Is Five Why Analysis Too Simplistic for Complex Problems?

By Pascal Dennis (bio)

A common question, especially in industries that are just now learning the Lean Business System.

Problem solving is a kata - a set of core forms that we practice over & over, hopefully under the guidance of a capable sensei.

When practicing the problem solving kata, we pull in the tools we need including, Five Why, Ishikawa, Process Flow Diagrams, SIPOC etc.

It's a mistake to structure any problem solving discussion in either/or terms.

It's not Five Why OR Ishikawa OR Process Flow Diagram OR FMEA.

To paraphrase Hemingway, "it's all true." We pull in what we need.

Another common mistake is underestimating Five Why.

"Five Why is too simple for me. I want a more complex tool, because this is a complex problem. (And I am a very complex guy!)"

In consulting practice we've used Five Why to get to the root cause of complex design, supply chain and organizational problems.

Five Why is especially helpful when we've clearly defined a Direct Cause.

Often there are multiple causes, and we need to apply Five Why sequentially to get to the root cause of each.

A common failure mode is not understanding the three types of Root Causes - Inadequate Standard, Inadequate Adherence to Standard, Inadequate System.

These are derived from the splendid NASA and Loss Control literature & are invaluable because they point to actionable root causes.

In summary, problem solving is a kata and not unlike trying to hit a curve ball, shoot hoops, or hit a golf ball.

(All of which baffle me...)

You practice, practice, practice the core skills & movements.

Then, if you're very lucky, the day comes you can do it unconsciously.

Best regards,

Pascal

Reprise: Jidoka & the Titanic

By Pascal Dennis

Building quality into the process, (Jidoka), depends greatly on developing in-process and end-of-pipe embedded tests into our standardized work.

We know thereby, if we are OK or Not OK, and have an early warning that countermeasures are needed.

And who is the source of such tests? Why the people closest to the work, hence the centrality of total involvement.

Common sense, you might say. (Doesn't everybody know this?)

But, as the saying goes, nothing is more uncommon.

In fact, just a few generations ago, the concept of embedded tests and Jidoka were literally unthinkable.

The most skilled people in the most advanced societies could not conceive of managing complex systems and machinery in this way.

As evidence, I offer the Titanic.

Some years ago I did a root cause investigation of the catastrophe. Here's one of the Cause & Effect (Ishikawa) diagrams

Almost all the root causes entailed an absence of embedded tests, including:

• Is lifeboat capacity adequate?


• Can the steel & rivets withstand cold North Atlantic temperatures?


• Does the ship's turning radius meet a predetermined standard?


• Can we evacuate this ship with a predetermined amount of time?

(Some homework for you. Can you identify at least five other tests?)

Nowadays, we wouldn't dream of designing a complex system without Jidoka and embedded tests.

But for the Titanic's designers, engineers and managers, Jidoka was unthinkable.

But 104 years later, are we not in a similar position?

Our management systems are more complex than ever. Have our mental models kept pace?

Our corporations comprise countless deep, complex, hyper-specialized multi-national, multi-cultural silos.

Is our thinking up to the challenge?

Best,

Pascal

Pascal Dennis Bio

Is Five Why Analysis Too Simplistic for Complex Problems?

By Pascal Dennis

A common question, especially in industries that are just now learning the Lean Business System.

Problem solving is a kata - a set of core forms that we practice over & over, hopefully under the guidance of a capable sensei.

(At Lean Pathways we try to reinforce the problem solving & related katas through our Brain Booster pocket cards & apps)

When practicing the problem solving kata, we pull in the tools we need including, Five Why, Ishikawa, Process Flow Diagrams, SIPOC etc.

It's a mistake to structure any problem solving discussion in either/or terms.

It's not Five Why OR Ishikawa OR Process Flow Diagram OR FMEA.

To paraphrase Hemingway, "it's all true." We pull in what we need. Another common mistake is underestimating Five Why.

"Five Why is too simple for me. I want a more complex tool, because this is a complex problem. (And I am a very complex guy!)"

In consulting practice we've used Five Why to get to the root cause of complex design, supply chain and organizational problems.

Five Why is especially helpful when we've clearly defined a Direct Cause.

Often there are multiple causes, and we need to apply Five Why sequentially to get to the root cause of each.

A common failure mode is not understanding the three types of Root Causes - Inadequate Standard, Inadequate Adherence to Standard, Inadequate System.

These are derived from the splendid NASA and Loss Control literature & are invaluable because they point to actionable root causes.

In summary, problem solving is a kata and not unlike trying to hit a curve ball, shoot hoops, or hit a golf ball.

(All of which baffle me...)

You practice, practice, practice the core skills & movements.

Then, if you're very lucky, the day comes you can do it unconsciously.

Best regards,

Pascal