Critical Thinking Paper:  Why Multiple Perspectives Can Help Shed Light on a Problem
Introduction

The crisis in the truss construction shop has come about because of a number of different factors that have given way to complaints, fears and concerns. The complaints have come from workers on the floor, sales reps dealing with customers, and customers questioning whether the trusses are up to standards. The fears are that the worker safety is in peril; sales may not go through which hurts the pay of sales reps; and that trusses might fail, which puts clients and the public at risk. The concerns are that the company has made claims about the strength of the trusses and it is unclear at this point whether the trusses can satisfy those claims; owners want to do more testing to see if trusses are failing at lower weight levels; workers want to know if the breakthrough technology used to create the trusses is really innovative or just cheap and dangerous. To address this crisis, management needs to engage in critical thinking. Critical thinking involves identifying the problem, gathering information, sorting out that information and accepting that which is relevant, understanding various points of view, and making the right decision based on what is morally right and what is in the best interests of all involved (Halpern, 2014). It should not mean having to chose one stakeholder over another, and it should not mean having to compromise. Critical thinkers look to create win-win situations out of what appear to be lose-lose situations (Nalis, Schutz & Pastukhov, 2018). As Fisher and Ury (1991) point out, the key to success is in getting everyone to agree with a firm yes that everyone’s needs have been met. That is what this paper will show by explaining the issue, analyzing the data, and discussing alternative points of view and recommendations.

Explanation of the Issue

The issue at stake is that a truss strength test was conducted, the truss broke because it was pushed past its threshold maximum, and an employee was injured. Various questions, concerns and fears have arisen as a result. One worker has even leaked information to the public, whether accurate or misleading is unknown, about what is going at the truss construction shop and why people should be alarmed. Overall, it is not a good look for the company. However, it does not mean the crisis cannot be solved with a little bit of critical thinking. As Julian (2002) explains, every crisis can be resolved by simply asking what one’s duty is in a situation and then adhering to that duty while keeping an open mind about how to use the situation to achieve an even greater outcome than what might have been expected.

What is known is that someone was injured on the floor. Why did this happen? Was the person following safety standards? Does the construction shop have safety standards? Does it need to develop safety standards? Safety is rightly an issue for employees and it should be addressed. The safety needs of workers should be satisfied.

The other issue is that the public now does not know whether the promises made by the company about the trusses are true. The company needs to be as transparent as possible. The truss that broke was past its maximum threshold. That means it broke because it was not designed to hold anymore weight. Even if everyone expected it to be able to, those expectations were obviously wrong. The recommended threshold was recommended for a reason and was correct. The truss will not be good past a certain limit. That needs to be made very clear to the public. Clients have to know what they can expect from the truss. Customer safety needs have to be satisfied just as much as worker safety needs.

Then there is the issue of the sales team. They have skin in the game as well because they are on the front lines making claims to customers and promising delivery. If shipments are held up, they lose customers, which means they lose pay. Before the company does anything it has to first be sure that the trusses are safe. So it needs to ask: Has the company tested the trusses enough at lower levels?

Analysis of the Information

The most relevant information is that regarding the trusses themselves. The truss is at the heart of everyone else’s issues—aside from...…weight limits.

The issue of safety in the construction shop is a separate issue altogether. A worker has been injured. That is unacceptable. He is now in an induced coma because something either went wrong on the floor and proper safety guidelines were not followed, or because there are no proper safety guidelines in place. There is no reason a worker should be injured during a truss stress test. It should be obvious to everyone what the risks of such a test are and if a worker is in a position where he could be injured that is on management to figure out why that is happening. Management should be concerned about these two issues because they are the problems that are at the bottom of the truss construction crisis.

Management should therefore make sure that the trusses are being tested sufficiently. If they have not been tested to standard according to the safety team, then there is nothing to do but delay shipment until all necessary tests can be completed and the true state of the trusses can be verified. If this means losing sales, that is unfortunate; however, it does not mean the sales team has to despair. Give the sales team an opportunity to keep these sales by informing clients that testing is being done to verify truss weight limits and that as soon as this is completed the trusses will ship. If it turns out that the tests show the trusses are not meeting expectations, it means the entire production has to shut down because the trusses themselves represent a significant problem. That is a bridge that should not be crossed until it is necessary. Right now, everything indicates that the truss failed because it went over the max threshold and that in itself should not be a cause of major concern. The public can be informed about this as well, and it should be explained that the injury of the worker was because of safety guidelines either not being followed or not being implemented. This injury should not be related to the issue of the trusses at all, since the truss failure was at a point above the threshold.

References

Bosworth, D. A. (2011).…