Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
Report Focus
A report reflecting on the experiences of the Everest group simulation with reference to concepts
and theories encountered in this course and through research
Executive Summary
This report provides a comprehensive analysis of the Everest simulation experience that
requires students in randomly allocated groups, to overcome challenges and work as a team in
relation to frameworks including decision-making, perception and attribution theory. Each
participant is assigned a specific role, including personalised characteristics and individualised
goals. Participants are confronted with the ultimate goal of maximising team goal achievements
whilst avoiding rescue. However, team members are faced with a variety of consequential game
mechanisms such as oxygen scarcity, fluctuating health conditions and unpredictable weather.
Subsequently, team members face the predicament of either avoiding rescue, or possibly losing
the opportunity to reach the summit.
As the first simulation was virtually conducted, it was evident that there was restricted
understanding of each group members personalities and roles, and essentially the game
system itself. Due to no preceding relationships amongst group members, perceptions were
often made which consequently lacked group cohesion and led to our ambiguous decisionmaking, identifying a interrelation between conflicts and poor group performance. However,
these experiences allowed the team to search for methods to improve for the second
simulation, especially within the areas of decision-making and to rectify our perceptions of each
individual member. We were able to establish stronger team connections and rapport through
communicating sessions during tutorials and debriefing sessions on social media via Facebook.
Due to a greater familiarity with each team members behaviours, individual goals and improved
understanding of the simulation system, this enhanced group cohesion and improved overall
percentage of team goals achieved.
Therefore the Everest simulation experience encapsulates a variety of management
frameworks such as factors influencing decision-making, perception and attribution theory. It
discusses how the different managerial theories and factors of both individuals and as a team
had differing impacts on the performance outcomes, and how specific methods catered for
overall improved team performance.
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
........................................................................................................................................
2
TABLE
OF
CONTENTS
..........................................................................................................................................
3
INTRODUCTION
....................................................................................................................................................
4
ISSUES
DURING
EVEREST
..................................................................................................................................
5
ISSUE
1
........................................................................................................................................................................................
5
ISSUE
2
........................................................................................................................................................................................
5
ANALYSIS
OF
THE
EVEREST
EXPERIENCES
..................................................................................................
6
EVEREST
SIMULATION
1:
VIRTUAL
........................................................................................................................................
6
EVEREST
SIMULATION
2:
FACE-TO-FACE
.............................................................................................................................
8
LEARNING
REVIEW
...........................................................................................................................................
10
CONCLUSION
.......................................................................................................................................................
12
REFERENCES
.......................................................................................................................................................
13
APPENDIX
............................................................................................................................................................
14
EVEREST
TEAM
CONTRACT
...........................................................................................................................
15
Introduction
The Everest simulation was conducted in randomly allocated groups of five or six. All teams
were given the opportunity to complete two attempts of the simulation, whereby participants
would virtually ascend Mount Everest to maximise team goals achieved whilst being presented
with numerous challenges. Each member was distributed with a role that included individualised
goals that often conflicted with one another, imitating the complex dynamics of the
contemporary workforce. Due to the lack of pre-existing relationships between team members,
this catered uncertain decision-making conditions that influenced ambiguous decision-making
through bounded rationality in the first simulation. Indeed, there were many factors that had
influenced team performance, stimulating strategic changes to the consensus-based policies
and minimising perceptual distortion guided by the attribution theory that improved the way the
team understood respective behaviours and reasons for poor work performance. This facilitated
significant improvement in the second simulation that was also coordinated by several
advances such as defined team goals and effective decision-making policies, which improved
group cohesion and rapport. This report critically analyses academic research that implicate the
importance of concepts such as decision-making, attribution theory and perception and how
strategies accompanied these frameworks to improve overall team performance.
Learning Review
Being assigned the role of an observer, it was clear that I had the least significant role that
essentially shows how job involvement can affect my level of satisfaction as part of a team.
However, the group made sure that I did not feel excluded, which enabled me to learn more
about how such dynamics are applicable to the contemporary workplace. I felt that my ability to
openly communicate with the group was determined by the leadership style and behaviour of
the leader, as well as the relationship it fosters within the culture of the team. In the first
simulation, I was very quiet and avoided providing my own opinions because I did not want to
give the team the perception that I tried to control or forcefully involve myself beyond the
characteristics of my role. In MGMT 1001, I learnt that managers/leaders should expect that
employees would look to their attitudes as models and how it can impacts their own behaviour
accordingly. This was clear as when I noticed the charismatic and confident characteristics of
the leader, it guided the team to encourage a knowledge culture (Sharma, 2010, p.103), which
ultimately influenced me to open up and collaborate with the team. Such communication
channels are paramount because it ensured participation and involvement (Vora and Markoczy,
2012, p.2337), encouraging me to also have a vote within the consensus decision-making policy
as well as feel a sense of job satisfaction. Thus, I learnt that when leaders adopt a democratic
style, it encourages me to involve myself within group discussions that essentially enhanced my
enthusiasm and performance within the team.
