Critical Thinking in Asking the Right Questions - Literature review Example

Running Heading: Critical Thinking in Asking the Right Questions Critical Thinking in Asking the Right Questions Introduction Critical thinking is extremely important in addressing complex organizational problems. The business environment is becoming increasingly complex and therefore managers have to use critical thinking in order to resolve day to day business issues. The critical thinking model that will be discussed in the paper involves asking the right questions. It is through asking questions that one is able to understand the main problem and come up with appropriate solutions. Critical thinking can also be applied in order to evaluate a given set of arguments. The aim should be to ask the right questions in order to do an in depth study and analysis of the issue at hand. This is what will be attempted in the paper. In this paper, critical thinking will be used to evaluate the argument given in a memo. The aim is to objectively evaluate the arguments of the author using the 10 steps of critical thinking. Step 1: What are the Issues and Conclusions? The memo is written in response to the request made by director of operations regarding a leadership program for junior executives. The main issue discussed in the memo is the infeasibility of the proposed leadership program. The author argues that the proposed leadership program is not necessary because leaders are born and not made. Personal motivation of the direction of operations is questioned in the memo. The author concludes that a leadership program is not worth spending any money, and theories of leadership advocated by the director of operations are not in line with the culture of the company. Personal motivation behind the proposals is also highlighted in the conclusion. Step 2: What are the Reasons? The reasons given in the memo for the infeasibility of the leadership program include selection issues, waste of money, ‘leaders are born not made’ view, leadership traits, and personal motivations of Miss Forsythe. Selection issues will be raised when many people will request for leadership training and this is something the company cannot afford, according to the memo. The leadership training will be a waste of money because the company has already fared well without such training in the past, and therefore the training is a waste of money. The philosophy of born leaders is used as a reason against leadership programs. The author argues that leaders are born and not made, and therefore leadership training will not help employees. Trait theory of leadership is used to dispel the idea of leadership training program in the memo. Another very important reason given against the leadership program is that the personal motivation of Miss Forsythe is to get the position of VP Human Resource. Step 3: Which Words or Phrases are Ambiguous? Ambiguity refers to the double meaning of words and phrases (Bach, 2012). There is ambiguity when the author talks about the company being prosperous because this word is not explained. The word ‘prosperous’ is ambiguous because it is subjective and can have many meanings. There is no universally accepted operational definition of the word and therefore this word is ambiguous. Also the word ‘effective’ is ambiguously used in the memo. The author argues that the company’s leadership has been effective. It is also difficult to find the exact meaning of ‘effective’. The word ‘liberal’ is also ambiguously used in the memo. The author claims that the Miss Forsythe is motivated by her liberal intention. These liberal intentions are not explained in the memo and therefore this word is also ambiguous. Step 4: What are the Value and Descriptive Assumptions? There are many value assumptions made in the memo. It is assumed that the success of the company is more important than the leadership training of individuals. It is also assumed that there is no good way of knowing which employees should be sent to the leadership training programs. It is also assumed that the company can spend its resources in a better way than spending on leadership training programs. These the some of the value assumptions made in the memo. The descriptive assumption made in the memo is that the personal (Miss Forsythe) motivation of a person is more important than the overall interest of the company. Step: 5 Are there any Fallacies in the Reasoning? There are a few fallacies in the reasoning of the author of the memo. The most obvious fallacy in the reasoning is ‘post hoc ergo proctor hoc’. The author shows that height and leadership skills are associated and then claims that height is a trait that is important for leadership. The memo also uses hasty generalization when arguing that good leaders are usually tall. Hasty generalization involves making generalization by observing only a small unrepresentative sample (“Fallacies,” 2012). Also sweeping generalizations are made in the memo like leadership only involves traits like ambition, self confidence, and intelligence. This is a sweeping generalization because not all cases (or traits) are considered (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2012). The memo also uses appeal to authority by quoting a famous economist. Step 6: How good is the Evidence? The evidence given in the memo is not of very academic nature. The author has supported his ‘height-leadership hypothesis with references from highly non academic sources. The author, although, has quoted two academic journals but this can also not be considered good evidence. This is because the exact studies are not quoted and only the name of the journals is mentioned. This is not the correct way to cite evidence and therefore it can be safely concluded the evidence used in the research paper is not very good. The author has also tried to use a quotation from a famous economist in order to support the claim that leaders are born and not made. The quotation given in the memo does not actually support the point of view of the author, and therefore it also not good evidence. Step 7: Are there Rival Causes? Rival cause can be defined as a possible interpretation that is different from the interpretation