A New Level of Thinking?

Training magazine and Pearson TalentLens research reveals how thinking styles differ by occupational level and industry.

Paul Simon’s song, “Still Crazy After All These Years,” is about a man who leans on old familiar ways. Choosing the familiar is a universal and ever so comfortable tendency, but as the song’s title suggests, it is not particularly adaptive. In Training magazine’s recent Skills Gap series, the case was clearly made: Organizations and employees need to quickly learn new skills and adopt new habits to achieve business sustainability.

For organizations trying to prioritize training needs, one of the largest and most pivotal gaps is in the area of critical thinking. Several nationwide surveys conducted by organizations such as SHRM and AMA have zeroed in on the prime importance of thinking skills. Critical thinking is the raw material that supports the ability to plan, organize, solve problems, make decisions, and innovate, and right now, organizational demand far outweighs employee supply.

Inserting critical thinking into the training curriculum is an important step, but as the third part of the Skills Gap series revealed, another step is motivating employees to complete additional skills training. When it comes to skills that are somewhat unfamiliar—such as critical thinking—it is not always an easy task. Trainers need to relate critical thinking to organization specific behaviors and to create engaging and applicable training. At a systems level, organizations need to explicitly link critical thinking skills to job tasks and career success. Our research at Pearson TalentLens shows that critical thinking is a powerful predictor of both on-the-job performance and career progression. Being able to thinking clearly is a valuable asset for both the organization and the employee.

In the January/February 2013 article, “How Do You Think?” we delved into critical thinking training by introducing a five-step model of critical thinking and a thinking styles assessment that supports the development of critical thinking skills. The My Thinking Styles (MTS) assessment measures seven thinking styles, which are positive habits that contribute to effective thinking:

  • Analytical: Organized, planful, methodical
  • Inquisitive: Curious, asks questions, probes deeply
  • Insightful: Steadfast, thinks before speaking, perseveres
  • Open-minded: Good listener, respects differences, adaptable
  • Systematic: Strategic, connects idea, sees big picture
  • Timely: Mobiles resources, multi-tasks, takes initiative
  • Truth-seeking: Frank, independent, asks the tough questions

BEHIND THE RESEARCH

To introduce this critical thinking training tool to learning professionals, Training magazine and Pearson partnered on a study in which Training magazine readers and Webinar participants, including those in the Top 125, were invited to complete the MTS. More than a thousand people responded, and this response allowed us to compare a smaller sector of Training Top 125 winners with the larger group. The pattern of scores for the two groups was similar, as expected, but the Training Top 125 group scored higher on all seven scales. They reported using positive thinking styles more frequently than the larger group, and they also reported higher levels of critical thinking skills.

The results were shared at the Training 2013 Conference & Expo in February, which led the audience to ask about possible differences across levels and functions within the profession. As part of the year-end wrap-up, we would like to answer those questions here.

LEVEL DIFFERENCES

We first looked at similarities and differences between Learning & Development (L&D) professionals and their Human Resources counterparts who are not involved in training. As the first set of graphs show below, the patterns of the MTS results are similar, but there are a few differences in level. Among individual contributors, the L&D group scored higher on timely than the HR (non-training) group. There were no significant differences among managers, but at the more senior level of director/executive, HR leaders reported more frequent use of insightful, open-minded, systematic, and truth-seeking styles than L&D leaders.

A comparison across occupational levels suggests that scores increase with occupational level. More senior people reported using positive thinking styles more frequently than their junior colleagues. Critical thinking skills also tend to increase with occupational level.

Another question related to possible differences in thinking styles based on the industry within which someone works. Essentially, the question is whether or not there is an environmental press for different thinking styles. To answer this question, we used a combined sample of talent management managers (both L&D and HR). Though some of the subgroups are fairly small, the preliminary results do suggest differences. For example, those working in the rapidly evolving worlds of IT/telecommunications and health care are practicing their open-minded style more frequently than those working in government. The financial services and government groups operate in a world where assumptions need to be bluntly confronted, and they do exercise a truth-seeking style more frequently than the manufacturing or IT/telecommunication groups. Finally, the financial services group draws on the analytical style more frequently than the other groups.

As such, it does appear that different industries push for certain thinking habits more than others, or perhaps, they draw talent management professionals who have different styles.

Ultimately, regardless of industry or occupational level, with critical thinking a training priority in today’s rapidly changing world, a thinking styles assessment is one tool L&D professionals can use to engage learners and encourage them to open the door to new thinking skills.

Judy Chartrand, Ph.D., is the chief scientist at Pearson TalentLens, where she works with corporate and consulting clients, helping them implement assessment solutions that foster employee development, team building, retention, high-potential engagement, career management, and succession planning. She received an Early Career Award from the American Psychological Association for her work in the career development field.