critical thinking examples in military

Critical Thinking for Military Leaders

To achieve high levels of success within military leadership, a broad range of skills are needed. Besides the physical demands of the military, these roles also require the mental capacity to process information strategically. Critical strategic thinking training combines the objectives of leadership development and reasoning skills to equip military leaders with expertise in active- duty decisiveness. Mastering the fundamentals of this training works to expand personal and unit influence through trained strategic thought. In preparation, it is important to understand what critical strategic thinking is, why it should be used in the military and how it can be trained for an applicable approach to your leadership development.

Military leaders often are charged with making crucial decisions in high-pressure scenarios. Having a strong foundation in critical strategic thinking better prepares leaders to respond effectively to both expected and unexpected challenges. For better preparedness in your organization, learn how the skill of critical thinking can be put to use and how to instill it in your ranks.

What is Critical Strategic Thinking Training?

Critical strategic thinking training is a form of training that prepares military leaders to think strategically in a variety of critical circumstances. Strategic thinking requires a deep understanding from multiple angles to assess a situation holistically and rationally. This mindset is actionable and considers long-term consequences, in which achieving the best possible outcome is the top priority.

Components of critical strategic thinking include situational analysis, questioning and response. Situational analysis requires that military leaders examine situations through a variety of internal or external methods to gain knowledge on the current strategy being used and the essence of the problem faced. Questioning entails comprehension and application of this knowledge in order for leaders to more accurately detect gaps in the strategy and calculate possible consequences of action plans. Lastly, in response, the intelligence gained through analysis and questioning is synthesized and applied in a strategic plan of action. The quality and success of critical thinking performance reflects the processing and leadership abilities of the individual involved.

Why Use Critical Strategic Thinking Training for Military Success?

To achieve military success, leaders must first and foremost be prepared. Critical strategic thinking supplements industrial readiness in military organizations as they face complex challenges daily, demanding efficient decision-making. Yet before leaders can put any strategy into action, they must develop the thought behind it. Critical strategic thinking training is essential for military leaders to simultaneously test plans and guide their unit in the right direction, while assessing high-risk situations with confidence. In these circumstances, critical thought becomes an essential precursor to physical defense tactics, as uninformed action itself is a risk factor.

Continuous learning in the defense industry becomes a substantial part of this preparation due to the dynamic, complex nature of national security issues. As a result, military leaders must learn to properly examine situations, to constantly improvise courses of action and to address challenges in the present and the future. Not only can this critical thinking raise leaders’ awareness of these possible dilemmas, but it enables them to modify missions and create contingency plans in an informed manner.

In addition, critical strategic thinking supports military leaders in establishing order. Those with experience in the military know that mental preparation is just as important as physical preparation. In order to develop the most effective approaches, restrictions and resources for missions, it is essential that leadership assesses the situation first to relay appropriate delegations.

How Can Critical Strategic Thinking be Trained in Military Leaders?

This type of thinking can be trained within military leadership by studying, reasoning through situations that occur in real life and participating in an active training environment . Multiple books, articles and compositions offer foundational information on critical strategic thinking, serving as a resource to assist individuals in developing an initial base of knowledge. Once basic concepts are grasped, leaders can begin to apply these principles to their current situations and practice reasoning through challenges. For a more holistic approach, military leaders can participate in training environments such as professional courses or seminars where live education, scenarios and feedback are offered.

Critical strategic thinking training equips military leaders with the tools to accurately analyze situations, question strategy and discern effective responses in their active duty. This thought process is beneficial to military endeavors as it develops physical and mental preparation and quick, informed decision-making in military leaders. Additionally, critical thinking promotes successful contingency planning and mission order. By framing strategy from the inside-out, leaders are prepared to create action plans in assurance, as they are backed by factual information and calculated reasoning.

Ready to develop your critical strategic thinking? The Institute for Defense and Business (IDB) offers programs concerning strategic studies , such as IB2 IO . This industry-based broadening course is designed for experienced professionals seeking a better understanding of information operations and the role of strategic communication within businesses. Despite the importance of critical strategic thinking training for military preparedness, this course approaches the subject matter to cater to a broader audience with a non-military perspective. IDB has many program offerings that develop analytical thinking and will allow you to return to your organization ready to apply strategic direction that best leverages people, processes and technology that distribute efficient and effective logistics and supply chain capabilities. Through an executive education in logistics, you will challenge old thinking and gain the ability to relate logistics-based issues to critical thinking.

About the Institute for Defense and Business

The Institute for Defense and Business (IDB) delivers educational programs and research to teach, challenge and inspire leaders who work with and within the defense enterprise to achieve next-level results for their organization. IDB features curriculum in Logistics, Supply Chain and Life Cycle Management, Complex Industrial Leadership, Strategic Studies, Global Business and Defense Studies, Continuous Process Improvement, and Stabilization and Economic Reconstruction. Visit www.IDB.org or contact us on our website for more information.

Similar Posts

A letter to maggie… post covid-19.

