Why start a root-cause analysis with a blank canvas? Are we better served starting with a blank canvas and an open mind, or do we put some common manufacturing problem areas in our template? Will the defaults in our template bias the discussion or make sure we always touch base on certain topics?
I was creating a template to facilitate meetings and ensure certain topics were always covered during a root-cause analysis. However, I found myself quickly filling up the paper. I ended up switching to a tabloid page size, but I thought I should capture several iterations of the template to compare and decide which one would be more conducive to getting a good discussion started.
Which one gets your brainstorming juices flowing? Which one will be more effective?
Do we start with a blank slate?
Staring at a blank template or whiteboard can be intimidating at first. It is now up to the participants to come up with some ideas. However, strong personalities can lead the discussion in a single direction and we risk skipping some potential areas for causes.
I personally like a little more guidance in a template. At least have some common headings for areas of discussion. This way we ensure that certain topics are discussed in every root-cause analysis.
On the other hand, starting with a full fishbone diagram does not seem good either. Perhaps we start with the last one we used like the one above. The risk here is that we might get a feeling that we are done already. Looks finished to me. So perhaps we need a partial template like the one below.
Maybe even this one is too full. But we might want to make sure certain common problems are always included in the discussion.
Consider adding the following common sources of problems in manufacturing to your templates.
1. Materials – Wrong, Deficient, Out of Spec – Is the material correct? Does it meet quality standards and specifications?
2. People – Skills and Certifications for Technicians and Inspectors - Are the employees performing the job qualified to do so? Is the training received sufficient?
3. Methods/Instructions – Incomplete, inaccurate or ambiguous – Are standardized work instructions provided? Are instructions illustrated? Are the work instructions missing a critical sentence or warning?
4. Environment – Controlled, temperature, humidity, vibration, etc. – Is the assembly environment adequate to perform the work? Do the environment conditions need to be monitored for the particular process?
5. Machines/Equipment/Gages – Set up, maintenance, cycles – How do you know that a machine was properly configured to perform the work? When was the last machine maintenance?
6. Configuration – Wrong, obsolete, or changed configuration – How do you know the correct configuration was selected when the assembly was worked?
7. Measuring/Test Equipment – Insufficient, inaccurate or incorrect measurements – How would you determine that the measuring/test equipment produced the desired result? When was the tool last calibration?
8. Design – Rework, work-arounds, ECO/ECN – Was the problem or failure due to design? Due to building the wrong configuration? Different revision levels?
Which template do you prefer as a starting point? Empty or half full?