What is the process for identifying the root cause of a problem in a Lean Six Sigma project?

Starting with the end in mind is a great way to solve a problem. Discovering the ultimate problem is a good start. But the problem may not be the problem you met first. Diging and peeling are necessary. Reasoning from First Principles is my way.

Defining the problem is a critical initial step in any Lean Six Sigma project, as it sets the stage for all subsequent analysis and improvement efforts. A well-defined problem provides a clear, focused objective for the team and ensures that the project is aligned with organizational goals and customer needs. The process of defining the problem involves several key components: 1 - Data-Driven Problem Statement 2 - Scope and Impact Analysis 3 - Goal Setting 4 - Stakeholder and Customer Identification 5 - Utilizing the SIPOC Diagram. Sigma project involves a comprehensive approach that incorporates a data-driven problem statement, scope and impact analysis, goal setting, stakeholder and customer identification, and SIPOC diagram.

?? ?????????????? ???????? ?????????????? ???? ?? ?????????????? ???????? ????????????. ???? ???????????? ?? ?????????????? ?????????????? ???? ?????? ?????? ?????????????? ?????????? ???????? ????????????????. Breaking down a problem into its components is a robust/useful data collection process following a structured 5W-1H approach. In this approach, teams need to answer the questions with W’s & H’s 1W – What exactly is the problem "The Perceived Problem"? 2W – Where does the problem occur? Point of Occurrence – Location 3W - When did the Problem Occurred? Point of Occurrence – Time 4W – Who identified the Problem? 5W – Why is this a Problem? 1H - How Big is this Problem (Severity – How many parts Failed / Rejected?)

Very often defining the problem is challenging because at the beginning we mostly deal with “symptoms”. The symptoms are very rarely the problem.

I will not repeat the process steps and the tools used already mentioned by other colleagues. But I will say that, in my experience, the critical part is understanding what a problem is. A problem is always a gap, a difference, between what we currently see/measure/define by our measuring units/describe as process steps (qualitative and quantitative attributes) and the desired state of things defined in our standards/expectations/want to be results. Once this is clear, stick to the process and thou shall not fail: apply tools and follow the problem solving process steps.

It’s also important to do a MSA ( Measurement System Analysis) to reduce variation or inconsistency in the measurement process including errors from tools or of manual measurements.

Well if Polychain GT Carbon can't fix the problem, then I suggest a bigger hammer. Thanks for asking. So I always wanted to be the guy that came up with the next sigma program, or iso9002, or 5S, so I could ride around getting paid to present seminars that often go against common sense, then people who are not the best thinkers apply practices that are not universal and screw up the company. Oops sorry, I'm off to the next presentation or better yet the next bad idea to infect manufacturing....next please

Simple words, if you do not know the starting point, from where you are going to compare the results obtained, you do not know if you arrived or not, therein lies the importance of measuring current performance or condition.

Containment Anyone? There are some great points presented in this article and the comments. It seems a critical step is missing from the 6 steps presented, that being an interim containment step. One that ensures no further defects or quality issues (known as “escapes”) persist or reoccur. In fact, a team should never proceed to formal root cause analysis (RCA) phases unless an interim containment has been established. The risks of not doing so can be disastrous to a product or a company’s reputation. Those interested might consider the Eight Discipline (8D) Problem Solving approach, which is also known as the Problem Solving Process (PSP) in the aerospace industry. It provides a time-tested approach that also includes a containment step.

the management guru Peter Drucker famously said, “If you can't measure it, you can't manage it.” it says everything and that's always true like if you can’t know whether or not you are successful unless success is defined and tracked.

After clearly defining the problem, stakeholders could apply tools like fishbone diagrams(useful for writing down all possible causes of the problem), 5 Whys(for drilling down to the root of the problem by analyzing why the problem occurred), and regression analysis. It’s important that stakeholders can use these tools to organize the investigation process, this goes a long way to document the root cause process.

Be aware that there may be multiple root causes. In fact, most times that is the case. Identifying as many root causes as posible also means you open yourself to having more options to eliminate the problem.

