How can you use root cause analysis to save money in Lean Manufacturing?

Saving money with root cause analysis! First look at how you lose money? how much you are losing? Loss cost matrix is a great tool to understand this. it shows how much you lose, from what areas and which department. Well. This is the problem you need to solve to save money. When there is a problem, you need to follow systematic problem solving and root cause analysis (RCA) to go to the roots. You eliminate the root cause, you eliminate the problem, you eliminate the problem you save money.

Ao aplicar essa abordagem, identificamos as causas fundamentais dos problemas, em vez de tratar apenas os sintomas. Isso resulta em solu??es mais eficazes e duradouras. Economicamente, essa metodologia proporciona uma redu??o significativa de desperdícios, retrabalho e falhas de qualidade, levando a uma economia de custos substancial. Por exemplo, ao investigar as causas raízes de tempos de parada de máquina, descobrimos que a manuten??o preventiva inadequada era a principal causa. Implementamos ent?o um programa de manuten??o mais eficiente, reduzindo os custos de reparo e aumentando a disponibilidade da máquina. Além disso, a identifica??o precoce de problemas de qualidade através da análise de causa raiz evita retrabalho e devolu??es.

It was a key tool used in the late 80’s when implementing our TQM Total Quality Management system in diagnosing the complexity of where problems can occur. Graphically it clearly showed all processes and made it simple to understand especially for non technical people.

Root cause analysis is crucial in all manufacturing environments, especially in critical industries custom automation design and manufacturing where I operate on daily basis. It goes beyond surface-level symptoms to identify underlying problem causes. By analyzing contributing factors, RCA enables effective solutions. In our data-driven world, decisions should be based on evidence, not emotions. RCA relies on data to identify patterns and correlations, empowering informed decision-making. Benefits of RCA in manufacturing include process improvement, cost reduction, and enhanced quality. It drives continuous improvement for greater efficiency and competitiveness.

Defining what the problem ISN’T is as important as defining what the problem IS. Using the what, where, when and to what extent tools defined by Kepner Tregoe will reduce time wasted chasing down rabbit holes. Possible causes can be reduced to the most probable cause by testing the hypothesis against the IS and the ISN’T. Time and money is wasted by “experts” who jump to conclusions based on experience only. Go onto problem forums and this becomes glaringly obvious. “I had the same problem and this fixed it”. It’s a presupposition that one symptom can have only one problem, which is not true. I’ve taught this with case studies and only students who patiently follow process without jumping to conclusions can solve complex problems.

After defining the problem or waste to be reduced, it is crucial to identify the cause or causes for this specific issue. At this point it’s important to consider opening your toolbox and “grabbing” the root cause analysis tools. I’m going to list some useful tools for this step: 1- Fish bone diagram or Ishikawa, a useful tool to identify several potential causes. A multi functional evaluation is very important. 2- Pareto charts can split factors from the most to the least relevant, getting a better understanding of the cause. 3- 5 why method is a great way to take a deep dive into a particular problem and get to the core of the issue. 4- Consider using FMEA as a preventative tool and when a problem occur revisit your evaluation.

Possibly the most important step in RCA, well before finding direct causes and root causes, is finding the point of cause - where the problem is occurring. Walk backward through the process, and at each step, ask "can the problem be observed here or can it occur here"? Keep going back upstream until the answer is 'no'. The point of cause - where to start brainstorming fishbone diagram entries - was the previous process step, where the answer was 'yes'. RCA exercises can be absolutely fraught with difficulty if the point (or points) of cause aren't identified first.

Sempre comece indo para o Genba! E como Fujio Cho já mencionou, pergunte o porquê e demonstre respeito. é no Genba que podemos iniciar os cinco porquês e a partir disso podemos encontrar a causa raiz.

Use técnicas como o Brainstorming e Diagrama de Ishikawa para analisar os fen?menos relacionados ao efeito, e depois utilize os “5 Porquês” para Encontrar a raíz do problema, Pergunte repetidamente “por que” o problema ocorre até chegar à raiz do problema. Por exemplo, “Por que a linha de montagem está parando? Porque a máquina X está superaquecendo.”

The subsequent phase in Root Cause Analysis (RCA) involves pinpointing potential causes of the identified problem, employing various analytical tools and brainstorming techniques. The 5 Whys method involves asking "why" repeatedly to peel back the layers of symptoms and reach the underlying cause. The fishbone (Ishikawa) diagram helps categorize potential causes into themes like people, processes, equipment, and materials, facilitating a structured analysis. The Pareto chart, a statistical tool, ranks causes by their frequency and impact, assisting in prioritizing problem-solving efforts. This systematic exploration might reveal, for example, that inadequate inventory management is a primary contributor to the issue.

