Encyclopedia Of

Encyclopedia of

EADERSHIP

George R. Goethals General Editor Williams College Georgia J. Sorenson General Editor University of Maryland, University of Richmond James MacGregor Burns Senior Editor Williams College

A Berkshire Reference Work

A SAGE Reference Publication SAGE Publications International Educational and Professional Publisher Thousand Oaks ● London ● New Delhi Race to the South Pole September 2003

RACE TO THE SOUTH POLE

By Dennis N. T. Perkins, Paul R. Kessler, and Catherine McCarthy The contest to become the first human temperatures in the interior can reach to set foot on the geographic South Pole minus 70 degrees C, and the mean is an exciting and controversial chapter annual temperature at the South Pole is in the history of leadership under minus 49 degrees C. adversity. Set in the most hostile In addition to the frigid temperatures, environment on Earth, the race to the there is the wind. Dense cold air rushing South Pole shows how leadership style, down from the polar plateau can personality, strategy, and openness to achieve speeds of almost 320 kilo- innovation interact to determine success meters per hour. And then there are the or failure. This historic quest demon- storms. The ferocious Antarctic winds strates how the best leaders are able to blow snow across the surface, resulting extend their reach by bringing out the in blizzards that make travel nearly best in others. Finally, it illustrates that impossible. In these blinding conditions, perceptions of leadership are altered by explorers have died only a few yards the changing lenses of culture and from their shelters. popular sentiment. Finally, there is the altitude. The South The Course Pole is located at an elevation of over 2,700 meters above the sea, and the It is difficult to understand the nature of pressure altitude that affects human the competition to reach the South Pole physiology is even higher. Because of without some knowledge of the extreme the spinning of the Earth, the air is conditions of Antarctica. For most of denser over the Equator and thinner the year, central Antarctica is enveloped over the Pole. As a result, the effective in total darkness or total daylight. Ice— altitude of the Pole is almost 4,200 up to 4,500 meters thick—covers over meters. Taken together, these elements 99 percent of the continent’s land mass. of cold, wind, snow, and altitude played But the most formidable obstacles are a crucial role in the race to the South neither darkness nor ice. Those who Pole. dream of reaching the Pole must contend with bitter cold, relentless wind Preparing for the Race and snow, and high altitude. In 1820, Fabian von Bellingshausen The coldest temperature ever measured (1778-1852), a captain in the Russian on the Earth’s surface—minus 89.2 Imperial Navy, was the first to sight the degrees C—was recorded in Antarctica. continent of Antarctica. A year later, Even during the warmest months, sealers from the United States and

Britain landed on the Antarctic Penin- sula. Other expeditions designed to The British Contestants explore the unknown continent soon At the International Geographical followed. Each effort increased the Congress held in London in 1895, the understanding of Antarctica and helped English geographer Clements Markham in the development of strategies for (1830-1916) called for further scientific dealing with the harsh polar environ- and geographical exploration of Ant- ment. arctica. Markham later helped organize In March 1898, a Belgian expedition led the British National Antarctic Expedition, by Adrian de Gerlache (1866-1934) and in 1899 chose explorer Robert became trapped by the pack ice near Falcon Scott (1868-1912) as its leader. the Antarctic Peninsula. Imprisoned Markham believed in youth over aboard the Belgica for more than a year, experience. He thought older men the crew members suffered from lacked not only energy and a capacity to depression, disease, and disorientation deal with emergencies, but also open- resulting from living in total darkness. ness to new ideas. “How can novel But they were the first to winter south of forms of effort,” he wrote, “be expected the Antarctic Circle, and a young from still old organisms hampered by Norwegian named Roald Amundsen experience” (Thomson, 2002, 10). Scott (1872-1928)—one of the ship’s officers— had no prior experience in polar absorbed the lessons of this experience. exploration, but Markham had been The same year, Carsten Borchgrevink impressed by Scott’s intelligence and (1864-1934) sailed on the Southern charm. Markham believed the thirty- Cross as a leader of what was called the one-year-old naval officer to be the right British Antarctic expedition. The age and temperament to lead an expedition, funded by a wealthy British Antarctic expedition. publisher, was hardly British: Twenty- On the recommendation of an eight of the thirty-one members were expedition benefactor, Markham also Norwegian, and the Southern Cross was selected an officer of the Merchant a converted Norwegian sealer. Landing Navy—Ernest Henry Shackleton (1874- at Cape Adare, ten of the explorers 1922)—as one of Scott’s sublieutenants. erected two wooden huts and set out to The two officers, both of whom became prove that humans could survive ashore important figures in the race to the in the cold, dark, Antarctic winter. The South Pole, had sharply contrasting expedition also produced maps of the backgrounds and personalities. Ross Sea region, and it expanded the store of knowledge and skills needed to survive in the extreme Antarctic environment.

