Analytical thinking breaks a problem or a set of information into its parts so you can understand how it works. Critical thinking judges whether the claims, evidence and reasoning you are given are good enough to believe or act on. In short, analysis asks “what is going on here?” and critical thinking asks “should I accept this?” The two overlap and usually work together: you analyse first, then evaluate what the analysis shows.
Employers often test both, but in different ways. Critical thinking is usually measured with a verbal test such as the Watson Glaser, and you can try one in a free critical thinking test written in its style.
The difference at a glance
| Analytical thinking | Critical thinking | |
|---|---|---|
| Main question | How does this work, and what are its parts? | Is this claim justified? |
| Main activity | Breaking down, organising, finding patterns | Questioning, weighing evidence, judging |
| Typical output | A breakdown, a model, a set of findings | A judgement or a decision |
| Typical tools | Data, calculations, diagrams, categories | Evidence, assumptions, logic, alternatives |
| Common risk | Producing detail without a conclusion | Judging before you understand the detail |
What analytical thinking looks like
Analytical thinking is about structure. You take something complex and split it into smaller pieces, then look at how those pieces relate. Examples include:
- breaking a sales total down by region, product and month to see where the change came from
- mapping the steps in a process to find where delays happen
- sorting customer feedback into categories so you can see which issues come up most
The aim is understanding. A good analysis makes a complicated situation clear, but it does not on its own tell you what to believe or do.
What critical thinking looks like
Critical thinking is about judgement. You take a claim, an argument or a proposed decision and test it. Examples include:
- asking whether the evidence for a conclusion is strong enough
- spotting an assumption in a proposal that nobody has stated
- considering other explanations for a result before accepting the obvious one
- deciding which of two arguments is stronger
The aim is a sound judgement. For a fuller definition, see our guide to what critical thinking is.
A worked example using both
A regional manager is told: “The new marketing campaign is working. Sales are up.”
The analytical step. She breaks the sales figures down by region. The campaign ran only in the North.
| Region | Last quarter | This quarter | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| North | £120,000 | £150,000 | Up £30,000, a rise of 25% |
| South | £200,000 | £190,000 | Down £10,000, a fall of 5% |
| Total | £320,000 | £340,000 | Up £20,000, a rise of 6.25% |
The working: £30,000 ÷ £120,000 = 0.25, or 25%. £10,000 ÷ £200,000 = 0.05, or 5%. £20,000 ÷ £320,000 = 0.0625, or 6.25%.
The analysis shows that the North’s rise more than accounts for the overall growth, because the South actually fell.
The critical step. Now she judges the claim. The North’s rise is consistent with the campaign working, and the South, which had no campaign, did not grow. That makes the claim more credible than the headline total alone. But she also asks:
- Did anything else change in the North, such as a new store or a competitor closing?
- Is this quarter normally strong in the North?
- Why did the South fall, and could the same cause be holding back the North too?
Her conclusion is that the campaign has probably helped, and that the result is worth testing in one more region before spending on a national roll-out.
Notice how the two skills depend on each other. Without the analysis, she would have judged the claim on a single total. Without the critical step, she would have a neat table and no decision.
Which one do employers want?
Most jobs need both, and job adverts often list them side by side. The balance varies:
- Roles heavy in data, such as analyst, finance and operations jobs, lean on analytical thinking, with critical thinking used to check the findings.
- Roles heavy in argument and judgement, such as law, policy and consulting, lean on critical thinking, with analysis used to understand the facts first.
In recruitment tests, analytical thinking tends to appear in numerical, logical and data interpretation questions. Critical thinking is tested more directly by tests such as the Watson Glaser, which ask you to judge inferences, assumptions and arguments. Our guide to what the Watson Glaser test is explains its five sections.
How to describe both on a CV or in an interview
Show the two together where you can. A strong example describes how you broke a problem down and then what you concluded and why. For instance: “I split the overdue invoices by client and by age, found that three clients accounted for most of the value, and recommended changing their payment terms rather than chasing every account.” The first half is analysis. The second is critical judgement.
How to develop both skills
To build analytical thinking, practise breaking information down: summarise a report in a table, or map a process step by step. To build critical thinking, practise questioning: name the assumption in an argument, or list other explanations for a result. Our guide to what critical thinking skills are covers each of the skills involved.
If you have a critical thinking test coming up, the best preparation is questions in the same format. Try a timed critical thinking practice test to see how you do.
