Project Management

Project Management Central

Please login or join to subscribe to this thread

Topics: Career Development, Risk Management, Talent Management
5 Why, Current Reality Tree (CRT) or another method?
When you need to analyze and troubleshoot which method you normally use: 5 whys, Current Reality Tree (CRT) or another method?
Sort By:
5 whys. Why? Asking why is the most natural thing in the world so I would imagine that it is the #1 go-to for most people. But I might follow up with other techniques depending on the situation.
Dear Anton
Not all people use the 5 whys technique properly.
Want to share what techniques and tools you use?
...
1 reply by Anton Oosthuizen
Oct 08, 2019 12:44 AM
Anton Oosthuizen
...
Firstly the 5 should not be seen as a literal 5 but rather an indication that you need to delve deeper into the answer you receive. The 5 why relies very much on common sense, intuition (call it what you want), the ability to know that you have touched on the root cause. Obviously it is called 5 whys because 5 seems to be an average depth to get to a sensible conclusion.

Whenever I find an answer that cannot be controlled I know that somewhere between the first and the current why we have missed something (or overshot the root cause) and I would go back to find it.

One thing I've seen suggested before is asking the same question 5 times. I cannot really see how that would be efficient in any way because basing the next why on the previous why is what moves you towards the cause.

But as I said in the beginning I would not advocate that the technique name is seen literally but rather as an indication that you need to question something down to a level where a change will make a difference.

CRT and Fishbone is something I will use only for more complex problems that require a visual model.
It depends on the problem. A single point failure is much better suited to the 5 whys rather than a systemic failure with multiple failure points.
Luis -

I've found 5 Why's and doing brainstorming/brainwriting with subsequent dot voting helps. If you have actual data to help identify root cause, then Pareto charting is a good way to get buy-in to proceed with the vital few...

Kiron
Oct 07, 2019 9:04 AM
Replying to Luis Branco
...
Dear Anton
Not all people use the 5 whys technique properly.
Want to share what techniques and tools you use?
Firstly the 5 should not be seen as a literal 5 but rather an indication that you need to delve deeper into the answer you receive. The 5 why relies very much on common sense, intuition (call it what you want), the ability to know that you have touched on the root cause. Obviously it is called 5 whys because 5 seems to be an average depth to get to a sensible conclusion.

Whenever I find an answer that cannot be controlled I know that somewhere between the first and the current why we have missed something (or overshot the root cause) and I would go back to find it.

One thing I've seen suggested before is asking the same question 5 times. I cannot really see how that would be efficient in any way because basing the next why on the previous why is what moves you towards the cause.

But as I said in the beginning I would not advocate that the technique name is seen literally but rather as an indication that you need to question something down to a level where a change will make a difference.

CRT and Fishbone is something I will use only for more complex problems that require a visual model.
...
1 reply by Luis Branco
Jan 07, 2020 6:05 AM
Luis Branco
...
Dear Anton
Yesterday I read an article on a blog that uses the term 5 Whys applying it to communication:
What, Why, When, Where Who by joining How, introduced by Rudyard Kipling

I remembered this topic about 5 Whys, created by Sakichi Toyoda to go to the root cause of the problems.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_whys
Oct 08, 2019 12:44 AM
Replying to Anton Oosthuizen
...
Firstly the 5 should not be seen as a literal 5 but rather an indication that you need to delve deeper into the answer you receive. The 5 why relies very much on common sense, intuition (call it what you want), the ability to know that you have touched on the root cause. Obviously it is called 5 whys because 5 seems to be an average depth to get to a sensible conclusion.

Whenever I find an answer that cannot be controlled I know that somewhere between the first and the current why we have missed something (or overshot the root cause) and I would go back to find it.

One thing I've seen suggested before is asking the same question 5 times. I cannot really see how that would be efficient in any way because basing the next why on the previous why is what moves you towards the cause.

But as I said in the beginning I would not advocate that the technique name is seen literally but rather as an indication that you need to question something down to a level where a change will make a difference.

CRT and Fishbone is something I will use only for more complex problems that require a visual model.
Dear Anton
Yesterday I read an article on a blog that uses the term 5 Whys applying it to communication:
What, Why, When, Where Who by joining How, introduced by Rudyard Kipling

I remembered this topic about 5 Whys, created by Sakichi Toyoda to go to the root cause of the problems.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_whys

Please login or join to reply

Content ID:
ADVERTISEMENTS

A conference is a gathering of important people who singly can do nothing, but together can decide that nothing can be done.

- Fred Allen

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsors