MSLD 500 Module 5 – Critical Thinking about Critical Thinking

Critical Thinking about Critical Thinking

I always considered myself a critical thinker, for the fact I analyze information in a deep perspective. I am used to bring up new possibilities and alternatives in a conversation, showing different points of views and antagonizing, especially paradigmatic data.

     Going through studies, I realize these traits are important and essential while thinking critically, however not necessarily means I am critical thinker. My competencies are still in a low stage. I got the knowledge of critical thinking concepts, elements, standards, traits and virtues, and most relevant, the importance of thinking critically and link all these knowledges, stated by Elder and Paul (2016).

     My thinking processes definitely changed since I went through the topic, however, in a practical scope, I still miss a structure, to analyze and face situations reasoning them out. I know which elements to consider and standards to focus on, but still does not come automatically to me, going around the circle (Nosich, 2012, p. 68) while reacting to an event or thinking about a subject matter, which according to the referred author, it is just the basic process of analysis. I recognize that some of the impediments listed by Nosich (2012, p. 16-25) and others not listed by him, have a great influence on my blockage for critical thinking.

     In an average perspective, considering the standards applied to the elements of critical thinking (Elder & Paul, 2016, p. 19), I can say I managed to internalize and apply, on a daily basis, some of them.  As mentioned, there is a long way to be in a high level, or level three, according to Elder and Paul (2016, p. 6). For an instance, in a personal and professional scope, the standards of clarity, logicalness, significance and depth is more constantly applied to the elements of purpose, points of views, information, inferences and implications. Consequently, I am already developing through my recent knowledge, fairmindedness, confidence in reason, intellectual courage, humility and slowly, intellectual autonomy.

     To make lasting, positive changes in the way I think, I need to step back while facing a challenging situation or conversations, and think through all I have learnt. For that, I need to memorize all the concepts and techniques by heart, to easily and quickly go through them, since some decision-making conditions lack on time availability. I understand that internalize deeply the knowledge I have learnt recently is the greatest step to take from now, only then I will be able to apply them naturally.

     I believe critical thinking and powerful leadership are inevitably connected. To be a great leader, it is crucial to think things through and act in accordance to it. To be an organizational powerful leader, with strong influence in the team and consequently in the organization, it is essential to lead by example, to be accurate, clear, relevant, logical, precise, significant, ample and deep, fair and complete, as a role model. It is compelling to think about the purpose of our thinking and actions, analyzing inferences, concepts, implications and assumptions, all the information available, alternatives and point of views, making questions to ourselves and our teams. Only this way we can achieve pivotal intellectual virtues to succeed as leader.

“Personal Power is the influence capacity a leader derives from being seen by followers as likable and knowledgeable… role model… competent … considerate.” (Northouse, 2016, p. 12)

  

Northouse P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice (7^th edition). Thousand Oaks, CA:  Sage.

Nosich, G. M. (2012). Learning to think things through: A guide to critical thinking across the curriculum (4th edition). Boston, MA: Pearson

Paul R., Elder L. (2016). Critical thinking: concepts and tool. Tomales, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking.

MSLD 500 module 4 - Ballet Slippers or Adorable?

The Art of Choosing

Nowadays, the system make us think that having the freedom to make choices is beneficial to everyone and in all situations. Most of the countries, especially those with restrictions regarding to genders, casts, races, assumes this is the best benefit of America: variety and freedom to make choices. In America, you choose what to do with your own life, and the opportunities are vast, there, simply waiting for someone to grab it! You make the decisions which affects your own life.

     Dr. Sheena Iyengar (2010) on her speech about choices brings up this subject with mastery. She went through some studies regarding to the art of choosing, to see how it is influenced by cultures, backgrounds, how it brings different consequences and until which point, the freedom to make choices is beneficial. She stated that the choices are more influenced by who the chooser is than the options available.

     According to Dr. Iyengar (2010) Americans make three assumptions when it comes to make choices, which are:

1. If a choice affects you, then you should be the one to make it.

2. The more choices you have the more likely you are to make the best choices.

3. You must never say no to choices.

     Considering these assumptions, she concludes that the benefic idea of choice is distorted due to cultural differences, situation itself and consequences which always having choices and making them can lead to. Dr. Iyengar agrees with the fact that choices made the world a fairer place, however having the Americans assumptions as an absolute truth is not necessarily the right way of thinking, based on her studies.

