Critical Thinking and Problem Solving Training Course

Duration 5 days 10 modules · 33 contact hours
Level Intermediate Certificate on completion
Who attends Managers, Project Managers and others
Fee from USD 1,100 KSh 95,000 for Kenyan organisations
Where 52 cities + online See dates by city
Next start 7 Nov 2026 Course code SD-PE-019

Before you join: Participants should have experience contributing to workplace decisions, projects, service improvement, operations, analysis or stakeholder discussions.

Dates & prices

Two start dates a month in every city, and live online on weekdays or weekends. Fees are per participant; classroom fees include tuition, materials, lunch and refreshments, and the certificate.

Suggest a date or city

Showing the next six months. Later dates, other cities and private deliveries for your team are available on request.

Course overview

Managers and specialists are often required to make recommendations from incomplete data, competing stakeholder views and time pressure. Weak problem definition, untested assumptions and premature preference for a familiar solution can lead to wasted resources, repeated incidents and decisions that cannot be defended. This course develops disciplined reasoning for diagnosing problems, evaluating evidence, generating credible options and making decisions that stand up to scrutiny.

Participants learn to frame a problem precisely, separate symptoms from causes, test claims using evidence and identify common cognitive biases. They use issue trees, Toulmin argument mapping, the Five Whys, Ishikawa diagrams, Pareto charts, weighted decision matrices and decision trees. The course also addresses how to communicate a recommendation clearly, handle objections, document rationale and monitor whether a chosen action has produced the intended result.

Instruction combines short tutor briefings with realistic cases, group analysis, facilitated discussions, decision simulations and individual application planning. Cases can be adapted to public services, banking, infrastructure, NGOs, manufacturing or corporate functions. Participants receive a certificate of completion and leave with reusable templates for problem framing, evidence review, root-cause analysis, option appraisal and a 90-day application plan. The course is available as a five-day classroom programme in 50+ cities or live online; each day runs from 08:30 to 16:30, with approximately 6.5 contact hours.

The course suits professionals who already contribute to decisions and improvement work, and who need a more explicit, repeatable method for analysing difficult issues and presenting sound recommendations.

What you will be able to do

  • Frame ambiguous business problems using operational definitions, issue trees and problem statements
  • Evaluate claims using Toulmin argument mapping, evidence hierarchy and source-quality checks
  • Identify cognitive biases and apply debiasing techniques to individual and group decisions
  • Diagnose root causes using process maps, Five Whys, Ishikawa diagrams and Pareto charts
  • Generate options using divergent thinking, SCAMPER and structured group ideation methods
  • Compare alternatives using weighted decision matrices, cost-benefit analysis and decision trees
  • Present recommendations using the Pyramid Principle, BLUF statements and objection handling
  • Create an A3-based action plan with measures, ownership, review points and escalation routes

Benefits of attending

For you

  • Make recommendations with clearer evidence, assumptions and decision rationale
  • Challenge weak reasoning constructively without turning disagreement into conflict
  • Reduce time spent pursuing symptoms instead of controllable root causes
  • Handle uncertainty using structured option comparison rather than intuition alone
  • Build a personal record of decisions and lessons for improved professional judgment

For your organisation

  • Improve the quality and traceability of operational, project and policy decisions
  • Reduce repeat incidents by identifying contributing causes rather than applying temporary fixes
  • Create clearer escalation papers, decision requests and management recommendations
  • Expose unsupported assumptions and bias before resources are committed
  • Establish shared methods for analysing issues across teams and functions

Course modules

10 modules over 5 days

Participants can convert an ambiguous concern into a bounded, decision-ready problem statement.

  • Distinguishing symptoms, problems, decisions and opportunities through operational definitions
  • Problem statements using SMART boundaries, measurable gaps and decision owners
  • Stakeholder mapping separates sponsors, users, subject-matter experts and decision makers
  • SCQA framing clarifies situation, complication, key question and answer need
  • Assumption logs distinguish known facts, beliefs, constraints and unknowns
  • Issue trees break broad concerns into mutually exclusive, collectively exhaustive branches

Participants can assess the structure and strength of arguments before accepting conclusions.