Scott was born to a well-to-do family in Plymouth, England. At the age of thir- The First Run Toward the Pole teen, he entered the Royal Navy as a In August of 1901, Scott and Shackleton cadet aboard the training ship Britannia. sailed for Antarctica aboard the Although Scott could be charming, he Discovery, the first ship designed and could also be detached and tem- built in Britain specifically for polar peramental. With his reserved and shy exploration. By mid-February of 1902, personality, Scott had trouble mixing the expedition had established winter with others. He was most comfortable quarters ashore. In November, Scott in the traditional, regulated, and hier- finally set out to explore the route to the archical caste system of the Royal Navy. Pole with Shackleton and scientific These personal characteristics limited officer Edward A. Wilson (1872-1912). his effectiveness as a leader, but Scott brought strengths as well. He genuinely Scott and his team were ill prepared for appreciated science and possessed the their first southern foray. They were physical stamina essential for polar poor skiers, and inept at handling dogs. exploration. In addition, his skill at vivid, The dogs were underfed and the sleds descriptive writing provided a clear were overloaded. Suffering from scurvy account of his expeditions and his role and lack of food, the party turned back in the race. more than 800 kilometers from the South Pole. Ernest Shackleton, by contrast, was an Anglo-Irishman born in County Kildare, On the journey home, the three tied their Ireland. Shackleton’s father, unable to remaining dogs behind the sleds, which afford the cost of the Royal Navy’s they “man hauled” back to their camp at Britannia, sent Ernest to sea on a ship of Hut Point. Strangely, Scott seemed the Merchant Navy. Aboard the Hoghton drawn to this grueling practice of man Tower Shackleton “learned the ropes,” hauling. He wrote that “no journey ever and he also learned the value of made with dogs can approach the developing relationships. height realized…when a party of men go forth to face hardships, dangers, and Although status distinctions in the difficulties with their own unaided Mercantile Marine were less rigid than efforts” (McGonigal and Woodworth, they were in the Royal Navy, sanctions 2001, 428). still existed against mixing with social inferiors. But Shackleton's outgoing The strain of the trip, combined with personality and lack of pretension clashes between Scott and Shackleton, enabled him to make friends at all undermined the cohesion of the levels—with officers, engineers, and southern party. At one point, Scott apprentices alike. This ability served referred to Shackleton as a “bloody him well in his journeys to the Antarctic. fool.” This clash—and the underlying