A fictional piece from our IDB Executive Fellow, Mike Dana, of what the world will look like in 2041: 25 May 2041 Mike Dana Nuevo…

IDB Podcast Series

NDTA/IDB: Post-COVID-19: How to be Lean without Becoming Brittle! 06.25.20 The COVID19 pandemic has highlighted supply chain fragility as organizations have become too lean. How do we change…

Global Energy and Security

by: Jonathan Bush Recently, I had the opportunity to speak with Dr. Navin A. Bapat to have a conversation and ask a few questions pertaining…

5 Ways to Maintain Strong Engagement in the Virtual Business Setting 

As a result of COVID-19, businesses are rapidly adapting to the remote working culture. Business leaders have been challenged to overcome the remote barrier and keep…

IDB Best Practices for Technology in Defense Logistics

Emerging technology is transforming the defense enterprise and how organizations develop strategy while simultaneously combating threats. To advance defense logistics, the industry is now depending…

Utilizing Life Cycle Logistics for Continuous Process Improvement in Business 

Advancements in technology, industry and processes require constant developments in business practices. As a result, continuous process improvements demand that participants invest time in improving methodologies, strategic…

Developing Critical Thinking Military Officers

Journal title, journal issn, volume title.

In May of 2020 the Joint Chiefs of Staff published guidance entitled Developing Today’s Joint Officers for Tomorrow’s Ways of War. In it they state, “To achieve intellectual overmatch against adversaries, we must produce the most professionally competent, strategic-minded, and critically thinking officers possible”. What then is critical thinking? These days many different definitions exist. The word critical comes from the Greek word kritikos, which pertains to judging or discerning. In the broadest sense, critical thinking involves objective analysis of facts to form a judgment. More specifically, critical thinking can be described as self-directed, self-disciplined, self-monitored, and self-corrective thinking.

Description

Item.page.type, item.page.format, collections.

• Recent Articles
• Journal Authors
• El Centro Main
• El Centro Reading List
• El Centro Links
• El Centro Fellows
• About El Centro
• Publish Your Work
• Editorial Policy
• Mission, Etc.
• Rights & Permissions
• Contact Info
• Support SWJ
• Join The Team
• Mad Science
• Front Page News
• Recent News Roundup
• News by Category
• Urban Operations Posts
• Recent Urban Operations Posts
• Urban Operations by Category
• Tribal Engagement
• For Advertisers

How We Think: Thinking Critically and Creatively and How Military Professionals Can Do it Better

Download the Full Article

Sometimes in the course of military operations ill-conceived ideas survive to produce unacceptable outcomes.  When this happens, frustrated leaders might ask, “What made us think this would work?”  The last decade of persistent conflict has made this a common experience especially when we face problems that are unique.  Why would this be the case?

Military professionals prefer thinking that is rational and analytical, and which helps in the selection of ideas that meet feasibility, acceptability, and suitability criterion.  In addition, they prefer to select rational and analytical ideas that have a history of working in similar situations as before.  This creates a "paradigmatic" mode of typical thinking, which is the opposite of deep, reflective, multi-perspective thinking.  This "field expedient" means of just enough thinking to find usual solutions has been so successful, through trial and error, that it takes a deliberate act of will to do original thinking that may take practitioners out of their professional paradigm.  It has been so successful that there is great pressure among practitioners to keep doing it precisely because it has been a good way to solve problems that fit within the accepted paradigm of the military profession.  In fact, it has made those kinds of problems so "solvable" that we are increasingly only left with the kinds of hard problems that our paradigmatic thinking is not well suited to handle.  However, it is not the paradigmatic way of thinking that is "faulty," but rather that when we try to apply it outside of the appropriate context, it begins failing us.  The fault is not in the mode of thinking but in its improper application to certain contexts.  These contexts are the medium to ill structured  problems that FM 5-0 introduces to the profession. 

To meet these types of problems, the military profession is expanding its thinking repertoire to include concepts such as “Design”, in order to allow its critical and creative thinking to account for problems that fall outside of the assumed context of the military operating parameters.  Professional military education institutions have furthered this effort by turning to theorists who have labeled the mental activities of critical and creative thinking.  Several military professional practitioners have described a practical explanation of the same type of activities.

This essay will summarize how cognitive theorists have described critical and creative thinking in general, and how some military practitioners have applied them.  In doing so, this essay will propose principles of critical and creative thinking applicable to the military profession to provide a common vocabulary that describes the type of thinking we do.  To expand and improve critical and creative thinking, military professionals need a common vocabulary that accurately describes the very thinking we are to expand and improve on.  Below is a synopsis of how a sampling of theorists and military practitioners describe the mental activities associated with critical and creative thinking.

About the Author(s)

Dr Mark Gerges is a retired Army officer with 20 years of service in armor.  He is currently an associate professor of history at the Command and General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. His research area is the French Revolution and Napoleon, and in particular command and control of the cavalry under the Duke of Wellington. He holds a Ph.D. in European History from Florida State University.

Ken Long is a retired Army officer with 25 yrs service as an infantryman and logistician. He is currently the curriculum designer for CGSC's Department of Logistics and Resource Operations. Research interests include systems management, organizational development, change management, critical thinking and participatory action research. He holds an MS in Systems Management from University of Southern California and completing his dissertation in organizational development from Colorado Tech University.

