Pedagogical Approaches to Develop Critical Thinking and Crisis Leadership

http://jme.sagepub.com/Education

Journal of Management

http://jme.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/01/09/1052562913519081The online version of this article can be found at:

DOI: 10.1177/1052562913519081

published online 10 January 2014Journal of Management EducationEdward H. Powley and Scott N. Taylor

LeadershipPedagogical Approaches to Develop Critical Thinking and Crisis

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

OBTS Teaching Society for Management Educators

can be found at:Journal of Management EducationAdditional services and information for

http://jme.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:

http://jme.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

What is This?

- Jan 10, 2014OnlineFirst Version of Record >>

at Maastricht University on July 5, 2014jme.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Maastricht University on July 5, 2014jme.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://jme.sagepub.com/

http://jme.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/01/09/1052562913519081

http://www.sagepublications.com

http://www.obts.org/

http://jme.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

http://jme.sagepub.com/subscriptions

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

http://jme.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/01/09/1052562913519081.full.pdf

http://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtml



Journal of Management Education 1 –26

© The Author(s) 2014Reprints and permissions:

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/1052562913519081

jme.sagepub.com

Article

Pedagogical Approaches to Develop Critical Thinking and Crisis Leadership

Edward H. Powley1 and Scott N. Taylor2

AbstractManagement schools must be prepared to aid leaders and managers to succeed in uncertain environments. We offer two approaches, each designed for critical thinking skill development, to teach graduate management students about leading in and through potential disruption to organizational life. First, we present a personalized case method that relies on a critical incident approach to examine crises students personally experienced at work. We provide a description of the student assignment and a process for student analysis. Second, we present a group project involving a poster session in which students collaboratively work on complex crisis leadership challenges and present their analysis to their peers. We describe how these two approaches develop the critical skills effective crisis leaders possess.

Keywordscrisis leadership education, critical thinking, leadership, character, resilience

Business schools do not typically emphasize crisis management education and leadership in crisis (Cirka & Corrigall, 2010). While models and approaches to managing human threats and crises abound, management pro-fessors are often constrained to disciplinary and subdisciplinary teaching

1Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, CA, USA2University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA

Corresponding Author:Edward H. Powley, Naval Postgraduate School, Graduate School of Business and Public Policy, 555 Dyer Road, Monterey, CA 93943, USA. Email: [email protected]

519081 JMEXXX10.1177/1052562913519081Journal of Management EducationPowley and Taylorresearch-article2014

at Maastricht University on July 5, 2014jme.sagepub.comDownloaded from

mailto:[email protected]


2 Journal of Management Education

material, which empowers them only to address crisis anecdotally. Moreover, many largely view crises from the perspective of business failure resulting from ethical lapses, economic downturn, or productivity and market share loss. A key message from a recent special issue in this journal on crisis man-agement (Comer, 2013) was that management schools need to prepare their students better to lead in challenging contexts and changing environments, sometimes unexpected and other times anticipated and imminent.

We begin with a brief discussion of emerging ideas in the area of leader-ship and crisis leadership. We then discuss critical thinking and models for structuring learning for critical thinking skill development. Next, we present two pedagogical approaches we use to teach crisis leadership in an introduc-tory organizational behavior course at the graduate level. We outline a per-sonalized case method and provide a description of the student assignment and process for student analysis. We then highlight a group project involving a poster session in which students collaboratively work on complex crisis leadership challenges and present their analysis to their peers. We developed these methods with military leaders in an MBA program, but they may be easily adapted for undergraduate management and traditional MBA students. We suggest that these two teaching tools enable the development of crisis leadership and critical thinking skills.

Developing Leaders for Crises

Crisis management and leading in crisis have not been a significant emphasis in teaching organizational behavior, strategic management, or leadership development. A few recent examples have shifted the trend. Waller, Lei, and Pratten (2013) suggest that crisis management education ought to address team capability for dealing with crisis. Clemson and Samara (2013) showed that crisis management simulations using narrative inquiry help determine transformative learning. A recent special issue on crisis management educa-tion in this journal presents approaches for case studies (McDonald, 2013), using evidence-based management (Wright, Nichols, McKechnie, & McCarthy, 2013) or developing communication skills with leaders (Foote, 2013). Aside from these pedagogical approaches, the way crisis leadership is taught remains important (Shrivastava, Mitroff, & Alpaslan, 2013), yet lead-ership is a key factor in effective crisis management (Hess & Cameron, 2006; Mitroff, Pauchant, & Shrivastava, 1988). A few scholars have made efforts to examine leadership in extreme contexts that could be considered crises (e.g., Hannah, Uhl-Bien, Avolio, & Cavarretta, 2009) and others have looked at crisis management from a positive perspective (e.g., Dutton, Frost, Worline, Lilius, & Kanov, 2002; James & Wooten, 2010; Powley, 2009). In recent years, crisis leadership of a different kind has gained increasing attention in



Powley and Taylor 3

organizations due to the effects of September 11 and threat of terrorism. What this new direction reveals is that to develop leaders who handle crisis situa-tions requires emphasis on communication, caring, and vision (Klann, 2003); empathy and expertise (Pagonis, 2001; Powley & Taylor, 2006); and provid-ing experiences that shape and test ability to lead (Bennis & Thomas, 2002).

Bennis and Thomas (2002, p. 45) capture much of this recent focus on the character of the leader (i.e., who a leader is) with a framework outlining what critical skills and capacities effective crisis leaders possess. First, they have “a sense of integrity and a strong set of values,” which guide and direct their behavior when times are tough. Crisis leaders also have a “distinctive and compelling voice” such that external and internal hearers have a clear under-standing of the leader’s intent and purpose. Third, crisis leaders “engage oth-ers in shared meaning,” that is, they look outward and demonstrate empathy, thus building a cooperative and community-based organizational culture. Finally, crisis leaders possess “adaptive capacity,” or the ability to flexibly manage crisis and transcend adversity. Crisis leaders are effective because they possess the awareness of themselves and others in the context of dynamic, tenuous, and shifting situations.

Embedded in Bennis and Thomas’s (2002) framework is the idea that cri-sis leadership is about who a leader is and how a leader responds to crisis. Leaders must not only possess the ability to manage crisis, but they must represent and embody characteristics that enable them to transcend difficulty. Leadership of this kind has been represented in constructs such as servant leadership (Spears & Lawrence, 2004), spiritual leadership (Fry, 2003), rela-tional leadership (Uhl-Bien, 2006), authentic leadership (Gardner, Avolio, Luthans, May, & Walumbwa, 2005), resonant leadership (Boyatzis & McKee, 2005; Goleman, Boyatzis, & McKee, 2002), fundamental states of leadership (Quinn, 2004), and eighth-habit leadership (Covey, 2004). These forms of leadership contend that one’s internal resources serve as guides to enable leaders to focus outward, especially in crisis (Useem, 1998; Dutton et al., 2002; Powley & Taylor, 2006; Taylor, 2010) and often lead to achieving extraordinary performance (Cameron, 2008). For example, Quinn proposes a kind of leadership that is internally directed, other-focused, externally open, and purpose-centered (Quinn, 2004), where the leaders act selflessly and transcend self-serving needs in favor of serving others.

We find the general principles offered by Bennis and Thomas (2002) help-ful, and we operationalize and build on those in this article. Crisis readiness, though, involves not only training to specific situations but also developing attributes of crisis leadership infused with inclinations toward strong charac-ter and moral values (Bennis & Thomas, 2002). Furthermore, Sankar (2003) notes, “The leader’s character is a strategic source of power for infusing the culture of his/her organization with a code of ethics, moral vision,




imagination, and courage” (p. 54). In essence, crisis leadership is more than just a set of behavioral skills but also includes a person’s fundamental aspira-tions, character, and values (Kouzes & Posner, 2002) and, as we take up in the next section, the ability to critically think through the challenges posed by crises (Lalonde & Roux-Dufort, 2013).