Temos algumas ferramentas que s?o mais utilizadas para análise de causa raiz como o Diagrama de Ishikawa, o Pareto e o método dos 5 Porquês. é de extrema importancia analisar a causa raiz para que o problema seja resolvido de fato onde nasce, assim sua eficiência será muito maior.

I think that combining different tools is important to isolate the root cause. The Ishikawa (or fish bone) diagram helps gather all potential sources even the least likely ones. the 5whys can help dig deeper and eliminate candidates. Anyway, communication with all stakeholders is crucial

it is also called Cause-and-Effect Analysis it involves using a Fishbone diagram (Ishikawa diagram) to identify potential causes of the problem, it is a visual representation of the problem-solving process, with the problem at the head of the fish and the potential causes as the fishbones.

Identifying the root cause can sometimes be very complicated. If it is not possible to identify these straight away, it is sometimes more efficient to determine several potential causes using a cause tree and the 5-Why method. Measures can then be developed to eliminate these potential causes.

Regression analysis is also an important tool that helps estimates the impact, variables or causes have on each other as well as the final problem.

Or implement a MVP and validate the results. I’ve even seen others make a non root cause more apparent to validate impact of the cause.

One of the tools that have been used during the “Verify” phase is to reintroduce the root cause to confirm if it is the source of the problem. If it is the actual cause then the problem should come back into the process providing additional assurance that the correct root cause has been selected.

In some cases, it may be challenging to recreate the failure due to various factors with a significant impact, such as cost, scrap KPI, or time constraints. However, whenever possible, I highly recommend replicating the failure more than once. This not only confirms the root cause but also allows for a step back to reassess and define the problem accurately in case is neccesary.

Takes the users on board. Solutions should be developed with those who will ultimately use them. Very good solutions can be developed in the form of workshops.

After implementing solutions, we must give enough time to standardise it and then take up May further improvement Read across, standardisation of the solution is important too.

While both implementing and monitoring are important steps, the monitoring step can help provide information for other areas or processes that were not anticipated. Solutions should not be implemented in a “silo”. When solutions are implemented other areas should be investigated to see if there has been an effect on costs, legal requirements, or potentially new problems. Double checking to make sure no new problems have come up will help promote the success of the solution.

Test, implement and either fail quickly giving time to change course or succeed and work to understand why it had a positive result so you can know when the data will yield a repeatable result.

Now the focus is to maintain the gains verified during in the implement solutions, to achieve this, it is essential that you define control criteria such as, for example, checklists, process capacity analysis, visual standards, poka-yoke, audits, etc.

While the listed steps appear to cover the Six-Sigma method, they don't fully align with the DMAIC mnemonic. I find remembering DMAIC helps to remember the process. The 5 steps of 6-Sigma (technically) are: 1. Define (the problem) 2. Measure (collect relevant data) 3. Analyze (determine and verify root cause) 4. Improve (eliminate root cause) 5. Control (Monitor AND control the improved process) I must note that in step 5, the author ends with "monitor". In my experience, far to often we implement "monitoring" and data collection without the necessary focus on action from that monitoring. Never forget, the purpose of monitoring is to drive action to improve. Monitoring/Measuring without action is eventually just waste.

Bill H. Is exactly correct. He maps yet another “recipe” back to Motorola’s Six Sigma DMAIC. The late Dr. Mikel Harry calls this “Recipe madness.” Control was often weak and thus C was added to DMAI. C is to monitor processes AND ACT on the input variation originally found in the analyze and improve phases is the control phase. Compliments also to writers in avoiding words which require defining. This is the opposite of lean by wasting time when the writer has to then translate to the language of the reader.

While the focus of problem solving is on ??occurrence??, in other terms ??why did this happen??, the detection (lack of) is often overlooked. In my experience, you learn a lot in understanding why a problem was not detected before it happened and finding solutions to better detect it. Some problems might be expensive or complicated to solve but can be easy to detect before they happen.

Never forget to save the "Lessons learnt" in the story library for the company, this way the next time (or in five years) you will save time by not repeating mistakes. Mistakes are only negative if you don′t learn from them.

Consider the human element. Take more time in the beginning doing research before jumping to conclusions. Meet with customers. Interview employees. Benchmark similar processes.