Using this method, one is encouraged to ask themselves 10 questions that will help with weeding out things such as false statements (fallacies), bias in pinion, omitted information, assumptions, and also help in identifying rival causes for the evidence used to support reasons. I will now be using these 10 critical thinking methods to evaluate and gain a clear perspective on a memo from Classified Holding Company of Masques discussing how beneficial funding a leadership development program for junior executives will be for the company.
What are the issues and conclusions? In Browne and Kelsey ten step method, the first step stated was to identify the issue and conclusion in an argument. The author’s elaborated on why this is of importance by stating ‘those who create web pages, blobs, editorials, books, magazines articles, or speeches are trying to change your perceptions or beliefs. For you to form a reasonable reaction to their persuasive effort, you must first identify the controversy or issue as well as the thesis and conclusion being pushed onto you. ” (Browne & Kelly,201 5 p. 3). The issue in this memo is whether or not the company should invest in a leadership development program for its junior executives. The issue here is what Brown and Kelly calls a prescriptive issue. Prescriptive issues are issues that bring to question what action should be taking, what is right or wrong/ good or bad (Browne & Kelly 2015). The writer of this memo Mr.. Ravish is attempting to convince the readers of this memo Ms. Cynthia Castle (CEO, CHEM.) that a decision to fund this sort of program would be a wrong and bad decision for the company.
In trying to convince Ms. Cynthia Castle, Mr.. Ravish came to the conclusion that the company should not invest in any initiative that remotes sending its junior executives to any form of leadership training. He supported this conclusion with his personal beliefs, opinions, statistics gathered from surveys, and theories from authorities. What are the reasons? The second step is Browne and Kelly’s critical thinking method is to identify reasons used to support the conclusion. The authors encourage us to always ask the question ‘Why? “If a statement doesn’t answer the question, why does the write or speaker believe that? Then its not a reason. ” After asking the question why to Mr.. Ravioli’s conclusion, I was able to locate the answers in his reasons. 1. The company has been prosperous without investing in development programs and will be in the future without such programs. 2. A survey completed by him showed that majority Of the current senior staff with the exception of one also agreed to the notion that leadership is something you are born with and can’t be thought.
He also supported this reasoning by listing powerful historical figures like, Winston Churchill, Mother Theresa, and Martin Luther king Jar, all of which he believed assessed and were born with leadership traits. 3. He stated a personal belief that all leaders have a tall physical stature. He supported this with favorable data listing heights of past American great leaders over 6 feet. In doing so, he tries to lead the CEO of the company to also believe that one’s height is connected to their capability of being leaders. 4.
He believes that sending junior insurance executives to leadership training will trigger a rise in employee training demands that could cause an unaffordable expense for the company. No proof was provided to support this claim. He then stated that due to that reason, “it will be more logical to select and recruit those with leadership traits than to try and develop those who are not” (A. Arrivals, p. 2) Which words of phrases are ambiguous? The third step of the critical thinking method is to identify ambiguous words or phrases used. Browne and Kenney described ambiguity as words that have multiple different meaning (Brown & Kelley, p. 5). The words prosperous, successful, and effective are example of ambiguous words used in the memo. Mr.. Ravish in is memo stated that CHEM. has been “prosperous” without anyone of its senior executives having to attend any leadership development programs. The use of prosperous in this case is ambiguous because the word itself has multiple meanings. It could be interpreted as having abundance of wealth and success or just reporting small profits. In this memo, the readers are being lead to believe that the company already has abundance of wealth without supporting any leadership development program.
Using critical thinking one might interpret that same statement as, the company is making mall profits but there’s room to potentially earn more by investing in the leadership development programs for its employees. The memo also states that Chum’s has been “Successful and Effective” without such program. The use of the words “successful and effective” is ambiguous because those two words have different measures depending on the person making the evaluation. What one person considers as being SUccessfUl and effective can be considered as failure to another depending on their goals and measures. What are the values and descriptive assumptions?