Critical Thinking and Learning

Organizational leaders are the central figures in helping create and maintain their organizations when crises affect processes and relationships. Regardless of their position, organizational members have the responsibility to support systems, structures, processes, and relationships that maintain clearly defined routines that minimize the extent and effects of unpredictability (Klein, Ziegert, Knight, & Xiao, 2006; Pagonis, 2001). To address these challenges, tensions, dilemmas, and dynamics (Gardner, 1990; Pearce & Sims, 2002), we argue that critical thinking skill development holds solutions for how stu-dents might learn crisis leadership.

Critical thinking (Fisher, 2001; Kiltz, 2009) stems from the learning theo-rists. Dewey (1909) called it “reflective thinking,” and defined it as “active persistent, and careful consideration of a belief or supposed form of knowl-edge in the light of the grounds which support it and the further conclusions to which it tends” (p. 9). Glaser (1941) further articulated critical thinking as “being disposed” to consider thoughts and ideas within one’s experience base supported by methods of “logical inquiry” and the skill to apply those meth-ods (p. 5). Embedded in both Glaser’s and Dewey’s definitions are two core ideas: reasons for believing and implications of beliefs, both of which require skillful reasoning by asking learners to raise questions, challenge ideas, and seek confirming and disconfirming information. Dewey saw critical thinking as an active process where individuals generate questions, thoughts, relevant information, and solutions rather than passively take in information from someone else (Kiltz, 2009).

A third key figure, Ennis, extends Dewey’s action orientation to critical thinking. He suggested “critical thinking is reasonable, reflective thinking . . . focused on deciding what to believe or do” (Ennis, 1993, p. 180). His contribution further anchored critical thinking as a substantively active pro-cess of reflection and inquiry about the merit, value, and usefulness of con-cepts. Others have continued the tradition set forth by these scholars (e.g., Paul & Elder, 2001; Paul, Fisher, & Nosich, 1993). For example, learning scholars conceive of critical thinking as an individual competency and struc-ture learning to foster critical thinking with students through discussion and exercises.



Powley and Taylor 5

For Dewey, critical thinking is about learners’ “engagement with a prob-lem” and “problems . . . evoke students’ natural curiosity and stimulate both learning and critical thought” (Kiltz, 2009, p. 5). By working with real-world problems in this way, the rationale goes, students are more apt to understand the challenges and find ways out of them as they activate prior knowledge (Ambrose, Bridges, Lovett, DiPietro, & Norman, 2010). This line of thought is foundational for the learning approaches discussed in this article. Each of the approaches asks students to reflect, write about, discuss, and present problems and challenges that they have or will potentially face in the future. Kurfiss (1988) “contended that critical thinking [is] required for solving unstructured problems that [have] no single correct answer” (Peach, Mukherjee, & Hornyak, 2007, p. 314).

In fact, given the often unexpected, complex nature of crisis, critical thinking serves as an excellent context for crisis leadership skill develop-ment. Specifically, critical thinking represents “an academic competency” (Fisher & Scriven, 1997, p. 21), which serves an important pedagogical purpose to develop learning in an active way. Critical thinking is one approach to structure learning activities such that it conditions intellectual development (Perry, 1999). Moreover, “there is widespread agreement that critical thinking in a university environment involves students’ abilities to identify issues and assumptions, recognize important relationships, make correct inferences, evaluate evidence or authority, and deduce conclusions” (Kiltz, 2009, p. 10; see also Tsui, 2002). The two approaches we conduct are crafted in such a way to promote these critical thinking abilities. The personalized cases culminate in a poster session where students apply and integrate their learning.

In our teaching, we challenge students to consider the models and theories presented, question their applicability, and articulate variations and differ-ences based on their own experiences, and as such to develop critical thinking skills and knowledge for managing and leading through complex and chal-lenging crisis problems. To build more awareness and invite deeper thought about individual leadership and management ability in complex situations, we draw on Perry’s (1999) model of intellectual development. Perry’s stages take adult learners through a process in which they model movement from dualistic and multiplicity toward relativism and commitment. The model shapes ways to structure student learning, thus helping them develop broader understanding of course concepts, integrate those concepts, and apply them appropriately. For instance, students may at first be committed to fixed under-standings based on assumptions and perceptions, but class discussion of com-plex cases, writing about their experiences, and presenting their work challenge preconceived ideas and increase awareness. In the process,




students begin to question previous positions. Doing so guides them on toward a commitment to challenging preconceptions and assumptions about crises. Moreover, our multistage case pedagogy drives at increasing student learning such that students work together to support each other to achieve learning and build knowledge for managing and dealing with complex unstructured problems (Kurfiss, 1988).

Learning Objectives

The next sections of the article present two guided approaches to help stu-dents develop and practice awareness of skills for complex and challenging situations. The two teaching approaches aim to (a) increase self-awareness to improve self-understanding and strengthen character development, (b) increase critical thinking skills to assess the challenges and circumstances of crisis situations, and (c) help students draw on these skills and prior knowl-edge to apply them in different situations. The structure of the course and the assignments presented here build on critical thinking and leadership models. Others have offered similar approaches that may also yield positive results and prove useful (e.g., Kiltz, 2009; Kurfiss, 1988). We begin with a personal-ized case and then finish with a poster session. We situate these two approaches at different points in the academic term to build on student knowledge and information previously presented in class. Table 1 outlines the respective objectives of the two approaches and their connection to important compo-nents of crisis leadership and critical thinking.

Our teaching context lends itself to discussing these topics in depth. Throughout their careers, our students have worked with a variety of manag-ers, peers, direct reports, teams, and organizations. They may have had sig-nificant experience managing supply lines and large operations with sizeable budgets, or overseeing large numbers of people, supplies, and expensive projects and equipment. The pedagogical practices we propose may be eas-ily adapted to various other management education contexts. An experi-enced MBA or EMBA cohort would draw from professional experiences where a current or past organization faced major financial, operational, ethi-cal, or leadership challenges, whereas an undergraduate class might be asked to respond to crises from case studies, films, or current affairs.

A Personalized Case Approach

Our first approach for teaching and developing crisis leadership is a personal-ized case. This individual writing assignment, in the form of a critical inci-dent (Flanagan, 1954), encourages students to think deeply about the



7

Tab

le 1

. O

bjec

tives

for

the

App

roac

hes

to T

each

ing

and

Dev

elop

ing

Cri

sis

Lead

ersh

ip a

nd C

ritic

al T

hink

ing.

Obj

ectiv

esC

ritic

al t

hink

ing

and

lear

ning

Cri

sis

lead

ersh

ip

Pers

onal

ized

Cas

e

1.

Incr

ease

indi

vidu

al c

hara

cter

an

d co

llect

ive

capa

city

to

han

dle

disr

uptio

n an

d ch

alle

nges

••In

crea

se in

telle

ctua

l dev

elop

men

t an

d in

tegr

ate

lear

ning

thr

ough

tho

ught

ful

cons

ider

atio

n of

exp

erie

nce

(Enn

is, 1

993;

K

iltz,

200

9)

••C

reat

e a

dist

inct

ive

and

com

pelli

ng

voic

e (B

enni

s &

Tho

mas

, 200

2)

2.

