Chapter 2: Critical Thinking

Chapter 2: Critical Thinking

Learning Objectives

By the end of this chapter, you should be able to:

• distinguish facts from assumptions
•  evaluate the quality of evidence
•  identify weaknesses in an argument
• recognise logical fallacies
• challenge your own conclusions before a judge does
• make recommendations supported by evidence rather than opinion

Why This Matters

One of the most common comments judges make after a competition is: “Your recommendation sounded reasonable, but I wasn't convinced." That comment is rarely about presentation skills. More often, it reflects weaknesses in the team's thinking. Many teams gather information. Fewer teams evaluate it.

Strong case competitors constantly ask themselves:

• How do we know this?
• What evidence supports this conclusion?
• What assumptions are we making?
• What evidence might contradict our thinking?
• Are we solving the right problem?

Critical thinking transforms analysis into insight.

Discover Your Mad Skills Principle

Don’t accept information simply because it appears in the case. Ask what it means, why it matters, and whether it changes your recommendation.

Deciphering Case Characteristics

Critical thinking looks different depending on the characteristics of the case. For example:

• A Turnaround Case: Your priority may be identifying the root causes of declining performance rather than simply describing declining sales.
• A Growth Case: You may need to question whether growth is actually the right objective or whether profitability should take precedence.
• A Social Enterprise Case: You may need to balance financial sustainability with social impact rather than optimising only one Outcome.
• An Innovation Case: The challenge may be evaluating uncertainty rather than proving certainty.

The questions you ask should always reflect the nature of the problem.

Understanding Critical Thinking

Critical thinking is disciplined thinking. It is the deliberate process of questioning information before accepting it as true. This does not mean being negative. Nor does it mean criticising every idea. Instead, critical thinkers ask whether conclusions are supported by evidence. Consider the following statement.

"Sales have declined by 18%; therefore, the company needs more advertising."

This may sound reasonable. But it contains several assumptions.

• Perhaps customers are leaving because of poor service.
• Perhaps competitors introduced a superior product.
• Perhaps distribution problems reduced availability.
• Perhaps demand has shifted entirely.

The conclusion may be correct, but it has not yet been earned.

Coach’s Lens

One habit separates exceptional teams from average teams. Average teams ask: "What should we recommend?" Exceptional teams ask: "What problem are we actually trying to solve?" Those questions sound similar. They are not. The second question often changes the entire direction of the analysis.

A Mad Skills Framework

When evaluating evidence, use four questions.

1. What do we know? Separate facts from opinions.
2. What do we think? Identify assumptions.
3. What don't we know? Recognise uncertainty.
4. What do we need to learn? Identify the information that will strengthen the recommendation.

This simple sequence prevents teams from jumping to conclusions too quickly.

Common Thinking Traps

•  Confirmation Bias: Looking only for evidence that supports your preferred solution.
• Anchoring: Allowing the first idea to dominate later thinking.
• Availability Bias: Giving too much weight to information that is easiest to remember.
• Groupthink:  Avoiding disagreement to maintain harmony.
• False Certainty: Presenting assumptions as facts.

Judges notice these mistakes immediately.

Competition Example

Imagine your team is working on a case involving declining customer retention. One team immediately recommends a new loyalty program. Another team asks:

• Which customers are leaving?
• Why are they leaving?
• When did the decline begin?
• What has changed?
• Is retention the biggest problem?

The second team may recommend the same loyalty program. But their recommendation will be stronger because it is supported by better thinking.

Mad Skills Drill

Read a recent business news article. Identify:

• Five facts.
• Three assumptions.
• Two unanswered questions.
• One conclusion that requires more evidence.

Discuss your answers with your teammates. How different were your conclusions?

Reflection Questions

1. Which assumption did your team make most often in your last competition?
2. Did you actively test it?
3. What evidence challenged your thinking?
4. How might stronger critical thinking have changed your recommendation?

Chapter Summary

Critical thinking is not about finding flaws. It is about improving decisions. Every recommendation should survive the question:

"What evidence makes us believe this is the best course of action?"

The strongest teams do not avoid difficult questions. They ask them first.

Key Takeaways

✓ Separate facts from assumptions.

✓ Question your own reasoning before judges do.

✓ Look for evidence that disproves your preferred solution.

✓ Understand the difference between describing a problem and explaining it.

✓ Remember that better questions usually produce better recommendations.

Looking Ahead

Critical thinking helps you evaluate information. The next chapter explores strategic thinking, the ability to understand how different parts of an organisation interact and why solving one problem often creates another.