership requires balancing authority and participative decision-making, especially amidst conflicting personalities and high-stakes situations. By reflecting on my role, team dynamics, and communication processes, I identified key areas for growth, including assertiveness and role clarity. Ultimately, these lessons will inform my future leadership endeavors and contribute to my development as a more effective team member and leader in organizational contexts.

References

• Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1994). Improving organizational effectiveness through transformational leadership. Sage Publications.
• Goleman, D. (2000). Leadership that gets results. Harvard Business Review, 78(2), 78-90.
• Hackman, J. R., & Wageman, R. (2005). A theory of team coaching. Academy of Management Review, 30(2), 269-287.
• Janis, I. L. (1972). Victims of groupthink. Houghton Mifflin.
• Katzenbach, J. R., & Smith, D. K. (1993). The wisdom of teams: Creating the high-performance organization. Harvard Business School Press.
• Northouse, P. G. (2018). Leadership: Theory and practice (8th ed.). Sage Publications.
• Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2019). Organizational behavior (18th ed.). Pearson.
• Tuckman, B. W. (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63(6), 384-399.
• Yukl, G. (2012). Leadership in organizations (8th ed.). Pearson.