Choosing the right backcountry travel companions will not only increase the amount of fun and laughs on a foray into the mountains but could also save your life. Being human comes with the reality of being imperfect. Pre-conditioned biases, an individual’s tendencies, ego, social influences, and heuristics (mental shortcuts we use to make sense of massive amounts of information) are all described as human factors. Even in the face of ominous signs of elevated avalanche danger, human factors can cause individuals to make poor decisions in the backcountry that go against their better judgment. These human factors influence us unconsciously and subtly, leading us to make decisions that in hindsight we clearly regret. Good partners and effective teamwork provide backcountry travelers the antidote to these human factors.

Choose your partners deliberately

The good news is that you have a choice when deciding who you recreate with in the backcountry. A thoughtfully formed group that listens to each team member makes better decisions. Assembling a strong, well rounded group that adheres to The AIARE Framework means that each individual agrees to travel together, decide together, listen to all voices, challenge assumptions and respect any veto. This can short-circuit detrimental human factors and help everyone make smarter, safer decisions.

What makes a good backcountry partner? The answer to this question should include some personal preferences. There is nothing wrong with a partner who always brings extra coffee, is willing to drive or happy to carry the first aid kit. However, none of that matters if they do not contribute to the team or are unable to take care of themselves in the mountains. Below are a few things to consider when selecting backcountry partners.

• Compatible Goals: Do they share objectives or ambitions for the day?

• Risk Tolerance: Does the amount of risk they are willing to accept align with yours?

• Group Consensus: Are they honest and effective communicators?

• Group Size: Is less, more or is more, less? What size is appropriate?

• Honest, Open Communication: Can you communicate with ease?

The Group Check In

A systematic group check in helps identify potential problems and human factors in the group, as well as strengths. Use the following prompts (which are also in The AIARE Fieldbook you will receive on your course) to check in with your group every time you travel.

Compatible Goals

The group should make sure members have compatible goals. First off, does everybody get along? Friction between team members hinders open and honest discussions. Team members should make sure they share similar objectives and ambitions. If one person wants to build a kicker, while another wants to get a tour in after a long work week, these two probably won’t have a particularly fun time together.

Questions to discuss regarding compatible goals:

• Is anyone familiar with the proposed trip?

• Is anyone an expert with current conditions?

• Are all group members skilled and fit enough for the trip?

• Is everyone familiar with their gear and how to use it?

• Will any of these issues affect the group’s ability to make decisions?

Risk Tolerance

Risk tolerance is the amount of perceived risk each individual is willing to accept. It may be a function of age or experience but really it is just as varied and unique as personalities are from one individual to the next. While discussing this issue can yield insight, observing a partner’s behavior in the field can be equally or more revealing.

Questions to discuss regarding risk tolerance:

• Do members perceive the day’s risks similarly?

• Are there different levels of risk tolerance within the group?

• Will the group need or feel the need, to reach its objective despite the conditions or risks?

• Will the team consider a more cautious approach given today’s avalanche or group conditions?

Group Consensus

Many avalanche incidents can be avoided if the individuals in the groups all agreed to ride together and decide together. Implicit in this agreement is consensus, meaning that everyone has a voice and everyone has a veto. This means that if one person feels the terrain is unsafe, the whole group will honor that and choose another place to go. If a group cannot ensure everyone’s opinion is equally respected and that all vetoes are valued, it is a sign of an incompatible group dynamic that must be addressed.

Keys to achieving group consensus:

• Prior to making key decisions, agree that—regardless of experience—all opinions are respected, and any one group member can veto the team’s choice or exposure to avalanche terrain.

• Allow an individual to challenge assumptions. The voice of the devil’s advocate is important and encourages us to identify what we know and what we are assuming is fact. This position can be appointed.

• Explicitly agree that the group is committed to consensus rather than majority rule.

• Agree that at each stop—which can be built into travel plans—the team considers local experience, familiarity with conditions, new observations made in the field, judgment versus desire, individual intuition, and common sense.

• Agree that no one gets left behind or out of sight, for any reason.

Questions to ask regarding consensus:

• Is someone silent at the back of the group?

• Do one or two team members tend to overwhelm others with strong opinions?

• Do certain teammates seem willing to just go with the flow and cede decision making to others?

Group Size

We all have attempted the painful task of eating out at a restaurant with a large group of people; parking, seating, allergies, cuisine, carnivores, omnivores, and let’s not forget the headache that comes with splitting the bill. Similar to the restaurant, a large number of preferences and desires renders consensus a daunting task to achieve in the backcountry. Research and experience indicate an optimal group size is three to five people. Individuals or groups of two may not benefit from collective experience and wisdom. They could lack an abundance of viewpoints to offer alternative perspectives. A smaller team sacrifices human power for self-rescue and backcountry evacuation. Groups larger than five can work, but often require expert facilitation to ensure all voices are heard, lines of communication are maintained and experience is recognized. True consensus is possible but takes effort and intention.

Honest, Open Communication

Team members should be transparent about any personal health issues and ability. For example, discovering your teammate has an ACL surgery scheduled might come at a shock considering you are trusting them with your own life in the event of a backcountry emergency. So can learning that your previously athletic partner is nervous about exerting themselves at elevation and logging the planned mileage in the time allotted. Anything as simple as a common cold, especially when compounded by fatigue, frigid temperatures and hunger, can affect a person’s ability to make good decisions. An open, thoughtful discussion among team members can appropriately modify the day’s objectives.

A solid, well-functioning team can address issues with flexibility and consensus. A team that lacks the ability to discuss and solve problems isn’t much of a team at all. If any of the above discussions introduce unresolved debate, you should question the group’s viability as a backcountry team. If consensus cannot be reached, agree upon a simpler terrain, smaller objectives and/or backcountry area closer to the trailhead and rescue services.