How can you assess critical thinking in risk management professionals during hiring?

When assessing a candidate's critical thinking skills, I would look for: Analytical thinking: Ability to break down complex problems. Logical reasoning: Capacity to draw accurate conclusions. Open-mindedness: Willingness to consider different perspectives. Attention to detail: Ability to identify and analyze relevant details. Effective communication: Ability to clearly articulate thoughts. Active listening: Skill to attentively listen to others' opinions. Adaptability: Capacity to adjust thinking based on new information. Creativity: Ability to think innovatively. Decision-making: Capability to make well-informed decisions. Self-awareness: Ability to recognize one's own biases and areas for improvement.

Critical thinking in risk is not a science but an art that can learnt through real life experience. As an individual progresses through the ranks in risk management the way of approaching risk also progresses from a doer to a thinker. While the risk specialist deals with specific aspects of risk on a day today basis, the leader in risk management spends more time analyzing scenerios and critically formulating cause of action way before events unfold. Keen observation is a key ingredient to great decision making of a critical thinker.

Critical thinking is a multifaceted skillset that varies depending on the risk management context. To effectively assess critical thinking, it's crucial to define relevant and measurable criteria aligned with the specific role. For instance, a risk analyst might need strong analytical and quantitative skills, while a risk manager might require strategic and communication prowess. Key competencies to consider include problem-solving, decision-making, logical reasoning, creativity, and ethical awareness. ?? Examples: ?? Problem-solving. ??Decision-making: Ability to make sound decisions based on evidence and analysis. ??Logical reasoning: Ability to draw sound conclusions from evidence and information.

I concur that thе critеria for proficiеncy in risk managеmеnt may fluctuatе contingеnt upon thе typе, lеvеl, and domain of thе disciplinе. Nonеthеlеss, I posit that thеrе еxist fundamеntal skills rеquisitе for any candidatе еngagеd in risk managеmеnt. For instancе, compеtеnciеs in problem-solving, dеcision-making, and logical rеasoning should bе еncompassеd within thе skill sеt of individuals in all rolеs associatеd with risk managеmеnt.

Critical Thinking is a key competency for Risk Management Professionals to demonstrate. That said, not all Critical Thinkers produce the exact same result in a given situation, as there are no definite paths to take. A person capable of critical thinking will typically demonstrate one or more of the following: a. Ability to align their thoughts on a given problem. b. Identify potential points of failure. c. Apply pareto (80/20) rule subconsciously for results. d. Maintain a posture of curiosity. e. Able to talk us through their thought process. Keen to deliberate with others who have different views. f. Call out empirical data to validate their thoughts.

Relying on a single method to assess critical thinking skills can lead to an incomplete or inaccurate evaluation. A comprehensive approach utilizing a combination of methods, including behavioral interviews, case studies, and psychometric tests, provides a more holistic assessment of a candidate's critical thinking abilities. This multi-faceted approach ensures that various dimensions of critical thinking, including cognitive abilities, personality traits, and practical application skills, are thoroughly evaluated. The Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (WGCTA) is an example of a psychometric test that effectively measures critical thinking components.

Risk Management is a support function, lay out a business scenario and see how the candidate applies the rudimentary of risk management to it. Also, look to see how they tie it to the enterprise risk management framework,as often times professionals are only versed in managing risk in sections of the business without being able to show its enterprise-wide impact therefore leading to diminished focus on the risk reports.

Critical Thinking alone is almost useless if not paired by effective communication skills towards counterparties or stakeholders. This is required not only to lead change management programmes in risk management, but also to day-by-day risk management activities. An effective critical thinker must: 1) be able to say "No" without feeling or showing much discomfort: 2) explain clearly and firmly the reasons for the "No", and most importantly: 3) explain what would be needed to turn the "No" into a "maybe" or into a full "Yes". In an interview it is useful to ask examples about the circumstances in which a "No" was necessary or particularly challenging, or if it became a "Yes" under the candidate's guidance.

A mi me ha resultado útil someter al candidato a un caso práctico multidiscisplinar en el que tuviera que tomar decisiones evaluables y así poder ponderar su grado de pensamiento crítico.

If the applicants are talking about risk, then don't hire them. If they are talking about eliminating or isolating hazards, then they are on the right path. Risk should only be considered when you can have no influence over the hazard. And even then, it's just a rough guess.

As a Chief Risk Officer, I believe that a thorough evaluation of candidates' critical thinking skills is crucial for selecting individuals who can effectively assess and mitigate risks within an organization. Implementing a structured scoring system or rubric can help standardize the evaluation process, reduce subjective biases, and identify patterns, strengths, and weaknesses in candidates' critical thinking abilities. Utilizing a scale to rate each skill and incorporating feedback from multiple assessors can further enhance the evaluation's validity and accuracy.

