Mgmt Everest Report

Abstract The report will seek to use personal experiences of the author during the Everest simulations to provide insight into how simulations can be used as a development tool for managers

EVEREST REPORT MGMT1001

Rahul Sunil Kapadia Z5116156 MGMT1001 Tuesday 4-5pm Paul Doran Date submitted: 13/05/2016

Z5116156

Executive Summary The Everest report refers, analyses, and reflects upon the experiences of Team 114 during the Everest simulation. The Everest simulation task involves a team of 5 individuals (in Team 114’s case 4) participating in two climbs over 6 virtual days. The report uses the personal experiences of the team leader regarding the Everest simulation to exhibit how effective it is in regards to providing an interactive environment where actual theory can be applied, and interpersonal skills can be used to ensure the team achieves its goals. Through discussing the possible benefits and costs of using virtual and face to face communication, the report comes to conclusion as to why 2nd simulation saw a decrease in personal and team goals achieved (see appendix A and B), in spite of the team members finding communication much easier when it was done face to face. What was found is that the importance of having an organised form of communication could be more vital than the medium of communication. Along the same lines what was found by analysing the different leadership styles used over the 2 simulations was that not following leadership processes could have a more vital impact on the results on teams than even different leadership styles. Through personal analysis from what the team leader obtained from his experiences with the Everest simulation, a personal management development program has been developed, with the aim of improving the team leader’s understanding of management theory as well as improving communication and leadership skills through potential work experience.

1 | Page

Z5116156

Table of Contents Executive Summary............................................................................................... 1 Introduction............................................................................................................ 3 Section 1: Value of simulations as a learning tool..................................................3 Section Two............................................................................................................ 5 Online communication........................................................................................ 5 Face to face communication...............................................................................6 Leadership.......................................................................................................... 7 Leadership Styles............................................................................................. 7 Section 3: Personal reflection.................................................................................8 Personal Management Development plan..........................................................9 Conclusion............................................................................................................. 9 References........................................................................................................... 10 Appendix.............................................................................................................. 11

2 | Page

Z5116156

Introduction The Everest simulation task involves a team of 5 individuals (in Team 114’s case 4) participating in two virtual climbs with the aim of reaching the summit. The report will touch upon the Everest simulation and how the experiences with the simulation can be used to reflect upon the theoretical frameworks learnt in the management course. Performances in the simulations are determined by the successful completion of team goals in conjunction with individual goals, as well as everyone in the team being healthy at the completion of the climb (See appendix A and B). The purpose of the two simulations as well as the subsequent analysis is to recognise why certain aspects of the simulation were successes or failures as well as gaining a stronger understanding of the importance of effective communication skills and developing leadership skills. By making reference to the personal experiences with the Everest simulation, the report will argue as to how simulations can be effective in allowing students to put management theory into practice and in developing personal leadership abilities. A personal review will also be undertaken in this report, with the aim of moving on from the simulation to developing key managerial skills.

Section 1: Value of simulations as a learning tool Simulations that create dynamic environments and involve interactivity are a valuable learning tool as they allow individuals to put theory into practice, and reflect upon the successes and failures of the simulation to further understand the theory at hand. Effective management requires the ability to comprehend and apply management theory. Simulations can create environments in which students implement features used in a work context without the fear of consequences in the real world (Elmuti 2004 cited in Poisson-de Haro & Turgut 2012 p.210; Lisk, Kaplancali & Riggio 2012). This concept centres around the basic notion of practice makes perfect in management (Brown, Parente & Stephen 2012; Lisk, Kaplancali & Riggio 2012). In this regard the Everest simulation is particularly valuable as team members were put into situations not familiar to them and had to exercise judgement where no guidelines existed with the example of making decisions on weather conditions, health of team members and the correct amount of oxygen tanks to take to the summit (Nichols & Wright 2015 p. 534). The decision making was made particularly difficult by the

3 | Page

Z5116156

fact that both simulations were undertaken without the Environmentalist. What group 114 was able to do effectively in the first simulation, was to recognise how certain individual goals were interlinked. By sharing information regarding individual goals and exclusive information that each individual was given, and mapping out a plan before starting the hike, the group was able to understand at a very early stage that certain decisions could potentially have flow on effects on the team. In this sense the Everest simulation provided an experiential environment in which students were able to implement strategies involving situational and interpersonal complexities (Nichols & Wright 2015). What simulations also provide is the opportunity to analyse and to reflect upon the team and individual performance, which enhances the learning experience as by analysing how effective the individual’s performance was, a student can assess on what he or she needs to improve on regarding their managerial abilities.