Furthermore, considering the complicated challenges within the design mechanisms of Everest,
I also came to a comprehensive understanding of how important everyones role is in regards to
providing their individual information and opinions. In preparation for the second simulation, it
was evident that a strategic direction was needed to help guide the team in improving our
overall percentage points above 60%. This facilitated into a contingency planning approach
whereby we developed various alternative plans to adapt to any potential challenges (Alison et
al., 2015, p.300) such as the physician leaving an extra asthma puffer and Gamow bag in case
the mountaineer would experience any critical health issues. Thus, by stressing that the
simulation had no universal rules or procedures, it is also through the framework of the systems
theory that emphasizes the importance of teams to take in consideration the inputs from
members that are essential in achieving goals. Therefore this contributed to a shift in the
decision making process from bounded rationality to a consensus policy (Alison et al., 2015,
p.301) which embraced the opinions from each member that benefited in offering new
perspectives. I learnt as part of a team that my ability to understand the program was due to the
various opinions by other members. Without them I would not have been able to thoroughly
Conclusion
The Everest simulation acts as a model that imitates an organizational environment, allowing
participants to experience the dynamics of the contemporary workforce. Various challenges
throughout the program were designed to highlight the interdependence between individuals
and team relationships, emphasizing on the importance of effective decision-making skills and
how certain perceptions and attributes impact it. Reflecting upon my personal and teams
experiences, it was made evident the various key attributes that contributed to the improvement
from the first simulation to the second simulation. It was found that face-to-face interaction
fosters a knowledge culture that encourages active discussion and more input from each
member in comparison to virtual simulations that hindered these benefits. Furthermore, the
team became more trusting of each other over time that developed camaraderie between
members, joined with the effective consensus-based decision-making policy that improved
overall group performance. Although the team was faced with various issues, we developed an
understanding of the significance of effective communication and how such strategies
interplayed with improving our ability to make decisions and attribute our perceptions of one
another and our behaviours. Thus, this report discussed the main issues and improvements that
influenced performance and how certain frameworks covered in MGMT1001 were displayed
throughout the Everest simulation.
References
Alison, L., Power, N., Heuvel, C., Humann, M., Palasinksi, M., & Crego, J. (2015). Decision
inertia: Deciding between least worst outcomes in emergency response to disasters.
Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. 88(2), 295-321.
doi:10.1111/joop.12108
Dawson-Shepherd, A. (1997). Communication in organisations operating internationally. Journal
of Communication Management. 2(2), 158-166. Retrieved from
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/eb023456
DeChurch, L.A., & Marks, M.A. (2001). Maximizing the benefits of task conflict: the role of
conflict management. The International Journal of Conflict Management. 12(1), 4-22.
Francis, S. (2011). The most insidious operational risk: lack of effective information sharing. The
Journal of Operational Risk. 6(1), 55-68. Retrieved from
http:///www.thejournalofoperationalrisk.com
Gera, S. (2013). Virtual teams versus face to face teams: A review of literature. Journal of
Business and Management. 11(2), 2319-7668.Retrieved from http://www.isorjournals.org
Kayworth, T.R., & Leidner, D.E. (2002). Leadership effectiveness in global virtual teams.
Journal of management Information Systems. 18(3), 7-40.
Lord, R.G., & Smith, J.E. (1983). Theoretical, information processing, and situational factors
affecting attribution theory models of organizational behaviour. The Academy of
Management Review, 8(1), 50-60. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/257167
Martinko, M.J., Gardner, W.L. (1987). The Leader/Member Attribution Process. The Academy of
Management, 12(2), 25-249. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/258532
Sharma, S.K. (2010). Examining the relationship between organisational culture and leadership
style. Journal of the Indian Academy of Applied Psychology. 36(1), 97-105.
Vora, D., & Markoczy, L. (2012). Group learning and performance: the role of communication
and faultlines. The International Journal of Human Resource Management. 23(11),
2364-2392.
Yamakawa, Y., & Cardon, M.S. (2015). Casual ascriptions and perceived learning from
entrepreneurial failure. Small Business Economics. 44(4), 797-820.
doi: 10.1007/s11187-014-9623-z
Appendix
Role: OBSERVER
Simulation 1
Simulation 2
Name
Role
Contact
Laurentiu Unguroiu
Leader
O430176563
Charlotte Owen
Mountaineer
0423979605
Joanna Cheng
Physician
0420246323
Lisa Vu
Observer
0433402911
Adam Soetrisno
Environmentalist
0468709880
Lucas Lim
Photographer
0413978018
Team Procedures
1. Day, time, and location of team members for Everest 2:
The second Everest simulation will be completed on the 8th of May between 3-7pm. The team
will meet at the main library in room 412. This room is sound-proof to allow for active discussion
and it has whiteboards for recording information. The meeting will begin at 3:15pm sharp.
2. Preferred method of communication before and during Everest 2 (i.e., e-mail, mobile,
chat function, face-to-face in a specified location).
A. Before the climb
Prior to the climb, the group will liaise through the Facebook chat group. Significant files will be
uploaded to the Google Drive.
B. During the climb (Note: Everest 2 has to be conducted face-to-face in a specified
location during the exercise)
Everest simulation 2 will be completed face-to-face which will allow for both written and verbal
communication. Furthermore, the team will be able to interpret a range of non-verbal signals
from members.
C. After the climb
Following the climb, the team will complete a quick debrief in person. Further collaboration can
occur in the following tutorial (Wednesday 13/05 12-1pm). Most communication will continue
through the established Facebook chat. Files will be uploaded to a Facebook group to ensure
all members have easy access to information.
The leadership style of our group will avoid laissez-faire style as this style tends to result in
the lowest level of productivity and is typically effective when employees are skilled and
motivated. Instead, the team will adopt democratic leadership style to encourage all team
members to share ideas and participate in the decision making process. As a result, the
team hopes that everyone will feel more engaged.
Personal Accountability
1. Expected individual attendance, punctuality, and participation at Everest 2:
Each member of the team is expected to arrive on time to the simulation and be prepared
to undertake the exercise.
Each team member must be committed to the simulation without external distractions or
the need to attend other commitments.