Dr. Bill McCollum joined the CGSC leadership faculty in November 2005. He received an Ed.D. in Organizational Leadership from the University of Sarasota (2003), and is a graduate of the Air War College (1995) and U.S. Army Command and General Staff College (1987). For the past 40 years McCollum has served in various military and education leadership positions including Commander, 1st Battalion (Attack), 4th Aviation Regiment, Assistant Dean for Baker University’s School of Professional and Graduate Studies in Overland Park, KS, and Vice President for University Relations at Baker University’s main campus in Baldwin City, KS.  McCollum now serves CGSC as a faculty Team Leader and Associate Professor in CGSC’s Department of Command and Leadership.

Leonard Lira is a Lieutenant Colonel in the U.S. Army.  He serves as an Army Strategist currently assigned as an assistant professor in the Department of Joint, Interagency and Multinational Operations in the Command and General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas.

Richard A. McConnell is a retired Army officer with 25 years of service as an artilleryman.  He is currently a Tactics Instructor at the Command and General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. Research interests include Leadership, Human Resource Management, Resilience, and Critical and Creative thinking. He holds a MA in Management and Human Resource Management from Webster University.

the first military professionals or power structures of society are obliged to protect society. Because not everybody thinks rationally, but each requires recognition of the society of his or her identity. The story you want to analyze, but the one who has eyes to see the present situation as a result of progress (or regress) of each country

I am not fond of the distinction between systematic and systemic (as Hubba Bubba suggests). They both subscibe to thinking the world (and its messes) out there as a system and composed of subsystems (some more complex than others). This is a paradigm in- and of- itself.

It may be that the systems paradigm is THE issue with our thinking.

"We need not certainly presuppose that the world somehow is systematic (simple, uniform, and the like) to validate our penchant for the systematicity of our cognitive commitments." --Nicholas Rescher

I'll go with Rescher on this point. We need to reread Rittel and Webber (i.e. 10 characteristics)! We have forgotten what wickedness means :)

I agree with most of Hubba Bubba's points below, and while we should continously endeavor to improve our ability to think creatively and critically this article appears to be largely a rational argument for continuing the current methodology, but focus on improving the individual planner, with the unstated assumption that is we have creative and critical thinkers conducting the planning the process will work. It may be improved incrementally, but the process is still largely similar to an algorithm and the input will be transformed into standardized results regardless of the level of creative thinking based on the military’s strong desire to embrace formats (which limit creative thinking and solutions) and employ all capabilities whether needed or not because good plans are joint and incorporate X, Y, and Z (according to our culture). Our planning processes are probably adequate for planning military operations that are focused on threats, but they are from ideal when we’re focused on “attacking” ideas, economic assistance, building local and national governments, etc. At the end of the day you still have military officers in the planning group that are not experts in these areas that are attempting to make these activities conform to our doctrinal processes. Occasionally we have the time and are humble enough to invite functional experts into our planning groups, but they’re frequently frustrated with our inability to grasp and implement their ideas when we distort their ideas (sometimes even give them military buzz word definitions) by attempting to adapt them into our preconceived phases of an operation. The author’s recommendations may make us “better” planners, but they won’t change the paradigmatic thinking rut we’re stuck in. While design is designed (pardon the pun) to help us understand the context and identify the real problems (as Einstein stated we should spend 90% of our time defining the problem, 10% solving it), I have yet to see it work in reality. It is simply an intellectual exercise that largely separate from the planning process, and all too frequently conducted by a limited number officers with strong biases or strong prepositions. Additionally, all too often when each of us talk about improving our strategic and operational level planning processes (for other than combat, because or processes work fairly well for what they were designed for) it means people should at the world the way I do. They should adopt my philosophy on life, my approach to problems, etc. Then of course if you are actually successful with developing a creative plan that is outside the norm (not just using new buzz words to try to sound like your approach is different), you have the challenge of selling it through multiple layers of bureaucracy manned by dinosaurs (often young dinosaurs stuck in a doctrinal rut and uncomfortable with anything that doesn’t adapt to their formats and processes) that can step on the brakes. From a frustrated planner.

Just a few thoughts-

Critical thinking and creative thinking require more than adherence to military doctrine, and the references to FM 5-0 as well as the many mechanistic and post-positivist procedures in this article reflect a very systematic rather than systemic appreciation for military conceptual planning and 'problem solving.'

Critical thinking evokes the concept of 'problematization' as espoused by Michel Foucault and represents the post-modern philosophical/organizational theory application to conceptual planning and problem-solving. To critically think requires one to challenge the institution, to include core values, and to 'think about thinking'- some use the term 'metacognition.' However, military planners and leaders that actually employ critical thinking will find many of the design references of this article quite constrictive, conformist, and lacking in appreciation of complex adaptive systems logic.