Simulation exercises have been considered a mechanism for enhancing the development of soft skills of managers. Katz originally argued that three skill areas are vital for managers; technical skills, conceptual skills and human skills (Brown, Parente & Stephen 2012). Managers need to develop interpersonal skills because a strong awareness of human behaviour is required to ensure efficiency and satisfaction between members in organisations (Poisson-de Haro & Turgut 2012; Brown, Parente & Stephen 2012). These skills include showing awareness and understanding of others’ opinions and the ability to work cooperatively and in coordination with others. In a simulated environment like Everest which involves interacting with other individuals, it provides the opportunity for students to experiment with their communication and behavioural styles and assess how effective these styles were (Brown, Parente & Stephen 2012). What was seen over the two simulations was that results were strongly linked with how effective communication and team cohesion was because it also affected the decision making process. In the second simulation, team 114 did not put emphasis on creating effective communication channels, which led to critical errors in the decision making process. This coupled with the inability to engage correctly with leadership functions resulted in the percentage of team and individual goals achieved to decrease significantly in the second simulation (See Appendix B)

4 | Page

Z5116156

Section Two Analysis of the successes and failures of the Everest simulation cannot just be put down to flawed decisions and individual effort, rather there needs to be a more widespread approach in analysing the factors that affect the organisational process. By delving into the differences in the communication methods used over the two simulations, more explanation can be given as to why results were better when communication was done virtually, despite the team members finding face-to face communication much easier. By looking at how leadership styles affected the team’s process of decision making and communicating, there will be further understanding why certain aspects of the Everest experience were a success or a failure. By analysing all these factors that affected the experience of Everest, this will allow further understanding theoretical frameworks in management.

Online communication Team 114’s team and individual performances over the two simulations were strongly influenced by the effectiveness of communication between team members. This is unsurprising as effective communication is strongly linked to the efficiency and success of an organisation (Zixiu, D’Ambra, Turner & Huiying 2009). The first simulation saw team 114 communicate solely online. One theory that is strongly linked with online communication is the online disinhibition effect (Suler 2005). The theory essentially relates to the lack of behavioural inhibition in an online environment, and the first simulation provided an opportunity for the disinhibition effect to take place. In regards to toxic disinhibition the likelihood of team members being rude or angry was small to begin with, partly due to the fact that the dissociative anonymity was not available for the team members who knew that the team members were from the same tutorial and would eventually meet (Suler 2005). The same reason could be applied as to why there was a lack of benign disinhibition amongst team members. The lack of the online disinhibition effect on team members, especially toxic inhibition, most certainly aided the team in communicating effectively.

Despite the perceived difficulties for online communication, team 114 used online communication effectively. In virtual communication there is reduced social context, and as a result messages and dialogue between team members need to be explicit because the normal mechanisms of voice intonation and non-verbal cues are not available (Chhay & Kleiner 5 | Page

Z5116156

2013). Along the same lines there needs to be clear understanding of the team goals and a high level of trust in order to reduce high levels of uncertainty (Germaine 2011). One of the positive aspects of the first simulation was that team understood and recognised how personal goals were interlinked and this was a result of effective communication by analysing each individual’s personal goal and showing trust in the opinions of the other team members. In one particular instance two personal goals of the photographer were to stay consecutive days in camp 1 and camp 2, however in order for the photographer to achieve two of his goals, the team leader would have to sacrifice two of his personal goals. The team understood that there needed to be a compromise between the photographer and team leader so that both achieve at least one personal goal each. This understanding was a direct result of the team going through great lengths of time to ensure effective knowledge sharing.