competition between the two men— accomplished other goals. They had created a rift that was never closed. uncovered coal and other fossils. They had discovered a new mountain range, When the party reached Hut Point, all traversed the high polar plateau, and three men were suffering from scurvy. they held the record for penetrating the Scott, with medical advice, declared farthest south. In addition, they Shackleton unfit for duty and sent him pioneered a path up the Beardmore home on a relief ship. Shackleton Glacier, the same route that Scott would reportedly wept as he sailed away. take on his next expedition. Shackleton’s Second Attempt The expedition also gave Shackleton a chance to demonstrate his exceptional Although Shackleton had been ordered leadership skills. He had faced danger home from the Discovery expedition, he with humor and good cheer, developing returned to England a hero of the a reputation for being cool in a crisis. expedition. He began organizing another Although called “the Boss” by his men, attempt, and in 1907 sailed for Shackleton established the norm of Antarctica aboard the Nimrod as the discussing problems openly and valuing leader of a second British Antarctic the opinions of others, regardless of Expedition. their position in the formal hierarchy. At the end of October 1908, Shackleton and three companions set out for the The Norwegian Challenger South Pole. Shackleton brought no dogs Roald Amundsen, born before Norway for the final assault, relying instead on separated from Sweden, learned to ski Siberian ponies for transport. The as a schoolboy and had a keen interest ponies were ill suited for the terrain, and in adventure. As a teenager, Amundsen once more, the British resorted to man- read the account of Sir John Franklin hauling. (1786-1847), a British explorer who died By January 9, 1909, they were 179 mysteriously in the Arctic. Enamored kilometers shy of the South Pole and with polar exploration, Amundsen honed desperately short of rations. In a typical his skills in long-distance skiing as he act of generosity, Shackleton gave one prepared for his “great adventure.” of his last biscuits to a companion, Despite the challenges he encountered Frank Wild, and then made the painful as a member of the Belgian Antarctic decision to turn around. He later Expedition in 1898, Amundsen con- explained to his wife: “I thought you’d tinued his polar exploration. He was the prefer a live donkey to a dead lion” first to navigate the Northwest Passage (Rubin, 2000, 39). aboard one vessel, and he spent three They had failed to reach the South Pole, winters in the Arctic. He lived with the but the British Antarctic Expedition had Eskimos, learning about cold-weather

clothing, dog handling, and travel—the When the Terra Nova reached foundational skills of polar exploration. Melbourne in October 1910, the news of Among explorers, he developed a repu- Amundsen’s altered goal came as a tation as a meticulous planner who was shock to Scott. The race was on! expert at traveling over snow and ice. Amundsen had always dreamed of The Last Lap being the first to the North Pole. In Scott reached Ross Island on 4 January 1909, as he was planning his North- 1911, and was soon laying depots south bound expedition, Amundsen received from his base at Cape Evans. word that Americans Frederick A. Cook Amundsen arrived in Antarctica shortly (1865-1940), a shipmate from Belgica, thereafter and established his camp on and Robert E. Peary (1856-1920) had the ice shelf at the Bay of Whales. both claimed that prize. Amundsen quickly changed his goal from north to Amundsen departed for the Pole on 8 south. After his expedition had departed September but was forced to retreat in from Norway—ostensibly for the Arctic— disarray by the bitter cold. On 19 Amundsen sent Scott a terse telegram: October, Amundsen set out once more “Beg leave to inform you…proceeding for the Pole with four companions and Antarctic” (Rubin, 2000, 40). four sleds, each pulled by thirteen dogs.

