Peak Fail: The Cricket Review Detail They Got Totally Wrong
Well, at least the cricket bits were spot on.
But there's one thing the review got wrong.
It's on page 15 of the 147-page report, in the methodology section where The Ethics Centre explains that it uses a thing called "The Everest Process".
It describes the process thus, with a lovely illustration:
"Developed over the past 25 years, the Everest process is a comprehensive review of an organisation’s culture to determine the degree of its alignment with its espoused Ethical Framework -- purpose, values and principles.
That is, we identify and assess gaps between what an organisation says that it stands for, and what occurs in practice. In our experience, the extent of any such ‘gaps’ correlates with the risk of unethical conduct."
Which all sounds terrific and wonderful. There's just one little problem. The mountain pictured is not Everest.
It is Ama Dablam, the 6812-metre peak which is on the most commonly hiked route to Mt Everest, but which is not the world's highest mountain. In fact it's two kilometres lower than Everest.
Because we are helpful people by nature, we alerted The Ethics Centre to this.
And they offered us a job, which was nice of them, and probably quite ethical too.
Given recent events surrounding a certain horse race and the Sydney Opera House, it's probably not surprising that a Sydney-based entity invoking the name of the world's highest peak would somehow make a hash of things.