Lesson
C1ENProblem Solving & Decision Making
Master the skills that separate reactive problem solvers from strategic thinkers. From root cause analysis and cognitive biases to group decision making and structured frameworks, this lesson builds the critical thinking B2-C1 professionals need when it matters most. A practical B2-C1 Business English lesson on problem solving, decision making, and critical thinking at work. Ideal for managers, Business English tutors, and corporate trainers.
Your Toughest Decisions
Talk Time
- Describe a difficult decision you had to make at work. How did you approach it?
- Have you ever made a decision you were confident about at the time — but later regretted? What happened?
- Do you tend to make decisions quickly or slowly? What are the advantages and disadvantages of your style?
- When do you trust your gut instinct over data and analysis — and when do you do the opposite?
- Have you ever been in a team where it was impossible to reach a decision? What made it so difficult?
- What's the best decision-making advice you've ever received — or given?
Solving Problems by Starting with the Worst Idea Possible
Content Block
Discussion questions
- The video presents "worst idea" brainstorming as a way to unlock better solutions. Have you ever tried this technique — or something similar? Did it work?
- Why do you think starting with the worst idea helps people think more creatively than asking for the best idea directly?
- Can you think of a real problem at work where this technique could have led to a better solution than conventional brainstorming?
- Reverse brainstorming works by generating the worst possible ideas and then inverting them to find solutions.True
- This technique is only useful for creative industries, not for business or operations problems.False
- Starting with bad ideas can help teams break out of conventional thinking patterns.True
- The "worst idea" approach replaces all other problem-solving methods.False
The Language of Problem Solving
Swipe Battle
Root cause analysis
A method for identifying the underlying reason a problem occurred, rather than just addressing its symptoms
Analysis paralysis
Making a decision too quickly without gathering enough information
Cognitive bias
A systematic error in thinking that affects the decisions and judgements people make
Groupthink
When a team reaches better decisions because of the diversity of perspectives and open disagreement
Devil's advocate
A person who argues against a proposal specifically to test its weaknesses, not because they oppose it
Confirmation bias
The tendency to search for information that confirms what you already believe
Escalation of commitment
Stopping investment in a project the moment early results are disappointing
Decision fatigue
The deteriorating quality of decisions made after a long session of decision making
Brainstorming
A creative technique for generating a large number of ideas without immediate judgement or evaluation
Pre-mortem
An exercise where a team imagines a project has already failed and works backwards to identify why
SWOT analysis
A framework for evaluating internal strengths and weaknesses and external opportunities and threats
Risk aversion
The tendency to avoid all decisions that involve any degree of uncertainty whatsoever
How Smart People Make Bad Decisions
Jigsaw Reading
Fragment A: The Confirmation Trap
One of the most dangerous tendencies in decision making is seeking evidence that confirms what we already believe and ignoring evidence that contradicts it. Research shows that once a person has formed a view, they consistently rate confirming information as more credible than disconfirming information — even when the quality of evidence is identical. In business, this means that the people most confident in a decision are often the least likely to notice the signals that it is going wrong.
Fragment B: The Sunk Cost Fallacy
A rational decision maker considers only future costs and benefits — not what has already been spent. But in practice, most people and organisations continue investing in failing projects because of what they have already put in: time, money, reputation. The logic feels intuitive — "we've come this far" — but it consistently leads to worse outcomes. The ability to walk away from a bad decision, clearly and without excessive guilt, is one of the most valuable and underrated skills in business.
Fragment C: The Danger of Groupthink
Teams are often assumed to make better decisions than individuals — more perspectives, more information, more checks. But research suggests that cohesive, hierarchical teams frequently make worse decisions than individuals, because the pressure to maintain group harmony overrides honest analysis. People self-censor, minority views are not heard, and the team converges on a position that everyone can live with rather than the position that is actually best. Psychological safety — the belief that disagreement will not be punished — is the single most effective antidote.
Fragment D: Deciding When You're Tired
The quality of decisions degrades significantly across a day of sustained decision making. Studies of judges showed that favourable decisions were granted roughly 65% of the time at the start of a session and dropped to nearly zero by the end — before resetting after a break. The same cognitive load that makes complex decisions tiring also makes the brain default to simpler, more conservative choices. Understanding when your decision-making capacity is at its best — and protecting that time for your most important choices — is a practical and underused strategy.