1. Army Design Methodology (in it's current form) reflects further 'group think' that attempts in a reductionist, or post-positivist manner to categorize thinking into a procedure. Step one- establish the environmental frame...step two..and so-forth. Doctrine codifies- it protects select narratives that are self-relevant to an institution; that is potentially why the military and some religious institutions (both defined by tradition, conformity, and the requirements for universalization and repetition of select behaviors and practices) use the term 'doctrine' in the first place. Doctrine is mostly about preservation of control- and the process of not thinking but following guidance to act.

2. Dr. Kem's work is largely in Operational Design, not Design. His short book referenced here (footnote 4) is actually a book on Operational Design which should not be confused with Design- or conceptual planning, or ADM, or Adaptive Campaigning, or any of the other hybrid terms out there for making sense of complex adaptive systems. Kem masterfully explained important concepts that are rooted in Effects-Based Operations (EBO)- which Joint Operations, the USAF, and the USMC tend to gravitate towards (pun intended) due to the cognitive maps (Dr. Reilly's contribution based largely upon Kem and Strange's work) where reverse engineering of strategic end-states link to centers of gravity, with lines of operation emerging from those back to the present state. This is, of course, my personal opinion based on Kem's work and interaction with him- I respect his position but disagree that Kem's work is the right material for any article on Design to cite, unless one is producing a paper that espouses the institutional position that the current doctrine "got it right." This strikes me more as a conformist or group-think position instead of a critical one. Instead of Kem's work, the authors might consider some actual critical thinkers- not limited to:

Ludwig von Bertalanffy, Valerie and Allen Ahl, Ervin Laszlo, Huba Wass de Czege, Francois Jullien, Michel Foucault, Peter Novick, Jeff Conklin, Gwilym Jenkins, Shimon Naveh, Gerald Weinberg, Nassim Taleb, Vladimir Slipchenko, Alex Ryan, Paul Ricoeur, Thomas Nelson, Thomas Kuhn, Steven Johnson, Anne-Marie Grisogono, Gilles Deleuze, Felix Guattari, Peter Checkland, Walter Buckley, Eva Boxenbaum, Linda Rouleau, Mats Alvesson, Jorgen Sandberg, among others. There are just so many out there- and most of them have nothing to do with the military- which has everything to do with why we keep attempting to solve complex problems the wrong way!

3. Figure 1 in this article makes the point that Army Design Methodology relies extensively on science, procedures, and rigid decision making trapped within a hierarchical structure that does not take well to critical or creative thinking. The Army Problem-solving Model's highly problematic logic begins with "identify the problem" which leads right into a systematizing and positivist logic where every problem identified automatically comes with an associated solution. Instead of problem-centric thinking, we ought to consider appreciating the complex system holistically- seeking patterns and emergence. Solving one problem likely creates three more..

4. Figure 1 also includes Mission Command (which many general officers still question whether it is much different from Battle Command...or more useful); and to my dread, also includes the utterly worthless graphic from FM 5-0 with the Design Methodology fishing net of nothingness. In terms of graphics, figure 1 for this article is less about explaining anything in the article, and more about showing the reader a smorgasbord of conforming and “group think” planning graphics collected from across the Army doctrine. These are procedures, and are generally quite rigid. That is likely why the military struggles to bridge conceptual to detailed planning- complex systems do not behave or respond well to these controlling methodologies that seek to “tame” wicked problems, as Conklin would argue.

5. By the time I got to figure 2, the overarching narrative of this article was clear. Instead of discussing critical and creative thinking across a holistic perspective that draws from outside the military approved and sanctioned “Design” field, this article showcases only approved ideas. Doctrine is good, and sanctioned military thinkers are good. This is hardly critical- and largely unhelpful for military planners attempting to explain or understand how to better plan under complex conditions. To think critically is to go beyond touting the party line, whether that line is directed by Washington, the Pentagon, Leavenworth, or even within CGSC or SAMS. We must break beyond the group-think of doctrine, question why we think the way we do- why we prefer to see the world and attempt to explain it in certain ways while ignoring or rejecting other perspectives. To be creative, one must go well outside of the box and not look for procedures, check-lists, or pretty graphics that are universal in nature and expect the reader to think less, and follow the procedure more. Planning is not about coloring within the lines- to think creatively and critically, turn the coloring book upside down and use the back of it- the blank paper- move away from the lines entirely- and begin from there instead….

Food for thought- my opinions are just my own.

Hubba Bubba

More From Forbes

Six creative leadership lessons from the military in an era of vuca and coin.

• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to Linkedin

By David Slocum

As part of a long-term research project examining the guiding tenets of creative leadership ,  Doug Guthrie  and I have interviewed dozens of leaders of creative businesses. Many of these leaders were previously or remain successful creatives. Besides illuminating the ways that effective creative leadership can be developed and sustained, one of the striking elements of these interviews has been the repeated references to military leadership – typically, as a contrast or foil to creativity-fostering leadership.

Military leadership is hierarchical and paternalistic, these creative leaders say. There is a lack of open-ended collaboration and reliance upon formal rather than informal authority. Ultimately, military activities are defined, many observe, by creativity-stifling constraints and discipline. The “salute point” at which decisions are made and where discussions or collaboration end seems to fly in the face of the openness and messiness required for creativity and innovation to flourish.

