The five whys technique: what it consists of and how to use it.

A summary of the five whys technique and how it works for problem solving.

There are many problem-solving techniques, all of them very useful depending on the type of issue to be solved.

Among those that have achieved the greatest popularity thanks to the simplicity of their application are the five whys techniquea tool that allows us to find the root cause of a given problem by asking questions.

Although easy to apply this technique, it requires some steps to follow, taking into account a few tips and assessing, also, its drawbacks, something that we will see in the following lines. Stay to learn more about this technique!

What is the five whys technique?

The five whys technique, also called the why-why-why technique or the whys ladder, is a widely used problem-solving strategy that allows us to find the root cause of a complex problem or the product of a succession of causes. a widely used problem-solving strategy to find the root cause of a complex problem or a problem that is the product of a succession of causes.. Its application is very simple, which is why it is so popular and used in the world of problem solving.

It is believed that the ideologist of this technique was Sakichi Toyoda, a Japanese industrialist and inventor who founded the Toyota company. Toyoda applied this tool for problem solving in automobile manufacturing. Later, it would be the engineer Taiichi Ohno, also from Toyota, who would give continuity and fame to this technique, popularizing its application.

The premise of the technique is simple, so much so that we can summarize it in the following statement made to the colleagues of these Japanese manufacturers: "observe the production workshop with no preconceived ideas and with a blank mind; repeat 'why' five times for each issue.".

Basically, it is a cause-effect analysis tool, which acts through questions. With this strategy, a problem is analyzed by asking the question "why". Once the answer to the first "why" is obtained, we ask the same question again, and so on, successively, until we find what has caused the problem we have come to solve.

Normally, a minimum of five whys are required to find the origin of the problem, which is why the technique is called "why".. However, despite what its name says, not doing the five whys does not mean that the tool is not being used properly, because the question should be asked until the root cause of the analyzed phenomenon is considered to have been reached, whether three whys or seven are enough.

How to apply the technique to solve problems?

Although it is a fairly free technique, doing an analysis using the five whys technique properly implies taking into account some considerations.

It is necessary to involve management in the five whys process in the company. For the analysis itself, it is necessary to consider which are the right people with whom to form a working group.. It is also advisable to use a person who can act as a facilitator of the process, in the sense that he or she is prone to ask questions about a given issue.

It is essential that the process of searching for the five whys be done on a sheet of paper or, even better, a whiteboard. By proxy it can be done with a computer, but it is better to do the whole analysis process with something that everyone can participate in physically at the same time. You should write the problem on the board and make sure that everyone understands it.

During the process, it is very important to think about what the real causes of the problem are and what symptoms or effects they cause, without confusing them.. We must not forget that a symptom is a consequence of something, and that it is that something to which a solution must be found. It is therefore essential to pay attention and follow the logic of cause and effect relationships.

We must make sure that we isolate the causes that have provoked the failures, problems or inconveniences of the situation in which we find ourselves. To do so, it is a very good strategy to make the sentences we have considered but in reverse, using the expression "and therefore" or "and for this reason". We must try to make the questions as precise as possible.

We should never resort to blaming solely and exclusively on human factors.. There may have been a human error, inattention on the part of a worker or any problem that was in the hand of one or more people, but the whole process must be evaluated and any problem, human or purely accidental, must be detected. This technique is not applied to look for those responsible, but to learn from mistakes and prevent them from happening again. It is necessary to foster an atmosphere of trust and sincerity, and accusations do not help to achieve this.

The question "why?" should be asked until the original cause of the problem is determined. That is, if you find that which, once solved or eliminated, prevents the mistake from being made again, then you have succeeded in fully applying the technique.. It is highly recommended to ask these "why?" questions from a customer's point of view rather than that of an employee.

Examples of application of this technique

Although the premise of this technique is simple, in order to understand it better we are going to present three examples that will surely make us understand more deeply how the five whys strategy works and how useful it is.

1. Toyota case

The first example we give is one proposed by Toyota itself.. A machine has a malfunction.

• Why did the machine break down? The fuse blew due to an overload.
• Why did it overload? The bearings were not sufficiently lubricated.
• Why did they not have enough lubrication? The lubrication pump was not circulating enough oil.
• Why was the pump not circulating enough oil? The pump was clogged with metal shavings.
• Why was it clogged with metal shavings? Because the pump does not have a filter.

So, after this analysis we can understand that the dirt in the pump due to not having a filter caused the fuse to overload, which caused the machine to break down. In this concrete example we can understand that every cause has its own effectSo by acting on the fifth cause, the problem should be solved.

2. Staff replacement

A customer data system seems to be out of date:

• Why is the system giving us out-of-date data? Because the analyst did not load updated data from the previous month.
• Why didn't the analyst load the data the previous month? Because nobody taught him how to do it.
• Why didn't anyone teach him how to do it? Because no one knows the procedure.
• Why doesn't anyone know the procedure? Because whoever did know the procedure left, and did not explain it to the incoming worker.
• Why was the procedure not explained to the incoming worker? Because it was not documented, nor was it foreseen that the one who did not know the procedure would leave without showing it to the new employee.

This problem, which at first appeared to be just a system failure, is in fact a human problem, in that the parties who were responsible for updating the data were not aware that this was their task, and no one informed or taught them properly. and no one informed or taught them properly. There was also no protocol specifying what to do in the event that whoever was in charge of updating the data left.

3. Lower sales

A company has started to record lower sales...

• Why have sales decreased? Because salespeople have not reached their monthly goals.
• Why haven't salespeople reached their monthly goals? because they don't have enough time to concentrate on their sales.
• Why don't they have enough time to concentrate on their sales? because daily errands are not solved quickly.
• Why are the daily errands not solved quickly? because the company has not implemented a tool that solves them quickly and efficiently.

In this particular case it can be seen that because the company does not have the tools to solve day-to-day problems quickly, it is the employees who have to figure out how to solve them.

As many of these problems are unfamiliar to them or are more complex than their knowledge allows them, take too much time and cognitive resources to resolve.. As a consequence, they do not have time to concentrate on sales and do less.

Advantages of this technique

We can mention a few benefits and advantages of the five whys technique:

• It allows you to quickly delve into the nature of the problem through various paths.
• It is a very easy technique to apply, simply by asking the right "whys" and finding out the cause behind each problem.
• Its use promotes teamwork. Ideally, it should be applied by people who have various roles in the company.
• It can be integrated with other problem-solving tools, such as Ishikawa analysis or the six thinking hats.

And as the main advantage that stands out from the others we can mention that acts on the root cause of the problem, preventing it from reoccurring once it is detected, understood and solved.understood and solved.

Criticism

But despite having several advantages, the five whys technique also has some disadvantages, especially because some consider it too poor a tool for analyzing the root cause of a problem..

This opinion was expressed by Teruyuki Minoura, former managing director of global purchasing at Toyota, who considered that this tool did not allow a deep enough analysis to solve problems in such a complex world as engineering.

In addition to this criticism, there are many other reasons:

• Tendency of researchers to stop at the symptoms instead of going to a deeper level and seeing the root cause of the whole problem.
• Inability to go beyond the researcher's current knowledge. The investigator cannot find the causes because he or she does not necessarily have the necessary knowledge to detect them to begin with.
• Lack of support to help the investigator give the right answer to the "why" questions.

In addition, the results are not replicable. Proof of this lies in the fact that different people using the five whys technique for the same problem may end up finding different causes..

Tendency to isolate a single root cause and look at it in a linear fashion, instead of considering the possibility that there are several causes that have originated the problem and as a consequence of the combination of several problems that give a multifactorial result.