When companies approach us with requests to organise team-building programs for 120, 200 or 300 participants, the intent is clear: to bring everyone together in a shared experience that supports team-building and collaboration. On the surface, the idea of 300 employees trekking at once seems like a grand opportunity to build a cohesive team.

However, at Indiahikes we do not accept such large numbers for our corporate learning programmes. Through years of experience, we’ve realised that while large groups create a sense of scale, they fail to deliver the genuine learning, connection, and growth that are the hallmarks of true team-building.

Large Groups Reinforce Existing Power Dynamics

Consider a past example where we hosted a Collaborative Leadership Programme on a Himalayan trek for 70 employees from a single company. The first thing that struck us was the deeply entrenched hierarchical behaviour within the team. Junior employees were hesitant to share tents with their senior colleagues, not because of any physical discomfort but due to a psychological barrier, a mental block ingrained by their company’s hierarchical structure.

This reluctance to break away from traditional roles and titles highlights a fundamental issue with large groups: they tend to reinforce, rather than dissolve, existing power dynamics. The reluctance however, went beyond just sharing of the tents. It was displayed in the way they consulted on coming up with a plan of action. It was displayed in the obvious lack of ownership of the whole team when it came to the assigned team tasks.

Smaller groups, in contrast, naturally encourage a more egalitarian environment. Here, individuals are more likely to engage with each other as equals, breaking down the barriers that often stifle collaboration in larger settings.

For example, when a 13 member team from Decathlon joined for a day trek to Hari Hara Betta, they themselves could notice areas of improvement and gained insights on how they can each play a better role in their team.

There is No Opportunity for Deep Conversations and Real Growth in Large Groups

At Indiahikes, we believe that the essence of team-building goes beyond ticking a box on a corporate calendar. It’s about fostering genuine connections, discovering hidden strengths within the group, and learning to solve problems together. These outcomes are only possible when teams have the time and space to engage in deep, meaningful conversations.

In a small team, participants can reflect on what worked, what didn’t, and why. There’s room for personal growth and development, and the learning is more profound. On the other hand, in a group of 300, meaningful exchanges are often replaced by surface-level conversations, and true collaboration becomes difficult. The sheer size of the group creates a barrier to personal engagement, leaving individuals with the feeling of having completed a task, rather than having undergone a transformative experience.

Sharwari, a senior trek leader, vividly recalls leading a collaborative leadership program for a corporate team in the Himalayas. She noticed that in smaller teams, informal bonding naturally occurred. In groups of 8-9, participants felt comfortable discussing their roles, identifying who they could rely on for different strengths, and understanding how to work together effectively.

On a recent trek to Bhrigu Lake with Ankur Warikoo, a well-known content creator and entrepreneur, his team, consisting of just a few members, experienced a level of bonding that surprised even them. For many, it was the first time they saw their colleagues in such an intimate setting, sharing simple, everyday moments like brushing their teeth together. This kind of closeness and camaraderie is rarely if ever, achieved in a group of 300.

In a similar programme, when a small group of employees from BeeNext trekked in the Himalayas, their CEO Teruhide Sato said: 

“The challenges naturally brought everyone together. Everyone tried to address problems by supporting each other. Leeches reaching out to you and climbing onto your body - particularly for people who live in cities - is not something usual. But everyone supported each other.

The team remained positive through leeches, wind, and rain. 

We learnt that we could be open-minded and embrace whatever happened. We rebuilt the plan if we needed to rebuild. Somehow, within one day, we went through all these processes within our team.”

Looking back, we realise that such intimacy and coming-together is only possible in a smaller team.

Actual Dysfunctions of the Team get Hidden Behind Large Numbers

During treks on the Collaborative Leadership Programme, we see patterns emerge that echo the concepts from Patrick Lencioni's famous book  ‘The Five Dysfunctions of a Team’. These dysfunctions: Absence of Trust, Fear of Conflict, Lack of Commitment, Avoidance of Accountability, and Inattention to Results are barriers that many teams face, yet rarely have the opportunity to address directly.

In the outdoors, where everyone is dependent on each other for success, these dysfunctions cannot hide. A team that lacks trust will struggle to support each other through difficult terrain. Those who fear conflict may shy away from necessary decisions, leading to frustration and missed opportunities. Without commitment, team members hesitate, unsure of the path forward, which can lead to dangerous delays or missed turns on the trail. And if no one holds themselves or others accountable, as is the case in large groups, the entire group suffers, often without even realising why.

Our facilitators are trained to recognize these signs and use the trek as a real-time laboratory for addressing them.

Communication Gets Lost in Large Teams 

Team-building is not just about surviving the trek; it's about thriving together in challenging conditions. Picture a group of ten people trying to pitch a tent in the rain. In a smaller group, everyone has a role, and communication flows easily. There’s room for strategy, debate, and quick decision-making, skills that are crucial in any corporate setting.

However, when the group swells to 300, this dynamic changes. Communication becomes fragmented, and the opportunity for meaningful interaction dwindles. Critical moments for learning are lost in the chaos of relayed messages and diluted discussions. By the time decisions are made, the moment for growth has often passed.

In smaller groups, every voice is heard, trust is built more quickly, and individuals are more likely to take ownership of both successes and failures. This sense of personal accountability and active participation is what drives true collaboration.

From Egosystem to Ecosystem

Our programs are designed to shift participants from an "egosystem"—where personal gains and recognition are prioritised—to an "ecosystem"—where collective growth and success are the focus. This transformation is vital for any team looking to enhance its collaboration and problem-solving abilities.

In smaller groups, participants can easily identify each other’s strengths and weaknesses. This openness encourages a shift from ego-driven motives to ecosystem-driven collaboration. In a group of 300, however, this dynamic cannot thrive. The sheer size of the group creates anonymity, allowing individuals to hide behind the crowd rather than confront their behaviours or limitations.

Quality Over Quantity: The Core of Our Programs

At Indiahikes, we’re not against large groups. If the goal is purely recreational, a large team outing can be fun and successful. However, when the objective is to foster learning, growth, and meaningful team development, we believe that smaller groups are essential.

Effective team-building demands time, space, and the chance for every individual to contribute meaningfully. In a massive crowd, these critical elements get lost. While we can handle the logistics of a large group—setting up 150 tents if necessary—the true essence of our programs would be compromised. Large numbers, more suited to a wedding banquet, dilute the depth of engagement, the personal connections, and the transformative experiences that define what we offer.

Why Smaller Is Better

For those seeking a meaningful, transformative team-building experience, smaller groups are not just preferable—they are essential. At Indiahikes, we are committed to offering programs that foster deep learning, personal growth, and real collaboration. While large groups may be tempting for their scale, the true value of team-building lies in the quality of the experience, not the quantity of participants.

For our Collaborative Leadership Programme, we have a ratio of 1:12, where one member from the Indiahikes team is available for every 12 participants. We not only have our experienced trek leaders, we have a game master in addition to our usual trained guides accompanying a team for these programmes.

The reason why we have such a ratio is so that every participant is given personal attention. Even a group as large as 40 participants is broken into four further groups, where a trek leader plays an important role in facilitating the learning activities and the entire journey around the reflections and learning. 

In the end, our goal is to help teams move from a collection of individuals focused on their own success to a cohesive unit working towards a shared goal. And for that to happen, we need to keep it small.