Leadership

Evaluating Shackleton as a Leader

1. In what context should the Endurance expedition be analyzed? As a scientific endeavor? An entrepreneurial venture? An exercise in imperial opportunity? By what criteria should the expedition be evaluated? Why?

The context in which the Endurance expedition should be analyzed depends on what area is to be seen as a success or failure. As a scientific endeavor, the expedition was a failure because the crew did not accomplish what it set out to do. As an entrepreneurial venture, the Endurance was a success because Shackleton was able to gather enough to fund the ship and all supplies necessary. Shackleton made it apparent young in his career that he wanted to be a leader and “make a name for himself.” He successfully led his crew and every member survived extraordinary conditions. Shackleton was such a successful leader that many of his crew was willing to follow him in future endeavors despite the failure of the Endurance. The criterion used to evaluate the expedition again depends on whether the successes or failures are being evaluated.

2. A managerial scholar has defined entrepreneurship as the “relentless pursuit of opportunity without regard to resources currently controlled.” Using this definition, was Ernest Shackleton an entrepreneur? A leader? If so, why? If not, why not?

Shackleton was definitely relentless when he was gathering funds. He was able to gather necessary funds despite the weak reputation he gained from the Discovery and the fact that nations were preparing for war. Shackleton was a leader because he was able to lead his entire crew through treacherous conditions and back to safety against all odds.

3. What were the key features of the context in which he operated?

Through past experience, Shackleton operated with skill and knowledge. He led by example and was able to resolve conflicts among his crew. Shackleton kept close interpersonal relationships with each of his...