tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5167539222502940808.post6839339562423334286..comments2024-03-29T05:07:19.409-04:00Comments on A Lean Journey: Defining the Problem StatementTim McMahonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07780727768370988177noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5167539222502940808.post-45121499339314962412017-12-31T00:21:59.820-05:002017-12-31T00:21:59.820-05:00Object
Defect
consequenceObject<br />Defect<br />consequenceAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5167539222502940808.post-20549644157709837862017-04-27T12:56:02.102-04:002017-04-27T12:56:02.102-04:00Hi Jamie, Awesome article. Congrats!Hi Jamie, Awesome article. Congrats!Gerardonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5167539222502940808.post-33992961027323405662015-07-13T10:08:37.315-04:002015-07-13T10:08:37.315-04:00They are variations of similar approaches. They ar...They are variations of similar approaches. They are attempting to define the problem statement so that you can get to root cause. In some cases using tools like is/is not, fishbone, trend data, etc are necessary to help define the problem. I recommend you pick a method you are happy with and use that.<br /><br />I learned from my friend Ron Pereira to ask "so what" after 5 Why analysis and working backwards to confirm root cause. <br /><br />http://blog.gembaacademy.com/2010/01/10/introducing-the-5-why-%E2%80%9Cso-what%E2%80%9D-test/<br />Tim McMahonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07780727768370988177noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5167539222502940808.post-67018125430083009632015-07-07T02:48:43.496-04:002015-07-07T02:48:43.496-04:00 which one is correct --- 5W1H or 4W2H for exact ... which one is correct --- 5W1H or 4W2H for exact problem statment. because during investigation we use 5why for all the possible cause that came from cause and effect diagram. ??? Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5167539222502940808.post-92232717888676794362011-05-09T10:16:55.514-04:002011-05-09T10:16:55.514-04:00Great post.Worth considering using the IS/IS NOT a...Great post.Worth considering using the IS/IS NOT approach as well as 5W1H per Kepner Tregoe problem solving.E.G.Who has the problem: Shift A Who doesn't Shift B,C,D inference:- it's something specific to Shift A.If all Shifts experience problem the implication is that the problem is not due to the people. if you aren't 100% confident on answering the Is Is Not you need to gather more facts and data. If you apply the Is-Is Not to all the 5W1H it is very powerful in directing towards root cause. I recently used this approach with a manufacturing team and we have eliminated some long standing customer quality issues now even the Quality Manager tells me she is convinced in the power of the problem solving methodology.Mark Colvinhttp://www.leanpal.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5167539222502940808.post-86421523502068356232011-04-28T20:57:02.333-04:002011-04-28T20:57:02.333-04:00Walter, Thanks for sharing. I think I follow your...Walter, Thanks for sharing. I think I follow your ladder logic. I like to use the 80/20 rule rather than perfection. It is better to move forward solving the problem then get stuck in analysis paralysis.Tim McMahonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07780727768370988177noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5167539222502940808.post-4501221820126264002011-04-27T14:25:37.076-04:002011-04-27T14:25:37.076-04:00A common challenge in formulating a problem statem...A common challenge in formulating a problem statement is knowing where to put a stake in the ground.<br /><br />If:<br /><br />A = the impact<br />B = the problem<br />C = the direct cause<br /><br />You can always ladder up or down, i.e., <br /><br />A = (out of scope)<br />B = the (newly defined) impact<br />C = the problem (used to be direct cause)<br />D = the new direct cause<br /><br />or<br /><br />Z = a (larger scale) impact<br />A = the problem<br />B = the direct cause<br /><br />Don't know if that makes sense in print. :-)<br /><br />But, I see a lot of people spend too much time going in circles, rather than picking a spot, deciding what is in/out of scope, and then moving on.<br /><br />Walter Reade<br />http://www.WalterReade.netWalterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11962517801523710774noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5167539222502940808.post-76189679070054502232010-03-11T16:10:05.149-05:002010-03-11T16:10:05.149-05:00Great points. Lean is very mush about solving pro...Great points. Lean is very mush about solving problems and teaching everyone to be able to do so well. The first place to start is a good problem statement. Rob S. so often we struggle to collect data to define the problem. Certainly you can't solve the problem without this necessary fact finding information. Certainly a good problem statement means the problem is half solved.Tim McMahonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07780727768370988177noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5167539222502940808.post-84162690966668660412010-03-10T16:53:47.189-05:002010-03-10T16:53:47.189-05:00I miss an essential element or at least I'd li...I miss an essential element or at least I'd like to see it back in more specific terms:<br />a problem is a deviation from the expected; the what is vs. the what should be; the result of the experiment vs the hypothesis; the case vs the standard.<br />This is where both specifics of the case should be recorded as well as that the team jointly defines what was expected in the 1st place. Sometimes, just doing that is part of the puzzle...Rob van Stekelenborghttp://twitter.com/leanstekelnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5167539222502940808.post-72124769360869595212010-02-25T11:52:37.708-05:002010-02-25T11:52:37.708-05:00I agree with Rob. We in America and esspecially in...I agree with Rob. We in America and esspecially in my own plant have a "Ready, FIRE, Aim" approach to problem solving.bret and familyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12305401287158044945noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5167539222502940808.post-1894431106991147842009-12-18T13:06:00.185-05:002009-12-18T13:06:00.185-05:00In my experience, problem statements are never don...In my experience, problem statements are never done that well. The desire to launch into the search for a solution often means the team rushes through the problem statement in the desire for action and movement. Often, problems DO end-up getting solved but NOT necessarily the ones which needed to be solved at the onset. Perceived inactive time at the front-end on a problem statement saves many hours later on in the process.Robhttp://learnsigma.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5167539222502940808.post-60575042385548525932009-11-22T21:24:28.220-05:002009-11-22T21:24:28.220-05:00I think this is critical and way under-appreciated...I think this is critical and way under-appreciated. People think the problem is obvious - "can't you all see it?" Why spend so much time defining it? Yet a poorly defined problem statement is like a poorly defined goal.<br /><br />I even dedicated a whole column to the subject a few months back: http://www.assemblymag.com/CDA/Articles/Column/BNP_GUID_9-5-2006_A_10000000000000616075<br /><br />Jamie FlinchbaughJamie Flinchbaughhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16714555426822621398noreply@blogger.com