Dev

elop

ana

lytic

al s

kills

to

mak

e se

nse

of c

ompl

ex

situ

atio

ns

••Id

entif

y, q

uest

ion,

and

eva

luat

e ex

peri

ence

an

d pe

rson

al b

ehav

ior

to d

eter

min

e w

hat

cons

titut

es e

ffect

ive

prac

tice

(Am

bros

e et

al.,

20

10; P

aul &

Eld

er, 2

001)

••D

evel

op a

war

enes

s of

indi

vidu

al

beha

vior

and

abi

lity

to a

ctiv

ate

resi

lienc

e in

cha

lleng

es (

Pow

ley

&

Tay

lor,

200

6)

••In

telle

ctua

l em

path

y (P

aul &

Eld

er, 2

001)

••Fo

cus

on h

ow t

o em

body

inte

grity

an

d a

stro

ng s

et o

f val

ues

(Ben

nis

&

Tho

mas

, 200

2)Po

ster

Ses

sion

1

. A

naly

ze a

nd a

sses

s cr

isis

si

tuat

ions

usi

ng a

ppro

pria

te

anal

ytic

al t

ools

••So

lve

unst

ruct

ured

pro

blem

s th

at h

ave

mul

tiple

and

com

plex

dyn

amic

s (K

urfis

s,

1988

)

••D

evel

op e

mpa

thy

and

min

dful

ness

fo

r ch

alle

nges

and

oth

ers

invo

lved

(B

oyat

zis

& M

cKee

, 200

5) 2

. D

evel

op s

yste

ms

awar

enes

s of

pot

entia

l cri

sis

face

d by

or

gani

zatio

ns

••En

gage

with

pro

blem

s to

stim

ulat

e le

arni

ng

and

criti

cal t

houg

ht (

Kilt

z, 2

009)

••En

gage

oth

ers

in s

hare

d m

eani

ng t

o bu

ild c

oope

rativ

e cu

lture

(Be

nnis

&

Tho

mas

, 200

2)

••Id

entif

y, q

uest

ion,

and

eva

luat

e ot

hers

ex

peri

ence

and

beh

avio

r to

det

erm

ine

wha

t co

nstit

utes

effe

ctiv

e pr

actic

e (A

mbr

ose

et a

l.,

2010

; Pau

l & E

lder

, 200

1)

••In

crea

se c

ompe

tenc

e fo

r ad

aptiv

e ca

paci

ty t

o em

body

flex

ibili

ty (

Benn

is &

T

hom

as, 2

002)

••

Con

fiden

ce in

rea

soni

ng a

nd fa

ir m

inde

dnes

s (P

aul &

Eld

er, 2

001)




implications of leading in crisis and their own leadership practice. Using such an approach increases students’ critical thinking and develops learning for how to lead in crises. The critical incident approach incorporates experiential learning (Kolb, 1984) and critical thinking (Fisher, 2001; Glaser, 1941; Norris & Ennis, 1989; Paul & Elder, 2001) as a means to develop significant learning (Fink, 2003). The various contexts to which these students have been exposed give them a rich database of work experience that provides a springboard for making sense of organizational life, understanding them-selves, and retaining and transferring learning (Cormier & Hagman, 1987). The critical incident activity (detailed in Appendix A) facilitates direct obser-vation of intellectual development of students and integrates transformational learning through thoughtful consideration (Perry, 1999). Appendix C lays out the evaluation criteria for the personalized cases.

We use an extreme personalized case approach to bring into relief those lessons students may draw on to lead organizations in crisis. By extreme, we mean cases that are disruptive to the status quo. Such cases tend to be high in volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and/or ambiguity (Johansen, 2006). By personalized, we mean cases that originate from the lived expe-riences of the students themselves or as part of a team or functional group. Students’ direct experiences, sometimes fraught with strong emotions or significant failure, represent a rich source from which to facilitate reflec-tion and transfer of learning (Cormier & Hagman, 1987) and promote fur-ther intellectual development. From a critical thinking perspective (Paul & Elder, 2001) and learning theory perspective (Kolb, 1984), this case approach enables students to reflect on, assess, and learn from their own personal experience.

In line with criteria from Bennis and Thomas (2002) for developing crisis leadership capability, the personalized case provides a forum for students to create a “distinctive and compelling voice.” As they articulate their own experiences with crisis and assess their level of adaptive capacity in that situ-ation, they attune themselves to what they value at the time of the crisis and how to handle those circumstances. This meets one of our key objectives, that is, to engage students in a self-directed, reflective process to build awareness of their individual behavior and ability to activate resilience (Powley & Taylor, 2006). Instead of providing a prescriptive set of leadership traits and character attributes, our hope is that when confronted with serious challenges, as leaders they will know through their own analysis how to effectively lead in crises (Bennis & Thomas, 2002; James & Wooten, 2010).

Finally, we use the personalized case to engage our students in reflective writing and practice (Ferris, 1998; Rosenberg, 2010; Seibert & Daudelin, 1999). Aside from the restorative effects of writing about crisis (Pennebaker & Harber, 1993), the personalized case study format helps students think



Powley and Taylor 9

critically about their experiences and guide their responses to challenges they face. In the process, they come to know themselves and establish their most hoped for, ideal character traits. Research clearly shows that when individu-als systematically and constructively reflect on their experiences, their learn-ing increases dramatically (e.g., Raelin, 2008; Seibert & Daudelin, 1999). This occurs because writing and reflection clarify one’s thinking, foster com-mitment to one’s ideas, and empower the ability to communicate one’s ideas more effectively to others.

Analysis of crisis leadership is likely to be more effective from more than one perspective and with multiple teaching activities to enable students to develop the strategies and skills necessary to manage and lead in crisis (Medina, 2008; Rock, 2009). We accomplish our learning objectives by help-ing students uncover their own lessons learned and determine what, for them, accounts for effective leadership in crisis. Therefore, as an extension to the personalized case, we also hold an in-class workshop to help students develop their “distinctive and compelling voice” and to learn how to “engage in shared meaning” (Bennis & Thomas, 2002). The workshop gives them an opportunity to articulate to classmates and receive feedback from them on assessments of their crisis leadership ability. In this approach, we want to engage students in a critical thinking process (Paul & Elder, 2001) by identi-fying, questioning, and evaluating crisis leadership characteristics from the case study and then, in concert with the course design, begin to develop a personal set of leadership qualities and skills. We refer readers of this article to a case study that follows this pattern of student writing (Powley & Taylor, 2010). The teaching note for the case includes a set of discussion questions to further enhance students’ crisis leadership.

Group Poster Session Approach

Our second approach for teaching how to lead through and manage crisis involves a Group Poster project that culminates in a 2-hour, in-class poster presentation session. The Group Poster Session is usually the final class exer-cise during the term and may accompany or replace a standard group project presentation. This exercise follows the personalized case workshop and any case study discussions about crisis leadership. The primary purpose of the session is to provide students an opportunity to work on a crisis leadership scenario. In the process they have chance to present their analysis of crisis cases to peers and further integrate their leadership learning. Students iden-tify leadership characteristics and propose ways to lead in crisis. This experi-ential exercise builds on the personalized case activity, reinforces previous learning (Cormier & Hagman, 1987; Fink, 2003), and continues to build on the critical thinking aims of the course.




The Group Poster Session has two primary objectives: (a) to help students analyze and assess crisis situations using appropriate tools, which supports the critical thinking objectives; and (b) to help students develop systems awareness of potential crisis faced by organizations, which supports an inte-grated method to learning. As a group, students work together to solve the problem and then present their analysis, findings, and model to the class in a poster session format. An outline of the poster session activity is in Appendix B, and Appendix D contains the criteria used to evaluate the poster projects.

To set up the poster session, groups of no more than five or six students select from several cases involving leaders who faced crisis and demonstrated strengths and weaknesses. Cases we have used in the past include Wagner Dodge and the Mann Gulch fire (Useem, 1998), Eugene Kranz and the Apollo 13 mission (Useem, 1998), Arthur Anderson and the Waste Management cri-sis (Diermeier, Crawford, & Synder, 2011), McDonald’s in Russia (Moon & Herman, 2002), or the Friendly Fire shoot down in Northern Iraq, April 1994 (Snook, Freeman, & Norwalk, 2004). These cases present leaders who dem-onstrate (or do not demonstrate) the four critical skills of leaders who lead effectively in crisis, offered by Bennis and Thomas (2002). Other similar cases would also be suitable material. Each group is also assigned a particular framework, which the students use to analyze the case. Frameworks include, but are not limited to, team leadership, leader and group member motivation, communication challenges, perceptions and decision-making, impact of organizational culture or structure, systems dynamics, ethical dilemmas, and so forth. The goal is to use the assigned framework as a lens to analyze the leader’s ability to deal with the crisis.