    I agree in Dr. Iyengar, and bringing those conclusions to a leadership point of view, make me think how a leader is always in a position do make decision, to choose the best way to deal with determined situation, to think always in a holistic perspective while choosing. As a leader we do not have a choice of not choosing, so what we can learn from Dr. Iyengar speech, is whenever it is possible, think if it is really a choice to be made, when, and if we really need to make it, what we should consider and how to filter them to avoid having a big amount of choices as a confusion key on decision making.  

    Still on this subject, Nosich (2012, p. 49) list alternatives as a central element of reasoning. Nosich (2012, p. 61) states that whenever we reason, there are alternatives, in other words, choices. As per Nosich perspective, the freedom of having alternatives is one of the greatest benefits of learning to think critically. He says that think about the elements of reasoning in terms of alternatives is empowering in a direct way. Make us think in other possible potential paths which we could not see before, make us consider different possibilities. So, the ideas of both researches, connected, make us think on the importance on the art of choosing in leader perspective.

“ We need to develop the ability to give up desired alternative paths, accepting that it is often important to grieve for paths we could not follow.” (Nosich)

Iyengar S. (2010). The art of choosing. Retrieved from http://www.ted.com/talks/sheena_iyengar_on_the_art_of_choosing?language=en#t-904622

Nosich, G. M. (2012). Learning to think things through: A guide to critical thinking across the curriculum (4th edition). Boston, MA: Pearson. 

MSLD 500 Module 3 - Organizational Leadership as a System

Organizational Leadership as a System

Organizational leadership can be seen in different ways depending on the perspective and approach of the leader, or of anyone interested on the subject. First it is important to understand the definition of organizational leadership, to than analyze the distinction between these perspectives.

     In accordance to TDK Technologies, organizational leadership is a dual focused management approach that works towards what is best for individuals and what is best for a group as a whole, simultaneously. It also mentions that it is also an attitude and a work ethic that empowers an individual in any role to lead from the top, middle, or bottom of an organization. Complementing this definition, MSG Experts say that organizational leadership deals with both human psychology as well as expert tactics. It emphasizes on developing leadership skills and abilities that are relevant across the organizations.

     There can be not just a distinction but often a contradiction between seeing organizational leadership as a simple body of information or as a system of thinking. Considering the definitions and descriptions mentioned previously, seeing the term simply as a body of information, it lacks on comprehension. There would be gaps with crucial questions as: what to do with this information? How to approach it? Who to direct to? For what? And so on.

      It is impossible to approach the term as just information given. Since it involves individuals, attitude, ethic, human psychology, tactics, all together, it is a must to involve thinking, or better than that, system of thinking. We can use a body of information associated to it, however not compare one definition with another.  Most of the organizations, especially in a time of constant changes witnessed nowadays, faces continual challenges which can turn to conflict and threats to any business. Thinking through the challenges as a whole, in a system perspective, it is crucial for organizational leaders and can define the future of their organization. Kaufman et al. (2003, p. 57) also highlights the importance of thinking and acting holistically for high payoff results. As leaders, we must to think through a system. The performance of a system depends on how the parts are connected and how they relate. (Kaufman et al., 2003, p. 61).

     Considering organizational leadership as a system of thinking does not change how I see and approach my course work, however it makes me keep focused on a holistic point of view through the discipline, facing leadership as complex system, where thinking critically plays an essential role through dynamic times.

“The greatest danger in times of turbulence is not the turbulence. It is to act with yesterday’s logic.” (Drucker, 1993).

    

Drucker P. (1993). Post-capitalist society. New York – NY: HarperBusiness.       

Kaufman R., Oakley-Browne H., Watkins R., Leigh. D. (2003). Strategic planning for success: Aligning people, performance and payoffs. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass/ Pfeiffer.

MSG Management Study Guide. Organizational Leadership. Retrieved from https://managementstudyguide.com/organizational-leadership.htm#

TDK Technologies. Key Components of Organizational Leadership. Retrieved from https://www.tdktech.com/tech-talks/key-components-of-organizational-leadership