  • Claims, evidence, warrants and rebuttals structured with Toulmin's argument model
  • Separate correlation, causation, coincidence and confounding before recommending action
  • Deductive validity tested through premises, conclusions and counterexamples
  • Inductive arguments assessed for sample quality, base rates and uncertainty
  • Socratic questions expose ambiguous terms, unsupported assertions and missing evidence
  • Argument maps show reasoning chains, objections and evidential dependencies

Participants can recognise predictable judgment errors and introduce practical safeguards against them.

  • Recognising confirmation, anchoring, availability and sunk-cost biases in workplace judgments
  • Pre-mortem analysis identifies failure assumptions before commitments harden
  • Red-team review challenges preferred options, evidence quality and hidden incentives
  • Ladder of Inference separates observations, interpretations, assumptions and conclusions
  • Debiasing checklists require disconfirming evidence, alternative hypotheses and base-rate checks
  • Psychological safety enables respectful challenge without personalising disagreement

Participants can assess whether available evidence is sufficient, credible and appropriately qualified.

  • Evidence hierarchy ranks primary data, operational records, expert opinion and anecdotes
  • CRAAP test assesses currency, relevance, authority, accuracy and purpose
  • Sampling plans define population, frame, sample size and selection bias
  • Triangulation compares independent sources before treating a claim as established
  • Data visualisation checks reveal truncated axes, misleading scales and omitted denominators
  • Confidence intervals and ranges communicate uncertainty without false precision

Participants can identify controllable causes and distinguish them from visible symptoms.

  • Process maps trace handoffs, queues, rework loops and control points
  • Five Whys probes causal chains beyond the first plausible explanation
  • Ishikawa diagrams organise potential causes under people, process, equipment and policy
  • Pareto charts prioritise frequent or high-impact defect categories
  • Fault tree analysis tests combinations of conditions producing failure
  • Root-cause statements specify mechanism, evidence and controllable contributing factors

Participants can produce a wider range of relevant options before selecting a preferred response.

  • Divergent thinking generates options before evaluating feasibility or preference
  • SCAMPER prompts modifications: substitute, combine, adapt, modify, put, eliminate, reverse
  • Analogical reasoning transfers mechanisms, not superficial features, from relevant cases
  • Constraints reframed as design criteria to widen feasible alternatives
  • Nominal group technique balances independent ideas with structured option refinement
  • Option portfolios combine quick containment, medium-term correction and strategic prevention

Participants can compare alternatives transparently using defined criteria, risks and trade-offs.

  • Decision criteria separate mandatory requirements from weighted preferences
  • Weighted decision matrices compare options against agreed scoring definitions
  • Sensitivity analysis tests whether score changes alter the preferred option
  • Cost-benefit analysis includes direct costs, opportunity costs, risks and benefits
  • Decision trees compare expected values under uncertain outcomes and probabilities
  • Risk matrices distinguish likelihood, impact, controls and residual exposure

Participants can present concise recommendations that link evidence, implications and required action.

  • Pyramid Principle orders recommendations, supporting arguments and evidence for senior readers
  • BLUF statements present the decision request, rationale and required action
  • Message maps adapt detail for executives, technical specialists and affected teams
  • Data stories connect evidence, operational implications and recommended decisions
  • Objection handling anticipates competing priorities, risks and evidence challenges
  • Meeting facilitation records decisions, dissent, actions, owners and due dates

Participants can turn a selected solution into accountable action, monitoring and organisational learning.

  • A3 reports document problem background, analysis, countermeasures and follow-up
  • PDCA cycles test countermeasures, review results and standardise improvements
  • RACI matrices assign decision rights, action ownership and consultation responsibilities
  • Implementation milestones specify dependencies, leading indicators and review points
  • After-action reviews capture expected results, actual results, causes and lessons
  • Control plans define monitoring measures, response triggers and escalation routes

Participants can establish a practical routine for applying critical thinking to current work priorities.