Of course, thinking historically, military leadership is among the most ancient of leadership forms. That long view, combined with the diverse military activities across so many different societies today, means that references to “military leadership” can point to a wide range of practices. The category is, consequently, an expansive one, which can contribute to partial understanding and even the creation of a “straw man” about which selective claims can be attached.

The military itself, long committed to leadership training and practice, has increasingly engaged in reflection and research on the topic. The United States military, in particular, has been active over the last three decades in re-thinking its leadership priorities and principles. Several familiar examples of recent developments convey some of the breadth of their approaches.

• V UCA: Volatility, Uncertainty, Complexity, or Ambiguity : This acronym emerged in the 1990s to describe the capability to engage situations marked by change and challenges. For leaders in the military and beyond, the doctrine underscores the importance of strategic decision-making, readiness planning, risk management, and situational problem-solving.

•  Be-Know-Do : Growing out of intensive analysis by the military of its leadership thinking, in part conducted with business management researchers, the Army Leadership Manual was revised following the end of the Cold War. This shorthand version resonated with other models at the time that sought to combine attention to a leader’s character, competence, and action-taking (the end result was a  best-seller ). The areas of focus here include individual values, people and teams, managing complexity, leading change, and leading learning organizations.

•  COIN : Over the last two decades, and notably after Sept. 11, the U.S. military developed a Counter-insurgency doctrine, with David Petraeus as its most prominent exponent. As Fred Kaplan recounts in his exceptional historical account,  The Insurgents  (Simon & Schuster 2012), the evolution of COIN represented a paradigm shift in strategic thinking that was

David H. Petraeus (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

equally a story of leadership struggling to effect change in a sprawling and tradition-bound organization. More specifically, and in keeping with the  zeitgeist , it is a story about the challenge of ceding control and allowing for more adaptable and situational leadership. Yet as Kaplan insightfully observes, the soldier-scholars like Petraeus who advanced this new approach overestimated its very sway and applicability: the COIN doctrine and approach ironically became for many a singular approach to war-making rather than one of many tools in the military leader’s kit.

The emphases in these compelling models on self-awareness, adaptability, situational awareness, and engaging complexity show their importance to non-military leaders. Still, I wanted to gain a fuller understanding of how military leadership operates and provides lessons for creative businesses. So I called Mike Zeliff. Mike is eminently qualified to speak to the question: a former U.S. Marine Corps infantry officer who also served as the Corp’s Chief Marketing Officer, he went on to earn his MBA and Ph.D. in Marketing. Today he consults to both the military and creative businesses.

A major thread running through Mike’s astute observations about military leadership involves the opposition between generalists and specialists. The uniformed services, he says, want an educated generalist good at war-fighting. However, some officers undergo intensive and continuing training to become experts in specialty areas like cyber, technology, finance or regional studies. General leadership skills and practice are not enough to advance in specialty areas anymore.

This emphasis has far-reaching implications, for example, in the opportunity to lead complex organizational change and drive innovation. Innovation certainly happens in the military, but unlike in business, where leaders often try to change everything about a unit or organization, it tends to be targeted and often involves implementing an established tool or model. Not only does the challenge of change exist as it does in nearly all organizations, as Mike explains, the military tends to resist change promoted by a generalist.

Another point concerns the difference between military leadership on the homefront versus the warfront. This was a contrast that several creative leaders have raised in interviews, though some defined the contrast in differing ways. For Mike, the warfront requires leadership – inspiring a team, demonstrating commitment, sharing troubles and challenges, and engaging in complex problem-solving. The homefront, conversely, is a setting for management, that is, filling time, being sure to complete tasks, and exercising simple problem-solving.

As these threads make clear, the boundaries between military and creative leadership are not nearly as clear-cut as many imagine. In fact, while perhaps more easily associated with military practice, at least a handful of shared priorities would serve those who want to lead more successful creative talent, teams and organizations. These include:

1)  Appreciating and Engaging Diversity : To solve the most complex problems, leaders need to engage multiple, diverse perspectives. The assumption here, essential to the successful operation of learning organizations, is that we have the most to learn from those who are least like us.

2)  Appreciating Generalists : The diversity of perspectives brought by generalists in mixing with specialists can spur creativity. More fundamentally, awareness of core values and priorities remains a touchstone for effective leaders.

3)  Decision-making : As a basis for fostering collaboration and creative excellence, leaders should be deliberate about making value-based, and well-communicated decisions.

4)  Practicing Discipline : This is not restrictive and rule-based authority. It's personal, team and organizational discipline, ranging from personal routines, sleep habits and consistency of interactions with subordinates.

5)  Managing and processing information   systematically : With so much data and information readily available, there is an imperative to be deliberate and systematic about deciding how to manage conflicting and often overlapping information. These are not only strategic; they can be as prosaic as asking, "What do I read?" And, "How do I decide what to read?"

6)  Role modeling behavior and integrity : The expectation that military leaders need, through their integrity and actions, to serve as role models to their subordinates is fundamental. Particularly in creative organizations where successful creatives have been promoted into leadership positions, such role modeling can be extremely inspiring and powerful.

Professor David Slocum is the Faculty Director of Executive MBA Program at the Berlin School of Creative  Leadership . Slocum designs, leads, and teaches executive training programs, and is a certified executive coach, with a focus on leadership and management of the creative and media industries. You can follow him @davidslocum on Twitter or at  his blog .

• Editorial Standards
• Reprints & Permissions

Ten Great Critical Thinking Questions Effective Leaders Ask

Leadership is critical thinking in action.

The greatest military leaders in ancient times, including Julius Caesar, Sun Tzu, Hannibal, Scipio Africanus, Attila the Hun, and Gaius Marius, were all superior critical thinkers. These historically effective leaders applied their outstanding skills of analysis, interpretation, inference, and evaluation to strategic, operational, and tactical problems of all kinds. The same can be said about the great leaders today no matter what their field of endeavor.

Effective leadership at every level is as much about thinking as it is about motivating and following through. Problems must be analyzed, plans devised and tested, adaptions made as conditions change, assumptions tested, and contingencies accounted for.

To lead well is to solve complex ill-structured, real-time, problems and make sound, informed decisions. 

Effective leadership cannot happen without critical thinking.

Strong deductive reasoning skills are vital whenever contexts are precisely defined, and when operational planning establishes firm deadlines. Deductive reasoning enables the leader to articulate the sequencing, define the performance tolerances, quantify the minimum and maximum limits, ensure the provision of essential resources, and plan each event as a necessary condition for the next.

Strong inductive reasoning is essential when making decisions in time-limited contexts involving risk and uncertainty. Inductive reasoning enables the leader to function well with partial or inconsistent intel, when facing a clever and adaptable enemy, and when evaluating the downside risks of unwanted secondary or tertiary effects. Using inductive reasoning leaders develop contingency plans, improvise tactical workaround as conditions change, and when to move forward aggressively and when to pivot to an alternative approach.

Adaption achieved through critical thinking is important at every level of an organization, small or large, business, military, educational, governmental, etc. In today’s complex world, responding to these global and local challenges effectively is a responsibility shared by health care providers, first responders, educators, NGOs, businesses, law enforcement, governmental agencies, and our military and intelligence services. The need for critical thinking to defend and enhance our free and open democracy and the unfettered advancement of science has perhaps never been greater.

Effective leaders trigger critical thinking in themselves and the groups they lead by asking ten vital questions:

• How is this situation like the prior situations?
• How is this situation NOT like prior situations?
• What happens if we take this element out of the equation?
• What happens if we insert this factor into the equation?
• What exactly is the problem, and is it changing over time?
• How can we adjust and adapt to those changes?
• Why are our standard approaches consistently failing?
• How can we seize the advantage?
• Why are our people over-simplifying the complexity confronting us?
• Am I, are we, missing anything that opposition leaders are seeing?

Effectively responding to these questions demands engaging our core critical thinking skills: interpretation, analysis, inference, induction, deduction, evaluation, explanation, and reflective self-correction.

Today we can measure the force of these skills scientifically. We do not have to wait for a blunder to know that a person is weak in one or more of these skills arenas. And more to the point, these are skills that can be strengthened through an educational process aimed at teaching thinking.

Equally important to critical thinking skills are one’s critical thinking mindset. The consistent internal disposition to address problems and to make decisions using strong, fair-minded, reflective reasoning is a habit successful leaders cultivate.

Successful leaders discipline themselves and their people to interpret and analyze intelligence with care, anticipate the obvious and the not so obvious consequences of alternative courses of action, evaluate options objectively, and clearly explain to others what must be done and why. The mental disciplines most valued by thoughtful leaders are focus, foresight, intellectual integrity, professional and communicative confidence, forthrightness, and teamwork. 

These disciplines of mind, like the skills, can be reinforced in the field by leaders who create and sustain an environment that values thoughtful, well-informed, and thorough planning and problem-solving. Successful leaders know that being prepared to think is as important as being prepared to compete.

5 Decision-Making Skills of Successful Leaders 10 Characteristics of Effective Leaders

About the author.

Oracle HR technology has immense potential in Human Resources, bringing the same evidence-based approach that has succeeded in fields like…

Chatbots can make us better critical thinkers. Humans use critical thinking to manage problems, some serious enough to threaten our…

Standardized tests are used to measure the strength of important skills and attributes in large groups of people. A standardized…

