Root Cause Analysis: there’s more to it than meets the eye
To get the most out of RCA, understand its subtleties
Root cause analysis (RCA) is a crucial concept for solving problems; its value is self-evident. If/When we address the root cause of a problem, rather than just symptoms or superficial causes, we can solve a problem fully, and conclusively.
Like a powerful and sharp sword, RCA must be wielded carefully. There are a couple of nuances in RCA, which if not understood, can derail the problem-solving process.
RCA is not as simple as 5 Whys
Problem-solving is an integral part of our lives. We are continually solving some problem, or another. A lot of it is done innately.
Root cause analysis however is a learnt skill. Our default instinct is to solve the symptom or apparent cause. Deciphering root causes is an acquired skill, typically achieved with by learning relevant tools or techniques. The most popular one is 5 Whys, attributed to Taichi Ohno of Toyota.
5 Whys, as the technique implies, involved asking “why” five times in succession to reveal the root cause, that may not have been obvious at the outset. It’s not clear what context Ohno said this in, or what he exactly meant. Nevertheless, 5 Whys is the predominant technique for RCA.
While the technique looks good in theory, and can work for simple(r) problems, it may not always be accurate. Accuracy is the quality of a measurement being close to its actual value. Two people using 5-Whys can arrive at two entirely different, yet equally valid, root causes!
A deeper critique of 5-Whys comes from Peter Cullen’s excellent video with JIT Cafe’s Elizabeth Swan. Cullen points out that 5-Whys uses “defensive reasoning” which can lead to solutions being dressed up causes. True causal reasoning, he points out, needs to consider actions and conditions.
RCA is not as simple as applying 5-Whys. It’s a more involved process, which may call for deeper analysis and broader, more systematic tools like fishbone diagrams or causal trees.
Discovering the root cause of a problem, particularly of a complex problem, which ironically need RCA the most, with accuracy and precision, can actually be quite arduous.
RCA can change the problem
A root cause is more fundamental than superficial causes. Therefore, solving a root cause can have a broader impact on a problem.
By expanding the problem, we can get more effective, efficient and durable solutions. This is why RCA is so important — it facilitates better solutions. The downside is the extra effort required, which despite being ideal, may not always be practical.
Let’s take a rather literal example.
A tree in a suburban house has become too big and is impinging upon water pipes. The solution is to cut the tree. In most cases, the stem is cut at a deep level. The tree is usually not uprooted. Why? Because grinding out the roots is a much bigger undertaking. It may be the ideal solution, but addressing the literal root cause here is no more beneficial than just cutting the trunk.
Beyond expanding footprints, addressing root causes can also completely alter the problem.
Geopolitics provides plenty of examples.
Post WW2, we’ve seen many proxy-wars play out between USA and Russia. In all cases, the war theatre has been limited. USA and Russia have never attempted to directly eradicate the root cause (each other!). Why? Because that could invite a full World War; a fundamentally different situation compared to a proxy war.
It’s not always practical to address the root cause. Situational factors often play a constraining role.
To be clear, the importance of RCA cannot be stressed enough. To solve problems better, RCA must be done every time.
Special attention however should be paid to how RCA is done, and how, and how much, we act upon it.
If you liked this post, you’ll enjoy my book📘Smart Problem Solving, available on Amazon in print and Kindle format.