Student groups then meet outside of class to discuss and analyze the case. Once they feel prepared with their analysis, the groups decide how to visually present their results. This consists of, first, analyzing the case in the context of their chosen framework (e.g., team leadership) and, second, seeking feed-back from the instructor who insures that the posters are distinct and have enough analytical rigor to hold an in-depth conversation with peers about the case. Posters are intended to be visually appealing, complete with charts, graphs, diagrams, pictures, and text, and should be able to stand-alone with-out the aid of a presenter.

The poster session is an open forum where students begin to integrate their learning about the larger system dynamics of crisis and its impact on manage-ment and leadership challenges. From a critical thinking perspective, the poster session is a primary mechanism to encourage retention of concepts and transfer learning (Cormier & Hagmam, 1987), in this instance through pre-sentation and in-depth discussion with peers or responding to challenging questions. During the 2-hour session, the instructor and students rotate from



Powley and Taylor 11

poster to poster, taking approximately 10 minutes for each one, until every-one has seen each project. Each group member is expected to be able to pres-ent his or her group’s poster. The session concludes with a class discussion about the leadership and management implications for managing crises. Again, this discussion, like the others described earlier, affords students time to reflect on how they might lead crisis situations. Students then write about their participation in the poster session, thinking about what they have learned and what they might do differently as leaders who may face crisis.

Evaluation

While we have not conducted empirical tests on whether students apply and practice their learning from these activities outside the classroom, we have collected and examined preliminary qualitative data from both students and a third-party expert from a faculty center for teaching (Schmidt-Wilk, 2010). These data suggest that the assessment tools and the assignments are at least initially, effective measures to gauge student learning, and that more in-depth investigation is needed. The first author’s experience with the exercises finds that students are energized and engaged through the in-class activities, the feedback process, and the in-class discussions. Students listen carefully to others’ comments, challenges, and questions and become more reflective of their own situation and approach to their respective crisis. This fosters reflec-tion on what works and what does not. Moreover, students appreciate the feedback we offer and the feedback they receive from peers during the writ-ing process and during the in-class working groups.

The qualitative comments reveal important themes about the effectiveness of the teaching approaches and suggest a high degree of face validity for them. Students appreciate the integration of material and the interactive nature of the assignments. The combination of experiential and discussion-based learning enables students to see readily the connections between the course materials and professional experiences. Students report in the course evaluation that they have a stronger sense of how to manage crisis and point to two primary lessons learned from the exercise. First, students recognize the interconnected nature of the concepts covered in the course as they begin to see causal relationships more clearly. For example, they come to under-stand (a) how individual motivation affects team dynamics, process, or out-comes in a crisis; (b) how values-based leadership and personal character enables effective crisis management (sense of integrity and personal values; Bennis & Thomas, 2002); or (c) how poor communication by a leader during a crisis negatively affects the perceptions of team members. Second, students realize that to understand problems requires more than singular focus on one




or two dynamics (i.e., adaptive capacity; Bennis & Thomas, 2002). For example, from the Friendly Fire case (Snook et al., 2004), some students assume that leadership is the primary cause of failure; others see groups and teams as the critical breakpoint, while others highlight the failure of technol-ogy or following established protocols. When groups see the final posters though, and learn about the differences, they begin to appreciate the impor-tance of variance and multiple perspectives (i.e., shared meaning and distinc-tive voice; Bennis & Thomas, 2002). The experience raises awareness about what may be required to manage in future assignments and further develops their critical thinking.

In terms of developing leadership, students have greater confidence in their ability to take these principles forward. In particular, students appreciate the direct application to challenges they have or potentially will face. Students report that they see the importance of leaders who are in touch with their personal identities, values, and ideal aspirations, and focus attention on oth-ers rather than themselves as essential to build resilience and to enable heal-ing. A selection of student comments shows the linkages to the four criteria Bennis and Thomas (2002) argue are essential for effective crisis leadership (as noted below in parentheses):

“The thing I liked best was the poster session. It made me really dig into the subject matter. It challenged my ideas about myself as a leader, and how I interact with others.” (i.e., sense of integrity and personal values; distinctive and compelling voice) (Student, Course Evaluation)

“I have definitely learned some very good concepts that will help me to deal with certain situations better then I probably did in the past. The group discussions and projects help to give a different perspective from other student’s experiences.” (i.e., adaptive capacity and shared meaning to build community) (Student, Course Evaluation)

“I learned how to be an effective leader and I’m confident that I gained new skills and techniques to motivate and lead my subordinates very effectively.” (i.e., distinctive and compelling voice) (Student, Course Evaluation)

“Thanks to this course, I am able . . . to analyze organization problems and flaws. And I obtained the knowledge to seek proper and adequate corrections and solutions for these flaws.” (i.e., adaptive capacity, or the ability to flexibly manage crisis and transcend adversity) (Student, Course Evaluation)

“I wish I had this prior to serving as a [mid-level manager], because understanding how leadership and motivation tie into leading is very important.” (i.e., sense of integrity and values) (Student, Course Evaluation)




“The poster session was worthwhile. It gave us an opportunity to work in groups (after studying the dynamics of how a group is formed and works) in order to deliver a product. That it would be graded by our peers made each one of us want to put significant effort into ensuring it looked good and was presentable.” (i.e., shared meaning to build community) (Student, Course Evaluation)

The effectiveness of these assignments help students move beyond the course content, see connections between discussion of content or theory and the real-world experience. Comments from course end evaluations point to how the students connect models and theories to real-world experience. Several students remarked that the “real-world case studies clarified various models and theories,” and that the individual paper and poster session were “very effective and useful tools in the real-time/real-world application of models and concepts from the lectures, textbooks, and readings.” Another noted that the application of the model’s to real-life examples, “helps drive home the points and I retain the ideas better when I can associate it with something concrete.” And a third student indicated value of the personal writ-ing exercise and case study helped [him/her] “understand how the concepts applied to [his/her] own work experience.”

Finally, the first author engaged an expert from the faculty teaching center to observe and assess the teaching activities, in particular the poster session and the overall structure of these course activities. The faculty center expert attended sessions in three quarters. Her feedback represents another source of external validity supporting our learning objectives on critical thinking and for developing the case activity and poster session.

“The poster session is a promising instructional practice that can be used to promote critical thought and the integration and application of knowledge, skills, and abilities.” (Poster Session objective: develop system awareness supporting integrated learning; Faculty Center Expert)

“The poster session leverages adult learning theory and learner-centered pedagogy to produce direct observations that can be used to measure the achievement of complex learning outcomes. The integration of adult learning theory with appropriate learner-centered methods is evidenced by the intentional alignment of course outcomes and well defined learning objectives with structured methods for guided inquiry, experiential learning, developmental feedback, and authentic assessments. Designed as a culminating activity to integrate course concepts and develop appreciation for complex problems, the poster session validates the integration of knowledge with specific skills and abilities.” (Poster Session objective: develop system awareness supporting integrated learning; Faculty Center Expert)




“The posters, developed by student groups, synthesize cognitive and experiential learning demonstrating the capacity to learn with and from peers, to perform cognitive skills and processes, and to correctly apply organizational models and interpret a complex case.” (Poster Session objective: develop positive working group; Faculty Center Expert)

“The benefits of this method [poster session] are easily observed through authentic student engagement in the learning process characterized by personal reflection and through qualitative feedback and academic interactions that support their intellectual development and increase the meaning and value of the learning experience.” (Poster Session objective: develop positive working group; Faculty Center Expert)

These comments from the faculty center expert highlight the effectiveness of the activities that reflect the overall aims and objectives for the Group Poster Session and the overall course objectives we articulated at the opening of our article. First, students demonstrate an increase in self-awareness and understanding as they reflect on their experience and the authentic feedback offered among peers. She notes that, second, the exercises increase critical thinking skills to assess the challenges and circumstances of varying crisis situations. And finally, the exercises also help students draw on critical think-ing and learning skills in addition to prior knowledge to apply them to orga-nizational models and interpretation of complex cases.

