UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA

SEMESTER 1, SESSION 2021/2022

GLRM0020

PROFESSIONAL ETHICS AND INTEGRITY

ASSIGNMENT 2

MEMBER’S NAME MATRIC NUMBER

CHIN LE YI A18KT0041

LAM CAI HUI A18KT0105

YAP PEI YI A18KT0326

TESHINI A/P HARI RAM A18KT0303

SATHAROOBNI A/P MUNANDI A18KT0271

3 Ethics Challenges Faced

1) Scott was not considering and listened to the advice from Boukreev about the unstable

weather and the high winds that had been blowing at higher elevations. The leaders'

choice to go ahead with the summit bid is not responsible enough to protect the members'

and team's safety. The leaders refused to listen to and accept other people's suggestions.

The ego and selfishness that was in their hearts had pushed them to make this decision.

This might be because they intend to demonstrate their guiding skill, as opposed to the

failure in 1995, which was due to weather conditions rather than guiding expertise. If I

were one of the leaders confronted with this situation, I would take the expert's advice

and minimise any potential risks. For me, the most vital and foundational consideration is

safety. The weather conditions make it hard to sustain with the summit bid, and it might

result in deadly tragedies. When acting as a leader, being stubborn, egotistical, and selfish

will not assist your team, but instead hurt it.

2) The second ethical challenge is Hall and Fischer’s refusal to observe the Two O’clock

law, which permitted them to get back to the wellbeing of the camp on the off chance that

they couldn’t arrive at the highest point by 1:00 pm or 2:00pm at the most recent, paying

little mind to the fact that they were so close to the culmination. On the off chance that

Hall and Fischer were sufficiently dependable to advise their crew to pivot since they

couldn’t arrive at the culmination by 2pm, the probability of the misfortune was thin. Be

that as it may, a few climbers disregarded the Two O’clock Rule since undertaking groups

didn’t have any acquaintance with one another well indeed. During their short time

together, they thought it was trying to set up shared regard and certainty. Many colleagues
 expressly recognized the risks of breaking the turnaround condition, yet chose not to

challenge the choice of the agents. It is on the grounds that Doug Hansen demanded

proceeding with his excursion to the culmination. Nonetheless, Hall and Fischer were

additionally acceptable pioneers when they passed on endeavoring to help different

climbers down the mountain. This is the verification that they are a moral chief since they

stay and help their climbers as opposed to descending and saving their own life. As for

the best ethical decision, when dealing with people with lack of experience, it requires the

leaders to put extra emphasis on every order. Leaders must be aware of dangers or

consequences of over-commitment to a flawed course of action during making any

decision. This results from not focusing on their leadership task, making fast or bad

decisions without thinking of the consequences, thus eventually leading into more issues

further.

3) The leaders' inability to secure ropes throughout the climb's path resulted in jams at the

Balcony and Hillary Step, causing an hour-and-a-half delay in reaching the summit. This

incident demonstrates how a lack of preparedness will almost always backfire. They

dismissed the situation, expecting that the ropes put by the last expedition is enough,

demonstrating that they do not take their responsibility seriously. Unfortunately, they

were insufficient, forcing the guides to continue securing the ropes, resulting in

unnecessary delay. This problem can also be linked to overconfidence and unwavering

faith in the Montenegrin expedition. It shows how Hall and Fischer sought to save money

by educating the Sherpas on how to tie the ropes. They should not have abandoned their

original strategy and instead conducted checks to ensure that the ropes were in fact
present, sufficient, and secure, even if it appeared that the Montenegrin team had already

done so. It is, nevertheless, always preferable to be safe than sorry. Furthermore, even if

the ropes had been affixed by the Montenegrin team ahead of time, the Summit's leaders

should have been aware that the ropes' condition could be jeopardised by the dreadful

weather conditions. In this circumstance, despite the Montenegrin expedition's efforts, I

would nevertheless advise the Sherpas to guarantee that the rope lines were really affixed

beforehand, in order to minimise bottlenecks and delays in reaching the summit. In this

instance, the crew would have arrived at the peak ahead of schedule.