Communication Skills:Assess their ability to articulate complex concepts and risks clearly.Evaluate their communication style to ensure they can effectively convey risk information to various stakeholders.

Using a scoring method to evaluate a candidate is a good thing but is a very subjective one and is prone to errors. However, the same is used in most organization coupled with other methods that reduce those loopholes. Obtaining a previous references is a good thing, but could also be biased. Hiring a candidate is always a tricky thing when it comes to evaluating them as the results might be extraordinary. The only method is to use the above techniques and choose the best out of the selected pool. There is of course a probation period also where the company can actually evaluate the hired employee.

In the complex world of risk management, effectively evaluating critical thinking skills is a pivotal task. Here's a structured approach: Skills Test: Use validated tests for problem-solving and decision-making abilities, paired with mindset assessments. Risk Assessment: Evaluate risk probability and impact through stakeholder interviews and documentation. Risk Matrix (RAM): Apply a probability and impact matrix to rate risks and identify strategic responses. Urgency Assessment: Combine risk rankings with urgency for a comprehensive risk sensitivity rating.

I am convinced that incorporating feedback from multiple assessors or sources adds valuable perspectives to the evaluation process. This comprehensive approach not only validates the results but also triangulates the assessment, providing a more holistic understanding of each candidate's suitability.

I firmly believe that continuous improvement is essential for maintaining a robust and effective critical thinking assessment process. By implementing data-driven monitoring and feedback mechanisms, organizations can ensure that their assessment methods remain relevant, reliable, and aligned with the evolving demands of the risk management field. Regularly evaluating the effectiveness and efficiency of assessment tools and procedures is crucial for identifying areas for improvement and innovation. This data-driven approach, coupled with feedback from candidates, assessors, and stakeholders, will empower organizations to refine their assessment processes, fostering a culture of continuous learning and growth.

Something very important for me is not to consider assessing critical thinking as a science, it is more of an art, therefore to improve the processes we need to consider that some of conclusions might not be accurate, and our perspectives misleading. In a nutshell, to improve the process we need to be willing to change opinion.

Continuous improvement is critical for most aspects of the hiring process. Measuring real world critical thinking is however very difficult in practice. Some organisations put too much focus on conformity and fitting in. The best critical thinkers may well be outliers in terms of being typical employees. These skills will be recognised very positively by some personnel while others can look negatively on such individuals who "focus too much on unlikely events". I've seen this for example in supply chain management where the mantra of lowest cost over rode discussions around dual sourcing and supply security.

I think being data driven (thus extremely objective) when assessing people / skills is important, but one should not ignore the ‘soft’ or EQ driven factors when evaluating risk managers. For instance, factors such as determination / historic perseverance / compassion of the candidate should be equally (if not more) important. These skills play a vital role in sucess of an organization/team.

I think By embracing a culture of continuous improvement, organizations can refine their critical thinking assessment process to be not only effective but also adaptable to the ever-changing landscape of risk management. Regularly monitoring and enhancing the process ensures that it remains a robust tool for selecting candidates who possess the critical thinking skills necessary to navigate the complexities of the risk management field successfully.

Critical thinking can be evaluated during hiring by emphasizing on 1. Situation / Scenario based questions 2. Evaluating candidates responses to see if the answers are solution oriented / is positive 3. Stress testing answer to evaluate if candidate is able to come up with alternatives 4. Case studies with facts and figures to evaluate the analysis skills 5. Complex problem solving situations which is layered with additional complexities as candidate answers to evaluate calmness and solution navigation skills 6. Decision making situations with multiple priorities can be evaluated

I would consider - Candidate adapatability to the everchanging situations, data and perspective - Openness to chanllenge self - Ability to convince or get convinced.

There can’t be a standard assessment mechanism for all levels of of risk management staff. Assessment of analyst for instance should be based on the the candidates ability to to detect patterns or detect anomalies in patterns that you display to them it appears basic but it gives you an indication of who pays attention to to detail which in risk management may be that deciding factor. Middle level risk management can be assessed easily on critical thinking by using the use of scenarios and what they see and miss especially in series of played video clips. This may seem tedious but what you are looking for in a good risk manager is the ability to see beyond the obvious with the right technical knowledge. Risk management at the senior level

I looked for skill but also for how candidates responded to questions that weren't related to the specific practice area. Also looked for candidates that understood that sometimes their overall thought process and training would produce an erroneous error. But the decider was that they understood when they needed to act and why.

In general look for a candidate who has the right attitude and aptitude to learn and perform. Nothing is rocket science. All skills can be nurtured and learnt by anyone with right attitude and aptitude. A person who passes with flying colours may not be a great performer on the role.