Conclusion

A key contribution of this article has been the multiple approaches to help students develop leadership capacity for dealing with crisis. Our students have or will face crises that require leadership capacity that involves better critical thinking. The pedagogical exercises presented in this article offer at least two ways to equip students with the leadership ability and critical think-ing skills needed to meet future challenges. The personalized case and class workshop enables students to “imaginatively put themselves in the place of others” and helps them release “the egocentric tendency to identify truth with immediate perceptions” (Paul & Elder, 2006, p. 16). The case helps students engage in shared meaning with other students and critical skills to crisis lead-ership (Bennis & Thomas, 2002). As students look for thematic patterns, they recognize other viewpoints and reasoning, thus increasing not only their understanding but also their personal capacity to lead in crisis. Likewise, the poster session engages students in an alternative learning environment (Kolb, 1984), which fosters different thought processes and opportunities to develop




critical thinking further. The primary focus for the poster session is to develop confidence in reasoning and fair-mindedness (Paul & Elder, 2006). As the student group develops an analytical framework for their given case, they innovate new ways to understand the case thus providing new insights, “drawing reasonable conclusions, thinking coherently and logically” (Paul & Elder, 2006, p. 17). Moreover, through the poster session, students persuade their peers by reason and arguments that their analyses stand valid. Their analyses and presentations focus on different aspects of organizational analy-sis and leadership. In concert, the assignment and activities have the potential to strengthen or develop leadership ability for crisis management.

Appendix A

Personalized Case: Student Assignment and Workshop

In the class sessions designed to help students increase their ability to lead in crisis, the personalized case is an exercise to reflect on critical events in per-sonal or professional work. The personalized case assignment provides a rich context in which to explore micro and macro topics in organizational behav-ior related to crises. We ask students to use these questions as they write their papers:

Drawing from your experience, retell an incident in which you or someone you know well was the central player. This should be an experience where you were tested to the extreme (e.g., emergency situation, ethical dilemma, seemingly overwhelming obstacles or challenge, or an equally challenging experience). It should be an incident where there was significant disruption to routines and/or possibly the future well being of you, others, or your department/organization. The incident’s outcome may have been happy or sad, successful or unsuccessful. Your paper should include three parts.

Part I: Summarize the incident. Consider questions such as: what happened from beginning to end; where did it happen (e.g., operational plant, sales team, finance or audit team, or the like); who were the key players; what was your role; what were the incident’s magnitude, duration, and intensity; how many people were affected? The intent of your description should be to provide just enough detail to provide a sense of what was going on; aim for a simple and engaging narrative, including the incident’s eventual outcome. (Limit your narrative to approximately 500 words.)

Part II. Articulate your main concern(s). The main concern is what was uppermost in your mind, what you were most concerned about. The main




concern is not the immediate task of dealing with the logistical aspects of the incident (e.g., if the incident is a fire in a plant, the immediate task [not the main concern] is to put out the fire). The main concern is uncovered by answering questions like: “what is/are the challenge(s) you face because of the incident?”

Describe the main concern(s) in detail: what is it; why is it important for your team/organization; what are the circumstances, issues, and dilemmas that make it a concern. You will explore, in depth, what is most important to those involved. This enables you to make sense of the underlying issues, dilemmas, and choices that were addressed (or not addressed). (This section should represent the bulk of your paper; limit your analysis to between 750 and 1,000 words.)

Part III. Discuss the resolution of the main concern and your involvement in the resolution. Was the main concern resolved? If it was, what factors explain how the concern was dealt with? How did you and others demonstrate and/or not demonstrate leadership during the crisis? If the main concern was not resolved, explain why not. What might be some of the fundamental lessons you and your team/organization learned from this experience? (Limit your resolution section to between 250 and 500 words.)

Workshop: Working With Incidents. Using their written personalized cases, we invite the students to engage in a critical thinking process by having them conduct an adapted form of thematic analysis (Boyatzis, 1998; see Step 3 below). The purpose of the case analysis and workshop is to develop critical thinking and induce further reflection of the case, as we look at implications and applications of principles from theories and models in the organizational sciences. The material from the personalized cases provides the context to develop critical thinking on crisis management skills and transfer learning (Cormier & Hagman, 1987).

Setting up the workshop. The 4-hour workshop is organized around leader-ship and crisis. If necessary, the workshop might be divided into two class ses-sions. Students submit their papers well ahead of the workshop, thus ensuring that the faculty member has time to review the papers beforehand. Students come prepared to discuss their papers with fellow class members; they come with at least two or three copies to share with class members in small groups of 3 or 4 students. These small groups work together throughout the workshop.

Introducing the topic. The faculty member selects and presents a case that deals with leadership. Cases might include Wagner Dodge and the




Mann Gulch Fire (Useem, 1998), Eugene Kranz and the Apollo 13 mis-sion (Useem, 1998), Friendly Fire (Snook et al., 2004), or a senior enlisted Marine and suicide bomb attack (Powley & Taylor, 2010). Business cases that deal with crisis leadership might also be used such as McDonald’s Russia (Moon & Herman, 2002) or Arthur Anderson’s work with Waste Management (Diermeier et al., 2011). As we introduce the concept of crisis leadership and resilience, it is important to emphasize the main concerns of the key players and how they were resolved, and what orga-nizational leaders in the case did to reestablish a sense of continuity and purpose.

Exercise. After the introductory case, we present the exercise. We have suggested times for each part of the exercise; these may vary depending on class size and desired discussion length. The faculty may use the following steps as a guide to lead through the exercise.

1. Students spend time reviewing their own cases (5 minutes). Rereading their papers before any discussion begins reengages the students with their own stories and primes their thinking after the short introductory case on crisis and leadership. We ask them to look for key phrases, jotting down impressions and thoughts as they read.

2. Working in small groups, the students read each other’s papers (30 minutes). The purpose of this step is to allow students to learn about another’s case and make mental comparisons with their own story. Students also look for patterns in their partner’s paper and together they look for common themes.

3. Next, the small groups of students briefly share their papers and themes (30 minutes). The objective is to have students generate a list of 5 or 6 common themes about how to manage and lead in crisis. We ask the students to define the themes they have discov-ered by noting the (a) label for the theme, (b) a concise description or definition of the theme, and (c) a specific example or two of each theme. This step completes the first half of the workshop. The class might adjourn and remaining group work may be continued outside of class. In the next step, students return to class to present their work.

4. The small groups then present their themes to the whole class (50 minutes). A spokesperson shares highlights from the papers and describes the themes that emerged across the set of papers.




5. A class discussion follows where students and the instructor apply the themes about what they see occurring in their cases (40 minutes) to crisis generally. Students may also identify theories or models dis-cussed in other class sessions that help explain the data and the themes from their analysis.

6. Students then return to their own cases and review their themes (10 minutes). They reevaluate their leadership approach and identify ways they might lead and manage through future challenges. They spend a few minutes writing ways they could approach the situation differently, and identify additional models or theories that would be useful to them.

Appendix B

Group Poster Session

The group poster session is collaborative learning space where students share their learning about the larger system dynamics from an organizational crisis case and the impact on leadership. Before the session, groups of students research a case, discuss particular angles to the case, and design the poster to share with the class. The typical size of a poster is 24” × 36”. The poster ses-sion follows several steps:

Set up: When students arrive for the poster session, the students place their posters around the room. We reassign all students to new groups. Each new group usually has at least one person from each original group.

