^

Business

Five Whys should be as many as 20 Whys

ELBONOMICS - Rey Elbo - The Philippine Star

Marcie (not his real name), the production manager, is at a loss trying to solve a recurring issue in their factory. Their problem? Constantly late delivery of their products to customers by an average of three days. This led to many lost opportunities. Some customers would rather buy from other suppliers than wait for their late delivery.

The factory is losing $1,200 for every day of delay, an average loss of $3,600 for three days. Marcie’s problem-solving team can’t solve the issue. They used many root cause analysis tools, including the Why-Why Analysis, a.k.a. Five Whys.

Marcie is working under the illusion that he has already done many things to solve the problem, including the routine replacement of the contractual driver and his pahinante (porter) assigned by the supply chain service provider. There were times when they were successful in delivering on time. Then, they would return to their old ways, sometimes as late as five days!

It turns out, nothing could happen spontaneously unless you do something through trial and error. That’s assuming you have enough time and the customers are willing to wait, which is a farfetched aspiration of lazy people.

So, what are the root causes of this problem? Initially, I thought of asking: “Why are you concerned about the performance of the service provider?” Marcie replied they can’t go on and on routinely replacing their service provider. He is correct.

Marcie’s team used Five Whys in defining the root causes of the problem. Nothing happened. I advised them to use the Fishbone Diagram as the first tool in listing down all possible root causes, classified according to the six categories, namely – manpower, material, machine, method and measurement.

In addition, consider Milieu representing Mother Nature or employee Morale in case of their supply chain provider that must tackle the hassle and bustle of heavy traffic and the poor morale of the driver and his pahinante.

After completing the Fishbone Diagram, then validate the results by asking Five Whys.

Data

American management genius W. Edwards Deming (1900-1993) said: “In God we trust. All others must bring data.” We can’t rely on people’s opinions and innuendos, no matter how they appear objective. Everyone must have accurate, current and factual information arising out of data.

Data are based on historical records. If the data are accurate, then we have a basis for analyzing them to provide the right context and meaning. I told Marcie to capture all data about each day of delay, like the day and time when they leave the factory. Record all information about the customer’s location, the time they departed from the factory, among other information, including the name of the driver, his pahinante and the plate number of their delivery vehicle, and other pertinent details.

By using Five Whys, we can validate all root causes starting from the number one root cause as defined by a team. For the uninitiated, let me tell you this hypothetical story. In one of his regular visits to the factory, the chief executive officer (CEO) asked the plant manager about the condition of their overhead water tank.

“I noticed that our water tank has been fast corroding. Why is that happening?” The manager says they’re using a harsh chemical compound to clean the tank. The CEO asked: “Why are we using such a harsh compound? The reply was: “It’s the best cleaner to remove stubborn pigeon poops on the tank.”

CEO: Why do we have many pigeon poops? Manager: Pigeons roam around while feeding on spiders below the tank. CEO: Why do we have spiders below the tank? Manager: The spiders feed on many insects that use the grasses for their habitat.

CEO: Why don’t we simply cut the grasses? Manager: You’re right, Sir! I got a better idea. We’ll cement that area right away to eliminate the grasses. In many cases like this one, the Five Whys can give us a low-cost solution.

But, what if the Fifth Why can’t give us the answer? Unknown to many people, we can raise as many as ten, 15 or 20 whys as long as the team is not satisfied with the right solution.

Conclusion

The above-stated illustration shows how much can be done if we explore the logic behind every situation. One caveat though. Some people would object to the Why-Why Analysis as it could uncover their incompetence in the process. Imagine a situation when an ordinary worker takes the place of the CEO who, in their innocence would question the use of harsh compound in cleaning the water tank.

The concerned manager may ignore such questions unless an organization has fully established a system where employees are encouraged to give their ideas, suggestions, and even complaints. Believe me. I’ve tested it successfully hundreds of times in the past.

In conclusion, when an alleged expert prescribes the Five Whys as part of a root cause analysis, ask their permission if they could go beyond the Five Whys. Chances are, they would be at a loss on what to do. If that happens, cite this article and find out their reaction. Therefore, be on the lookout for familiar problem-solving tools and challenge their validity, if not how to modify them.

No matter how credible it may sound, you will learn many things other than problem-solving.

 

 

Rey Elbo is a quality and productivity improvement enthusiast. For free insights, email your story to elbonomics@gmail.com or via https://reyelbo.com. Anonymity is guaranteed.

PRODUCTION

  • Latest
  • Trending
Latest
Recommended
Are you sure you want to log out?
X
Login

Philstar.com is one of the most vibrant, opinionated, discerning communities of readers on cyberspace. With your meaningful insights, help shape the stories that can shape the country. Sign up now!

Get Updated:

Signup for the News Round now

FORGOT PASSWORD?
SIGN IN
or sign in with
-->