✅ Why critical thinking is your professional superpower in an age of AI

AI can generate and review content in seconds, but it can’t think critically or offer credible counsel. The practitioners who thrive in 2026 will be those who do the hard work themselves.

The modern communications environment rewards speed. AI generates content in seconds. News cycles compress. Posting to social media costs nothing and takes seconds. Clients and managers want answers now. The pressure for practitioners to react has never been greater.

But speed without understanding and judgment is noise. If there is one capability that will separate high-performing practitioners from the rest in 2026, it is critical thinking. This is the ability to evaluate information, question assumptions, and form reasoned judgments before acting.

The information environment demands it

The operating context for corporate communication and public relations has shifted dramatically in the past five years. Geopolitical volatility, algorithmic mediation, AI-generated content, and polarised public discourse have made the information environment more complex, more contested, and less trustworthy.

Practitioners are expected to advise leadership on issues where the facts are unclear, the stakes are high, and the sources are unreliable. They must distinguish signal from noise, detect weak signals early, and counsel with confidence when certainty is impossible.

This is sensemaking work, and it depends on critical thinking.

Yet too often, our industry defaults to instinct, anecdote, and the first result that confirms what we already believe. We cite surveys without questioning methodology. Worse, we design research to support an existing hypothesis. We share AI-generated summaries without reading the source. We mistake volume for efficacy and validity.

One of my pet hates is the growing trend of uploading reports and research papers to AI tools to extract summaries. You see it daily on LinkedIn: so-called hot takes that are nothing more than regurgitated bullet points from a language model. Sometimes people admit to using AI, but mostly, they don’t.

This is the fast food equivalent of learning. I’ve said it before: it’s the nutritional equivalent of eating a Crunchie or Wotsits for breakfast. It completely bypasses cognitive and critical thinking.

You cannot challenge what you have not read. You cannot advise with confidence on material you have only skimmed using a machine. And you certainly cannot build the kind of deep expertise that earns a seat at the management table.

Three habits that build critical thinking

Critical thinking is a set of habits that can be developed through deliberate practice. In writing today’s newsletter editorial, I’ve summoned the wisdom of Tara Brabazon from her brilliant audio book, Know What You Do Not Know. It’s intended for PhD researchers, but has broad application for anyone in a professional role.

Here are three habits that Tara outlines in her book that I apply in my own work.

1. Seek and cross-reference multiple data sources

No single source tells the whole story. A survey may reflect sample bias. A report may serve commercial interests. A news article may lack context.

Triangulate before drawing conclusions. Look for convergence across independent sources. Where sources disagree, interrogate why. The goal is not consensus, but confidence in your reasoning.

This discipline is especially important when working with AI-generated content. Large language models synthesise information probabilistically, not truthfully. They flatten nuance and obscure provenance. Cross-referencing is essential.

2. Read widely and assess the credibility of each source

Not all knowledge is equal. Peer-reviewed research should carry significantly more weight than a LinkedIn post. Primary data is more reliable than aggregated opinion. A practitioner’s lived experience is valuable, but it is not generalisable evidence.

When you read, ask: how much do I trust this source to be knowledge rather than opinion? What is the author’s expertise? What methodology underpins the claim? Is the source transparent about limitations?

This is data and information literacy. Without it, critical thinking is impossible. I make a point of reading academic journals alongside trade media, and both alongside mainstream news. The friction between sources is where insight lives.

3. Separate the context of reading from the context of writing

One of the most corrosive habits in modern knowledge work is cutting and pasting. It feels efficient, but is not a good means to learn.

When you copy text directly from a source into a document, you bypass the cognitive work that produces understanding. You reproduce rather than interpret. You assemble rather than synthesise.

Instead, read in one environment (a Kindle, newspaper or book) and write in another (a notebook or separate device). Force yourself to close the source before you summarise. If you cannot articulate an argument without looking at it, you have not understood it.

This separation creates the friction that thinking requires. Much like printing work for proofing, it separates context and slows you down.

A professional imperative

Critical thinking is the foundation of credible counsel. In an age of AI-generated content, synthetic media, and institutional distrust, the practitioner who can evaluate evidence, weigh competing claims, and communicate with intellectual honesty will be indispensable.

The one who cannot will be replaceable by a prompt. The choice is yours.

Happy New Year and have a good week ahead.

---

The Wadds Inc. newsletter is trusted by 5,000 practitioners seeking clarity on issues such as artificial intelligence, diversity and societal polarisation, from a management and communication perspective. We distil news, research, and industry developments twice a week into actionable briefings to help you enhance your work.

The newsletter takes four to five hours each week to produce and is reader-supported. A paid subscription helps fund my independent PhD research on high-performance corporate communications and public relations.

Thank you.