Comprehension questions
- Can you think of a time — at work or in life — when you or someone else fell into the confirmation trap, only looking for evidence that supported what you already believed?
- Why do you think it is so hard for organisations to walk away from a failing project, even when it is clearly not working?
- How would you describe the level of psychological safety in teams you have worked in — do people feel genuinely free to disagree?
Problem Solving Language
Word Choice
- Before we look for solutions, we need to identify the rootrealmainkey cause of the problem, not just treat the symptoms.
- The team fell into analysis paralysisdecision fatigueconfirmation biasgroupthink — they had so much data that they couldn't commit to any course of action.
- A classic biasSWOTrootrisk analysis helped us map out our internal strengths and the external threats we needed to respond to.
- We need someone to play devil'stheoura advocate in this meeting — someone who will actively challenge our assumptions before we commit.
- The project was clearly failing, but nobody wanted to stop because of the money already invested — a classic case of confirmationanalysisdecisionescalation of commitment.
- A good pre-mortemSWOTpost-mortembrainstorm exercise asks the team to imagine the project has already failed — then work backwards to find out why.
- The team suffered from groupthinkconfirmation biasanalysis paralysisdecision fatigue — nobody wanted to disagree with the director, so everyone nodded along to a plan that several people privately thought was wrong.
The Problem Solving Meeting
Roleplay Quest
Scenario
A product launch scheduled for next month is at serious risk. Sales projections are 40% below target, the marketing campaign has underperformed, and two team members have raised concerns about the product's core features. The leadership team has one meeting to decide: delay the launch, proceed as planned, or cancel entirely.
Product Director
You have led this product for two years and believe strongly in its potential. The problems are real but fixable.
Secret goal: Push for a short delay of 6-8 weeks to address the key issues. Do not let the team cancel without a full evidence-based discussion.
Head of Sales
Your team is on the ground and the market feedback has been consistently negative. The product has a genuine positioning problem that a delay won't fix.
Secret goal: Push for a fundamental rethink or cancellation. Do not agree to a delay that simply postpones the same problem.
CFO
The company has invested €2 million. Cancellation means a full write-off. A delay costs an additional €300K. Proceeding as planned carries significant reputational risk if the launch fails publicly.
Secret goal: Present the financial reality clearly. Do not advocate for a position — push the team to make a decision they can quantify and defend to the board.
CEO
You have the final call. The board is watching. You need a decision today.
Secret goal: Listen to all three perspectives. Make a clear decision — delay, proceed, or cancel — and state the reasoning. Do not leave without a committed next step.
Decision Making Vocabulary Sprint
Speed Match
- Root cause→The underlying reason a problem occurred
- Cognitive bias→A systematic error in thinking that distorts judgment
- Pre-mortem→Imagining failure in advance to identify what could go wrong
- Sunk cost→Money or time already spent that cannot be recovered
- Groupthink→When team pressure overrides honest individual judgment
- Analysis paralysis→Being unable to decide because of too much information
- Devil's advocate→Someone who argues against a position to test its strength
- Decision fatigue→Reduced quality of decisions after sustained mental effort
- Escalation of commitment→Continuing to invest in something failing because of past investment
- Confirmation bias→Favouring information that confirms what you already believe
Tough Calls
Debate Roulette
Useful phrases
- In high-pressure situations, I think...
- The evidence suggests that...
- That depends on the type of decision...
- The risk with that approach is...
- From a cognitive science perspective...
- You could argue the opposite — that...
- In my experience, the best decisions...
- Should important business decisions always be made by teams — or are individuals sometimes better decision makers?
- Is it ever right to go with your gut instinct over data and analysis?
- Should leaders always explain the reasoning behind their decisions to their teams — or is "because I decided so" ever acceptable?
- Is it better to make a fast, imperfect decision or a slow, thorough one?
- Should companies set formal rules about when a failing project must be cancelled — or should that always be a judgment call?
- Do cognitive biases make humans fundamentally bad decision makers — or are they just the price of having a fast-thinking brain?