Rotation and Presentation: During a 2-hour class session, these new groups rotate from poster to poster approximately every 10 to 15 minutes until each group has seen each poster. When a group comes to a poster, the group member, whose poster it is, presents the poster to the others in his or her group. At each poster, the group member presenting explains the visual representation of the analysis. The others observing ask clarifying questions and challenge the analysis.

Debrief: At the end of the poster session, we hold a class discussion about the implications for handling crises. These discussions afford students time to reflect on and articulate to their peers the challenges for the leaders and organizations in the case, how they (the students) might lead in similar circumstances, and the competencies and skills necessary for such situations.

Write-up: We then ask students to write about their participation, their experience working with others, their individual learning, and different strategies for the future.



19

App

endi

x C

Eval

uatio

n Cr

iteria

: Per

sona

lized

Cas

e

Key

Tas

kEx

empl

ary—

4Sa

tisfa

ctor

y—3

Belo

w S

atis

fact

ory—

2U

nsat

isfa

ctor

y—1

Ove

rall

Purp

ose

••A

ccur

atel

y id

entif

ies

the

assi

gnm

ent

purp

oses

and

pr

epar

es a

pre

cise

, org

aniz

ed,

and

reas

oned

res

pons

e to

all

elem

ents

of t

he a

ssig

nmen

t

••Id

entif

ies

the

assi

gnm

ent

purp

oses

and

pre

pare

s an

or

gani

zed

som

ewha

t re

ason

ed

resp

onse

to

all e

lem

ents

of

the

assi

gnm

ent

••Id

entif

ies

the

assi

gnm

ent

purp

oses

and

pre

pare

s a

vagu

e an

d so

mew

hat

orga

nize

d re

spon

se t

o so

me

elem

ents

of t

he a

ssig

nmen

t

••D

oes

a po

or jo

b of

iden

tifyi

ng

assi

gnm

ent

purp

oses

and

pre

pare

s a

vagu

e re

spon

se t

o a

few

ele

men

ts

of t

he a

ssig

nmen

t

Sum

mar

izes

the

In

cide

nt••

Is w

ell o

rgan

ized

and

ar

ticul

ates

cri

tical

ele

men

ts••

Is t

old

sim

ply

with

rel

evan

t da

ta in

clud

ed••

Lack

s de

tail

and/

or d

etai

ls

need

furt

her

expl

anat

ion

••Is

too

sho

rt (

e.g.

, out

com

e no

t in

clud

ed, k

ey p

laye

rs n

ot id

entif

ied,

co

nfus

ing

logi

cal s

eque

nce)

••

Wri

ting

enga

ges

read

ers,

cl

earl

y co

nvey

ing

wha

t is

at

stak

e

••W

ritin

g do

es li

ttle

to

enga

ge

read

ers

••W

ritin

g m

ay b

e w

ordy

, and

lo

gica

l seq

uenc

e m

akes

it

hard

for

read

ers

to fo

llow

••Is

too

long

and

/or

inci

dent

has

un

nece

ssar

y de

tails

(to

o m

any

of

them

) le

adin

g th

e re

ader

aw

ay

from

impo

rtan

t de

tails

••

Brin

gs p

laye

rs t

o lif

e w

ith r

ich

desc

ript

ion

and/

or d

etai

l

Art

icul

ates

the

Mai

n C

once

rn(s

)••

Cle

arly

def

ines

the

mai

n co

ncer

n(s)

; acc

urat

ely

iden

tifie

s th

e co

ntri

butin

g co

re is

sues

••D

efin

es t

he m

ain

conc

ern(

s);

iden

tifie

s co

re is

sues

, but

may

no

t fu

lly e

xplo

re it

s de

pth

and

brea

dth

••D

efin

es t

he m

ain

conc

ern(

s),

but

poor

(su

perf

icia

lly,

narr

owly

); m

ay o

verl

ook

som

e co

re is

sues

••Fa

ils t

o cl

earl

y de

fine

the

mai

n co

ncer

n(s)

(di

scus

ses

task

of

inci

dent

inst

ead)

; doe

s no

t re

cogn

ize

the

core

issu

es

••A

ppre

ciat

es d

epth

and

br

eadt

h of

mai

n co

ncer

n••

Dem

onst

rate

s fa

ir-m

inde

dnes

s (s

tand

poin

t vi

s-à-

vis

all

stak

ehol

ders

)

••H

as t

roub

le m

aint

aini

ng

a fa

ir-m

inde

d ap

proa

ches

(s

tand

poin

t vi

s-à-

vis

all

stak

ehol

ders

)

••Fa

ils t

o m

aint

ain

a fa

ir-m

inde

d ap

proa

ch (

stan

dpoi

nt v

is-à

-vis

all

stak

ehol

ders

)

••

Dem

onst

rate

s fa

ir-

min

dedn

ess

(sta

ndpo

int

vis-

à-vi

s al

l sta

keho

lder

s)

(con

tinue

d)



20

Key

Tas

kEx

empl

ary—

4Sa

tisfa

ctor

y—3

Belo

w S

atis

fact

ory—

2U

nsat

isfa

ctor

y—1

Res

olut

ion

of t

he

Mai

n C

once

rn(s

): Im

plic

atio

ns,

Con

sequ

ence

s,

Less

ons

Lear

ned

••Pr

ovid

es c

lear

con

cise

di

scus

sion

of f

acto

rs t

hat

expl

ain

how

and

why

the

m

ain

conc

ern(

s) w

as (

or w

as

not)

res

olve

d

••Su

mm

ariz

es s

ever

al fa

ctor

s th

at t

oget

her

expl

ain

how

the

m

ain

conc

ern(

s) w

as (

or w

as

not)

res

olve

d

••D

eals

with

how

man

agem

ent

and

lead

ersh

ip s

houl

d de

al

with

the

inci

dent

••R

eite

rate

s th

e ou

tcom

e of

inci

dent

••

Iden

tifie

s th

e m

ost

sign

ifica

nt im

plic

atio

ns a

nd

mos

t co

nseq

uenc

es o

f the

re

ason

ing

(whe

ther

pos

itive

or

neg

ativ

e)

••Id

entif

ies

sign

ifica

nt

impl

icat

ions

and

con

sequ

ence

s an

d di

stin

guis

hes

prob

able

fr

om im

plic

atio

ns, b

ut n

ot

with

the

sam

e in

sigh

t an

d pr

ecis

ion

as a

“4”

(ge

nera

l le

sson

s le

arne

d)

••H

as t

roub

le id

entif

ying

si

gnifi

cant

impl

icat

ions

and

co

nseq

uenc

es; i

dent

ifies

im

prob

able

impl

icat

ions

(a

few

poo

rly

desc

ribe

d le

sson

s le

arne

d)

••Ig

nore

s si

gnifi

cant

impl

icat

ions

and

co

nseq

uenc

es o

f rea

soni

ng (

no

less

ons

lear

ned)

••

Dis

tingu

ishe

s pr

obab

le fr

om

impr

obab

le im

plic

atio

ns

(fund

amen

tal l

esso

ns le

arne

d)

Con

cept

s••

Iden

tifie

s an

d ac

cura

tely

ex

plai

ns/u

ses

the

rele

vant

key

co

ncep

ts c

hose

n fo

r an

alys

is

of t

he c

ase

••Id

entif

ies

and

accu

rate

ly

expl

ains

and

use

s th

e ke

y co

ncep

ts b

ut n

ot w

ith t

he

dept

h an

d pr

ecis

ion

of a

“4”

••Id

entif

ies

som

e (n

ot a

ll)

key

conc

epts

, but

use

of

conc

epts

is s

uper

ficia

l and

in

accu

rate

at

times

••M

isun

ders

tand

s ke

y co

ncep

ts o

r ig

nore

s re

leva

nt k

ey c

once

pts

alto

geth

er

••

Mak

es k

ey li

nkag

es b

etw

een

conc

epts

Sour

ce. A

dapt

ed m

ater

ial f

rom

the

Fou

ndat

ion

for

Cri

tical

Thi

nkin

g (w

ww

.cri

tical

thin

king

.org

).