Antarctica Amundsen Scott Shackleton

With their exceptional skiing and dog- with poor weather and a number of handling ability, the Norwegians moved errors and miscalculations, was to prove across the terrain with relative ease. fatal for Scott and his polar party. They traveled only six hours a day, On 3 January 1912, Scott made a late reserving the remainder for sleep and decision. Although plans for the polar rest. Thanks to their carefully planned assault had been based on a team of diet and well-marked depots, food was four, Scott inexplicably announced that never an issue. he would take one extra man on the Amundsen and his men arrived at the final leg of the journey. The sleds were South Pole on 14 December 1911. only equipped with supplies for four Because all five had risked their lives on men and the tents were designed to this adventure as a team, Amundsen accommodate four, so this change insisted that they plant the Norwegian complicated their movement. They had flag together. The men erected a tent also brought only four sets of skis, so with a Norwegian flag on top. Expecting the entire polar party was restricted to a that Scott was still to reach the Pole, walking pace. they left him a letter and another to Scott and his men arrived at the South deliver to King Haakon in case they Pole on 17 January 1912—35 days after failed to return. Amundsen. Finding the Norwegian tent, By 25 January 1912, Amundsen and his Scott wrote: “Great God! This is an awful party had returned to base camp with place, and terrible enough for us to have eleven remaining dogs, only 99 days labored to it without the reward of after their departure. They were as well- priority….Now for the run home and a nourished and fit as when they had left. desperate struggle. I wonder if we can Because of their meticulous planning do it” (Neider, 2000, 288). and efficient travel, the Norwegians had They could not. One member died a made it look easy. month later after sinking into a coma. While Amundsen basked in the warmth The next month, a second man—Titus of his victory, Scott and his party still Oates—stepped out into a blizzard never struggled southward, unaware that they to return. Suffering from severe had already lost the race. Scott had frostbite, Oates apparently sacrificed his begun his journey almost 112 kilo- life rather than continue to delay his meters farther from the Pole than comrades. Amundsen had, and his decision to use On 19 March a blizzard again enveloped ponies as well as dogs had created a the surviving three members of the further delay. As a result, they esta- polar party. Imprisoned just over 19 blished their last food depot, “One Ton kilo-meters from One Ton Depot, they Camp,” approximately 66 kilometers had only enough food for two days. short of their goal. This shortfall, along Scott’s last entry on March 29 reads:

“We shall stick it out to the end…and the winner of the race, has been criticized end cannot be far….For God’s sake look for his single-minded determination and after our people” (Neider, 2000, 267). perceived duplicity in “stealing the prize.” Eight months later, expedition survivors came upon the tent of the polar party. In view of Scott’s flawed record as a When Scott and his two companions leader, it is difficult to attribute his were eventually found, their sledge had failure simply to an unexpected cold included 14 kilograms of geological snap. But debating Scott’s culpability is specimens. The weight of these speci- less important than understanding the mens, confirming Scott’s dedication to broader leadership lessons provided by science, was not the main cause of his the race to the South Pole. tragic death. But the stones, although of scientific importance, symbolize the Effective Leadership Requires a Clear inherent contradiction of trying to finish Strategic Focus. a race while carrying rocks. Amundsen’s ambition was to stand first at the North Pole. When Cook and Back in Britain, Scott was hailed as a Peary claimed that prize, Amundsen hero who had died for his country, while immediately shifted his attention to Shackleton, who had turned back on his winning the race to the South Pole. This attempt at the Pole, was criticized by new goal became the sole focus of his some as being unpatriotic: His failure to expedition. With single-minded deter- sacrifice his life, and the lives of his men mination, Amundsen set his plans and enabled a foreigner to win the race. priorities. This uncompromising clarity contributed to his success in reaching Leadership Lessons from the Race the Pole and to his ability to bring his to the Pole men safely home Fascination with the race continues to Scott, in contrast, lacked such focus. To the present day. For most of the twen- support his scientific goals, he assem- tieth century, Scott was considered a bled the most capable scientists and the heroic figure. Toward the end of the best-equipped expedition ever to explore century, some historians began to Antarctica. Yet, he had also stated that question his leadership. Instead of a one of the major objects of the hero, Scott was cast as a bungler whose expedition was to reach the South Pole, errors in judgment had cost him not only securing the honor of that achievement the conquest of the Pole but also the for the British Empire. Striving for both lives of his men. Today, another goals, Scott failed to win the race, and contrarian view has emerged. His his grueling march to an arbitrary failure was simply bad luck: Unusually geographic point was inconsistent with cold weather was a major contributor to the pursuit of scientific research. Scott’s tragic end. And Amundsen, the