Explore your training options in 10 minutes Get Started

• Graduate Stories
• Partner Spotlights
• Bootcamp Prep
• Bootcamp Admissions
• University Bootcamps
• Coding Tools
• Software Engineering
• Web Development
• Data Science
• Tech Guides
• Tech Resources
• Career Advice
• Online Learning
• Internships
• Apprenticeships
• Tech Salaries
• Associate Degree
• Bachelor's Degree
• Master's Degree
• University Admissions
• Best Schools
• Certifications
• Bootcamp Financing
• Higher Ed Financing
• Scholarships
• Financial Aid
• Best Coding Bootcamps
• Best Online Bootcamps
• Best Web Design Bootcamps
• Best Data Science Bootcamps
• Best Technology Sales Bootcamps
• Best Data Analytics Bootcamps
• Best Cybersecurity Bootcamps
• Best Digital Marketing Bootcamps
• Los Angeles
• San Francisco
• Browse All Locations
• Digital Marketing
• Machine Learning
• See All Subjects
• Bootcamps 101
• Full-Stack Development
• Career Changes
• View all Career Discussions
• Mobile App Development
• Cybersecurity
• Product Management
• UX/UI Design
• What is a Coding Bootcamp?
• Are Coding Bootcamps Worth It?
• How to Choose a Coding Bootcamp
• Best Online Coding Bootcamps and Courses
• Best Free Bootcamps and Coding Training
• Coding Bootcamp vs. Community College
• Coding Bootcamp vs. Self-Learning
• Bootcamps vs. Certifications: Compared
• What Is a Coding Bootcamp Job Guarantee?
• How to Pay for Coding Bootcamp
• Ultimate Guide to Coding Bootcamp Loans
• Best Coding Bootcamp Scholarships and Grants
• Education Stipends for Coding Bootcamps
• Get Your Coding Bootcamp Sponsored by Your Employer
• GI Bill and Coding Bootcamps
• Tech Intevriews
• Our Enterprise Solution
• Connect With Us
• Publication
• Reskill America
• Partner With Us

• Resource Center
• Bachelor’s Degree
• Master’s Degree

Best Critical Thinking Examples to Help You Improve Your Critical and Analytical Skills

Critical thinking has been studied since ancient times. Greek philosophers such as Aristotle and Plato provided us with good critical thinking examples and the foundations for this field. Socrates is widely regarded as one of the fathers of critical thinking and deductive reasoning, a valuable skill in a world plagued with fake news and overwhelming amounts of information.

However, what is critical thinking? How can we use it in everyday life? In this article, we will explain what critical thinking is and why it is important, provide tips for improving your critical thinking skills, and offer the best examples of critical thinking.

Find your bootcamp match

What is critical thinking.

Critical thinking is the ability to think clearly and logically about what to do or believe. To do so, you must establish logical connections between ideas, evaluate arguments, approach problems systematically, and reflect on your values and beliefs. Logical thinking and scientific thinking are types of thinking that depend on these skills.

Additionally, the critical thinking process involves challenging knowledge to discover the truth. It involves reviewing knowledge and information to make an informed decision. You can improve your critical thinking skills by becoming more adept at analyzing problems, identifying biases, practicing active listening and inductive reasoning, and avoiding emotional reasoning.

Where Is Critical Thinking Used?

• Progressive education
• Risk assessment
• Programming
• SAT standardized tests

Why Is Critical Thinking Important?

Critical thinking is important because it allows you to better synthesize, analyze and interpret information. Other critical thinking skills like problem-solving , observation, and communication, can help you advance in your career. All of these skills can enable you to understand yourself better and make better life decisions.

Many people believe they are critical thinkers. However, when drawing conclusions in real life most people rely on common sense and numerous fallacies. To avoid this, we must have critical thinking dispositions to gain more insight, learn to identify a weak argument, and make better decisions. Understanding critical thinking concepts is crucial if you want to understand your thoughts, emotions, or live a better life.

Real-World Examples of Critical Thinking

People live their lives based on the choices they make. As a result, they require critical thinking skills and a constructive approach to problem-solving to make their lives easier. For example, if you need to deliver to multiple locations, don’t just go there by chance.

To save time, determine which location is closest and devise an efficient pattern for the next locations you will need to visit. This is just one of many examples of critical thinking for the following section. Below are more critical thinking examples.

• Self-evaluation of your actions
• HR manager resolving conflict between staffs
• A military officer working on tactical plans
• Professor guiding students to fresh ideas with creative questioning
• Student defending a master’s thesis
• Basketball coach seeking out new tactics during a timeout
• Writer organizing content ideas
• Applicant preparing for a job interview
• Using a disciplined process to look for a job
• A detective using their observational ability to analyze a crime scene

10 Great Examples of Critical Thinking

Critical thinking example 1: self-evaluation of your actions.

Self-evaluation is essential for improving your overall performance. When you use reflective thinking or try to evaluate yourself, you analyze what went wrong and how you can improve in the future. You attempt to understand what happened and figure out what you need to change to get different results.

Many universities and schools use special questionnaires that test critical thinking abilities. For example, Cambridge, a school with over 20 years of experience in assessing critical thinking, uses a student self-assessment critical thinking questionnaire .

Critical Thinking Example 2: HR Manager Resolving Conflict Between Staffs

Employees have disagreements in every organization. In many cases, it is the HR manager who steps in to solve the problem. However, the HR manager must first listen to both sides, determine the source of the problem, assess the situation, and decide how to proceed. As a result, a soft skill such as problem-solving or management is essential for HR.

Critical Thinking Example 3: A Military Officer Working on Tactical Plans

A military officer working on tactical plans for extracting fellow soldiers in a dangerous military zone is another example. In this case, the military officer must find an effective way to get the soldiers out of the danger zone while minimizing casualties, which requires logical thinking.

