The purpose of this paper is to go a step further from the traditional 5 Whys technique by adding three more legs during the root cause analysis stage – occurrence, human and…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to go a step further from the traditional 5 Whys technique by adding three more legs during the root cause analysis stage – occurrence, human and systemic issues that contribute toward the problem, hence the term 3 × 5 Whys. Performing individual 5 Whys for these three components enables to identify deeper root cause(s) that may spawn across multiple groups within an organization.
Design/methodology/approach
Cause-and-effect analysis used during traditional root cause investigations within an 8D or Lean six sigma project is used as a theoretical foundation. Examples from different industries are presented showing the 3 × 5 Why’s framework and advantages it brings to the organization along with identifying shortcomings and suggestions to make it more effective.
Findings
If properly used this integrated methodology will reveal higher order systemic causes (e.g. policies or management decisions) stemming from lower lever symptoms (e.g. defective parts, procedural errors). Effective execution of this methodology can provide tremendous results in defect reduction, yield improvement, operational efficiency improvement and logistics management type of projects. Resolving higher level sources of problems allows an organization to evolve itself and maintain a competitive edge in the market.
Research limitations/implications
Adopting this quality management technique in start-up companies entails some challenges and other implications have been discussed with SWOT analysis.
Practical implications
Examples from various sectors using 3 × 5 Why approach have been presented that show that this methodology provides deeper insight into root causes which could be affecting multiple groups in an organization. Using this technique effectively is found to be beneficial to resolve issues in operations management, logistics, supply chain, purchasing, warehouse operations, manufacturing, etc.
Social implications
This methodology has a human component which often results in some sort of resistance as not all working professionals think alike when it comes to accountability and ownership of issues. This may hinder root cause analysis and subsequent corrective actions implementation.
Originality/value
This study is unique in its in-depth real-world case studies demonstrating the need for taking a deep dive approach to root cause analysis by understanding specific, system and human components responsible for causing the failure mode.