of the writer, made in the text, regarding occurrence of an outcome (“Are there Rival Causes,” 2012). The same evidence can sometimes be interpreted in different manners and these different interpretations are referred to as rival causes. The author of the memo presents evidence that the company has performed well even without any former leader training programs. This evidence can have many different interpretation or rival causes, for example the success of the company might also be because of the lack of competition in the industry or because of commitment of employees. The success of the company, therefore, cannot be presented as evidence against leadership. Also the author has tried to link height with leadership traits. The author presents evidence that tall people possess good leadership skills. This evidence can also have rival causes, for example many of the leaders discussed in the memo all had strong personalities. This might be the reason of their good leadership skills and not their height. Step: 8 Are the Statistics Deceptive? There are occasions when the statistics used in the memo are deceptive. The height of many leaders of United States of America is presented in a table but only those leaders who are taller than 6 feet are included in the list. This is an example of deceptive statistics because the author tries to support the conclusion by showing only Presidents who were tall and not all of them. Also the statistics regarding the success of the company is deceptive. The author mentions only the growth rate of the company and does not compare it with the industry average. The company might be operating in an industry where the average industry growth rate is much higher than 12 percent per annum. This is another deceptive statistic used by the author in the memo. Step: 9 What Significant Information is Omitted? The author omits the height of all Presidents of the United States in the memo in order to support his conclusion. The author also does not say anything about the relative positive effects the leadership program might have for the company. It is also not mentioned how the funds of recruitment program will be affected exactly if the leadership program is approved. There is also no mention of the fact that there are many schools of thoughts of leadership and there is no evidence as to which one of them is absolutely right. All this significant information is omitted from the memo. Step: 10 What Reasonable Conclusions are Possible? One reasonable conclusion can be made from the memo is that the culture of the company is such that it does not need a leadership program. This is a reasonable conclusion because there are companies where future leaders are groomed by present leaders. The company’s culture might not be such that a leadership training program is needed. A reasonable conclusion can be drawn from the memo that the author is only looking out for himself and not the company. The author is only interested in saving his own position in the company, and is not willing to make another person look good in front of the top management. Another reasonable conclusion is that the author is not confident in his skills and his position in the firm. This is why he feels threatened that another person might take his position in the firm. This is a reasonable conclusion because the author is not able to give convincing arguments in the memo against the proposal of leadership training programs. Another reasonable conclusion is that it is not easy to tell whether the leadership program will work or not in the company. The author has presented a biased view regarding the leadership program and has not evaluated the effectiveness of the leadership program in an appropriate manner. This is why it is not possible to either support or reject the proposal. Conclusion Critical thinking involves deep analysis of all the arguments and conclusions drawn in the text. It also involves identifying logical fallacies and rival causes. The aim of critical thinking is to evaluate the evidence presented and see whether conclusions drawn are reasonable or not. The 10 step model of critical thinking is a step by step guide that allows us to evaluate arguments and conclusions made in any text. The author of the memo has discussed reasons regarding the infeasibility of leadership training program proposed by an employee. The author has presented the overall success of the company as evidence against the proposed leadership program. The main issue raised in the memo is that the leadership program is not required. The reasons given for the infeasibility of the leadership program include cost issues, malicious intent behind the proposal, trait leadership theory, and selection issues. There are many ambiguities in the memo, for example the author uses the word prosperous for the company. The author has also used the word effective for the current leadership of the company. These words are ambiguous and can have many meanings. There are also logical fallacies like hasty generalization and ‘post hoc ergo proctor hoc’ in the memo. The reasons presented in the memo against the leadership program are not justified, and are based on assumptions. It can be concluded that the author of the memo is not confident in his own position in the company, and therefore feels threatened by the leadership training proposal. The author has also assumed that the money spent on leadership program will be wasted and this assumption has not substantial grounds. This is why it can be concluded that the reasoning presented in the memo is quite weak and irrational. References Bach, K. (2012). Ambiguity. Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry. Retrieved 29 December, 2012 from http://online.sfsu.edu/kbach/ambguity.html Bownet.org. (2012). Are there Rival Causes? Retrieved 29 December, 2012 from ftp://bownet.org/draynard/Rival%20Causes.pdf Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. (2012). Fallacies. Retrieved 29 December, 2012 from http://www.iep.utm.edu/fallacy/ The Nizkor Project. (2012). Fallacy: Hasty Generalization. Retrieved 29 December, 2012 from http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/hasty-generalization.html Read More