Critical Thinking Skills Applied to Real Life Problems
Critical Thinking Skills Applied to Real Life Problems
Introduction
The challenges of modern life pose many problems in one’s daily life and increasing standards of performance and competitiveness in both personal as well as professional spheres of life present people with different issues and problems. The basic and simple problems are also usually compounded by the faulty thinking and perception of those involved in the thinking process surrounding a situation. The inequality of opportunities and lack of level playing field usually translates into challenges at work and in personal life, which if not overcome within a reasonable span of time and within the purview of reasonable resources, lead to frustration, de motivation and or unhealthy competitive practices or inter personal issues and conflicts. Usually flaws in thinking lead to faulty decisions related to the problem and create unnecessary and uncalled for complications and aggravate the effects of the problem.
Issue
How to make career choices and routine work decisions when suffering from long term health issues which intervene with one’s performance and motivation compounded by overt attention or neglect from peers and superiors.
I am working as a work and career counselor at one of the local counseling agencies and recently encountered cases of employees’ increasing frustration and being unhappy at work due to being unable to contribute to work as much as they could primarily due to long term health issues such as diabetes or Asthma. Some of the peers as well as superiors show a negative attitude and try and restrict them based on the biased perceptions of the particular employees’ ability to deliver specific tasks effectively. The sympathetic attitude many peers and superiors show as part of their generosity and concern usually leads to actually hindering the performance of the said employees. As a counselor, I need to advise them as to how to deal with the problem.
Review and Discussion of Relevant Research and Data
As such discovering or being diagnosed with an illness is tough to accept and deal with in itself. In many cases, the employers are supportive and flexible, however in other cases, they are very negative. Usually, long term illness can be categorized into two broad areas, one wherein the employee is ill and needs a lot of time off work; second where the employee has an illness but can continue to work. The present discussion deals with the second type of employees as the problem being discussed is about the challenges at work for employees with long term illness. The employer can be extremely non committal in many cases, discouraging in others and outright discriminatory in still others. Usually, there is law protecting such employees from discrimination and the employers have legal obligations to make ‘reasonable adjustments’ for the employee if he or she qualifies under law as having long term sickness affecting the performance of the employee substantially. However, research has shown that a very small percentage of claims brought under the relevant laws result in favorable verdicts for the employees. In this scenario it is very likely that a dismissal or continual denials of opportunities for growth are encountered by employees.
In most cases, where the problem is not seemingly serious enough to warrant a dismissal from employers’ point of view, it is even more difficult to take recourse to legal remedies. It is in such cases that the problem translates into work related stress and anxiety for the employee who is already battling an unfavorable health condition. This situation is compounded by a lack of health insurance. As per research, lack of health insurance is one of the top reasons for work place anxiety and aggravation of health related problems at work. The anxiety and stress in turn contribute to lack of self confidence among the employees and a lack of confidence among employers and peers about their ability to perform tasks given to them and expected as part of their duty after making enough concessions owing to their health condition. The dual nature of problem ties down the employees into tough scenario where they are faced with a dilemma as to whether to make a case for their ability to perform certain tasks or inability to perform others. In either case, the peers and the employers usually suffer from a myopic interpretation of the health condition and resultant capabilities to perform at work.
The impatience related to granting concessions at work and the associated guilt of having availed concessions can sometimes be hurting to the self esteem of certain individuals. This also contributes to frustration at work. It is thus advisable for the employee to be in close contact with the employer as well as fellow employees and keep them informed about the true condition, so that they are aware of what the employee can or cannot do. Quite often, making others aware of what you can do under the circumstances and health condition is the best thing to do since it not only clears your position with regards to your keenness to perform, but also establishes your honesty and sincerity to work. Thus possibility of unnecessary hindrances and snatching away of opportunities to perform work that the employee could do perfectly well in spite of the medical condition is minimized. On the other hand the tasks that cannot be performed as well as others, but still be performed within reasonable standards can also be assigned to such an employee without loss of productivity. This increases the chances of the said employee being considered for incentives and promotions at par with other performing employees and reduces work place tension and work related anxiety on part of the ill employee.
Discussion Based on Critical Thinking
Based on the above review of the research related to the issue as mentioned, various critical thinking tools can be applied to the problem and the relevant facts enumerated above to arrive at a broader perspective of the problem and thus pave a way for possible solutions to the issue that can be suggested to the employees. The problem at hand requires us to critically analyze the problem in terms of the various elements of thought to which intellectual standards can be applied for evaluation. The above review can be broken down for analysis in terms of the elements of thought for critical thinking as mentioned below which shows that the overall discussion of the problem is already proceeding as per the following elements of thought.
Question at Issue
This element requires any piece of thinking to essentially have a valid question. In this case the question has already been defined in the introduction section and pertains to challenges faced at work place regarding career and work decisions owing to long term health problems. A faulty question as part of critical thinking leads to faulty outcomes and answers .
Purpose
The purpose or reason of the discussion surrounding the problem also has been discussed above in the introduction section and pertains to the employees affected by problem stated above, approaching the critical thinker for advice and counseling.
Point of View
The present paper discusses the problem from the perspective of the employees affected by the faulty perceptions and resultant behavior which can alternatively be that of overt attention or lack of understanding of the problem. The frame of reference for the discussion of problem strictly work related and maintains an acknowledged distance with the legal aspects of the problem as the specific issue at hand hovers within the work premises and out of the legal precincts. The problem discusses the case of those employees who in spite of long term illness are able to attend work. Such people do not have much practical respite from law and thus are dependent on their own management and balancing of their chronic illness with workplace.