Face to face communication In the second simulation, which was done mainly face to face, saw results for the team leader (see Appendix A and B) and the team decrease (see Appendix A and B). Face to face communication has always been viewed as the most effective medium for teams to communicate through (Zixiu, D’Ambra, Turner & Huiying 2009). Partly because the messages can be spoken vocally and involve the non-verbal cues which forms a vital part of communication and thus makes it easier to understand the message (Zixiu, D’Ambra, Turner & Huiying 2009; Chhay & Kleiner 2013). Although team 114 found communicating face to face much easier, without the implementation of a communication guideline or a method for everyone to individually voice their opinion in a structured manner, critical errors were made in the second simulation. The critical point in the 2nd simulation was when the physician in round 4 had signs of having frostbite, and asked the team leader what medical supply to use on himself, and team leader mistakenly told him that in his opinion the Gamow bag should be used. The other 2 team members were working on predicting the temperature, and although the correct step would have been to address the issue with the whole team this was not done so and resulted in the physician needing to be rescued. One cause for this critical error was the fact that there was limited time to do the simulation, because the team only had a certain overlap in time in each other’s day to do the simulation face to face which meant decisions were taken in haste. One advantage of doing the

6 | Page

Z5116156

simulation virtually was that the issue of location and to an extent time did not affect the decision making process for the team.

Leadership The Everest simulation had experiences that involved the abilities or capabilities required for the exercise of leadership. Although in the context of the Everest simulation, there is a team leader appointed for the simulation, leadership is widely considered to be something that in team environments occurs through a process rather than appointment (Siewiorek, Saarinen, Lainema & Lehtinen 2012). Team 114 originally consisted of 5 members; Environmentalist, Marathoner, photographer, physician and team leader. However not being able to make any contact with the Environmentalist (who was originally the team leader) before the simulations, it forced the team to do the simulations without her, and the roles being switched around. Her absence most certainly affected the percentage of team goals and personal goals achieved, because in both simulations her character had to be rescued (see Appendix A and B). What occurred in the first simulation was that the appointed team leader also emerged as the leader of the group because he believed he was the most prepared and was also the first to attempt to convince the team members to put aside their individual goals and convince them to focus on the climb (Hogan, Curphy, and Hogan 1994 cited in Siewiorek, Saarinen, Lainema & Lehtinen 2012).

Leadership Styles The directive leadership style the team leader adopted was successful during the first simulation due to the fact it the simulation was done virtually. To ensure there was no misunderstanding of what team members should do, explicit instructions were given. The team leader also ensured that the team sketched out a rough plan as to how to the team was going to reach the summit. What had occurred during the second simulation was that all team members showed the drive and willingness to lead and as a result shared leadership was implemented (Siewiorek, Saarinen, Lainema & Lehtinen 2012). The reason why the leadership style in 2nd simulation did not work well was because a key leadership process was not followed. There was an inability to structure and plan the team’s work, as there was no coordination of how to work together and accomplish the team goals (Morgeson, DeRue, & Karam 2010). Although there was a team contract (see appendix C) which set out some of 7 | Page

Z5116156

the guidelines, it wasn’t used for the simulation, as a more spontaneous approach was used. In this regards it can be seen that while leadership styles can influence the results of the team, not following certain leadership processes can have a much more negative impact.

Section 3: Personal reflection Through the experiences of the Everest simulations, and in a sense writing this report, I have become more informed of the management theory regarding communication as well as becoming more aware of my personal leadership development. One valuable instance of learning was regarding the absence of the environmentalist across both simulations. In certain instances, the group was missing crucial information which most likely her avatar had, which made it difficult to obtain bonus points regarding the weather, oxygen and applying the correct medical supplies to team members (see appendix B). However, to use her absence as an excuse for the overall failures in both simulations would be ineffectual as both simulations were done with her absence yet the results in the 2nd simulation worsened significantly. It is easier to critique other members of the team, and absolve yourself for making any errors, however this hinders personal development. In some sense this situation was reflective of potential organisational issues, as managers on a consistent basis are faced with unforeseen challenges in complex scenarios (Poisson-de Haro & Turgut 2012). The learning experience of the Everest simulation was pivotal in regards to leadership development, as I was put in situations where I had to anticipate reactions from other team members which although was in a simulated environment the interactions were authentic (Lisk, Kaplancali & Riggio 2012). The ability to extract insight from the Everest experience with the example of understanding the benefits or costs of the Directive leadership style or the shared leadership style is a testament to the value of post simulation analysis. The only thing I have would done more differently in the simulations, was perhaps to try and motivate the team members to show some dedication into planning and communicating with the other team members before the simulations.