App

endi

x C

(co

ntin

ued)


www.criticalthinking.org


21

App

endi

x D

Eval

uatio

n Cr

iteria

: Gro

up P

oste

r Se

ssio

n

Key

Tas

kEx

empl

ary—

4Sa

tisfa

ctor

y—3

Belo

w S

atis

fact

ory—

2U

nsat

isfa

ctor

y—1

Ove

rall

Pu

rpos

e••

Acc

urat

ely

iden

tifie

s th

e as

sign

men

t pu

rpos

es a

nd p

repa

res

a pr

ecis

e,

orga

nize

d, a

nd r

easo

ned

resp

onse

to

all

elem

ents

of t

he a

ssig

nmen

t

••Id

entif

ies

the

assi

gnm

ent

purp

oses

and

pre

pare

s an

or

gani

zed

som

ewha

t re

ason

ed

resp

onse

to

all e

lem

ents

of

the

assi

gnm

ent

••Id

entif

ies

the

assi

gnm

ent

purp

oses

and

pre

pare

s a

vagu

e an

d so

mew

hat

orga

nize

d re

spon

se t

o so

me

elem

ents

of

the

assi

gnm

ent

••D

oes

a po

or jo

b of

id

entif

ying

ass

ignm

ent

purp

oses

and

pre

pare

s a

vagu

e re

spon

se t

o a

few

el

emen

ts o

f the

ass

ignm

ent

Key

Que

stio

n,

Prob

lem

, or

Issu

es

••C

lear

ly d

efin

es t

he is

sue

or p

robl

em;

accu

rate

ly id

entif

ies

core

issu

es o

f the

ca

se

••D

efin

es t

he is

sues

of t

he c

ase;

id

entif

ies

the

core

issu

es, b

ut

may

not

fully

exp

lore

the

ir

dept

h an

d br

eadt

h

••D

efin

es t

he is

sue,

but

poo

rly

(sup

erfic

ially

, nar

row

ly);

may

ov

erlo

ok s

ome

core

issu

es in

th

e ca

se

••Fa

ils t

o cl

earl

y de

fine

the

issu

e or

pro

blem

; doe

s no

t re

cogn

ize

the

core

issu

es

of t

he c

ase

••

App

reci

ates

dep

th a

nd b

read

th o

f the

pr

oble

m fa

ced

by t

he k

ey p

laye

rs in

th

e ca

se

••D

emon

stra

tes

fair

-m

inde

dnes

s••

Has

tro

uble

mai

ntai

ning

a

fair

-min

ded

appr

oach

tow

ard

the

prob

lem

••Fa

ils t

o m

aint

ain

a fa

ir-

min

ded

appr

oach

tow

ard

the

prob

lem

••

Dem

onst

rate

s fa

ir-m

inde

dnes

s to

war

d th

e pr

oble

m

Info

rmat

ion

••G

athe

rs s

uffic

ient

, cre

dibl

e, r

elev

ant

info

rmat

ion:

obs

erva

tions

, sta

tem

ents

, lo

gic,

dat

a, fa

cts,

que

stio

ns, g

raph

s th

emes

, ass

ertio

ns, d

escr

iptio

ns, e

tc.

abou

t th

e ca

se

••G

athe

rs s

uffic

ient

cre

dibl

e,

and

rele

vant

info

rmat

ion

abou

t th

e ca

se

••G

athe

rs s

ome

cred

ible

in

form

atio

n, b

ut n

ot e

noug

h fo

r a

solid

ana

lysi

s; s

ome

info

rmat

ion

may

be

irre

leva

nt

••R

elie

s on

insu

ffici

ent,

irre

leva

nt, o

r un

relia

ble

info

rmat

ion

••

Incl

udes

info

rmat

ion

that

opp

oses

as

wel

l as

supp

orts

the

arg

ued

posi

tion

••In

clud

es s

ome

info

rmat

ion

from

opp

osin

g vi

ews

••O

mits

sig

nific

ant

info

rmat

ion;

incl

udes

som

e co

unte

rarg

umen

ts

••Fa

ils t

o id

entif

y or

has

tily

dism

isse

s st

rong

, rel

evan

t co

unte

rarg

umen

ts (con

tinue

d)



22

Key

Tas

kEx

empl

ary—

4Sa

tisfa

ctor

y—3

Belo

w S

atis

fact

ory—

2U

nsat

isfa

ctor

y—1

••

Dis

tingu

ishe

s be

twee

n in

form

atio

n an

d in

fere

nces

dra

wn

from

the

info

rmat

ion

••D

istin

guis

hes

betw

een

info

rmat

ion

and

infe

renc

es

draw

n fr

om it

••So

met

imes

con

fuse

s in

form

atio

n an

d th

e in

fere

nces

dr

awn

from

it

••C

onfu

ses

info

rmat

ion

and

infe

renc

es d

raw

n fr

om t

hat

info

rmat

ion

••

Dra

ws

on e

xter

nal d

ata

or m

odel

s to

he

lp m

ake

sens

e of

the

cas

e

Con

cept

s••

Iden

tifie

s an

d ac

cura

tely

exp

lain

s/us

es

the

rele

vant

key

con

cept

s ch

osen

for

anal

ysis

of t

he c

ase

••Id

entif

ies

and

accu

rate

ly

expl

ains

and

use

s th

e ke

y co

ncep

ts b

ut n

ot w

ith t

he

dept

h an

d pr

ecis

ion

of a

“4”

••Id

entif

ies

som

e (n

ot a

ll) k

ey

conc

epts

, but

use

of c

once

pts

is s

uper

ficia

l and

inac

cura

te

at t

imes

••M

isun

ders

tand

s ke

y co

ncep

ts o

r ig

nore

s re

leva

nt k

ey c

once

pts

alto

geth

er

••M

akes

key

link

ages

bet

wee

n co

ncep

ts

Sour

ce. A

dapt

ed m

ater

ial f

rom

the

Fou

ndat

ion

for

Cri

tical

Thi

nkin

g (w

ww

.cri

tical

thin

king

.org

).

App

endi

x D

(co

ntin

ued)


www.criticalthinking.org



Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publi-cation of this article.

References

Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., Lovett, M. C., DiPietro, M., & Norman, M. K. (2010). How learning works: 7 research-based principles for smart teaching. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Bennis, W. G., & Thomas, R. J. (2002). Crucibles of leadership. Harvard Business Review, 80(9), 39-45.

Boyatzis, R. E. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Boyatzis, R. E., & McKee, A. (2005). Resonant leadership. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Cameron, K. S. (2008). Positive leadership: Strategies for extraordinary perfor-mance. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.

Cirka, C. C., & Corrigall, E.A. (2010). Expanding possibilities through meta-phor: Breaking biases to improve crisis management. Journal of Management Education, 34, 303-323.

Clemson, D., & Samara, K. (2013). Crisis management simulations: Narrative inquiry into transformative learning. In I. Ramos (Ed.), European Conference on Research Methodology for Business and Management Studies (pp. 100-107). Kidmore End, England: Academic Conferences International.

Comer, D.R. (2013). Educating students to prepare for and respond to crisis that affect organizations: An introduction to the special issue. Journal of Management Education, 37, 3-5.

Cormier, S., & Hagman, J. (1987). Transfer of learning. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Covey, S. R. (2004). The 8th habit: From effectiveness to greatness. New York, NY: Free Press.

Dewey, J. (1909). How we think. Boston: MA: Heath.Diermeier, D., Crawford, R., & Snyder, C. (2011). Arthur Anderson (a): The waste

management crisis (Case KEL558-HCB-ENG). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing.