Utilize a técnica dos 5 Why's para descobrir a causa raiz do problema, aplicando esta técnica adequadamente, você evitará que o problema volte a acontecer.

Sempre fa?o a seguinte pergunta para definir o plano de a??es da RCA "Vamos implementar as a??es de R$100,00? E as de R$100.000,00?" e as resposta, "Sim e n?o", respectivamente s?o as mais comuns. A melhor solu??o é aquela que apresenta o melhor custo x benefício, podendo n?o ser a mais barata! Precisamos mudar o nosso mindset e come?ar a pensar de forma mais abrangente e n?o apenas no valor financeiro absoluto da a??o planejada. Claro que esse é um fator importante, pois quanto mais barato, mais fácil de encaixar em um or?amento, porém n?o pode ser o único fator a ser considerado. Fatores como retorno financeiro, aprendizado para a organiza??o, padroniza??o de componentes, vida útil, etc. também devem ser levados em conta.

Avalie as op??es de solu??o com base na causa identificada. Priorize as solu??es que abordam a causa raiz e n?o apenas os sintomas. Por exemplo, em vez de simplesmente reiniciar a máquina, adote solu??es que resolva o superaquecimento.

Selecting the optimal solution in RCA involves evaluating potential remedies against criteria like feasibility, effectiveness, cost, and impact. Decision-making tools such as the decision matrix, cost-benefit analysis, and impact-effort matrix help in comparing and prioritizing these solutions. Consideration of associated risks and potential consequences, both of implementing and not implementing the chosen solution, is crucial. An example of a selected solution might be the implementation of a kanban system to enhance the flow and availability of parts and materials, chosen for its balance of efficiency and cost-effectiveness.

Root cause analysis provides a return on your investment in at least three ways. 1) Improves the quality of your service or product output and increases customer enthusiasm when receiving a better service or product. 2) Improves throughput by eliminating scrap, increasing uptime and optimally and efficiently manufacturing the product. 3) There are collateral benefits of root cause analysis like improved safety and reduced risks, better ergonomic application, more efficient use of resources to produce the same amount of product or more.

Implemente a solu??o escolhida e monitore os resultados atráves de um bom plano de a??o que pode ser um 5W2H. Acompanhe métricas relevantes, como tempo de produ??o, qualidade e custos. Certifique-se de que a solu??o está funcionando conforme o esperado e fa?a ajustes, se necessário.

Após a identifica??o das causas raízes, é definido e implementado um plano de a??o corretiva. Esse plano de a??o é projetado para resolver os problemas subjacentes identificados na análise das causas raízes. Precisa sem bem conciso e ter os responsáveis pelas a??es descritos. Uma sugest?o de ferramenta é o 5W2H.

Em solu??o de problemas geralmente pulamos direto para as solu??es (contramedidas) ou definimos causas raízes muito amplas, ambos caminhos nos levando para grandes mudan?as que demandam recursos excessivos e, muitas vezes, difíceis de se implementar de forma sustentável. A chave é, ainda na análise da situa??o atual, encontrar a fundo os pontos de causa dentro do processo, as poucas atividades pequenas que, se alteradas, impedem que o problema volte a ocorrer. Foque nos pontos de causa.

The Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award (MBNQA) model encourages organizations to systematically assess their manufacturing processes, identifying performance gaps related to quality, productivity, efficiency, or cost and determine underlying factors contributing to these issues. Baldrige stresses the importance of analyzing the cost of poor quality (COPQ) to prioritize improvement efforts effectively. Based on RCA and COPQ analysis findings, organizations develop action plans to address root causes, including process improvements, training initiatives, and cultural changes. This systematic approach drives continuous improvement in Lean Manufacturing, fostering competitiveness and efficiency.

Muitas análises de causa raiz findam em "falta de treinamento" e "falta de padr?o". Mas aqui cabe um pensamento crítico sobre a própria análise. Será que a equipe está realmente engajada para buscar a verdadeira causa? Ou participa desse tipo de encontro apenas por ser mais uma obriga??o?

If you are willing to address the true root cause of a problem, it is certainly possible to generate cost savings and/or cost avoidance as a result. Root cause and corrective actions (RCCA) should be addressed both from a corrective and preventative action point of view. For example, many times operator error and operator training is often used as a RCCA to a problem when in reality, that is not the RC and that is not an effective CA. Identifying how the operator was able to make the defect and why the training was not effective will have a much larger impact on a potential cost savings/cost avoidance.

O básico de identificar a causa raiz é para desenvolver um plano de a??o que vai impedir que a causa ocorra de novo. Resumindo evitar recorrência. A elimina??o destas recorrências no mínimo é um "cost avoid" . Estes custos s?o desperdícios.