8 | Page

Z5116156

Personal Management Development plan In assessing what I would done differently over the 2 simulations, a potential management development plan can be developed. In my opinion one strength that I possess is the ability to assess and analyse situations. My weakness however which was shown during the simulations was not necessarily having the required background knowledge to correctly assess situations. In order for me to grow as a leader or a manager, I believe further engagement with key management theory needs to be undertaken within the next 6 months. This will be done by reading journals and articles online from the MYUNSW library database. As it would have been more interesting to analyse a situation during the simulation and then apply a certain leadership style as opposed to unwittingly becoming a directive leader and then assessing why It did or didn’t work (Nichols & Wright 2015). The second aspect I believe improvement is required is working and communicating in a team environment especially in an organisation. While the experiences with the simulation have shown me that I have the ability to manage conflict and direct people, it is important that I keep on applying and testing these skills as management theory need to be applied in order to come full view. Work experience will be pivotal in providing an environment to hone and develop communication skills (Brown, Parente & Stephen 2012) and attempts within the year will be made to possibly obtain work experience through university or externally by applying for internships in certain organisations that oriented towards teamwork (i.e. marketing).

Conclusion Through references to the personal experiences with the Everest simulations, understanding can be made as to why simulations are particularly effective as learning tools, and more specifically as a tool to develop soft skills for managers. Often management theory is applied through case studies where the organisation is static, however through the interacting in the dynamic environment of the Everest simulation, understanding can be made of the importance of the application of theory and frameworks as it then provides an opportunity to analyse and discuss theory through personal experience. By specifically examining key individual issues faced in the simulation, the importance of effective communication and applying leadership functions in team environments becomes highlighted. By reflecting upon the learnings from the simulations, areas of the individual’s personal leadership which are 9 | Page

Z5116156

strong and that are weak also come to light and possible steps can be taken to improve these areas. Thus by experiencing the simulation, analysing and reflecting upon it, the theories and frameworks of management become clear and easier to apply in actual situations.

References Chhay, R. & Kleiner, B. 2013 ‘Effective communication in virtual teams’, Industrial Management, Vol 55, no, 4, pp. 28-30,5, viewed 5th May 2016, [Proquest Central] Germain, ML 2011, ‘Developing trust in virtual teams’, Performance Improvement Quarterly, Vol 24, no. 3, pp. 29–54, viewed 10th May 2016, [Wiley online library]. Guo, Z., D’Ambra, J., Turner, T. & Zhang, H. 2009 ‘Improving the effectiveness of virtual teams: A comparison of Video-Conferencing and face-to-face communication in china’, IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, Vol 52, no, 1, pp. 1–16, viewed 5th May 2016, [IEEE Xplore journals] Lisk, T.C., Kaplancali, U.T. & Riggio, R.E. 2012 ‘Leadership in Multiplayer online gaming environments’, Simulation & Gaming, Vol 43, no. 1, pp. 133–149, viewed on 7th May 2016, [SAGE journals].

Morgeson, F.P., DeRue, D.S. & Karam, E.P. 2010 ‘Leadership in teams: A functional approach to understanding leadership structures and processes’, Journal of Management, Vol 36, no.1, pp. 5–39, viewed 11th May 2016 [SAGE journals]. Nichols, E. & Wright, AL 2015 ‘Using the Everest team simulation to teach threshold concepts’,Journal of Management Education, Vol 39(4), pp. 531–537, viewed 5th May 2016, [SAGE journals]. Parente, D.H., Stephan, J.D. & Brown, R.C. (2012) ‘Facilitating the acquisition of strategic skills’,Management Research Review, Vol 35, no 11, pp. 1004–1028, viewed 7th May 2016, [Proquest Central] Poisson‐de Haro, S & Turgut, G. 2012 ‘Expanded strategy simulations: Developing better managers’, Journal of Management Development, Vol 31, no, 3, pp. 209–220, viewed on 5th May 2016, [Proquest Central].

