Safety and leadership in the Berg

Depends on the group really.

If everyone in the group is experienced, no need for a definitive leader figure, in fact someone trying to assume this role can lead to friction.

Leading inexperienced people such as school kids, or family members with little/no experience, in my opinion requires a group leader. I for one assume a very definite leader role when taking family members into the Berg, even on day hikes. I even do this on two man excursion my brother in law and I regularly do in the Berg or Eastern Cape Witteberge. He is as good a hiker and climber as I am, but I've been in more sticky situations than him, and it is exactly these kind of situations where a singular decision becomes important. Again, IMO.

this is all very existential but I'm still interesting in finding out about better leadership focus so I will go first.

Whoever the leader is or if it's a shared role... I think there are some key requirement areas and I would like to explore this.

Off the top of my head: 1)Travel arrangements, 2)Logistics including food and gear requirements, 3)Route planning and Navigation which should probably include some weather conditions research and monitoring and lastly 4)some consideration for Safety Conditions/ first aid requirements

I think these are the basic areas of responsibility which could easily be shared in a group or it could be agreed that each person is independently responsible so long as an dependencies are taken care of.

As a group we are probably less interested in 1) and quite independent in terms of the rest but I have had problems on hikes because people came under equipped for the route / conditions and also had issues with poor route planning so there are potential consequences for not focusing on these items. Any thoughts?

All very interesting!

I have been a professional - commercial - charging for my services - qualified and registered - ie legal 'Mountain Walking Guide' for nearly 8 years. I also guide (lead) vehicle, cultural and pony trekking trips. I came through the ranks participating in, and then leading private and club hikes over many years. There are some interesting differences in 'group dynamics' between leading private / club hikes and commercial trips.

I have experienced far more challenges to my leadership on private and club hikes (the type Bobby Stanton describes) than on commercial trips. In my experience, on commercial trips it is virtually unheard of. The main reason - the clients are paying for my services, and so are prepared to accept my leadership without question. They have ample opportunity to check my credentials before engaging my services. Almost all of them come from countries other than SA, so do not know, or think they know more than I do in the Drakensberg.

But of course, I know almost nothing about my client's characters or abilities before we actually start hiking, other than a 'feel' through the - sometimes lengthy - email correspondence leading up to the trip. So of necessity I must build plenty of 'escape routes' and alternatives into my routes. This also means that I have to know the part of the mountains I am guiding in extremely well.

This is all part of 'risk management'.

I use the following as my hiking and guiding mantra. I have found it extremely helpful when forced to make decisions involving the group as a whole, such as when to turn back or shorten a hike - I heard it from an experienced Mountain Club leader, but I don't know who thought of it first...

Come back safely
Come back friends (This implies having fun)
Reach your objective

In that order!

I hope this helps.

Another good mantra for leaders...

There is no good reason to split a party!

In other words, if one has to go back you all go back.

Philip wrote: Another good mantra for leaders...

There is no good reason to split a party!

In other words, if one has to go back you all go back.

That didn't happen with our group of over 20 hikers on the Ship's Prow trip last year, 2 people turned back at lunchtime, after reaching Ship's Prow stream.

The group had already split previously in the day, into a 'fast' group and the rest.

I don't disagree, that was the situation in which I found myself. I wouldn't be keen to do it again, but I would with certain provisos, like having a small sub-group of 3-4 like-minded people, with own maps, compass etc, so we can make decisions independantly if necessary.

That is why 6 of us broke off the huge group early on in the hike. We actually wanted to get up the pass in daylight still! I did mention to the hike leader at the pre-hike meeting that the group was too big and that half the people didn't know what they were letting themselves in for. But enough said of this hike.

Just a thought - on groups over 5 a dual leader function may work if there is a leader and sub-leader. But this does require the right dynamic between the group members.

The reason I say this:
- GT last year: John Pickup was the overall leader, but Andre, Tony and Jo had all done a few GT's before and functioned as sub-leaders. Through a team effort amongst them I think our group of initially 10, 9 after Sani were all monitored and for the most part the group functioned well. The general group dynamic was good and friendly.
- Bannerman Face/Sanqebethu hike earlier this year: myself and Fitness worked together on leading the group of 7 and despite some issues along the way (people feeling sick, mist etc) the team functioned well.

Sabine wrote: That is why 6 of us broke off the huge group early on in the hike. We actually wanted to get up the pass in daylight still! I did mention to the hike leader at the pre-hike meeting that the group was too big and that half the people didn't know what they were letting themselves in for. But enough said of this hike.

Agree with your sentiments