Dutton, J. E., Frost, P. J., Worline, M. C., Lilius, J. M., & Kanov, J. M. (2002). Leading in times of trauma. Harvard Business Review, 80(1), 54-61.

Ennis, R. H. (1993). Critical thinking assessment. Theory into Practice, 32, 179-186.




Ferris, W. P. (1998). Fear, stress, and second-guessing in leadership decision mak-ing: Using interior monologues, reflective nonfiction, and spiritual approaches. Journal of Management Education, 22, 26-48.

Fink, D. L. (2003). Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach to designing college courses. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Fisher, A. (2001). Critical thinking: An introduction. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Fisher, A., & Scriven, M. (1997). Critical thinking: Its definition and assessment. Norwich, England: Edgepress and Centre for Research in Critical Thinking, University of East Anglia.

Flanagan, J. C. (1954). The critical incident technique. Psychological Bulletin, 51, 327-335.

Foote, L. M. (2013). Honing crisis communication skills: Using interactive media and student-centered learning to develop agile leaders. Journal of Management Education, 37, 79-114.

Fry, L. W. (2003). Toward a theory of spiritual leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 14, 693-727.

Gardner, J. W. (1990). On leadership. New York, NY: Collier Macmillan.Gardner, W. L., Avolio, B. J., Luthans, F., May, D. R., & Walumbwa, F. (2005). Can

you see the real me? A self-based model of authentic leader and follower devel-opment. Leadership Quarterly, 16, 343-372.

Glaser, E. (1941). An experiment in the development of critical thinking. New York, NY: Advanced School of Education at Teachers College, Columbia University.

Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R. E., & McKee, A. (2002). Primal leadership: Realizing the power of emotional intelligence. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Hannah, S. T., Uhl-Bien, M., Avolio, B. J., & Cavarretta, F. L. (2009). A framework for examining leadership in extreme contexts. Leadership Quarterly, 20, 897-919.

Hess, E., & Cameron, K. S. (2006). Leading with values: Values, positivity, virtue, and high performance. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

James, E. H., & Wooten, L. P. (2010). Leading under pressure: From surviving to thriving before, during, and after a crisis. New York, NY: Routledge Academic.

Johansen, B. (2006). Get there early: Sensing the future to compete in the present. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.

Kiltz, L. (2009). Developing critical thinking skills in homeland security and emer-gency management courses. Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, 6(1), 1-23. (Article No. 36)

Klann, G. (2003). Crisis leadership: Using military lessons, organizational experi-ences, and the power of influence to lessen the impact of chaos on the people you lead. Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership.

Klein, K. J., Ziegert, J. C., Knight, A. P., & Xiao, Y. (2006). Dynamic degradation: Shared, hierarchical, and deindividualized leadership in extreme action teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51, 590-621.




Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2002). The leadership challenge (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Kurfiss, J. G. (1988). Critical thinking: Theory, research, practice, and possibilities (ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 2). Washington, DC: ASHE.

Lalonde, C., & Roux-Dufort, C. (2013). Challenges in teaching crisis management: Connecting theories, skills, and reflexivity. Journal of Management Education, 37, 21-50.

McDonald, L. M. (2013). Using student-constructed cases to investigate crises. Journal of Management Education, 37, 115-134.

Medina, J. (2008). Brain rules: 12 Principles for surviving and thriving at work, home, and school. Seattle, WA: Pear Press.

Mitroff, I. I., Pauchant, T. C., & Shrivastava, P. (1988). The structure of man-made organizational crises: Conceptual and empirical issues in the development of a general theory of crisis management. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 33, 83-107.

Moon, Y., & Herman, K. (2002). McDonald’s Russia: Managing a crisis (Case 9-503-020). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing.

Norris, S. T., & Ennis, R. H. (1989). Evaluating critical thinking. Pacific Grove, CA: Critical Thinking Press and Software.

Pagonis, W. G. (2001). Leadership in a combat zone. Harvard Business Review, 79(11), 107-117.

Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2001). Critical thinking: Tools for taking charge of your learn-ing and your life (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2006). The miniature guide to critical thinking: Concepts and tools. Dillon Beach, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking.

Paul, R., Fisher, A., & Nosich, G. (1993). Workshop on critical thinking strategies. Rohnert Park, CA: Sonoma State University, Foundation for Critical Thinking.

Peach, B. E., Mukherjee, A., & Hornyak, M. (2007). Assessing critical thinking: A college’s journey and lessons learned. Journal of Education for Business, 82, 313-320.

Pearce, C. L., & Sims, H. P. (2002). Vertical versus shared leadership as predictors of effectiveness of change management teams: An examination of aversive, direc-tive, transactional, transformational, and empowering leader behavior. Group Dynamics, 6, 172-197.

Pennebaker, J. W., & Harber, K. D. (1993). A social stage model of collective coping: The Loma Prieta earthquake and the Persian Gulf War. Journal of Social Issues, 49(4), 125-145.

Perry, W. G. (1999). Forms of ethical and intellectual development in the college years. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Powley, E. H. (2009). Reclaiming resilience and safety: Resilience activation in the critical period of crisis. Human Relations, 62, 1289-1326.




Powley, E. H., & Taylor, S. N. (2006). Values and leadership in organizational crisis. In E. Hess & K. Cameron (Eds.), Leading with values: Values, positivity, vir-tue, and high performance (pp. 194-212). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Powley, E. H., & Taylor, S. N. (2010). Leading healing in a broken unit: Case Study No. 9, teacher edition. In K. Guttieri (Series Ed.), Complex operations case stud-ies series. Washington, DC: Center for Complex Operations, National Defense University.

Quinn, R. E. (2004). Building the bridge as you walk on it: A guide for leading change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Raelin, J. A. (2008). Work-based learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Rock, D. (2009). Your brain at work. New York, NY: HarperCollins.Rosenberg, L. R. (2010). Transforming leadership: Reflective practice and the enhance-

ment of happiness. Reflective Practice: International and Multidisciplinary Perspectives, 11(1), 9-18.

Sankar, Y. (2003). Character not charisma is the critical measure of leadership excel-lence. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 9(4), 45-55.

Schmidt-Wilk, J. (2010). Evidence: Where scholarship meets artistry. Journal of Management Education, 34, 195-199.

Seibert, K. W., & Daudelin, M. W. (1999). The role of reflection in managerial learn-ing: Theory, research, and practice. Westport, CT: Quorum.

Shrivastava, P., Mitroff, I., & Alpaslan, C. M. (2013). Imagining an education in crisis management. Journal of Management Education, 37, 6-20.

Snook, S. A., Freeman, L. J., & Norwalk, L. J. (2004). Friendly fire (Case No. 404083-HCB-ENG). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing.

Spears, L. C., & Lawrence, M. (Eds.). (2004). Practicing servant-leadership: Succeeding through trust, bravery, and forgiveness. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Taylor, S. N. (2010). Redefining leader self-awareness by integrating the second com-ponent of self-awareness. Journal of Leadership Studies, 3(4), 57-68.

Tsui, L. (2002). Fostering critical thinking through effective pedagogy. Journal of Higher Education, 73, 740-763.

Uhl-Bien, M. (2006). Relational leadership theory: Exploring the social processes of leadership and organizing. Leadership Quarterly, 17, 654-676.

Useem, M. (1998). The leadership moment. New York, NY: Three Rivers Press.Waller, M., Lei, Z., & Pratten, R. (2013). Focusing on teams in crisis manage-

ment education: An integration and simulation-based approach. Academy of Management Learning and Education. Advance online publication. doi:10.5465/amle.2012.0337

Wright, A. L., Nichols, E., McKechnie, M., & McCarthy, S. (2013). Combing cri-sis management and evidence-based management: The Queensland Floods as a teachable moment. Journal of Management Education, 37, 135-160.



Documents

Pedagogical Approaches to Develop Critical Thinking and Crisis Leadership