Root Cause Analysis
Root Cause Analysis
“Assessing Problems and Building an Effective Problem Statement”
By: Jeff Kruzil
If you are experiencing any or all of the items above, do not worry, you are not alone. The goal of this article is to illustrate some of the common issues with problem solving and provide some avenues to help you get the most value out of problem solving. Focus is given to improving in the areas of problem understanding and problem statement generation.
RCA: Root Cause Analysis
Most companies follow a structured process of steps for RCA. While it is very good to have a structured process, not all problems are created the same and not all problems require going through the full RCA process. RCA is a great process that should be handled with care. By this, I mean that if RCA is overused, and/or used incorrectly; it can result in frustration. I believe a problem should not be “fit to a tool.” Rather, a “tool should be fit to a problem.” If everything goes directly to RCA, before understanding the problem, then we can incorrectly use and/or overuse the RCA process; ultimately lumping in several different problems into one big problem. This can result in a poor RCA session and the non-value added use of RCA tools such as the “5 whys” and the “fishbone” diagram. Teams begin to feel they are going through the motions for RCA and do not fully see the value.
When you end up with a clear problem you cannot solve coupled with the need to understand root cause; then RCA can work wonders and prove extremely valuable. However, when the problem statement is too broad or contains a mixture of multiple problems, it can cause a chain reaction of poor RCA steps and confusion in RCA sessions, thereby, diminishing its value.
In addition, when everything is taken to RCA before the problem is prioritized and understood, several problems can become tangled into one. Some problems may need to be set aside or cancelled due to other priorities, rationale, or the need to try to gather data. So it is important to break down those problems and prioritize them to take efficient action where necessary as well as decide NOT to take action where necessary.
RCA Content
If you are familiar with 5S, there is a saying that goes “Everything has a place and is in its place.” This holds true for problem solving. Each problem should be addressed and put in the place it goes. This way, we do not tackle everything at once and we also do not lose sight of problems we set aside, or cancelled. As we are working through the RCA process, we should continually be reviewing how information links to the problem statement. And, if information comes up that does not clearly support the problem statement, discussion should occur to determine if a separate problem as emerged and may need to be removed from that particular problem analysis.
The Problem Statement
I would argue that one of the most critical items for RCA, if not the most critical, is the Problem Statement itself. This is also one of the most misused steps in RCA. Second to that, is the initial breakdown of reviewing and clarifying the problem.
A problem statement should be as simple and concise as possible. It should be continually referred to throughout the entire RCA session. It should also address What, When, Where, How Much, and How do you know.
If it takes a long time to develop a problem statement, it is usually an indicator that the problem is a mix of many problems and/or the problem is not yet well understood and thus, not ready for solving with RCA.
Does this mean that we have to understand every problem before we can solve it? The short answer is no. However, it does mean that we should follow some critical steps to try to clearly understand the problem and scope it using data whenever possible.
Does this mean that we cannot solve large complex problems with RCA? Again, the short answer is no. However, throughout my career in multiple industries, I have facilitated sessions with extremely large complex problems as well as small ones. I approach both of them the same way and do the best I can to help clarify a complex problem the same way I clarify a small one. After all, many large problems are multiple problems lumped into one giant mess.
Does this mean problems cannot be solved without data? Absolutely not! Although, I see too many problems move forward to RCA without first taking the time to think through possible data sources. Always look for ways to quantify the problem. If, after doing that, no data is available, then proceed with the notation that effort was made to obtain data and no data was available.
Understanding the Problem Prior to RCA
Breaking down a problem is a very important step within the overall problem solving process. It is an efficient and simple way to begin to separate and clarify problems to determine path forward. It helps you to better understand the problem. It can also help to sort out things that are “Quick Action Wins” which ultimately allows you to take the more appropriate problems to RCA. The graphic below illustrates how many teams are currently taking problems to RCA vs. a recommended approach.
This proposed approach often becomes a missed step in the problem solving process. The graphic at the right shows a nice view of the process flow leading up to RCA. The benefit of doing this process is to “filter” items that should go to RCA vs. items that do not need to or are not yet ready. This helps to ensure the most value is derived out of the problem solving process and is done so effectively and efficiently. Steps to understand the problem involve gathering data, assessing risk, assessing impact, and stakeholders.
Summary
I hope this article helps you along your journey of problem solving. By understanding problems and taking some time to separate, clarify, prioritize, and assess them, we can very efficiently make the best use of the entire problem solving process. Please feel free to contact me with questions or comments. Now, let’s go solve some problems!