  • Problem-solving charter consolidates scope, evidence standards, roles and decision gates
  • Personal decision journal records assumptions, rationale, outcomes and calibration lessons
  • 90-day application plan identifies priority problems, sponsors and early milestones
  • Peer review criteria assess clarity, evidence quality, options and recommendation logic
  • Escalation protocols distinguish decisions requiring authority, expertise or risk acceptance
  • Reflective practice converts feedback into specific changes to reasoning habits

Exercises and examples are adapted to each cohort's sectors and roles.

What you take back to work

  1. Problem-framing charter template
  2. Toulmin argument map template
  3. Evidence and bias review checklist
  4. Root-cause analysis toolkit
  5. Weighted decision matrix template
  6. 90-day critical-thinking application plan

Who should attend

  • Managers — make defensible decisions amid competing priorities and incomplete information
  • Project Managers — resolve delivery issues, risks and stakeholder disagreements systematically
  • Business Analysts — turn ambiguous requests into evidence-based recommendations and requirements
  • Policy and Programme Officers — assess options, assumptions and public-interest trade-offs clearly
  • Operations and Quality Professionals — identify recurring causes of defects, delays and failures
  • Technical Specialists — communicate complex analysis persuasively to non-specialist decision makers

Skills and tools covered

Problem framingEvidence evaluationRoot-cause analysisDecision analysisArgument constructionRecommendation communication

Tools and standards

Toulmin Argument Model, Five Whys, Ishikawa Diagram, Weighted Decision Matrix

How the course runs

Training methodology

The course uses short tutor briefings to introduce each method, followed by case analysis, group exercises, structured discussions and decision simulations. Participants work with ambiguous scenarios that require problem definition, evidence assessment, root-cause diagnosis, option generation and recommendation writing. Facilitated review compares different reasoning paths and tests the quality of assumptions, evidence and conclusions. Individual application planning helps participants select a live workplace issue and identify how they will apply the methods after the course.

Requirements and prerequisites

Participants should have experience contributing to workplace decisions, projects, service improvement, operations, analysis or stakeholder discussions. They should be comfortable reading short reports, interpreting basic tables or charts, and explaining the reasoning behind a recommendation. No formal qualification in logic, statistics, data science, economics or project management is required. Advanced mathematics is not needed. Participants do not need prior knowledge of Kepner-Tregoe, Lean, Six Sigma or formal decision-analysis methods; relevant techniques are introduced and applied during the course.

A typical training day

08:30 – 10:30First session
10:30 – 10:45Refreshment break
10:45 – 12:30Second session
12:30 – 13:30Lunch and networking
13:30 – 15:00Third session
15:00 – 15:15Refreshment break
15:15 – 16:30Workshop and daily review

Live online deliveries follow the same structure in East Africa Time, with shorter screen blocks and longer breaks.

What the fee includes

  • Instruction by a practitioner facilitator
  • Full course workbook and materials
  • Exercise files, templates and case studies
  • Refreshments and lunch on classroom deliveries
  • Certificate of completion
  • Post-course application plan

Frequently asked questions

You should have experience contributing to workplace decisions, projects, operations or improvement work. No formal training in logic, statistics, Lean, Six Sigma or decision analysis is required.

Bring a current or recent workplace issue that would benefit from clearer analysis, such as a service failure, project delay, recurring complaint or policy choice. You may also bring non-confidential reports, data extracts or decision papers for reference.

It is designed for managers, analysts, project professionals, technical specialists, policy staff and operational leaders. It is particularly useful for people who need to justify recommendations to senior stakeholders or cross-functional groups.

This course gives equal attention to problem definition, evidence quality, reasoning errors, root causes, option generation and communication. Decision-making courses may focus mainly on choosing between options, while creative problem-solving courses may place greater emphasis on idea generation.

Participants leave with templates for framing problems, testing evidence, analysing causes and comparing options. The final module produces a 90-day plan linked to a real work priority, with milestones and review points.

Each day runs from 08:30 to 16:30 and includes approximately 6.5 contact hours. Time is divided between tutor input, cases, group analysis, simulations, facilitated review and application planning.

Questions about this course?

Ask about dates, fees, group bookings or running it for your team. Our training team replies by email.

Ask on WhatsApp info@skillsetdevelopment.com

Related courses in Personal Effectiveness