Analysis Using Critical Thinking Model: Cliffside Holding Company Memo

Analysis Using Critical Thinking Model: Cliffside Holding Company Memo

University of Maryland University College

Introduction

Amidst this barrage of information in today’s world, it is often difficult to make a decision and stand by it, assured that it was the most advantageous to all those involved. Fortunately, critical thinking is a tool available to assist in making well thought out decisions in the face of contradictory opinions and impulsive actions. In Asking the Right Questions: A Guide to Critical Thinking, Browne and Keeley (2013) explain that critical thinking is “reacting with systematic evaluation to what you have heard and read” (p. 4). They further assert that critical thinking “requires a set of skills and attitudes that are built around a series of related critical questions” (p. 4). By asking the right questions, we employ the skill of critical thinking to enhance what and how we process information. To examine the concept of critical questions, this paper will analyze a business document from Cliffside Holding of Massapequa using the critical thinking model outlined by Browne and Keeley (2013) in Asking the Right Questions.

Analysis

Mr. Anil Ravaswami, Vice-President (VP) of Human Resources (HR) of Cliffside Holding Company of Massapequa (CHMC), wrote a memo to CEO Cynthia Castle in response to her request for the evaluation of a proposal for a new leadership development program to be designed for Cliffside’s junior insurance executives (personal communication, October 10, 2012). To evaluate the memo, the first critical question we have to ask is what is the issue and what is the conclusion? Mr. Ravaswami stated, “This is in response to your request for our office to evaluate the merit of Ms. Forsythe’s proposal that we establish and fund a new leadership development program for our junior insurance executives” (personal communication, 2012, p. 1). Thus, the issue in question is – should CHCM “establish and fund a new leadership development program for their junior executives.” The issue “raises questions about what we should do,” so it is a prescriptive issue (Browne & Keeley, 2013, p. 25). The conclusion can be determined by whether or not Ravaswami believes a leadership development program should be established and funded. It holds that the conclusion of this memo is CHCM should not establish and fund a new leadership development program for its junior executives (A.Ravaswami, personal communication, 2012, p. 3).

The next question in the critical thinking model is what are the reasons? What has Mr. Ravaswami given as reasons why CHCM should not establish and fund a new leadership program for its junior executives? The first reason he provides is that in the 50 years CHCM has been in business with a yearly

...