10 | P a g e

Z5116156

Siewiorek, A., Saarinen, E., Lainema, T. & Lehtinen, E. 2012 ‘Learning leadership skills in a simulated business environment’, Computers & Education, Vol 58, no, 1, pp. 121–135, viewed 9th May 2016, [Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals] Suler, J. 2005 ‘The online Disinhibition effect’, International Journal of Applied Psychoanalytic Studies, Vol 2, no. 2, pp. 184-188, viewed on 9th May 2016, [Wiley Online Library].

Appendix A) 1st simulation

B) 2nd simulation

11 | P a g e

Z5116156

C) TEAM CONTRACT Everest 2

Team Name _________________Team__Everest______________

1

Name Rahul Kapadia

Role Leader

Contact Facebook, email

2

Nathan Chan

Physician

[email protected] Email: calvin_hey_hei@hotmai

3 4

Haohao (Mabel) Chen Qinhui Chen

Marathoner Photographer

l.com Facebook Facebook

Team Procedures 1. Day, time, and location of team members for Everest 2: Tuesday 26th April 4pm room 306 Main library UNSW.

12 | P a g e

Z5116156 2. Preferred method of communication before and during Everest 2 (i.e., email, mobile, chat function, face-to-face in a specified location).

A. Before the climb Messenger on Facebook, or on Tuesdays before we have our MGMT tutorial B. During the climb (Note: Everest 2 has to be conducted face-to-face in a specified location during the exercise) Face to face and chat function during the simulation if we want to say something to a individual person C. After the climb Messenger on Facebook and face to face for further clarifications or clarity on particular issues

3. Team goal for Everest 2: Achieve more than 70% of our team goals and ensure that individuals obtain more individual personal goals. Ensure that every individual feels that they have their voice heard.

4. Decision-making policy (By consensus? By majority vote? By team leader?): Consensus because this is what we believe that everyone is content with as decisions made as group members will engage more and share information for the information for the purpose of increasing each other’s understanding of the issue.

Team Participation

1. How will we resolve conflict?

13 | P a g e

Z5116156 Understanding and appreciating the various viewpoints involved in conflict will be key factors in resolving conflict. Agree to a process in order to solve the conflict, and ensure there is clarity of what the actual conflict is, present facts and analyse the conflict and how the facts are related to the conflict. After which a discussion can be had and then if a consensus cannot be reached or a mutual agreement then majority voting will have to suffice only as a last resort.

2. Strategies for encouraging/including ideas and debate from all team members: The Everest team leader can take the initiative but first and foremost if three of us are having a discussion then it is the responsibility of the three discussing to try and involve the other person. (Example: asking if there has been any special information given about the particular issue on their computer screen because at least that gets the other person to communicate).

3. Strategies for achieving our goal: Ensuring that details are carefully understood because some of the points we lost in the first simulation was lost in regards to bonus points for guessing the weather or correct level of oxygen needed to be taken to climb the summit. In order to ensure that everyone is satisfied with the decisions after analysing all the information before submitting all our decisions we ask if everyone is one the same page. 4. Preferences for leadership (team leader only, shared leadership): Shared Leadership

Personal Accountability

14 | P a g e

Z5116156 1. Expected individual attendance, punctuality, and participation at Everest 2: Everyone is able to attend allocated date unless specified, upon which adjustments can be made if for example someone falls sick. Everyone reaches by 5 minutes past 4 and everyone contributes with dialogue and insight.

2. What are the consequences for lack of engagement in Everest 2?

If a team member doesn’t attend on the day without any given notice, opportunities will be given for themselves to explain themselves after which we can adjust for another time, but this will only be done once. In regards to lack of engagement during Everest 2 simulation then it will be noted by all other individuals in the group and made reference to in the debrief questions.

15 | P a g e