Comment utilisez-vous l’analyse des causes profondes pour améliorer les performances de votre équipe ?

In my view - solution to any problem begins by understanding the problem sharply to begin with. Many a times we read the problem as is visible on the surface and jump into actions ( for example - sales is down by 15% ). The right approach should be a peel down the layers and deep dive into the root causes which will come in from data analytics, feedback layered by intuitive knowledge of issues. Drill down to 3-4 core issues leading to the larger problem on hand, find out the insights which have lead to those issues and focus on fixing them. Resources are always constraint and a sharper definition of problem can also help putting in resources (budgets / people / infrastructure) in the most optimal manner and probability of success is higher.

Although defining the problem can seamlessly to be easy, I found that people make the problem too broad and try to tackle multiple issues with 1 RCA. It is important to dial into the problem so that you can truly solve it. Maybe in the process you found your next RCA.

Identify specific performance issues or areas where expectations are not being met. Detail the symptoms of these problems and their impact on team outcomes. This precise problem definition sets the foundation for a thorough investigation, guiding the team to look beyond surface-level symptoms and explore underlying causes. Understanding the root of performance challenges enables targeted interventions, leading to more effective and sustainable improvements in team performance.

Data collection is key to an RCA. You have to go in without a bias so that the information you find tells the store of what you’re diving into. Many times in my RCA’s I found data that was different to what I expected and it only helped to broaden my knowledge.

To get to the root of any problem it is critical to collect relevant data which can guide to the core issues to be addressed. Data also helps clear biases, bring all stakeholders on one page, prevents judgemental views and finally funnels down what exactly is to be focused upon. Data collection can be done from multiple sources - externally and internally. In my view it should be done both ways for better validation and perspective. Data collection can be draining if not defined well on what is to be scope and with defined timelines. Once reports are generated - raw data needs to be put up in a readable form through thorough analysis and filters and funnel down to the last mile to arrive at the root causes. RCA is key to problem solving.

La identificación de la causa raíz sin duda en el objetivo del ejercicio, y podemos hacer uso en primera instancia del Diagrama Ishikawa, ya que secciona la Causas en 4 o 6 categorías, Principalmente usando las 4 M´s, o bien, ajustando a nuestras propuesta, y con esto evitamos que los participantes den respuestas demasiado dispersas. Posteriormente tomamos la técnica 5 Porqué para llegar al fondo de la causa que origina los problemas. Es importante orientar a los participantes para que no propongan causas que en realidad son problemas o que hagan preguntas tipo 5 porqué durante el análisis de ishikawa.

Identification of root cause is the most important block to make an impact thru RCA of any process. whether its fishbone or pareto or any other RCA, one need to put all relevant data on the table and club them under broad points. These broad points can further be dissected across people, process, lagging or leading metrics etc and then the solutioning can be done. Focusing on just solution normally dilute the whole process and hence due diligence to be done for each metrics or parameter so that the output can be sharper and effective.

Após detecção de uma oportunidade em um procedimento, há a aplicação do framework Ishikawa, também reconhecido como diagrama de espinha de peixe. Este método auxilia na identificação das possíveis origens, categorizadas nas principais áreas: Recursos Humanos, Materiais, Método, Medida, Meio Ambiente e Máquina. Após a descrição de cada potencial origem, torna-se imperativo identificar a mais provável. Nesse sentido, recorre-se ao gráfico de Pareto para reduzir a gama de causas prováveis. Posteriormente, emprega-se a técnica dos 5 Porquês para cada causa destacada no gráfico de Pareto, culminando na identificação da raiz do problema.

Die Rolle von Soft Skills, wie empathisches Zuhören und emotionale Intelligenz, im Prozess der Ursachenanalyse kann nicht hoch genug eingeschätzt werden. Diese Fähigkeiten helfen dabei, tiefere Einsichten in die Ursachen von Problemen zu gewinnen und Lösungen zu finden, die das Team stärken.

After identify an opportunity in a process, there is the ishikawa framework, also known as the fishbone diagram, that helps locate the possible causes according to the main areas: Workforce, Materials, Method, Measure, Environment and Machine. After describing every possbile cause, it's time to identify the most probable cause. For that, we can use the Pareto graph to reduce the range of probable causes and after that the 5Why for each Cause located in the Pareto Graph to get to the root cause of the problem.

Generating solutions seems like the most daunting part of the RCA but it's one of the most useful ones. I recommend including a large array of people so you have proposals with different perspectives and trying to get the ball rolling with simple ideas if nobody is providing anything. There's a tendency to go to the "perfect solution" right away and to stick to discussing it for a long time. Avoid analyzing any proposal until you have a large number of options. This way you reduce your risk of leaving good proposals out.

This is the largest part of a group RCA. You want to have multiple stakeholders in the room based on the size of the problem. For example, I conducted a RCA for a safety incident in a warehouse. We had the Manager, trainer, safety team member and me, the AP Manager. We were able to identify a real solution based on everyone’s insight.

This is a big step as you are putting words into action. Make a plan to follow up with the solutions and give realistic time lines. The best I have is put it on paper. This way you know it’s important and there should be a name or names attached with a due date.

I like to call these an After Action Review. The outcome determines how well the solution was or how well you executed the plan. Either way, this is where you take the real feedback and use it in future RCA’s.

I have completed multiple RCA’s around safety and they were typically cut and dry due to the nature of the business. I can say that the best advice I have is the stake holders involved in the RCA. Have an expert in each category or process so that you can get their advice. You need the buy in of the team and it helps when that assist in the resolution.

Eine effektive Ursachenanalyse erfordert Führungskräfte, die nicht nur analytisch denken, sondern auch empathisch führen können. Die Fähigkeit, ein Umfeld zu schaffen, in dem Teammitglieder offen über Fehler und Lernmöglichkeiten sprechen können, ist entscheidend für den Erfolg.

In my view is also fundamental to have an open approach from everyone, learning from failure is key. For example, analyzing a project failure with openness and identify issues lead to fundamental improvement. It's very important for an organization to have the right mindset and culture to fully transform issues in future value. This finally reflect in higher performance for individuals and the overall organization, but I have seen to many situations where fear sabotage this process.