Project Example 3 - First to the South Pole

Robert Scott 1911-12
This could be considered a project disaster resulting in the tragic death of 4 of the team.  On 1 November 1911, Scott left base camp with support parties, innovative motor sledges, dogs and ponies. The motor sledges were poorly suited and soon abandoned. The ponies were found unsuitable. As Scott's men laid supply depots along the way, individual teams and dogs returned. Scott chose the team for the final push, 150 miles from the goal. An extra fifth man impacted rations and fuel. His men pulled sledges with harnesses. On 17 January 1912, Scott arrived at the Pole 33 days after Amundsen. Suffering from starvation, scurvy and hypothermia the first man died on 17 February, he stumbled behind group. The second on 17 March, crippled with frostbite, walked out of his tent. The remaining men awaited death confined by a swirling blizzard, with “One Ton Depot” lay only 11 miles away.

The main reasons for the project failure were:

·         Scott risked untested transportation technology in motor sledges, and ponies unsuited to extreme cold (although they did provide meat).

·         He failed to integrate the transportation approaches.

·         He ordered dog teams back to base camp losing the one advantage he had.

·         Wrong project team members with paying guests to look after ponies.

·         He chose his team too late and miscalculated the resources for the number of team members.

·         Beaten to the Pole his team was demoralized for the return.

·         Pulling the heavy sledges with man-harnesses sapped his team of strength.

·         He had mixed project objectives namely, first to the pole, and a scientific expedition. On the trek back the team were still hauling scientific equipment.

Roald Amundsen

This could be considered a project success, as he won the race by reaching the South Pole 1 month ahead of Scott. Amundsen told his men his plans in Madeira. He was confident that skis and dogs used in the Arctic experience were suitable for the Antarctic. He landed further along the Ross Ice Shelf and risked setting up base camp on the ice. He laid supply depots Southwards using expertly trained dog teams, much further South than Scott's. He anticipated there were alternative routes to the Polar Plateau. He handpicked 4 men (skiing champion and two expert dog-drivers) and left with 50 dogs on 20 October 1911. Progress was swift as he moved with the dogs up the newly discovered Axel Heiberg Glacier and across the Polar Plateau. On 14 December 1911 he reached the Pole.

The main reasons for the project success were:

·         He planned brilliant, avoided unnecessary press leaks, and managed public expectations by not disclosing plans.

·         He stayed with proven and tested transportation technology in his skis and dogs, refining these.

·         He took calculated risks setting up base camp on the ice based on experience and cut the journey down.

·         He anticipated alternatives and made the best use of these.

·         He handpicked a well balanced team of individual skills to support the technology.

·         He relied on his experience to carry the project through.

·         He carefully managed all the critical paths of project and completed testing.

·         He was a great project manager and carefully managed the project to ensure ultimate success.