Assumptions
The review of the problem makes a few assumptions about the work environment and the response of the peers and employers at the said employees’ workplace. Firstly, the discussion assumes that the peers at the workplace are likely to have a biased opinion which is causing the ill employees to have apprehensions about they being treated fairly and being unable to perform as well as they can in spite of their illness. In reality, the perceived bias could be a result of the employees own lack of confidence, while the others might just be treating them as they want to be treated. Secondly, it assumes the illness of the employees is not critical enough to warrant protection under the law and does not bind the employer to definitively act in accordance with the accommodative law regarding treatment of employees with chronic illness substantially affecting their performance. In reality, there is a chance that the employer might just retrench the employee over period of time due to impatience borne out of the employees inability perform as per their expectations .
Concepts
The discussion does mention the conceptual framework in terms of the laws that bind the employer to grant concessions or be flexible in accommodating the needs of the employees who are suffering with chronic illness. The discussion also clarifies that in this case the employees are suffering from typical situation wherein the relevant law has very little chance of practically safeguarding their interests. The concept of self preservation applies to the issue more than the legal aspects. The rules of interpersonal communication come into play when looking at effective management of the problem .
Information
The information contained in the discussion is more subjective than objective in nature however the sources of the information are credible. For instance, the information about the relevant laws, the scenario pertaining to the possibility of success of a claim pertaining to requests for favorable and accommodative behavior owing to the illness of employees though subjective, does provide an important input in the overall discussion. Further, by pointing out the established relationship between the lack of health insurance and workplace anxiety, the discussion paves the way for further analysis of the problem and leads us to observe the fact that the additional anxiety results in peers and employers treating the ill employees with kid gloves leading to lack of opportunities in the long run .
Implications and Consequences
Although the implications and consequences of the problem have been discussed at length, it is important to put them in an analytical perspective. This helps derive the critical aspects of the problem and the level to which the problem or its solution can affect those involved. The consequences of the problem for the said employees are grave in the long run, if not successfully solved or managed. The discussion does imply that there is neither a legal nor a medical remedy to the problem. The problem or the issue can primarily be managed at workplace with respect to the employer and peer behavior .
Interpretation and Inferences
The analysis so far indicates that the problem or issue cannot be definitively solved. Rather, it can be managed effectively by managing expectations of peers and employers and oneself by the affected employees. The solution thus suggested comprises of (1) effectively evaluating the level and extent of the tasks and work critical to the job responsibilities of the employees, (2) Assessing one’s own capabilities and the level to which they can fulfill the critical responsibilities, (3) Communicating the capability and expected level of fulfillment to the employer. (4) Demonstrating the committed level of performance. (5) Setting mutually acceptable standards for review of performance keeping the disability or illness as well as company standards in mind.
The above discussion based on elements of thought needs to be further evaluated against the intellectual standards of critical thinking.
The critical analysis based on the standards applied to the above review of problem is presented below.
Clarity
The discussion and analysis of the problem as above is clear in its purpose as well as definition of the problem. The clear enumeration of the various perspectives as well as frames of reference provide for an overall clarity right from the beginning. On the basis of the clarity in above areas the discussion and analysis proceeds towards an effective solution to the problem.
Precision
The analysis is precise in the facts, observations and the experiences enumerated as well as the overall information pertaining to the problem at hand. This helps the advisor to arrive at relevant interpretations and possible solutions to the problem .
Relevance
The discussion of the problem is relevant to the labor laws as well as the performance of the employees and the solution to the problem reflects a relevance of large number of employees who might be suffering from long term illness. The applicability of various concepts like self preservation, interpersonal communication shows the relevance of the problem and its analysis .
Depth
The analysis goes deep into the psyche of the affected employees, the employer as well as the peers. The extent of the analysis lets the counselor to identify the fact that the problem has to be managed by managing the perceptions of the peers and employers .
Breadth
The discussion takes into account the views and perceptions of not just the affected employees but also the employer and the employee. Moreover, it assesses the problem from a legal point of view and overall organizational performance aspects .
Logic
The analysis uses a logical sequence to arrive at the problem and employs reason at every step to arrive at the conclusion that the problem cannot be entirely solved but managed .
Fairness
The discussion in all fairness takes into account the points of view of a opposing parties and arrives at an all encompassing and win-win solution to the problem.
References
Alderman, L. (2009, June 19). Protecting Your Job While Coping With a Chronic Illness. New York Times. Retrieved March 26, 2016
Edwing, E. (2006, September 6). Long-term illnesses at work. The Guardian. Retrieved March 27, 2016, from http://www.theguardian.com/money/2006/sep/06/discriminationatwork.discrimination
Karni, E., & Schmeidler, D. (1986). Self-Preservation As a Foundation of Rational Behaviour. Journal of Economic Behaviour and Organization, 71-81.
Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2006). Critical Thinking Concepts and Tools. Retrieved from www.criticalthinking.org: https://www.criticalthinking.org/files/Concepts_Tools.pdf
White, G. B. (2015, February 12). The Alarming, Long-Term Consequences of Workplace Stress. The Atlantic. Retrieved March 27, 2016, from http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/02/the-alarming-long-term-consequences-of-workplace-stress/385397/
Wood, J. T. (2010). Interpersonal Communication: Everyday Encounters. Boston: Cengage Learning.