Successful Leaders Are Open to New Ideas Scott believed that he had learned from earlier mistakes, but the evidence A second lesson from the race concerns suggests otherwise. On later expedi- the leader’s critical role in fostering tions, both Shackleton and Scott innovation. The process of innovation experimented unsuccessfully with motor depends on an openness to new ideas, sledges and ponies, but neither made coupled with the ability to learn from effective use of dogs and skis. experience. On this dimension of Ultimately, both relied on the slow, leadership, there were striking differ- exhausting technique of man hauling. ences between Amundsen and both Scott and Shackleton. In the end, Scott proved Markham wrong. Though he possessed youth and The Norwegians owed much of their inexperience, Scott often failed to success to the use of sophisticated display an openness to new ideas and technology for polar travel—skis, dogs, the ability to learn from mistakes. In his clothing, and diet. It is true that skiing final “Message to the Public,” Scott was an integral part of their culture, attributes the cause of the tragedy while the British knew relatively little of simply to “misfortune.” Scott’s lengthy the art. But Amundsen continued to journey did subject his party to the refine his skills throughout his life. He misfortune of particularly cold weather— learned from his earliest experiences on conditions that Amundsen escaped the Belgica, he imported ideas from the through a rapid assault on the Pole. Eskimos, and he systematically developed an integrated set of com- Leaders Need to Draw on the Collective petencies for polar life and travel. Wisdom of the Team Consequently, his trip to the pole was As a leader, Scott believed it was his remarkably routine, and he was able to unique responsibility to analyze situa- avoid the extreme weather that Scott tions and draw conclusions. His had to endure. decisions were closely held and Scott and Shackleton, in contrast, were sometimes revealed at the last minute— surprisingly resistant to the use of these witness his decision to take a fifth man superior methods. It is easy to under- to the Pole. One consequence of Scott’s stand their failure to use the best decision-making style was that he often technology on their first journey toward failed to use the opinions of others to the Pole in 1902—although Scott’s find the best possible course of action. admission that none of their equipment In addition, because they were not had been tested is still surprising. In involved in the process, members of his later expeditions however, their persis- expedition had only a limited under- tent reliance on unproven or inferior standing of the rationale behind his methods is difficult to under-stand. decisions.

In sharp contrast to Scott, both never isolating themselves from other Amundsen and Shackleton made a members of the expedition. These point of soliciting the ideas of their team behaviors, both practical and symbolic, members. As a result, their actions reinforced the message of unity. were better informed, and the process Reflecting on the abilities of these three itself—because it gave people a sense of leaders, Apsley Cherry-Garrard, a control—resulted in greater ownership member of Scott’s second expedition, and commitment. made the following observation: “For a joint scientific and geographical piece of The Best Leaders Forge Strong Team Bonds organisation, give me Scott... for a dash The contest to be first at the Pole shows to the Pole and nothing else, Amundsen: that teams under the best leaders form if I am in the devil of a hole and want to cohesive bonds that enable everyone to get out of it, give me Shackleton every work together in the face of daunting time” (Wheeler, 1999, 87). adversity. On this point, Scott again stands apart from Shackleton and Looking back over the history of the Amundsen. Scott did inspire loyalty race, these words ring true. And yet, among some key members of his team, despite their differences, Amundsen, and his doomed polar party stayed Scott, and Shackleton did share some together until the very end. But Scott’s important characteristics. All were able detachment, his emphasis on hierarchy, to endure extraordinary hardship and his unilateral decision-making style through exceptional perseverance, created barriers to team cohesion. deter-mination and courage. Those qualities are crucial for any leader—no Neither Shackleton nor Amundsen led matter what race must be run. perfectly harmonious expeditions, but both leaders demonstrated the crucial For more information, please contact skills needed to maintain a unified The Syncretics Group at (203) 481-6118 team. Although their personalities were or visit us at www.syncreticsgroup.com different, the leadership practices of the ebullient Shackleton and the under- stated Amundsen were remarkably similar. They were both acutely sensitive to the emotions of their men and consciously intervened when morale dropped. They were skilled at managing conflict and winning over potential troublemakers. They placed greater emphasis on individual ability than on rank or social status. And they partici- pated in the most menial camp chores,