Asking the Right Questions

Introduction

Asking the Right Questions, in and of itself was a phenomenal read. I gained an incredible amount of insight with regards to critical thinking, but I also learned a lot about myself. While reading the text, I frequently had light bulb moments where I would reflect on my decision making process in personal relationships, but also business relationships. This book assisted me in identifying a new way in which I process information and how I make decisions. Asking the Right Questions, gives you the tools and skills to carefully approach questions and the ability to skillfully think through tasks. Critical thinking as defined by Browne and Keeley consists of an awareness of a set of interrelated critical questions, the ability to ask and answer critical questions at appropriate times and the desire to actively use the critical questions.

This assignment, which focused on the PDQ Memorandum (Mark Headlee, personal communication, October 1, 2011), was an interesting discussion to use for the critical thinking process. Initially, when I thought about critical thinking as a task, my mind immediately focused on a problem and a solution. It most often times in my experience has been a lengthy discussion which resulted in numerous steps in the process. The model used by Browne and Keeley, is a different approach than what I was familiar with, however, it was quite unique when applying it to the PDQ CEO compensation evaluation.

The PDQ scenario was very unique, because there was some background information provided which helped to frame the case of the writer. Without knowing the background information and why the task was being assigned, it would have been difficult to ascertain why the memo was written and also why the critical thinking exercise was even necessary. Throughout the remainder of this paper, I will use the critical thinking model outlined in Asking the Right Questions to describe the PDQ Manufacturing CEP compensation evaluation.

Issues and Conclusions

After reading the PDQ memo, it was quite clear very quickly what the issue with the memo was. The Human Resources (HR) Department were charged with the task of reviewing the current CEO’s compensation plan. The issues that were evident to me were, whether the compensation level for Raymond James was appropriate for the position with relation to the current industry standards. The second issue, identified by HR was the fact, that for six years ‘the company experienced only 3% overall growth while the CEO salary increased by 48%’ (Mark Headlee, personal communication, October 1, 2011). Thirdly, the HR Department identified the respect of union workers had been lost due to the flyer being circulated that taunted an unflattering Raymond James as CEO. According to the HR representative, ‘once the respect of other employees had been lost it would be too difficult