Critical Thinking Example 4: Professor Guiding Students to Fresh Ideas With Creative Questioning

Creative questioning is an interesting process because it can promote critical thinking. By asking creative open-ended questions, the professor makes students think more deeply about a subject. Therefore, they need to discern what information to pick and share. Analysis of arguments is another way to foster analytical thinking among students.

Critical Thinking Example 5: Student Defending a Master’s Thesis

Writing a master’s thesis requires applying critical thinking. You seek and gather information, conduct research, perform calculations, analyze data, and draw conclusions. You also demonstrate what critical skills you used to create the thesis by explaining all of the steps and methodology you used in the research process.

Critical Thinking Example 6: Basketball Coach Seeking Out New Tactics During a Timeout

In some cases, if the match does not go well, the basketball coach may call a timeout to reassess the team’s strategy. During the timeout, a basketball coach looks for new tactics that reveal the vulnerabilities of the opposing team. The coach needs to find a way to assess the potential risks and provide a new strategy that will lead the team to victory.

Critical Thinking Example 7: Writer Organizing Content Ideas

When writing articles, writers must distinguish between good and bad information. They must also make the article flow. To accomplish this, writers must adhere to the core concept of writing format: title, introduction, body, and conclusion. This means that they have to choose certain information to insert in certain sections of the text.

Critical Thinking Example 8: Applicants Preparing for a Job Interview

If you apply for a job and go to the interview blindly, there is a high chance you will not be hired. It is preferable to arrive prepared and apply critical thinking to the interview. One tip for interview preparation is to ask yourself outcome-based questions about the job. Before going to the interview, practice answering questions and acting quickly.

Critical Thinking Example 9: Using a Disciplined Process to Look for a Job

It can be difficult to find a job. Some stats show that on average it takes 100 to 200 applications to get a job. To improve your chances, you should put your critical thinking cap on. Logical thinking can help you consider how you will approach employers, devote time to updating your resume, skills, and create an effective cover letter .

Critical Thinking Example 10: A Detective Using Their Observational Ability to Analyze a Crime Scene

As a police detective, you must have strong critical thinking skills as well as excellent observational abilities to analyze a crime scene. You need logical inquiry and deduction skills to analyze the evidence. A police detective must have probable cause to obtain a search warrant from a judge to search a suspect’s home, which is another example of critical thinking.

Pro Tips to Boost Your Critical Thinking Skills

• Analyze and Break It Down. Before forming an opinion, conduct extensive research and analysis. Once you have enough information, then you can try to break down all that information and analyze what it means. It is a good idea to break the problem down into smaller pieces so that you can see the bigger picture.
• Deal With Your Biases. Critical thinking requires constant work, as people have biases that they need to deal with throughout their lives. If a person is aware of their biases, they can be aware of their own thought process and make sure they’re not just thinking one way.
• Seek Advice. Develop a strong sense of acquiring knowledge. This means seeking advice when you are not sure about what you know. If you don’t know something, ask someone that knows. The more information you have, the better conclusion you can draw. Deal with the fact that you are not always right.

What Should Be the Next Step in My Critical Thinking Learning Journey?

Your next step in your critical thinking learning journey should be to actively use it in your everyday life. In real life, people encounter many opportunities to solve problems. With critical and careful thinking, you can afford to lead a better life and make more accurate decisions.

Using analytical and objective reasoning are some of the intellectual virtues that critical thinking offers to get a better job. If you use it in self-evaluation you can become a better version of yourself.

Advancing this skill can improve your professional life, problem-solving, and improve in developing and executing solutions. If you want to have well-informed opinions and deal with your biases, advance your critical thinking skills.

Critical Thinking Examples FAQ

Yes, critical thinking is a skill. The interesting part is that critical thinking is a learned skill. If it can be learned then it can be taught. However, the problem is that in many cases an experienced instructor is needed to transfer the skill. It is also one of the 21st-century skills you need to add to your resume.

Developing your critical thinking skills is a gradual process that requires deliberate effort. Changing your thought patterns and practices is a long-term project that you should commit to for the rest of your life.

No, IQ tests don’t measure critical thinking. Intelligence and critical thinking are not the same. If you want to test your critical thinking ability, you need a specialized critical thinking test. One example is the Cornell critical thinking test .

The bandwagon fallacy is about creating an opinion based on what the majority thinks. If everyone says the same thing, then it must be true. The problem with this notion is that the opinion of the majority is not always valid or a real form of knowledge. To avoid the bandwagon fallacy, you need to have a critical thinking disposition.

About us: Career Karma is a platform designed to help job seekers find, research, and connect with job training programs to advance their careers. Learn about the CK publication .

"Career Karma entered my life when I needed it most and quickly helped me match with a bootcamp. Two months after graduating, I found my dream job that aligned with my values and goals in life!"

Venus, Software Engineer at Rockbot

What's Next?

Get matched with top bootcamps

Ask a question to our community, take our careers quiz.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *